How to read primary sources

So that you will be better prepared for the exams and better able to make insightful comments about the reading, I am posting a guide to the levels of analysis with which you should treat primary documents. A lot of this information might seem elementary, but I don't know how much experience you all have had with primary sources. I think it's best to put the information out there and hope that it will help you take better reading notes.

The following is taken from Mark Kishlansky (ed.), Sources of the West: Readings in Western Civilization. Volume I: From the beginning to 1715, 6th edition. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. Pp. xiii-xxii.

Level One: The first questions you ask about a document are those for which you can find concrete answers. These answers will provide you with the basic information you need to pursue a deeper analysis of the work. While reading, you should write down the answers to these questions as they become apparent in the document.

1. Who wrote this document? You cannot know why a document was written or what meaning its author intended unless you know something about the person who wrote it. This means more than just knowing the person's name. What was the author's social class? His/her position? Did he/she belong to a certain group? Knowing details such as the author's nationality and his/her political leanings is also helpful in this regard. You should also note whether the document was written by a single individual or if it was produced by a group. In the former case, was this document meant to be published (was the author writing in his official capacity) or was it presumed to be private correspondence? In the latter case, be aware that any document produced by a group would have been subjected to rigorous debate, discussion and revision. These documents, then, tend to reflect wider support and consensus. But because these documents are essentially subject to committee approval, you should consider which statements might be compromises between a stronger line and a weaker (or more conciliatory) line.
2. Who is the intended audience? "The relationship between author and audience is one of the most basic elements of communication and one that will tell you much about the purpose of the document." Knowing the intended audience for a document guides your expectations as you read, allowing you to consider language choices, the knowledge an author presumes his audience has, and what the best form of communication might be. When you come across something that doesn't jive with your expectations, that can be a telling clue about the significance of the document. (For instance, you should notice if a petition to a king contained language which was disrespectful or inappropriate given the king's status.) Knowing the intended audience also makes you aware of material the author omitted, embellished, or twisted.
   
3. What is the "story line?" This means paying attentions to what the document actually says. As Kishlansky puts it, the more often you ask, "What's going on here?", the better you will be able to discern the narrative of the document. There will be signposts in the document that should indicate what precipitated its writing and what actions and responses are hoped to follow.

Level two: These are the questions that enable you to get beyond the simple facts and probe for deeper meaning. "Since your goal is to learn what this document means... you now want to study it from a more detached point of view, to be less accepting of 'facts' and more critical in the questions you pose."

1. Why was this document written? "Understanding the purpose of a historical document is critical to analyzing the strategies that the author employs within it. A document intended to convince will employ logic; a document intended to entertain will employ fancy; a document attempting to motivate will employ emotional appeals. In order to find these strategies, you must know that purpose the document was intended to serve."
2. What type of document is this? "The form of a document is vital to its purpose. The form or genre in which a document appears is always carefully chosen. Genre contains its own conventions, which fulfill the expectations of author and audience." So note whether the document is a petition, a letter, a sermon, a biography, etc. The form tells you what the author hopes the piece will accomplish and what the readers are expecting to get from it.
3. What are the basic assumptions made in this document? "All documents make assumptions that are bound up with their intended audience, with the form in which they are written, and with their purpose. Some of these assumptions are so integral to the document that they are left unsaid, others are so important to establish that they form a part of the central argumentation." These assumptions are often framed as references to the past -- a petition of grievances to a king might mention past laws of the realm, for instance.

Level three: The questions in levels one and two essentially have direct answers. You can answer most of the questions just by looking at the document; that is, you don't need to do any outside reading or heavy mental lifting. In level three, however, you must start thinking historically. This means you will "pose your own questions about the past and to use the material the document presents to seek for answers." These answers aren't always direct or definite. These sorts of questions are the stuff of academic debate. It is at this level that you must use your powers of critical thinking and imagination to assess the value and significance of a document. Answering these sorts of questions is how you craft a historical argument.

1. Can I believe this document? "To be successful, a document designed to persuade, to recount events, or to motivate people to action must be believable to its audience. For the critical historical reader, it is that very believability that must be examined. Every author has a point of view, and exposing the assumptions of a document is an essential task for the reader. You must treat all claims skeptically. One question you will certainly want to ask is, 'Is this a likely story?'"
2. What can I learn about the society that produced this document? "All documents unintentionally reveal things about their authors and about their era. It is the things that are embedded in the very language, structure, and assumptions of the document that can tell you the most about the historical period or event that you are studying." (Kishlansky gives the example of the Petition of Right submitted by the English Parliament to King Charles I in 1628. Kishlansky notes that the very fact that they are petitioning the king, but not explicitly blaming the king, shows that the Parliament still believes in monarchy.) To answer this sort of question, you have to "read into the document rather than simply read it."
3. What does this document mean to me? While for most history assignments you are trying to discern what a primary source meant to the people who wrote it and read it, it's also worth considering what this document might mean for your own society. Documents about Greek democracy and Roman republicanism certainly have meaning in our time. An even better example might be the documents which you will read about early modern Britain. You will see the language of freedom, liberty, protection of property, and due process of law being crafted in documents from seventeenth-century England and this has an unmistakable influence on the founding of the American republic.