CMS150 - Winter 2001
Trials of Conscience: Litigation
and the Rhetoric of Identity
Source Analysis Form
The Authorship of the Text
Is the source autobiographical? If yes,
What do we know about the author from sources independent of this text?
Was this text written directly by the author or dictated?
Is the source a memoir or recollection by someone other than the person accused?
If yes,
What do we know about the person who wrote the text independent of the
text itself?
What was the relationship of the person who wrote the text to the person
accused?
What was the relationship of the person who wrote the text to the
accusors?
Did the person who wrote the text have any official role in the trial of the
accused?
Does the trial role (or absence thereof) of the person who created the text
affect the way you evaluate the text's historical accuracy and reliability?
Did the person who wrote the text have any unofficial role in the trial of
the accused?
Did the person who wrote the text have a particular personal or political
agenda implicated directly or indirectly by the trial and its outcome?
Do such agendas affect the way you evaluate the text's historical accuracy
and reliability?
Is the text an official document (e.g., transcript) of the trial? If yes,
Who created the text?
Under whose authority did the person who created the text act?
In what language was the text originally prepared?
Is this the native language of the person accuse?
Do we know if the person accused had any knowledge of the language in
which the text was prepared?
Did the accused, or any person representing the accused, have any
opportunity to review or correct the text?
Did any persons other than the accusors have any opportunity to review
or correct the text?
The Nature of the Text
When the text created?
How contemporaneous was the creation of the text with the trial?
If there was any delay between the trial and the creation of the text, how do you
account for it?
Do matters or events which explain a delay between the trial and the creation of the
text undermine the reliability of the text as a historically accurate source?
Does the text reveal traits of a specific literary genre?
If the text is an example of a literary genre, how do conventional or generic
features of the text affect the way you evaluate the text for historical accuracy?
Evidence in Addition to the Text
What other accounts of the trial exist in addition to the one we have read for class?
Are these accounts explicitly autobiographical, recollective or transcriptive in
nature?
Do you know if these accounts agree with or contradict our text's representation
of the trial and its participants?
What factors may explain agreements and contradictions between different
accounts of the trial?
If these other accounts are not explicitly autobiographical, recollective or
transcriptive in nature, what sort of accounts are they?
If these other accounts are not explicitly autobiographical, recollective or
transcriptive in nature, how should you value them in coming to an historical
understanding of the trial?
Is there evidence of the trial from contemporary sources other than written texts
(e.g. inscriptions, account books, paintings or mosaics)?
How can you use these types of evidence in coming to an historical understanding
of the trial?