Using sources and evidence

Apprends en jouant

Réponds à ces questions pour gagner de l'énergie, puis pêche et explore. Sans compte.

Pour les enseignants : diapos de leçon, notes de révision prêts à l'emploi pour Using sources and evidence (KS3 History, Historical Skills) — utilise-les en cours, ou lance le thème en activité de classe interactive que tes apprenants jouent en direct.

Notes de leçon

What are historical sources?

Primary sources are materials created at the time of the event by people who were there, such as letters, diaries, photographs, or artefacts.
Secondary sources are created later by people who were not present, such as textbooks, documentaries, or history books.
Material evidence includes objects and buildings, and can be uncovered through archaeology.
Oral history is spoken testimony, often recorded in interviews, and can preserve memories not found in written records.
Historians use a mix of primary, secondary, and material sources to build a picture of the past.

Provenance: asking the right questions

Provenance means the origin of a source: who made it, when, where, and why.
Key questions include: When was it produced? Where? By whom? From what earlier material? In what original form? What is its evidential value?
The first four questions are called external criticism; they check whether a source is genuine.
The final question about the content's credibility is called internal criticism; it checks how trustworthy the information is.
External criticism is like a gatekeeper, saving us from using false evidence; internal criticism tells us how to use evidence that passes the gate.

Reliability and bias

Reliability means how trustworthy a source is for a particular purpose.
Bias is a slant or tendency that affects what a source says; it may be deliberate or unconscious.
A source's tendency is its motivation for providing a particular view; historians try to minimise it or balance it with opposite views.
If a source has no direct interest in creating bias, its credibility is increased.
Reliability is not all-or-nothing: each statement in a source should be judged separately, even if the author is generally trustworthy.

Types of evidence and their value

Relics are physical remains, such as a fingerprint or an artefact; they are generally more credible than narratives (written or spoken accounts).
Eyewitness testimony is usually more reliable than second-hand reports, which are more reliable than hearsay.
The closer a source is in time and place to the event, the more accurate it is likely to be.
Independence matters: if several independent sources agree, the message is stronger.
A source that can be partially confirmed by outside authorities may be trusted in its entirety if full confirmation is impossible.

Cross-referencing and contradictory sources

Cross-referencing means comparing sources to see where they agree and disagree.
If sources all agree on an event, historians may consider it proven—but agreement alone is not enough.
Majority opinion does not automatically win: even many sources can be wrong if they share the same bias or error.
When sources disagree, prefer the one with more authority—created by an expert or an eyewitness.
If two independent sources agree, the reliability of each is increased.
When there is no other way to judge, historians may choose the account that best fits common sense.

Making inferences from sources

An inference is a conclusion you draw from evidence, even if it is not stated directly.
To infer, look for clues in the source: what is shown, what is missing, and what is emphasised.
Consider the purpose of the source: why was it made, and who was meant to see it?
Check whether the source is typical or unusual by comparing it with others.
A strong inference is supported by evidence from more than one source.

Historical interpretations and why historians disagree

Historical interpretations are different ways of explaining the past.
Historians may disagree because they use different sources, ask different questions, or have different perspectives.
Some fields, such as religion, art, or democracy, are 'essentially contested' and require diverse tools to interpret.
There are no universally agreed specific rules for historical proof; historians agree only on very general principles.
Historiography is the study of how history has been written and how interpretations change over time.

Evaluating sources: a checklist

Validity: is the source genuine and relevant to the question?
Reliability: how trustworthy is it, based on its origin and content?
Usefulness: even a biased source can be useful for understanding attitudes or propaganda.
Authenticity: check for forgeries or later alterations using external and internal criteria.
Always ask: who made it, when, why, and for whom?
Use multiple sources to build a balanced picture and avoid relying on a single account.

Diapos

Step through every slide for this topic — plus flashcards and revision notes — with a free account.

S'INSCRIRE — GRATUIT CONNEXION

Questions d'entraînement

Aperçu gratuit — 8 sur 57 questions. Inscris-toi pour toutes les voir.

1.In history, what is a primary source?
Easy
- AA source created at the time of the event by someone with a direct connection to it
- BA textbook written many years after the event
- CA historian's interpretation of the past
- DA summary of other historians' work
2.Which of the following is an example of a secondary source?
Easy
- AA diary written by a soldier during a war
- BA textbook about the war written in 2020
- CA photograph taken during the war
- DA letter sent by a soldier to his family
3.When historians ask 'Who made this source and why?', which aspect of source criticism are they focusing on?
Easy
- AProvenance
- BChronology
- CBias
- DReliability
4.Which of the following best describes the difference between external criticism and internal criticism of a source?
Easy
- AExternal criticism checks the source's origin and form; internal criticism assesses the credibility of its contents
- BExternal criticism checks the source's contents; internal criticism checks its origin and form
- CExternal criticism is done by archaeologists; internal criticism is done by historians
- DExternal criticism is used for primary sources; internal criticism is used for secondary sources
5.According to the principles of source criticism, which type of source is generally considered more credible?
Medium
- AA narrative such as a written statement
- BA relic such as a fingerprint or artefact
- CA secondary source written by a historian
- DA source created long after the event
6.A historian has two sources about the same event. One is a letter written by an eyewitness the day after the event; the other is a newspaper article written a year later by a journalist who interviewed people who were there. Which source should the historian generally prefer, and why?
Medium
- AThe newspaper article, because it is printed and therefore more reliable
- BThe eyewitness letter, because it is closer to the event and from a direct witness
- CThe newspaper article, because it includes multiple perspectives
- DThe eyewitness letter, because it is older
7.Read this extract from a historian's account: 'The castle was built in 1215 by King John to control the river crossing.' Which of the following is an inference that can be drawn from this statement?
Medium
- AThe castle was important for controlling movement across the river
- BKing John built many castles during his reign
- CThe river was the only means of transport at the time
- DThe castle was built to protect against Viking raids
8.A historian finds two medieval chronicles that disagree about the outcome of a battle. Chronicle A was written by a monk who lived in a nearby monastery at the time. Chronicle B was written by a monk in a distant monastery 50 years later. According to the principles of source criticism, which chronicle should the historian prefer, and why?
Medium
- AChronicle A, because it is closer in time and place to the event
- BChronicle B, because it was written with more hindsight
- CChronicle A, because monks are always reliable
- DChronicle B, because it is more detailed

Plus de questions

9.A historian is investigating a medieval village. She has three sources: a tax record from 1350, a painting of the village made in 1600, and a modern archaeological report. Which combination would best allow her to cross-reference evidence about the village's population?
Medium
- AThe tax record and the archaeological report
- BThe painting and the tax record
- CThe painting and the archaeological report
- DAll three sources equally
10.Which of the following best explains why historians might disagree in their interpretations of the past?
Medium
- AThey use different sources, ask different questions, or have different perspectives
- BThey are all biased and cannot be trusted
- CThey deliberately lie to confuse students
- DThey only use primary sources
11.A historian is studying a diary written by a factory owner in 1840. The diary describes working conditions in his factory as 'fair and comfortable'. The historian also has a government report from 1842 that describes the same factory's conditions as 'dangerous and overcrowded'. Which of the following is the most likely reason for the difference?
Hard
- AThe factory owner had a vested interest in presenting conditions positively
- BThe government report was written by someone who never visited the factory
- CThe diary was written by someone who was not actually there
- DThe government report was based on hearsay
12.According to the seven-step procedure for contradictory sources, if two independently created sources agree on a matter, what happens to the reliability of each?
Hard
- AThe reliability of each is measurably enhanced
- BThe reliability of each is reduced because they might have copied each other
- CThe reliability stays the same
- DOne source is automatically rejected
13.Which of the following questions are part of source criticism? (Select all that apply)
Medium
- AWhen was the source produced?
- BWhere was it produced?
- CBy whom was it produced?
- DWhat is the evidential value of its contents?
- EWhat is the most popular interpretation of the source?
14.A primary source is created at the time of the event by someone with a direct connection to it.
Easy
True or false?
15.A secondary source is always less reliable than a primary source.
Easy
True or false?
16.If several independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of that message is strongly increased.
Easy
True or false?
17.Match each type of source with its correct description.
Medium
- Primary source
- Secondary source
- Relic
- Narrative
- A source created at the time of the event by someone with a direct connection
- A source created after the event by someone without direct connection
- A physical remain such as a fingerprint or artefact
- A written or spoken account such as a statement or letter
18.Match each of Garraghan and Delanglez's inquiries with the question it asks.
Medium
- Date
- Localization
- Authorship
- Analysis
- Integrity
- Credibility
- When was the source produced?
- Where was it produced?
- By whom was it produced?
- From what pre-existing material was it produced?
- In what original form was it produced?
- What is the evidential value of its contents?
19.Put the six inquiries of source criticism in the order given by Garraghan and Delanglez.
Medium
- Date
- Localization
- Authorship
- Analysis
- Integrity
- Credibility
20.Put the following steps from the seven-step procedure for contradictory sources into the correct order.
Medium
- If the sources all agree, the event can be considered proven.
- Majority does not rule; critical textual analysis must be passed.
- A source confirmed in some parts can be trusted in its entirety if the whole cannot be confirmed.
- When two sources disagree, prefer the one with most authority (expert or eyewitness).
- Eyewitnesses are generally preferred, especially for facts known by most contemporaries.
- If two independently created sources agree, the reliability of each is enhanced.
- When two sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, take the one that accords best with common sense.
21.Match each type of evidence with its correct example.
Medium
- document
- image
- artefact
- oral history
- a letter written by a soldier
- a photograph of a street in 1900
- a Roman coin found in a field
- a recording of a grandmother telling her childhood memories
22.Put the following steps for checking the provenance of a source into the order a historian would normally follow.
Medium
- Identify who made the source.
- Establish when the source was made.
- Work out why the source was made.
- Decide how reliable and useful the source is for the enquiry.
23.Which of the following questions are part of provenance? (Select all that apply)
Medium
- AWho made the source?
- BWhen was the source made?
- CWhy was the source made?
- DWhat colour is the source?
- EHow many pages does the source have?
24.A source can be reliable but not useful for a particular enquiry.
Easy
True or false?
25.What does it mean to cross-reference sources?
Medium
- ATo compare information from different sources to check if they agree
- BTo copy information from one source into another
- CTo ignore sources that disagree with each other
- DTo use only the most recent source
26.Match each term with its correct definition.
Medium
- provenance
- reliability
- bias
- usefulness
- the origin of a source — who made it, when and why
- the extent to which a source can be trusted
- a one-sided tendency that distorts a source
- how well a source helps answer a particular question
27.Put the following stages of a historical enquiry into the order a historian would normally follow.
Medium
- Ask a question about the past.
- Find relevant sources.
- Evaluate the sources for provenance, reliability and bias.
- Cross-reference the sources.
- Construct an interpretation and reach a conclusion.
28.Which of the following would make a source less reliable? (Select all that apply)
Hard
- AIt was created long after the event by someone who was not there.
- BIt was created by someone with a strong reason to favour one side.
- CIt is a forgery.
- DIt was created at the time by an eyewitness.
- EIt agrees with several other independent sources.
29.A diary entry written by a soldier on the day of a battle is an example of which type of source?
Easy
- AA secondary source
- BA primary source
- CA historical interpretation
- DA forged document
30.Which of the following best explains why a historian might prefer an eyewitness account over a story passed down orally through several generations?
Medium
- AThe eyewitness account is always completely accurate
- BThe oral story is always deliberately false
- CThe eyewitness is closer to the event and less likely to have been altered by retelling
- DThe oral story is a secondary source and therefore useless
31.Two medieval chronicles disagree about the outcome of a battle. Chronicle A was written by a monk who lived in a nearby monastery at the time. Chronicle B was written by a poet at the court of the victorious king 200 years later. Using the principles of source criticism, which source should the historian prefer and why?
Medium
- AChronicle B, because it was written by a professional poet
- BChronicle A, because it is closer in time and by an eyewitness
- CChronicle B, because it celebrates the victor and is more detailed
- DNeither, because both are biased and therefore worthless
32.Which of the following are reasons why historians might disagree in their interpretations of the past? (Select all that apply)
Medium
- AThey use different sources
- BThey ask different questions
- CThey have different values or perspectives
- DThey all use the same evidence and reach the same conclusion
- EThey interpret the same evidence differently
33.A source can be reliable but not useful for a particular historical enquiry.
Easy
True or false?
34.Read this extract from a letter written by a factory worker in 1842: 'The mill gates lock at five in the morning and we work until eight at night, with only half an hour for dinner.' What does this extract show directly?
Medium
- AThe length of the working day in that mill
- BThe amount the worker was paid each week
- CThe number of workers employed in the mill
- DThe type of machinery used in the mill
35.A historian reads a diary entry written by a soldier on the evening of a battle. The soldier writes that his side 'won a great victory'. A newspaper published the next day reports the same battle as a 'costly defeat'. Which source is likely to be more reliable for the outcome of the battle?
Medium
- AThe newspaper, because it was printed for a wide audience
- BThe diary, because it was written by an eyewitness close to the event
- CThe newspaper, because it was written after more time for reflection
- DThe diary, because soldiers are always honest about battles
36.A medieval chronicle says a castle was built in 1215 by King John to guard a river crossing. Which of the following is an inference a historian could make from this statement?
Medium
- AThe river crossing was important enough to need defending
- BKing John visited the castle every year after 1215
- CThe castle was the largest in England at the time
- DThe castle was built by Roman engineers
37.A historian is investigating a medieval village. She has three sources: a tax record from 1350, a painting of the village made in 1600, and a modern archaeological report. Which of the following statements about these sources are correct? (Select all that apply)
Medium
- AThe tax record is a primary source for the village in 1350.
- BThe painting is a primary source for the village in 1350.
- CThe archaeological report is a secondary source for the medieval village.
- DThe painting is more reliable than the tax record for information about 1350.
- EThe tax record and the archaeological report can be cross-referenced to check each other.
38.Which of the following best describes source criticism?
Medium
- AThe process of evaluating the qualities of an information source, such as its validity, reliability and relevance
- BThe process of writing a history of the past using only primary sources
- CThe process of collecting as many sources as possible about a topic
- DThe process of translating historical documents into modern English
39.Which of the following is the correct definition of external criticism?
Medium
- AEvaluating the evidential value of a source's contents
- BEstablishing the date, place, author and original form of a source
- CDeciding whether a source is useful for a particular enquiry
- DComparing a source with modern historical interpretations
40.Which of the following inquiries is part of internal criticism?
Medium
- AWhen was the source produced?
- BWhere was the source produced?
- CBy whom was the source produced?
- DWhat is the evidential value of its contents?
41.What is the term for the process of evaluating the qualities of an information source, such as its validity, reliability and relevance?
Easy
42.What is the term for the study of historical method and of different ways of writing history?
Medium
43.In what year did Bernheim publish his seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
44.Complete the sentence about source criticism.
Medium
The first four inquiries of source criticism are known as ____ criticism, the fifth is called ____ criticism, and together they are known as ____ criticism.
45.Complete the sentence about criteria of authenticity.
Medium
Historians use ____ and ____ criteria of authenticity to separate genuine sources from forgeries.
46.In what year did Bernheim publish the seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
47.In what year did Langlois and Seignobos publish their version of the seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
48.What is the name for the study of historical method and of different ways of writing history?
Easy
49.Complete the sentence about the core principles for determining reliability.
Medium
The tendency of a source is its ____ for providing some kind of bias.
50.Complete the sentence about the six inquiries of source criticism.
Easy
The first four inquiries are known as ____ criticism; the fifth is known as ____ criticism; and the sixth is known as ____ criticism.
51.Explain why two historians might reach different interpretations of the same past event.
Hard
52.A historian has two sources about a medieval battle: a chronicle written by a monk who was present, and a poem written 200 years later celebrating the victor. Explain which source the historian should find more reliable and why.
Hard
53.Explain how a historian would use the seven-step procedure to decide between two contradictory sources.
Medium
54.Explain how the seven-step procedure for contradictory sources helps a historian decide between two disagreeing accounts of the same event.
Hard
55.In what year did Bernheim publish his seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
- A2267
- B1889
- C2078
- D1700
56.In what year did Bernheim publish the seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
- A2078
- B2267
- C1700
- D1889
57.In what year did Langlois and Seignobos publish their version of the seven-step procedure for source criticism?
Easy
- A2278
- B2088
- C1708
- D1898

Notes de révision

## Using Sources and Evidence **Historical method** = the techniques and guidelines historians use to research and write about the past. Historians draw on **secondary sources**, **primary sources** and **material evidence** (e.g. from archaeology). The historian's skill is to identify sources, judge their authority, and combine their testimony into an accurate picture of the past. ### Types of evidence - **Primary sources** — produced at the time (documents, images, artefacts, oral history). - **Secondary sources** — written later, often using primary sources. - **Material evidence** — objects and archaeology. ### Source criticism (information evaluation) Evaluating a source's **validity, reliability and relevance**. Six inquiries: 1. When was it produced? (date) 2. Where? (localization) 3. By whom? (authorship) 4. From what pre-existing material? (analysis) 5. In what original form? (integrity) 6. What is its evidential value? (credibility) Inquiries 1–4 = **higher criticism**; 5 = **lower criticism**; together = **external criticism**. Inquiry 6 = **internal criticism**. External criticism is 'negative' — it saves us from using false evidence. Internal criticism is 'positive' — it tells us how to use authenticated evidence. **Key rule:** establish credibility **separately for each particular** of a document, regardless of the author's general credibility. ### Contradictory sources — seven-step procedure 1. If sources all agree, the event can be considered proven. 2. Majority does not rule — the version must pass critical textual analysis. 3. A source confirmed in some parts by outside authorities can be trusted in its entirety if the whole cannot be confirmed. 4. When two sources disagree, prefer the one with most **authority** (expert or eyewitness). 5. Prefer **eyewitnesses**, especially where an ordinary observer could have reported accurately. 6. If two **independent** sources agree, the reliability of each is enhanced. 7. If sources disagree and there is no other means of evaluation, take the one according best with **common sense**. ### Core principles for determining reliability - **Relics** (e.g. a fingerprint) are more credible than **narratives** (a statement or letter). - A source may be forged or corrupted; signs of originality increase reliability. - The **closer** a source is to the event, the more it can be trusted. - **Eyewitness > second-hand testimony > hearsay**. - Independent sources with the same message strongly increase credibility. - **Tendency** = a source's motivation for bias; minimise it or supplement with opposite motivations. - No direct interest in creating bias → increased credibility. ### Criteria of authenticity External and internal criteria help separate genuine sources/content from forgeries or manipulation. ### Interpretations Historians agree on basic principles, but 'specific canons of historical proof are neither widely observed nor generally agreed upon'. Some fields (religion, art, science, democracy, social justice) are 'essentially contested' and need tools particular to them. **Historiography** = the study of historical method and of different ways of writing history.

Historical method: The collection of techniques and guidelines that historians use to research and write histories of the past.
Primary source: A source produced at the time of the event being studied.
Secondary source: A source produced later, often drawing on primary sources.
Material evidence: Physical evidence such as that derived from archaeology.
Source criticism: The process of evaluating the qualities of an information source, such as its validity, reliability, and relevance to the subject under investigation.
External criticism: The first five inquiries (date, localization, authorship, analysis, integrity); includes higher and lower criticism.
Internal criticism: The sixth inquiry: what is the evidential value of the source's contents (credibility)?
Provenance: The origin of a source — who made it, when and why.
Reliability: How trustworthy a source is, judged by principles such as closeness to the event and independence.
Bias / Tendency: The motivation of a source for providing some kind of bias; tendencies should be minimised or supplemented with opposite motivations.
Cross-referencing: Comparing sources; if a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased.
Inference: A conclusion drawn from evidence in a source.
Historiography: The study of historical method and of different ways of writing history.
Relic: A human source such as a fingerprint; relics are more credible sources than narratives.
Narrative: A human source such as a statement or a letter.

Cartes mémo

What is a primary source?

A primary source is a document, image, artefact, or other evidence created at the time of the event by someone with direct experience, such as a diary, letter, photograph, or eyewitness account.

What is a secondary source?

A secondary source is created after the event by someone who did not experience it directly, such as a textbook, biography, or historian's article, often interpreting primary sources.

What is provenance?

Provenance is the information about who made a source, when and where it was made, and why it was made.

Why is provenance important for evaluating a source?

Provenance helps you judge a source's reliability, bias, and usefulness by revealing its origin, purpose, and context.

What is the difference between reliability and usefulness in a source?

Reliability is about how trustworthy and accurate a source is; usefulness is about how helpful it is for answering your specific historical question.

What is bias in a historical source?

Bias is a source's tendency or slant that may distort the information, often because the creator has a particular motivation or point of view.

What does it mean to cross-reference sources?

Cross-referencing means comparing information from multiple independent sources to check for agreement, disagreement, or gaps.

What is an inference in history?

An inference is a conclusion you draw from evidence, going beyond what is directly stated in a source by using reasoning and context.

Why do historians disagree in their interpretations?

Historians disagree because they may use different sources, ask different questions, have different perspectives, or interpret the same evidence in different ways.

What is source criticism?

Source criticism is the process of evaluating an information source's validity, reliability, and relevance to the subject under investigation.

What are the six inquiries of source criticism?

The six inquiries are: when was the source produced, where was it produced, by whom was it produced, from what pre-existing material was it produced, in what original form was it produced, and what is its evidential value.

What is external criticism?

External criticism is the process of authenticating a source by examining its origin, date, authorship, and original form, often to rule out forgeries.

What is internal criticism?

Internal criticism is the process of evaluating the credibility and evidential value of the contents of a source, after it has been authenticated.

According to R. J. Shafer, what is the function of external criticism?

External criticism's function is negative: it saves us from using false evidence, while internal criticism has the positive function of telling us how to use authenticated evidence.

What is the general rule for establishing credibility according to Louis Gottschalk?

For each particular of a document, the process of establishing credibility should be undertaken separately, regardless of the general credibility of the author.

In source criticism, what is a relic?

A relic is a physical source, such as a fingerprint or artefact, that is more credible than a narrative source like a statement or letter.

What is a narrative source?

A narrative source is a spoken or written account, such as a statement or letter, which is generally less credible than a relic.

What is the principle about proximity in source criticism?

The closer a source is to the event it describes, the more trustworthy it is for giving an accurate historical description.

What is the principle about eyewitnesses in source criticism?

An eyewitness is more reliable than second-hand testimony, which is more reliable than hearsay at further remove.

What is the principle about independent sources agreeing?

If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of that message is strongly increased.

What is a tendency in source criticism?

A tendency is a source's motivation for providing bias; historians should minimize it or supplement it with opposite motivations.

What is the principle about a source with no direct interest in bias?

If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias, the credibility of the message is increased.

What is the seven-step procedure for contradictory sources?

The seven steps are: if sources agree, the event is proven; majority does not rule; a source confirmed in parts can be trusted in whole if the whole cannot be confirmed; prefer the source with most authority; prefer eyewitnesses; independent agreement enhances reliability; and when no other means exist, choose the source that accords best with common sense.

What is historiography?

Historiography is the study of historical method and of different ways of writing history.

What is the historian's skill in using sources?

The historian's skill lies in identifying sources, evaluating their relative authority, and combining their testimony appropriately to construct an accurate and reliable picture of past events.

Unlock all 57 questions, flashcards & more

Crée un compte gratuit pour voir toutes les questions, les diapos, les cartes mémo et les notes de révision de ce thème.

S'INSCRIRE — GRATUIT CONNEXION

Annales

Les annales d'entraînement pour ce thème arrivent bientôt.

Bientôt disponible