Mastering the Source Enquiry: Evaluating Four Contemporary Sources

Welcome to the "detective work" of your History A Level! In Unit Group 1 (British Period Study and Enquiry), Section A asks you to do something very specific: take four contemporary sources and use them to test a hypothesis. This isn't just about reading; it's about investigating. By the end of these notes, you’ll know exactly how to pull a source apart and put it back together to build a high-scoring argument.

What is the Source Enquiry?

In your exam for Unit Group 1, you will be given four primary or contemporary written sources. These are documents written at the time of the events you are studying. Your task is to answer one compulsory question, worth 30 marks. This entire section tests AO2: your ability to analyse and evaluate source material within its historical context.

Important Note: While you need to know your history, "knowledge of context" is only rewarded here when you use it to evaluate the sources. Don't just write everything you know about the topic; use your knowledge to prove if a source is reliable or useful!

Key Terms to Know

  • Contemporary Source: A document created during the time period being studied (e.g., a diary entry from 1550).
  • Hypothesis: A statement or "theory" provided in the question that you must test using the sources (e.g., "The main cause of the rebellion was religious grievance.").
  • Provenance: The "biography" of the source—who wrote it, when, where, and why.
  • Attribution: The information provided above or below a source that tells you its origin.

The "Big Three" of Source Evaluation

To evaluate a source effectively, you should always look at three specific areas. A simple way to remember this is the NOP mnemonic:

1. Nature
What type of source is it? Is it a private letter, an official Act of Parliament, a public speech, or a secret report? Example: A private letter might be more honest than a public speech designed to impress an audience.

2. Origin
Who wrote it and when? Was the author an eyewitness? Were they a supporter or an enemy of the person they are writing about? Example: An entry in King John’s own records will have a very different perspective than a chronicle written by a monk who hated him.

3. Purpose
Why was it produced? Was it meant to persuade, to record facts, to complain, or to deceive? Example: A government proclamation is designed to show strength and control, even if the reality on the ground was chaotic.

Using Historical Context as a Tool

Don’t worry if this seems tricky at first! The trick is to treat your historical knowledge like a "fact-checker."

When you read a source, ask yourself: "Does this match what I know happened?"

  • If the source says the economy was booming, but you know there were three years of failed harvests, you can challenge the accuracy of the source.
  • If a source expresses fear of a Spanish invasion in 1588, you can use your contextual knowledge of the Spanish Armada to explain why the author felt that way.

Quick Review: Context should always be "pinned" to a specific detail in the source. Never just write a paragraph of general history!

How to Structure Your Answer

The examiners are looking for a substantiated judgement. This means you need to reach a conclusion based on evidence. Here is a step-by-step guide to building your essay:

Step 1: The Introduction

Briefly state the hypothesis and give a "roadmap" of which sources support it and which ones challenge it.

Step 2: Analysis of Sources (Grouping)

Don't just describe Source A, then Source B, then Source C. Instead, group them by how they relate to the hypothesis.
"Sources A and C suggest that religious changes were the main cause of unrest..."
"However, Sources B and D offer a different view, focusing on economic factors..."

Step 3: Comparative Evaluation

This is where the high marks live! Compare the sources against each other.
"Source A is more convincing than Source B because it is a private document, whereas Source B is a piece of propaganda intended to hide the truth."

Step 4: The Conclusion

Bring it all together. To what extent do the four sources, as a whole, support the hypothesis? Be balanced but make a clear choice.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

  • The "Laundry List": Avoid simply listing what each source says (e.g., "Source A says X. Source B says Y."). You must evaluate why they say it.
  • Ignoring the Attribution: Always read the little bit of text that tells you who wrote the source. It contains vital clues for your evaluation!
  • Losing Sight of the Question: Every paragraph should relate back to the hypothesis given in the exam paper.
  • Floating Knowledge: Don't include "fun facts" about the period unless they help you judge the reliability or usefulness of a source.

Key Takeaway Summary

The Source Enquiry is about testing a theory (hypothesis) using four contemporary voices. To succeed, you must look beyond what the sources say (content) and investigate why they say it (provenance), using your own knowledge of the period (context) to decide which sources are the most "convincing."

Note: For help with comparing modern historians' views, see the chapter "Historical interpretations: comparing two extracts".