The first thing to remember in a question such as this is that an introduction is NOT needed. It wastes time and will not allow you to evaluate the source fully. The question is not asking you to DESCRIBE the source. This is a low level skill and you will therefore be awarded a maximum of 3-4 marks out of 8 if you choose to do this. A really strong answer will structure an answer like the following:A) Explain why the source is useful to a historian- what things does the source show that develops are understanding of the period? What year was it written? What was going on during that time and how does the source fit into this? B) Explain why the source may have limitations to a historian- does the source have a particular bias? Who wrote it and what motive may they have had to write the source? From your contextual knowledge, can you see any bits of information that are not correct? Then, a mini conclusion where you should give a JUDGEMENT.