The context of a source is the situation its author was in when they wrote: what had just happened, what they were trying to do, and what they could not yet know. Explaining context well means staying inside that moment.
You meet this skill whenever a question asks why a source was written, what it shows about its time or how far it can be trusted. It follows from building a dated sequence and leads into evidence and source interpretation.
How do you explain context step by step?
- Fix the date of writing and the date of any event the source describes.
- List what had already happened by that date, using your sequence.
- List what had not happened yet. Anything after the date is outside the author’s knowledge.
- Identify the problem or purpose the author was dealing with.
- Separate three layers in your answer: what the source states (fact claimed), what the author believes or hopes (viewpoint), and what you conclude (interpretation).
Worked example
All material is invented for practice, about the imaginary town of Port Selan.
Source H (invented council minute, 12 May 1902): “This wall will protect the town for generations. The cost of the works cannot exceed the sum raised by the harbour levy.”
Step 1. Written on 12 May 1902.
Step 2, what had happened by then. The storm of October 1901 had flooded the east quay warehouses. The council had been asked to act.
Step 3, what had not happened. The wall was not yet built (it was completed in August 1903). Anything that happened to the wall afterwards was unknown to the writer. Suppose an invented later record says a storm in 1931 overtopped the wall. The council of 1902 could not have known that.
Step 4, the purpose. The minute records a decision and sets a spending limit. The phrase “for generations” is the council’s hope and persuasion, since the town needed to accept the cost.
Step 5, three layers.
- Fact the source claims: the council has decided to build a wall within a budget.
- Viewpoint: the council believes the wall will last for generations. That is a belief, not a result.
- Interpretation, ours: the council was reacting to a recent flood and a limited budget. The strong wording suggests it wanted to reassure residents who were paying the levy.
Our explanation uses only what was known by May 1902.
What mistake do students make?
Mistaken answer: “The council was foolish to say the wall would last for generations, because it failed in 1931.”
The student judged the 1902 writer using a 1931 event.
The council did not know it. The correction is to explain the claim from the author’s situation: a recent flood, a tight budget and a need for public support. If the question asks how far the claim proved right, you may then add the 1931 failure in a separate sentence marked “later evidence shows”.
Check yourself
1. Which of these facts can be used to explain why the council wrote the minute in May 1902? (a) the October 1901 storm (b) the August 1903 completion (c) the levy limit
Show answer
(a) and (c). Both existed in May 1902. (b) is later, so the council could not use it in making its decision.
2. In the minute, “for generations” is most accurately described as a fact, a viewpoint or an interpretation? Why?
Show answer
A viewpoint. It is the council’s own belief and persuasion about the future. It is not a recorded result. It becomes evidence about what the council hoped, not about how long the wall lasted.
3. A student writes: “A merchant in 1903 praises the wall, so people in 1902 must have agreed it would work.” What is wrong?
Show answer
It uses a 1903 source to describe the thinking of 1902 without evidence that the 1902 view matched. The date of the merchant’s praise is later than the decision. It may show attitudes in 1903, not in 1902.
Where this leads next
With context secure, finish the module by checking a timeline against its stated period, then try the integrated practice set.
Learners who want to apply this to the sources in their own depth study can do that with a teacher in online one-to-one History tuition.