Read and evaluate historical sources
Use provenance, content, context, corroboration and purpose to interpret sources without assuming that a source is simply true or false.
Section Paper 2 · Document Questions
AO3 source skills support Paper 2 in both qualifications. The prescribed topic changes each series; use the current official syllabus. All examples here are invented practice, not Cambridge source material.
Before you begin
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
What is the strongest first step when interpreting a source?
What you will learn
- Identify what a source says and distinguish quotation or detail from inference.
- Assess who created it, when, for whom and for what purpose, then relate those features to the specific claim.
- Corroborate or challenge it with another source and contextual knowledge, and explain what cannot be concluded.
Read the evidence closely
Begin with the question and the source's actual content. Quote or describe a precise detail, then explain what it suggests. A source may be useful for one question and limited for another.
Provenance matters when it affects the claim: creator, date, audience, purpose and circumstances may shape what is said or omitted. Do not label a source unreliable merely because it is biased; explain how a perspective affects its value.
Corroborate and qualify
Compare sources for agreement, difference and the reasons those differences might exist. Use contextual knowledge to test a claim, but keep source evidence distinct from outside knowledge.
StudyForA source exercises use original invented practice claims rather than historical documents. They teach the reasoning process; they do not stand in for the prescribed topic or authentic sources in an exam paper.
Sources for this lesson
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2024–2026 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2024–2026 syllabus update
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2027–2028 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 · 2029–2030 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2024–2026 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2027–2028 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 · 2029–2030 syllabus
- Cambridge IGCSE History 0470 qualification page
- Cambridge IGCSE (9–1) History 0977 qualification page
Pause and explain
When does provenance matter most?
Worked example
An original practice extract praises a policy but gives no evidence of its effect. What can it show?
Show the worked solution
- Identify the creator, date, audience and the words actually used.
- It can show that the creator presented the policy positively to that audience.
- It cannot alone show that the policy worked; compare it with outcome evidence and other sources.
Answer It is evidence of the creator's public presentation of the policy. Without corroboration or evidence about outcomes, it cannot establish that the policy succeeded.
From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
An invented practice extract says a government policy was ‘welcomed by the public’. What should you ask next?
Give me a hint
Identify whether the extract provides evidence for the claim and whose voices are represented.
Compare my reasoning
- Quote the words that make the claim.
- Check creator, date, audience and purpose to explain how the presentation may be shaped.
- Seek evidence from other groups and outcome records; the claim alone does not establish broad public opinion.
The extract shows how its creator presented the policy. It does not establish that the whole public welcomed it unless corroborating evidence supports that broader claim.
Look for these in your work
- Uses precise source content
- Explains relevant provenance
- Identifies an evidence limit
Two invented practice extracts disagree about whether a policy helped workers. How would you evaluate them?
Give me a hint
Compare specific claims and contexts, then test both against evidence about workers' outcomes.
Compare my reasoning
- Identify one point of agreement or disagreement in the extracts.
- Compare each creator's context, audience and purpose where relevant.
- Corroborate with contextual evidence and state what remains uncertain.
The disagreement may reflect different experiences, audiences or purposes. Neither account should be accepted automatically; compare precise details with independent evidence about workers' conditions and explain any limits.
Look for these in your work
- Compares rather than summarises
- Uses provenance only where relevant
- Corroborates with contextual evidence
Write a 3-step source analysis for a new exam-series topic without assuming its prescribed topic in advance.
Give me a hint
The skill transfers; the exact topic and source pack do not.
Compare my reasoning
- Read the question and identify the source's precise evidence.
- Use provenance and context to explain its value or limitation for that question.
- Compare it with another source or contextual knowledge and reach a qualified conclusion.
For any topic, anchor the answer in source content, explain relevant context and provenance, then corroborate or qualify. This method transfers across exam series, but it does not replace studying the prescribed topic published for the candidate's actual series.
Look for these in your work
- Begins with source content
- Connects context or provenance to the question
- Corroborates and qualifies
Common mistakes
- Calling a source reliable or unreliable without explaining why
- Using context to ignore the source's actual content
- Treating an invented practice prompt as a real historical document
What can you explain now?
What can an original extract establish by itself?
Compare with the explanation
What its creator communicated in that context
Whether the policy worked for everyone
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Describe one detail, one relevant provenance point and one limit for a source, keeping each tied to the question.
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.