How useful are (sources) for a historian? (15 marks)
The second question will ask you to look at two different sources and a historian’s interpretation. You will need to consider how the sources could be of use to a historian looking at a particular topic. These are likely to be a mixture of primary and secondary sources.
Example:
How useful are B, C and D for a historian studying [___]?
In this question you should look to do three things:
- Show that you have knowledge and understanding of the topic raised in the question. It is important that you can place sources within their historical context.
- Analyse the sources you have been given, evaluate how useful they are in finding out about the topic in the question.
- Analyse the interpretation you have been given, evaluate how useful it is in finding out about the topic in the question.
Tips:
- You will need to look at the sources AND use your own knowledge in your writing – don’t do one or the other, do both! Use your own knowledge to support what you are saying or challenge the usefulness of a source.
- Make sure you stay focussed on the idea of how useful the sources are throughout your writing – don’t stray into general examination of their strengths/weaknesses.
- Regularly link back to the question and directly explain how the point you are making demonstrates that the source is/isn’t useful.
- Identify when there are agreements across the sources, ie “both sources B and C suggest that…” If you can group ideas/issues together in your writing this is better than looking at each of the sources alone.
- Consider the limitations of the sources/interpretation when you are thinking about usefulness.
- When you analyse sources, consider a range of areas to focus on, use the mnemonic PATCH…
Purpose | Why have the sources been produced? Was it to give information or is it meant to persuade you? |
Author | Who wrote it? Are they a neutral, reliable source or will they be wanting to promote a particular way of thinking? |
Tone | How has the source been written? Is it full of emotion or is it a neutral, balanced examination of facts? |
Completeness | Is this a complete overview or focussed on a narrow part of the topic? |
Historical context | What do you know about the topic outside of the source that you could use to support or challenge the usefulness of this source. |
Purpose |
---|
Why have the sources been produced? Was it to give information or is it meant to persuade you? |
Author |
---|
Who wrote it? Are they a neutral, reliable source or will they be wanting to promote a particular way of thinking? |
Tone |
---|
How has the source been written? Is it full of emotion or is it a neutral, balanced examination of facts? |
Completeness |
---|
Is this a complete overview or focussed on a narrow part of the topic? |
Historical context |
---|
What do you know about the topic outside of the source that you could use to support or challenge the usefulness of this source. |