GCSE-ready- Home
- Lessons
- KS3 History
- Thinking like a historian: time, sources and evidence
Thinking like a historian: time, sources and evidence
🎬 The doodle video for this lesson is coming soon. Subscribe on YouTube to see it first.
Historians are detectives. They put events in order, ask questions, and test the evidence before they believe it.
Putting time in order
Chronology means putting events in the order they happened.
BC (or BCE) dates count down to year 1. AD (or CE) dates count up from year 1.
A century is 100 years. The years 1001 to 1100 are the 11th century, so 1066 is in the 11th century. A quick trick: for most dates, take the first two digits and add one.
BC (or BCE) dates count down to year 1. AD (or CE) dates count up from year 1.
A century is 100 years. The years 1001 to 1100 are the 11th century, so 1066 is in the 11th century. A quick trick: for most dates, take the first two digits and add one.
Primary and secondary sources
A primary source comes from the time being studied: a letter, a diary, a photograph, a coin, a castle.
A secondary source was made later by someone looking back: a textbook, a documentary, a historian's book.
Both are useful. A primary source shows how people saw things at the time. A secondary source can use many sources and hindsight.
A secondary source was made later by someone looking back: a textbook, a documentary, a historian's book.
Both are useful. A primary source shows how people saw things at the time. A secondary source can use many sources and hindsight.
Testing a source
Ask who made it, when, and why (its purpose). This is its provenance.
A source can be biased: one-sided because of who made it or why. A biased source is still useful, because it shows what that person believed.
An anachronism is something in the wrong time, like a Roman with a wristwatch.
A source can be biased: one-sided because of who made it or why. A biased source is still useful, because it shows what that person believed.
An anachronism is something in the wrong time, like a Roman with a wristwatch.
A monk wrote a chronicle in 1120 praising the Norman kings. Is it a primary source for 1066, and is it reliable?
- It was written about 50 years after 1066, so it is close to the time but not from the day itself.
- Monks often wrote to please powerful patrons, so it may be biased towards the Normans.
- It is still useful: it shows how the Normans wanted to be remembered.
Answer: Close to the time but probably biased; useful for Norman views, so check it against other sources.
Chronology puts events in order. Primary sources come from the time; secondary sources look back. Test a source by asking who made it, when and why. Biased sources can still be useful.
The interactive lesson includes the diagrams for this topic.
Check you have got it
Answer 6 quick questions with instant marking. If you get one wrong, GCSE-ready shows you why and gives you another go. It is free, and you do not need an account.