Reference no: EM132287908

First steps

(For each of the items below, you should consider make use of research as necessary. Always include full bibliographic citations of whatever sources you consult.)

In each of the following sections, you should consider the points raised and then ask yourself: "How does knowing/thinking this change how I interpret this source?"

a) Author

Go beyond just "who wrote this" and consider what you know about them, about the categories in which they would have grouped themselves (religious, cultural, demographic, economic, political, etc.), about the categories into which they have been grouped, about the brisance of any of those categorical distinctions, etc.

b) Audience/occasion

Consider not just the prima facie audience and/or occasion for the production of the source, but also its continued use and the mechanisms by which it appeared before you in a university class as a primary source. Who would have been excluded from access to this text?

c) Date of composition/copying

What do you know about the historical and cultural context in which this source was first produced and the contexts in which it was preserved/copied/translated/edited?

d) Purpose of the source

What is the stated purpose of the source? What subsidiary motives might there have been in its production and dissemination? To what ends has it been put since its original production?

e) Genre/species

What kind of source is this? How can you tell? What was the function of this sort of thing in its original context of production? What assumptions structure this particular genre (e.g., when reading a obituary, you probably understand that critical engagement with the moral failings of the deceased is not appropriate to the genre)

f) Peculiarities

Engage the source thoughtfully, attending to those moments where your curiosity is piqued, where cultural/historical difference strikes you, where significance seems to lurk. Make note of each of these, in the margins or in your notes.

Second steps

1) What does the text say?

What kinds of claims does the text make?

Where does the text focus its attention?

Have you understood everything in the text (who's who, concepts, terms)?

2) What can you deduce about the culture/point in time/society/author on the basis of what is (or is not) in the text?

What is the genre of the text?

Who is the author and what was her/his station in society and how might that inform how we read the text?

Who was likely the intended audience and how does that impact what was written?

What values, what assumptions about the world, about how society should be ordered, are expressed?

What is not mentioned in the text? Why? How does that impact how you read the source?

3) What are the limits of the text as a window onto the past?

In what ways is the text representative of wider society? Think about the author's status, their preoccupations, the likely audience, the dissemination of the document, etc.

In what ways do its qualities as a text of a certain sort limit what we can use the text to claim?