Weakness And Strengths Of Primary Sources From The 17th Century
Primary Sources from the 17th Century: Weakness and Strengths
Not very many accounts have survived from the early Northern Colonies; thus, the accounts that have survived are held with great esteem. However, primary sources are not always the best things for an historian and students to study if they are wishing to receive a completely accurate and unbiased outline of history. In many cases primary sources, such as Words of the Bewitched, and Observations of New England Indians, are riddled with fallacies and clumsy mishaps that causes their veracity to be analyzed. While certain aspects of primary sources make them unreliable to historians, other key points such as originality, emotional connection, purpose, and perspective cause the primary sources to become unreplaceable.
First of all, primary sources can be weaken or strengthened according to how original they are. Historians can view a primary source that is original negatively because they may be no other sources that could confirm if the article is actually true or fictional. An example of originality from the Observations of New England Indians that could be viewed negatively from a historians is that although Roger Williams learns the Natives cultures, and feels that the Europeans treatments of the Indians is ruthless, he stills refers …show more content…
For instance, The Testimony against Accused Witch Bridget Bishop was written as a way of keeping information from a trail, while A Key into the Language of America was written as a way for Williams to educate the Puritans (and all New Englanders) on the subject of Indian culture and customs. Furthermore, if the purpose of the two authors were to keep a personal account of their lives such as a diary, or if the purpose was for them to write back home the entire essence of the source would be different. The purpose of writing the accounts can not only effect the author, but also the intended
Not very many accounts have survived from the early Northern Colonies; thus, the accounts that have survived are held with great esteem. However, primary sources are not always the best things for an historian and students to study if they are wishing to receive a completely accurate and unbiased outline of history. In many cases primary sources, such as Words of the Bewitched, and Observations of New England Indians, are riddled with fallacies and clumsy mishaps that causes their veracity to be analyzed. While certain aspects of primary sources make them unreliable to historians, other key points such as originality, emotional connection, purpose, and perspective cause the primary sources to become unreplaceable.
First of all, primary sources can be weaken or strengthened according to how original they are. Historians can view a primary source that is original negatively because they may be no other sources that could confirm if the article is actually true or fictional. An example of originality from the Observations of New England Indians that could be viewed negatively from a historians is that although Roger Williams learns the Natives cultures, and feels that the Europeans treatments of the Indians is ruthless, he stills refers …show more content…
For instance, The Testimony against Accused Witch Bridget Bishop was written as a way of keeping information from a trail, while A Key into the Language of America was written as a way for Williams to educate the Puritans (and all New Englanders) on the subject of Indian culture and customs. Furthermore, if the purpose of the two authors were to keep a personal account of their lives such as a diary, or if the purpose was for them to write back home the entire essence of the source would be different. The purpose of writing the accounts can not only effect the author, but also the intended