a Hi s T o r i a n ’s Us e o f ev i d e n C e
Students unfamiliar with historical analysis often confuse
sources with evidence. Sources, at best, provide raw materials
(metaphorical straw and clay) that scholars fashion into evidence
(bricks) to assemble a historical argument (structure). In order
to collect this evidence, historians interrogate sources by reading
closely and asking critical questions:
Who• produced this source? Is the author’s biography
(i.e., viewpoints and personal background) relevant to
understanding this source? Was the author biased or
dishonest? Did he or she have an agenda?
When• was this source created? Where? Is it
representative of other sources created at the same time?
In what ways is it a product of its particular time, place, or
context?
Why• did the author produce this source? For what
audience and purpose? Did the author make this purpose
(or argument) explicit or implicit? Was it intended for
public or private use? Is it a work of scholarship, fiction,
art, or propaganda?
How• does this source compare with other sources you
have analyzed for this assignment? Does it privilege a
particular point of view? Incorporate or neglect significant
pieces of evidence? Structure its argument according
to similar (or different) time periods, geographies,
participants, themes, or events?
Although your teachers will expect a persuasive thesis statement,
they will ultimately judge your argument’s success on the
collection, organization, and presentation of its evidence. Once
again, selection is essential. Because of space and time constraints,
you will not be able to marshal an exhaustive body of evidence.
(Don’t worry! Even if you had a lifetime to devote to this
project, you could never be exhaustive.) Instead, think carefully
and critically about what evidence to include, what to exclude,
and how to frame your analysis. Because issues of selection and
interpretation are at the heart of most historical disagreements,
make sure to consider reasonable counter-arguments to your
thesis. Effective essays anticipate the reader’s likely responses and
address (if not reconcile) contradictory pieces of evidence, rather
than simply ignoring them.
so U r C e s f o r Hi s T o r i C a l an a l y s i s
Whatever the assignment, all historical
writing depends on sources. Once
scholars have located a topic and
formulated a set of historical questions,
they turn to sources to begin answering
them. Sources essentially come in two
varieties:
Primary sources are materials •
produced in the time period
under study; they reflect the
immediate concerns and
perspectives of participants in
the historical drama. Common
examples include diaries,
correspondence, dispatches,
newspaper editorials, speeches,
economic data, literature, art,
and film.
Secondary sources are materials •
produced after the time period
under study; they consider the
historical subject with a degree
of hindsight and generally
select, analyze, and incorporate
evidence (derived from primary
sources) to make an argument.
Works of scholarship are the
most common secondary
sources.
Note that many sources can serve as
either primary or secondary sources,
depending on your topic and particular
frame of reference. Edward Gibbon’s
History of the Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire, for instance, can
represent a secondary source (if your
topic is imperial Rome in the first
millennium) or a primary source (if
your subject is imperial Britain in the
eighteenth century, when Gibbon
wrote his masterpiece). Regardless of
such categorization, you should treat
any source with a critical eye. Sources
do not answer historical questions on
their own; they yield evidence only
after a process of interrogation and
analysis.