 |
GLC05471
(Detail) George Washington, print. 1853. Washington crossing the Delaware.
|
|
|
|
|
 ike a detective, a historian must reconstruct past events out of various pieces of evidence. Historians typically rely on written documents--letters, diaries, memoirs, newspapers, and government reports.
Some of this evidence is reliable; other pieces of evidence are less trustworthy, but valuable nonetheless. Still other pieces of evidence are misleading or even fraudulent. Evaluating the evidence and interpreting its meaning is one of the most difficult tasks a historian faces.
Generally, historians consider "primary sources" to be the most reliable source of historical documentation. A primary source is an observer's first-hand account of a historical event. Yet even primary sources raise difficult issues of assessment. It is important to know whether a document was written at the time an event took place or later; whether the document's author was involved in the event or was an "impartial" observer; and whether the author had ulterior motives for writing the document.
One of the basic skills that all students need to learn is how to interpret a historical document. After closely reading the document, the students must respond constructively and analytically to the ideas advanced in the text. It is useful for students to conceive of the process of interpreting a historical document in terms of a series of questions:
1. Who wrote the document? What assumptions guide the author's arguments?
2. When was the document composed? What other events occurred around the same time?
3. For what purposes was the document composed? What evidence does the document present to support its argument?
4. How reliable do you consider the document as a source of factual information?
5. What information does the document convey?
6. What is the document's historical significance?
7. How does this information compare with other sources, of greater or lesser reliability?
|
|
|
Continue to