Analyzing Historical Sources: The Freedom Rides and Civil Rights
Analyzing Historical Sources: Comparing and Contrasting
A compare and contrast style answer makes a general statement about both sources, then makes explicit reference to each source as evidence.
Valid Contrast Example
The sources disagree about why Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) did not personally join the Freedom Rides. The video source tells us that he feared the violence that might result. The text source tells us he feared being arrested.
Valid Comparison Example
The sources agree that MLK was asked to join the Freedom Rides. The video source showed the director explaining how MLK had been asked to join. The text source mentions a “direct request” for MLK to join.
Evaluating the Value of a Historical Source Based on Origin
Production by the History Channel
The source was produced by the History Channel. It is valuable to a historian as this is a nationally broadcast cable channel in the USA, with a large audience. It allows an insight into what the American public is commonly told about the event.
Date of Production: 2008
The source was made in 2008, which is valuable to a historian because, as it was made almost 50 years after the event, it allows for a long perspective. It draws on many primary and secondary source materials and is less affected by emotions or attitudes of the 1960s.
Place of Production: USA
The source was made in the USA, which is valuable to a historian as it is an American interpretation and explanation of an American event. It allows the historian to see an American perspective of the Lunch-Counter sit-in.
Evaluating the Value of a Historical Source Based on Purpose
- The source was made as a simple, short summary (6 minutes) of the Lunch-Counter sit-ins to communicate basic information. This is valuable to a historian as it highlights what the producers believe are the most important details and the significance of the event.
- The source was made to educate and inform average Americans. It is thus valuable to a historian as it shows the context in which average Americans can understand the event and the details that might be interesting to them.
(It was also made to entertain, which is valuable becauseā¦)
Evaluating the Value of a Historical Source Based on Content
The video includes the major details of the Lunch-Counter sit-in, one of the events of the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. The video includes the date, location, those involved, and a summary of the significance of it to the movement. This is useful to a historian as it provides the key details and a framework that they can then refer to as they research deeper into the event.
Limitations of the Video Source
Limitations Based on Origin
The video source was made by the History Channel, a commercial cable TV provider. It is limiting to a historian based on its reliability, as the cable channel may be less accurate with its information compared to a referenced academic text.
The video source was made in the USA, which may limit its usefulness to a historian, as it may overemphasize the significance of the event in Greensboro, NC, USA.
The video source was made in 2008. It may be limiting to a historian, as it was made almost 50 years after the events. Knowing the outcome of the Civil Rights Movement influences more recent interpretations.
Limitations Based on Purpose
The source was made to entertain, which limits its usefulness to a historian as it may overemphasize the drama of the events (for ratings, maybe!).
Limitations Based on Content
The video source spends much of its 6 minutes discussing the bench and stools in Woolworths, which limits its usefulness to a historian, as it strays (loses focus) from the important details.
The video source only includes the key details, explained in 6 minutes, which limits its usefulness to a historian because it does not go into depth about the event.