OPVL

Why do we need to analyze sources?

“OPVL is a technique for analysing historical documents. It is used extensively for testing materials, and is incredibly helpful in becoming critical observers.”

Created byJacob Clifford and Adriene Hillin 2015

ORIGIN

MEANING

PURPOSE

VALUE

LIMITATIONS

ORIGIN

In order to analyse a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and limitation Some question you can answer to know the origin:

• Who created it?
• Who is the author?
• When was it created?
• When was it published?
• Where was it published?
• Who is publishing it?
• Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?

ORIGIN TIPS

This question is especially important. The more you know about the author of a document, the easier it is to answer the following questions. Knowing that George was the author of a document might mean a lot more if you know you are talking about George Washington and know that he was the first president, active in the creation of the United States, a General, etc.

Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?

PURPOSE

This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document. At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating. Some question you can answer to know the purpose:

• Why does this document exist?
• Why did the author create this piece of work?
• What is the intent?
• Why did the author choose this particular format?
• Who is the intended audience?
• Who was the author thinking would receive this?
• What does the document “say”?
• Can it tell you more than is on the surface?

PURPOSE TIPS

• Avoid using“I think the document means this...”

• Try saying “The document means this... because it is supported by x evidence.”

VALUE

Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was created... what value does this document has as a piece of evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put the piece in context. Bring in your outside information here. Some question you can answer to know the value:

• What can we tell about the author from the piece?
• What can we tell about the time period from the piece?
• Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece reflect those circumstances?
• What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?
• Does the author represent a particular ‘side’ of a controversy or event?
• What can we tell about the author’s perspectives from the piece?
• What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how does this piece accurately reflect it?

Historian

VALUE TIPS

It helps if you know the context of the document and can explain what the document helps you to understand about the context.

The following is an example of value analysis: "The journal entry was written by President Truman prior to the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan and demonstrates the moral dilemma he was having in making the decision of whether to drop the bomb or not. It shows that he was highly conflicted about the decision and very aware of the potential consequences both for diplomatic/military relations and for the health and welfare of the Japanese citizens."

LIMITATIONS

The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians?

• With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given because the source was created by one person (or a small group of people), naturally they will not have given every detail of the context.
• Do not say that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof (from another source) that they chose to leave information out.
• Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came after the creation of the document.
• Do not state that the document “does not explain X” (if X happened later).

LIMITATIONS

Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail.

If you are going to comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail.

• Who is it biased towards?
• Who is it biased against?
• What part of a story does it leave out?
• What part of the story is MISSING because of parts left out?

LIMITATION TIPS

• What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document
• How could we verify the content of the piece?
• Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?
• What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you know)?
• What is purposely not addressed?

This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need to briefly explain the parts of the story that the document leaves out. Give examples of other documents that might mirror or answer this document. What parts of the story/context can this document not tell?

How did the events of the Russian revolution build up to the Russian Civil War?

A few days earlier Lenin left Finland and was hiding in the outskirts of the city, in the workingmen's quarters. On the evening of the 25th, he came secretly to the Smolny [Bolsheviks´ headquarters]. According to newspaper information, it seemed to him that the issue would be a temporary compromise between ourselves and the Kerensky Government. The bourgeois press had so often clamored about the approach of the revolution, about the demonstration of armed soldiers on the streets, about pillaging and unavoidable streams of blood, that now this press failed to notice the revolution which was really taking place, and accepted the negotiations of the general staff with us at their face value. Meanwhile, without any chaos, without street fights, without firing or bloodshed, the government institutions were occupied one after another by severe and disciplined detachments of soldiers, sailors and Red Guards [Bolsheviks army], in accordance with the exact telephone orders given from the small room on the third floor of the Smolny Institute.

Trotzky, L. (1919). The decisive Day. From October to Brest-Litovsk (p. 7). Socialist Publication Society. Retrieved from https://0-search-ebscohost-com.biblioteca-ils.tec.mx/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=22089969&lang=es&site=eds-live&scope=site.