How Do Historians Know?

Let’s look at our sources of information

Historians are concerned first and foremost about the reliability of sources.

That means we want sources which are accurate and can be verified.

Establishing reliability can be hard.

Which of the following would be the most reliable source of information on the health risks of smoking? a) A report by the tobacco industry. b) A 50 year study by the University of Toronto Medical School. c) Your uncle Gus, a lifetime smoker.

Which would be the most reliable source of information about current conditions on a First Nations Reserve in Manitoba? a) A diary written by an elder resident in b) A federal government report written by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs in c) A CBC television documentary produced last year.

What would be the best source of information regarding the violence last week’s victory speech by the new PQ Premiere-elect of Quebec? a) The account of Mme. Marois herself. b) The account of a person at the rally who saw the incident c) The account of the man accused of the shooting. d) The account of a police officer at the scene.

Historians use different sources for different purposes.

The goal is to have as many different sources as possible.

Primary Sources accounts of participants or witnesses, usually in their own words OR a document or record produced at the time - eg: a diary, autobiography, letter, witness statement, report card, photograph, audio recording

Artifacts b) Artifacts: anything made or used by people in the past -eg: clothing, coins, medals, weapons, tools, furniture, garbage, you name it! Artifacts do not “speak” for themselves but have to be interpreted in context, by someone familiar with it.

Secondary Sources accounts written or produced by people who did NOT witness events, but who are recording interpretations of them -eg: newspaper articles, TV documentaries, and history books are mostly secondary

Unfortunately, all sources reflect bias

Bias: an inclination to prefer one point of view or interpretation over others, which may be equally if not more valid.

Some sources are very very biased, like a speech from a politician. Others are far less so, like a journal entry from a soldier in the trenches of WWI. The politician will be speaking with an intent to convince an audience - the soldier will be writing from his own point of view, but not usually to convince anyone of anything.

The role of the historian is to account for, and minimize the bias in an attempt to accurately portray the past.