How To Read a Primary Source
THE HISTORIAN AS DETECTIVE
When reading primary sources, think of yourself as a detective. Good historians bring to
their work the detective's attitudes of curiosity, detachment, skepticism, and suspicion. They
employ the detective's skills at observation, interrogation, inference, and conjecture. Above all,
they exhibit the detective's tenacity: they go over the evidence again and again and again, until
they come up with an explanation.
Like a detective, you'll go through three stages in your work. First, you'll look for clues.
You'll try especially to notice "telling details"—those significant and revealing facts that are full
of meaning. (An example: as a student walks out of her final exam, she throws her course
notebook in the trash.) Second, you'll interrogate the witnesses; that is, you'll analyze and
evaluate the evidence. In this stage, you'll ask a lot of questions: who? what? when? where?
how? why? and so what? Good questions make a good historian. You'll find that the telling
details provoke questions that, in turn, lead you to new details and thence to still more questions.
Third, you'll build the case. In other words, you'll see connections, draw conclusions, and make
judgments. As with detectives, so with historians: the case is built; the evidence is constructed.
The explanation doesn't just offer itself up. Instead, the historian must actively participate in
working it out. And like detectives, too, historians usually have to content themselves with
explanations that are merely plausible, not certain.
CROSS-EXAMINING THE WITNESSES
Historical detectives cross-examine the sources to discern a pattern of meaning and significance.
Here are some of the general assumptions they bring to the task.

The best witness is one close to the event. Primary sources are better than secondary
sources.

It is essential to do some leg-work to understand what the witness is saying. That means
looking up unfamiliar references and allusions. It also means using a historical dictionary
like The Oxford English Dictionary to check whether words have changed their connotations
over time. For example, referring to someone as "a gay man" means something different in
the 1990s than it did in the 1890s.

There are different types of witnesses. Some documents are written for the public eye, or
even for posterity. They are often deliberate and self-conscious and articulate about the
meaning that they intend to convey. The Declaration of Independence is an example of this
kind of source. Other sources—especially those that are private, spontaneous, or casual in
their composition—can be unwitting informants. Because they were written for other
purposes, they often know more than they say. So they need to be grilled. For example,
consider the class list for our course. It was not created to reveal our values, but we can
make it do so. What conclusions would you draw if the names were arranged alphabetically?
by grade point average? by parents' income? by class order, with seniors first?

It is risky to take what the sources say at face value. Evaluate their testimony. Recognize
that there is often a difference between what is said and what is really meant. Be alert for
irony or conventional language, both of which mask the true meaning. Read between the
lines. Torture the witnesses to force them to disclose their secrets.
Primary Source
2

All sources have biases and limitations. Their reliability and usefulness are determined by
the questions asked of them. If your source can't be trusted to tell you facts, ask about
opinions. For example, if someone swears that Elvis was abducted by Martians, the question
you should ask is not, "Was ‘The King’ really snatched by space invaders?" but rather, "Why
would an American living in the 1990s want to believe this story?" What does the existence
of such a belief tell us about the individual, the society, or the era?

The sources need to be read in the context of their own times and in the light of their own
values. Historical detectives need to be open-minded while conducting their investigations.
They must temporarily suspend their own values in order to understand the values of the
people they are studying. The historian's first goal is to comprehend the people of the past,
not to condemn them or praise them. Historians who blithely assume that their own values
are universal or absolute have fallen into a trap called "presentism." Another word for it is
"arrogance." Remember that the past was different. Remember too that what we think of as
the fixed and settled past was, for the people who lived in it, a present that was as confusing
and contingent and murky as our own is to us.
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THE WITNESSES
About the Document

What kind of document is it? Is it private or public? Is it casual or formal? Is it a
government document or a work of fiction or a diary or a reminiscence or a newspaper
editorial? Does this particular genre have any conventions or peculiarities that affect its
reliability or usefulness?

What was the motive for producing the document? In a sense, every document is an answer
to some question or a response to some problem—that's simply a way of saying that things
are written for a reason. If this document is the answer, what is the question? Is it a strong
answer or a weak one? How does the author's intention affect the document's credibility?

Why was the document produced at precisely this moment and not, say, 5 years earlier or 50
years later? What does its appearance tell us about the society at that particular time?

In what ways is this a useful document for historians? What are its strengths and weaknesses
as a source? What conclusions could you draw if this were the only surviving source about
its subject?

What questions does this document leave unanswered? What is left out, slurred over, or
slighted? What other conceivable document would you like to have as a supplement to this
one?
About the Author

What do you know about the author? What was his background—his social position,
economic class, occupation, religion, education, place of residence, and circle of associates?

Would anything in that background make him likely to notice certain things or to overlook
certain things? For example, a fashion model would be likely to pay attention to clothing.

What does the document itself tell you about its author? Can you infer from it anything
about him, people like him, or his society?
Primary Source
3

Is the author a credible witness? Was she in a position to see what she describes? Was she
physically present? Is the document a first-hand account? If not, on what sources did she
rely?

Was the author mentally in a position to see? Did he have the expertise or social familiarity
needed to understand what he saw? For example, could your grandmother give a reliable
explanation of the lyrics of a rap song?

What is the author's relationship to the subject being described? What attitude does she take
toward it? Is she interested? indifferent? What biases or prejudices does she express openly
or reveal unintentionally?
About the Audience

For whom was the document written?

What was the relationship of the author to the audience? Did the author have any reason to
deceive the audience?

What response did the author hope to produce in the audience? What tone did the author
take with the readers? Was it sincere, bitter, sarcastic, pleading, hortatory, or threatening?

Was the author speaking, either explicitly or implicitly, to any opponents? Who were they?
On what grounds was he seeking to refute them? What is at stake in their disagreement?
WHERE THE CLUES HIDE
Here are some places in a document that deserve special scrutiny.

The title. Why did the author give the document this title? What does the title mean? Can
you turn the title into a question? If so, what is the answer to that question?

The beginning. How does the document start? Why did the author begin with this particular
sentence? with this particular paragraph? How does the beginning set up the rest of the
argument?

The ending. How does the document end? Why does it end in this way? What's the
relationship between the document's ending and its beginning?

Key sentence. Can you identify one sentence that seems to be crucial to the entire
document? Is there a sentence that summarizes the document's main point? Is there one that
seems to be especially significant or difficult?

Key words. What words does the author use repeatedly? What words seem to be given
special emphasis? Circle these significant words and look them up in the Oxford English
Dictionary.

Descriptive language. What images or figures of speech are used by the author? What are
the implications of the metaphors and figurative language? For example, consider the very
different implications of describing society as a machine or a body or a ship or a
battleground or a marketplace.

Causal statements. Does the author make any generalizations or claims about causes or
effects? What are the underlying assumptions of these generalizations? For example,
consider the very different implications of stating that witchcraft or anthrax caused a cow's
death.
Primary Source

Fuzzy logic and awkward organization. Look very carefully at places where the argument
seems strained or inconsistent or feeble or evasive. Pay attention to clanging and banging
transitions or abrupt shifts of topic. These places often reveal inner contradictions in the
document.

Other bumps in the reading. Give special scrutiny to any statement that seems odd,
unexpected, puzzling, confusing, funny, or irritating. These places are the crevices that can
open up a source if you dig at them. One of the best ways to develop an interpretation of a
document is to try to understand why these places caught your attention.
4
TECHNIQUES AND TACTICS

Make a list of concrete images that occur in the document.

Make a list of key words that occur in the document.

Cluster either of the preceding lists. Clustering (or mapping) is a technique of free
association that helps you come up with ideas and helps you organize those ideas into a
logical structure. Put a significant word down in the middle of a page, then write down
whatever word next comes to mind. Connect the second word to the first with a line. A third
word can be connected to either the first or second word, and so on. When you run out of
words, draw circles around the clumps or clusters of words that seem to go together. This is
a very effective way to outline a paper.

Paraphrase the document paragraph by paragraph. Ask yourself how each paragraph
advances the overall argument of the document. This technique helps you understand the
document and see its structure.

Free writing. Put the document aside and write 5 minutes each about the title, first
paragraph, last paragraph, and key sentences.

Try to compose truth statements about the document. For example, if you are reading a
slave's narrative, try to complete a sentence that begins, "It is a fact about slavery that . . . ." A
similar technique involves writing "Yes . . . but" statements. For example, you might try to
complete a sentence that begins, "Although it is true that slaves were denied their freedom, . .
. ." Still another variant is to write a bumper sticker for the author of your document. All
these techniques are designed to get you to recognize the main point of a document. The first
two have the additional benefit of forcing you to see complications, contradictions, and
ambiguities in the document. The bumper sticker is a good way to come up with a paper title.

Write down a list of questions that you would like to ask the author of the document. Figuring
out what you don't know about a document is an excellent way to develop an interpretation of
it.

Try to see connections with other course readings. Ask yourself what other document is this
one most like? least like? What are the similarities? the differences? Try to figure out why
this document is being assigned at this point in the course.

Ask yourself what aspects of the document are most compatible with your own values? least
compatible? These questions help expose your own biases and preconceptions.
COMING UP WITH A THESIS
If you follow the suggestions above, you should have no trouble coming up with an
interpretation, which is nothing more than your own handle or hook for understanding a source.
Primary Source
5
Developing a thesis is a creative act, involving the use of conjecture, speculation, and
imagination in an effort to discern a pattern of meaning and significance in the source. Of
course, the creativity must be disciplined and responsible. Your inferences have to be grounded
in the evidence; you can't just make things up. Still, this is an opportunity to let your originality
show. Resist the easy, obvious initial conclusion. Push your thinking. Ask yourself, How far
can I take this idea? The following list provides examples of some of the common types of
interpretations advanced by historians.

Describing the hidden or underlying assumptions in a document. For example, discussing
the unstated limitations in the Declaration's assertion that "all men are created equal."

Describing the implications of the rhetoric or imagery in a document. For example,
explaining how the image of a "body politic" implies a notion of interdependence among the
members of a society.

Exposing unresolved inconsistencies, ambiguities, or inner conflicts in a document. For
example, the historian might show that the ends advocated by a document are at odds with
the means proposed for accomplishing those ends. Or she might show that some of the ends
advocated are mutually contradictory. Or she might show that several of the means proposed
are inconsistent with one another. The historian's aim is to find tensions within the document
and then to explain why the author is ambivalent or self-contradictory.

Exposing a hidden motive or intention. Historians frequently "unmask" sources to show that
an announced aim is not the real one. For example, they might show that professed high
ideals are a cover for the pursuit of power and wealth.

Extending any of the previous four interpretations to the society as a whole. In other words,
claiming that the document is broadly representative of its time and place.

Relating any of the first four interpretations to the author's biography or psychology. For
example, arguing that the inconsistencies in a document arise from an experience in the
author's life or that they reveal a psychological condition.

Finding similarities where one might expect differences. For example, arguing that during
the Revolution, patriots and loyalists shared many of the same values.

Finding differences where one might expect similarities. For example, arguing that the
Puritan experience of conversion was different for men and women.

Finding continuity where one might expect change. For example, arguing that the Civil War
did not change relations between blacks and whites in the South.

Finding change where one might expect continuity. For example, demonstrating that the
legal status of black laborers in colonial Virginia changed dramatically over the first 75 years
of settlement.

Tracing a pattern of evolution or development over time. For example, showing how the
concept of the Union gradually emerged in the years from the Revolution to the Civil War.

Showing that a source reconciles extremes or fashions a middle way. For example, arguing
that Jonathan Edwards reconciled Calvinism and the Enlightenment.

Describing how things actually worked as opposed to how they are thought or said to work.
For example, showing that party nominees were determined by political bosses and not really
chosen by the convention delegates.
Primary Source

Describing behavior as a ritual and explaining the function of that ritual within the society.
For example, arguing that horse races were a ritual by which Southern planters displayed
their social rank and legitimated their social authority.
Fall 1999
6