history 'biased'
History Homework
1) The word ‘biased’ means being for something. For example if there was a protest about who should be the next Prime minister you would be biased if you wanted one of the nominees to win more than the others.
2) I think that William of Jumièges’ evidence is biased because he would only bring with him writers he could trust. These writers were from Normand as he was a Norman himself. If these writers were from a different country or place then maybe they would betray him. This meant he was biased over the fact that he would only have Normans as his writers.
3)
(a) Brave, slaughtering, lord of battle, marched on, noble conqueror, so many dangers, came back to the battle field his victory, praise, wonderful virtues.
(b) This Duke after following his enemy’s, came back to the battlefield in the middle of the night. At first dawn he took the road to London At length he brought his soldiers safely across the river Thames. From there he went through London. The Londoners gave hostages and gave themselves and all that they owned to William. Finally he won the battle.
(c) Yes because it hasn’t got much detail in it so it sounds boring and uninteresting. It sounds like no one cared about him and he didn’t have any followers because of the poor quality writing.
4) Yes because if they knew everything about him and how kind he was then they would be able to write from the truth and the writers wouldn’t just me making up lies to interest people.
5) Because it makes it look as though William is a big strong hero who is bigger than everyone, like a God or a really strong lord rather than a King.
6) I think source E was written by an Englishman because it doesn’t include anything good about him. It just says how things get worse and worse not “Things were getting worse but this didn’t stop William!”
1) The word ‘biased’ means being for something. For example if there was a protest about who should be the next Prime minister you would be biased if you wanted one of the nominees to win more than the others.
2) I think that William of Jumièges’ evidence is biased because he would only bring with him writers he could trust. These writers were from Normand as he was a Norman himself. If these writers were from a different country or place then maybe they would betray him. This meant he was biased over the fact that he would only have Normans as his writers.
3)
(a) Brave, slaughtering, lord of battle, marched on, noble conqueror, so many dangers, came back to the battle field his victory, praise, wonderful virtues.
(b) This Duke after following his enemy’s, came back to the battlefield in the middle of the night. At first dawn he took the road to London At length he brought his soldiers safely across the river Thames. From there he went through London. The Londoners gave hostages and gave themselves and all that they owned to William. Finally he won the battle.
(c) Yes because it hasn’t got much detail in it so it sounds boring and uninteresting. It sounds like no one cared about him and he didn’t have any followers because of the poor quality writing.
4) Yes because if they knew everything about him and how kind he was then they would be able to write from the truth and the writers wouldn’t just me making up lies to interest people.
5) Because it makes it look as though William is a big strong hero who is bigger than everyone, like a God or a really strong lord rather than a King.
6) I think source E was written by an Englishman because it doesn’t include anything good about him. It just says how things get worse and worse not “Things were getting worse but this didn’t stop William!”