Source Analysis, Chronology, Causation and Historiography
Working with sources
Candidates must distinguish primary from secondary sources, assess provenance, purpose, audience and bias, and judge usefulness rather than simply labelling a source reliable or unreliable. A colonial governor's dispatch, a plantation inventory, a wrecking licence, a newspaper report and an oral testimony each answer different questions. Cross-checking two sources is stronger than trusting one.
Chronology and causation
Chronology questions reward secure dates and sequences, so build timelines for settlement, abolition and apprenticeship, the Loyalist era, the labour and suffrage movements, majority rule and independence. Causation questions require distinguishing long-term causes from triggers, and economic, political and social factors. Avoid single-cause answers; explain how factors combine.
Historiography
Historiography means the study of how history has been written and argued. Candidates should recognise that interpretations change: older imperial accounts emphasised governors and merchants, while later scholarship examines enslaved people, women, labourers and migrants as actors. A question asking why historians disagree is asking about evidence, perspective and the questions each generation asks.
Traps to expect
Do not treat a source as unbiased because it is old, or as useless because it is biased; bias itself is evidence of viewpoint. Do not confuse correlation with causation. Remember that a secondary source interprets primary evidence.
Worked example
Given a ship's log recording wrecked cargo and a merchant's letter complaining about wreckers, use both: the log establishes fact, the letter reveals attitudes. Together they support a claim about the wrecking economy more strongly than either alone.