How can I evaluate a source?

When confronted with an historical source, there are a few easy steps you can take to immediately assess how reliable it is. First of all, you need to decide whether the source is primary or secondary.  A primary source is one that has been produced either by a participant or an observer or a particular event or moment in time. Primary sources include letters, diaries, accounts, autobiographies, memoirs or newspaper articles. Material culture can also be considered a primary source - see the embroider that Mary, Queen of Scots' produced when she was living with Bess of Hardwick under the close eye of Elizabeth I; while these textiles do not explicitly tell us a story, they illuminate the way a queen spent her time while in exile. A secondary source is one that has been produced using primary sources. For example, David Starkey's book Elizabeth: Apprenticeship uses primary sources to tell the story of Elizabeth I's reign. While his book is not untrue, he has analysed primary sources to tell a story that he thinks is as close to the truth as possible.   Once you have worked out whether your source is primary or secondary, there are different ways for you to analyse and evaluate both categories. To analyse a primary source, you must consider the following: 1. Who wrote/ created the source, when and why?  This will allow you to think about why the source was created and ask questions such as 'did the author have a personal bias or agenda when creating the source?' and 'was there a specific audience in mind? If so, do you think the source has been altered to flatter or please a certain group of people?' - asking these questions right from the start will allow you to better understand the motivations of the author and decide whether you think their account is credible. 2. How does this source relate to other sources from the same event/ time? If you are able to compare two or more sources from the same period, you can better understand whether it is reliable. For example, if you were faced with four contemporary sources that describe King George IV as obese versus one that promoted his svelte frame, you may be inclined to believe the majority and then wonder what the author of the latter had to gain by flattering the king is this way. Finally, it is important that you do not read sources from a modern day perspective. You must always remember how different our values, customs and ideas are today versus those from the past. For example, a letter from an 18th century Duke describing his wife as 'fat' could mean simply that he was proud that she was pregnant, whereas today we would consider it rude and hurtful to write about your partner in such a way. To evaluate a secondary source, you must: 1. Pay attention to the date it was created A book about World War Two written in 1978 will be outdated in terms of its scholarly 'freshness' - remember that there are hundreds of academic conferences every year where historians discuss new theories and evidence, so, while an old secondary source should not be disregarded and may have lots of useful information, you must always remember that ideas will have evolved since it was published. Think about it in terms of the very first iPhone versus the iPhone 8 - you wouldn't think of the original iPhone as the pinnacle of technological innovation today, would you? 2. Think about the author's motives  Just like with primary source authors, it is important to consider any bias or agenda the author of a secondary source may have. What political or cultural institutions may have influenced the author? Does the author hold any personal beliefs or views that may have shaped the way their work turned out? 3. Look at the footnotes!  It is important to read the footnotes and references in a secondary source to work out: a. What primary sources the author was using and whether these were used effectively. b. What other historians the author looked at to shape their argument and whether they are reliable and how the engaged with/ challenged the arguments put forward in those works. c. Look for gaps where the author could have expanded on their arguments and ideas - these gaps also often help indicate how truthful and unbias an author has been. It is important to aim to be as unbias as possible when looking at sources, however, every historian will ultimately have an argument that they wish to pursue and therefore having an agenda is inevitable. It is important then, to use sources effectively so that they support your argument thoroughly and fairly.