Before I discuss the themes, I believed to be most interesting, I want to show you a quote from the beginning of the article that provides a great description of primary sources and their importance. “historians must rely on the records left behind by the people we’re trying to understand” (Walbert 2). Walbert provides a clear example to the reader, describing the difference between historians and other scholars that study people and societies. Walbert goes on to say, “historians can’t use direct observation and experimentation to prove their arguments” (Walbert 2). This shows the reader that historians aren’t afforded the ability to go back in time and learn from people and societies from the past, they must learn by studying primary sources. The first key theme that I want to shed light on is “why did the person who created the source do so?” This question can answer several questions that one might have when they first begin to study a specific primary source. The author offers another question for the reader to ask themselves, “Do you think this source was created…show more content… I find this theme to be one of the most interesting out of all. Walbert offers a very important step in identifying a primary source. Understanding who created a specific source will allow one to more accurately determine the credibility and how their opinion may have been swayed one way or the other by their point of view or past experiences. Walbert explains this by saying, “knowing who wrote the source can also help you figure out the angle or perspective that that source will convey.” Not only can information become slightly changed because one’s bias and opinion, the information can be completely different than what happened. The importance of knowing who created a source is huge as it has the potential to accurately or inaccurately write
