TL;DR:
Two honest accounts of one event can differ, because each writer saw a part of it and had a purpose.
Compare point of view, purpose and detail, then look for what both agree on.
Corroboration, agreement between independent sources, is what makes a claim reliable.
On the evening of 5 March 1770, a crowd gathered in front of British soldiers in Boston, shots were fired, and five colonists died. People who were there told very different stories about what happened. This is not unusual: it is the normal state of historical evidence. The skill is knowing how to use two imperfect accounts together.
Why accounts differ
A witness sees one part of an event, from one place, in the middle of noise and fear. Later, the same witness writes or speaks with a reason: to defend themselves, to blame someone, to persuade a reader. Even an honest witness leaves things out, remembers some things better than others and describes the event in words that reflect their side.
Worked example: two descriptions of the Boston Massacre
Two kinds of source survive in large numbers: accounts that came from the colonial side and accounts from the British side. To compare them fairly, set up a table. The descriptions below are summaries of the typical claims, so check them against the actual documents your class gives you.
Question | A colonial account | A British officer's account |
|---|---|---|
Point of view | Written from the side of the townspeople who were in the street. | Written from the side of the soldiers and their commander. |
What it stresses | Soldiers fired on a crowd that was largely unarmed. | The soldiers were threatened by a crowd throwing objects and shouting. |
Who gave the order to fire | Often blames the soldiers or their officer. | The commander states he did not give the order. |
Purpose | To show the town was wronged and to gain support. | To defend the soldiers and their commander before the courts and the Crown. |
Look at what happens when we place them side by side. The accounts are not completely opposed. They differ most on the question of who started it and who gave the order, which is exactly the question each side had a reason to answer in its own favour. They are closer on the basics: a crowd, soldiers, a shot or shots, and deaths.
This is a useful pattern. The points where two opposed sources agree are the safest facts, because neither had a motive to invent them. The points where they diverge show the interests at stake. The later trial, in which the soldiers were defended by lawyers including John Adams, is another source to bring in, since the court heard many witnesses and tested their claims.
Point of view, purpose, detail
Point of view. Where was the writer standing, and who were they with?
Purpose. What did they want the reader to conclude?
Detail. Which specifics are given, and which are skipped? What can be checked against other evidence?
Timing. Was the account written the same day, or years later when memory and politics had changed?
Corroboration
Corroboration means that independent sources support the same claim. If two people with opposite interests both say the event took place in the evening, in front of a particular building, you can be fairly sure. If only one side says the crowd was armed with clubs, treat it as a claim to test. The more independent the sources, the more weight the agreement carries.
Independence matters. Two accounts that copy from each other are really one source. Ask whether each writer saw the event, or heard about it from someone else.
Note: Do not conclude that the truth is exactly halfway between two accounts. Sometimes one account is far more reliable than the other on a given point. Judge claim by claim.
What a visual source adds
Some of the most famous evidence of the Boston events is a picture: an engraving made soon afterwards and sold widely. A picture is also an account. It chooses a viewpoint, arranges figures, and leaves things out, and its maker had a message. Treat it as a third source and ask the same questions: who made it, for whom, for what purpose, and how does it match the written accounts?
When a picture agrees with one written account and disagrees with the other, that does not prove which is right. It tells you how that side wished the event to be remembered.
Write the comparison
Say what you are comparing: Name both sources, their dates and their authors.
Point out one big difference: For example, who gave the order, and say why each author might have written it that way.
Point out one agreement: Say which facts both accept.
Judge: Say which account is stronger on which point, and why.
Common mistakes
Calling one account biased and the other true. Both have a view.
Comparing only the content and ignoring purpose and timing.
Missing the common ground, which is the most useful part.
Using one quoted sentence from each as if it were the whole account.
Your plan for this week
Take two accounts of the same event from your course and fill in the four rows of the table. Then write three sentences: one difference, one agreement, and a judgement. You can ask DuckyHelper to quiz you aloud on each source's purpose before you write.
Frequently asked questions
What if I have only one source?
Look for another kind of evidence about the same event, such as a court record, a map or a later account, and compare. If there is nothing else, say so, and treat the claim with care.
Is an eyewitness always the best source?
Not always. An eyewitness may see only a small part and may be affected by stress. A later careful investigation can sometimes be more reliable on some points.
Get started
