Ever heard APOCAC? I sat my GCSE History in Y10 (over two years ago now) and got an A* somehow o_O But my teachers taught me that when comparing sources you should consider...oh boy I think I have forgotten some now though
Author
Purpose
Objective or subjective?
C
Accuracy
C
oh boy I have D: if anyone else can help I'd love them.
But basically look at the author, who they are might effect how they report something. In the American west the white man would record the killings of Indian's in a 'heroic' positive light, where-as an America indian would see it as a tragedy!
What purpose did the text have? Was it a speech made to change people's minds? Or was it someone's true thoughts in a diary?
Objective or subjective? Was the person trying to be biased, or where they giving the whole story?
Accuracy and accountability: A well renowned historian will have had to spend ages checking their facts, they wouldn't want to publish something false in case it hurt their respect! Hence it is more likely to be accurate. A soldier on a field might have just made something up to make them seem better. Heck I could write something and someone could use it as a source, doesn't mean it is accurate!
There was also something about when was it written? If it was written close to the date it might mean that the person was a first hand witness, and therefore may have known the details. If someone wrote in 1953 about something that happen in the 1700's how can we know for sure that they are certain what happened? However perhaps thing written later may have been able to have been researched so all sides of an argument were covered.