history is fun

Another earlier post done by Mr Donald Leo to help your revision for CA2!

Reliability

Reliability of a source is about its accuracy!

• The reliability of the evidence in an historical source can depend on what you want to use it for.
• An historical source may be reliable in some parts and unreliable in others.
e.g. A cartoon might prove unreliable in telling you the facts about an event, but it could be very reliable for showing the way people thought about the incident at that time.

You might suspect a source provides unreliable evidence because:
• It shows the clear bias of the writer.
• It contains factual errors.
• It contains exaggerated comments.
• It is inconsistent with similar sources.
• It was written a long time after the events it describes. (Or it can just be immediately to add more fuel to the fires.)
• It was produced for a particular purpose which might affect its reliability.

E.g. PROPAGANDA = INFORMATION WHICH GIVES A ONE VIEW OF EVENTS EITHER BY CAREFUL SELECTION, EXAGGERATION OR DELIBERATE UNTRUTHS WHICH IS DESIGNED TO GENERATE SUPPORT FOR ONE SIDE IN A CONFLICT, OR QUARREL OR COMPETITION.

RELIABLE = CAN BE TRUSTED OR MADE USE OF AT FACE VALUE.
REMEMBER - JUST BECAUSE A SOURCE IS UNRELIABLE, THIS
DOES NOT MAKE IT TOTALLY USELESS.

If you want to discuss the bias of a source then what reveals its bias?
- its content?
- its attribution? (provenance)
- your knowledge of the period?

ATTRIBUTION / PROVENANCE = THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN
WHICH A SOURCE WAS PRODUCED REMEMBER - INACCURATE OR UNRELIABLE SOURCES DO NOT MEAN USELESS SOURCES.

There are three ways a historian can seek to establish the reliability of a source:
a. Site visits (this is out in exam context)
b. Cross-referencing with other sources from the same period
c. Referring to background information

There are several key questions which you can ask of a source in order to establish its reliability.

• Who produced the source and when?
• Was the writer/artist an eyewitness? What were the sources of her/his information?
• Why was the source produced?
• What is the origin of the source? (i.e. where was it produced?)
• Is there consistency in the source? (i.e. does everything in the source make sense?)
• Is there consistency with other sources? (i.e. do other sources agree with this source?)

Level of analysis
L1/1 Provenance or details only
L2/2 Uncritical acceptance of content
L3/3 Unsupported assertion of bias
L4/4 Reliability affected by date of the source
L5/5 Cross-reference to other sources/specific contextual knowledge [1. Identify content 2. Identify supporting or contradictory content from other sources 3. Draw your conclusion]
L6/6 Evaluation of source content using provenance/purpose/audience etc. [Content + who, where, when > purpose + motive > audience and how (tone)]