Comparing source accounts means saying what two sources agree on, where they differ, and why they differ. The explanation is where the marks sit. This lesson uses a defined episode, the Berlin blockade of 1948 to 1949, which you will meet in the Cold War origins unit.
It sits in Core option B study pathways. The general source skills are taught in evidence and source interpretation.
How do you compare two accounts?
- Establish the facts first. From 24 June 1948, road, rail and canal access from the western zones to West Berlin was cut by Soviet authorities. Western powers supplied the city by air. The blockade was lifted on 12 May 1949.
- Agree. List what both sources say that matches those facts.
- Differ. List where they diverge in cause, blame, tone or emphasis.
- Explain. Use author, date, purpose and audience to say why.
- Judge usefulness. For what question is each source good evidence?
Worked example (invented extracts, written for practice)
Source A (invented, a Western newspaper editorial, July 1948): “The city’s people must not be starved into submission. Our aircraft carry flour, coal and medicine because the road was closed against them.”
Source B (invented, an Eastern bloc newspaper article, July 1948): “Currency changes imposed in the western sectors disrupted the economy. Traffic restrictions are a necessary response to protect the eastern zone.”
Agree. Both accept that movement into the city was restricted in 1948.
Differ. A presents the restrictions as an attack on civilians. B presents them as a defensive reaction to a currency change in the western sectors.
Explain. A is written for readers in a country supplying the airlift, so it stresses humanitarian need. B is written for readers in an eastern state that supported the Soviet position, so it stresses the earlier western action. Each author has a reason to give a partial picture.
Usefulness. Both are useful evidence of how each side presented events to its own public. Neither alone proves the intentions behind the blockade. A sound conclusion: “The sources agree that access was restricted but disagree about why, and this reflects the positions their authors wanted to defend.”
What mistake do students make?
Mistaken answer: “Source A is better because it is about helping people, and Source B is lying.”
The student has taken sides and used a present-day moral judgement in place of evidence. The correction is to say what each source reveals about its author’s position and what it leaves out. “Lying” is not a finding unless you can show the claim conflicts with established facts.
Check yourself
1. Write one sentence stating what both sources above agree on.
Show answer
“Both sources accept that movement into Berlin was restricted in 1948.”
2. Give one reason, based on audience, why the sources differ in emphasis.
Show answer
Each was aimed at a readership that supported one side, so each stressed the information that fitted that side’s position.
3. For which question is Source B good evidence, and for which is it weak?
Show answer
Good evidence of how the Soviet-aligned side justified its policy to its public. Weak evidence of what actually caused the blockade, because it gives one side only.
Where this leads next
Use the same steps on the United States containment unit, then move to sourced explanations. The practice set includes a comparison task. For students who would like a teacher to mark source comparisons, we offer online one-to-one History tuition.