Primary Evidence Paper

Choose ONE of the questions below and construct a 4-5 page typed essay discussing how the example used primary materials. In each case you need to highlight the issues/the debate, discuss what the primary evidence is, and what challeges the primary evidence presents. The questions under each larger question are to help you think about these larger issues. You do not specifically answer these questions, rather you are to create a cohesive essay. Everything you need is on reserve.



1.Read the three primary accounts (Aage Bohr's, Robert Oppenheimer's and Werner Heisenberg's) of the conversation between Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg and the question of the atomic bomb. Read the excerpts from secondary sources (on reserve) describing this conversation. All are in the folder entitled Gohr-Heiseberg Controversy.(1)

Think about:

• What are the problems with this evidence?
• As a historian, what would you do with this apparently conflicting evidence?
• What other kinds of information did these historians use to interpret the Bohr/Heisenberg. encounter?
• Can you detect bias in any of the historians' interpretation? Do they give credence to either the Bohr or the Heisenberg. view? Why?
• Are the historians' interpretations influenced by the time in which the historians are writing?
• What is the significance or purpose of this conversation?
• Do all accounts, both primary and secondary agree?

2.Read the article "Browning's Version" Lingua Franca Feb., 1996 pp. 48-57. (on reserve) as well as some of the book reviews provided. Discuss:

• What are the opposing views of Daniel Goldhagen (Hitler's Willing Executioners) and Christopher Browning (Ordinary Men)? Both have written books detailing the participation of ordinary Germans in the Holocaust. What historical evidence each is using to support his interpretation.
  
  
• How do you account for the differing interpretations considering the commonality of some of the primary sources. How do you decide who to believe? As a historian, what would you do with this possibly conflicting evidence? Consider the background of the authors and the social and political climate in which each of these books have been written.
  
  

3. View the video, A Midwives Tale (on reserve in the IMC, 3rd Floor King) and think about how the historian used her sources, previously dismissed as having no value, to expand our knowledge of 18c American Women's lives. Historians of 18c women's history have difficulties with primary sources because so few women could read and write, had the means to keep journals, etc., or had daily lives that would leave some sort record to be studied (woven cloth, recipes, etc.). You may also wish to look at the website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/midwife/. Consider the following questions.

• What did Martha record in her diary and why was this information not considered valuable? How did the historian use other sources to make clearer sense of Martha's diary.
  
  
• What data does the historian create out of seemingly just words? Also how does Martha deal with social issues such as rape. What does this information tell us about women's status? How does the historian enhance this information with other primary sources?
  
  
• How does the historian use Martha's diary to examine the new social order and the political changes in the colonies and the United States.
  
  
• Look at the credits at the end of the video. What "sources" were used to create the video as well as enhance the narration?

4. In 1990, the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum launched and exhibit on the Enola Gay, the airplane that dropped the Atomic bomb on Hiroshima. The exibit incited controversy because of the way in which it interpreted the act of dropping the bomb. Read the actual exhibit (titled, Crossroads) and some of the artilces in the folder titled "Enola Gay Controversy." You may also want to look at the website: Historians Committe for open Debate on Hiroshima http://www.historians.org/directory/committees/hiroshima.html

• Who are the principle groups and individuals involved in the controversy and what are they upset about?
• Given the documents the Smithsonian wanted to display, how could the interpretations vary so widely?
• When should morality and public sentiment dictate what is displayed (or even published)? Were captions needed in this exhibt or could the documents, photos, and other primary evidence just have been displayed with nothing more than an identifying description?
• Did this controversy result in censorship or in a better balanced exhibit?

5. Over the years questions have arisen about the veracity and authenticity of Alex Haley's Roots. Claims of plagerism and errors factual evidence have plagued the novel (and the later television mini-series). Alex Haley has called his work "faction". Others have called it fiction. Yet, it has been treated as fact. Read the article in Village Voice by Philip Nobile in the reserve packet titled, "Alex Haley's Roots". Read other articles in the packet to get a balanced view of the issues and construct a paper discussing Alex Haley's use of historical evidence. Some Questions to help you think about the issues:

• What was Alex Haley's purpose in writing Roots? Did he intend this work to be fiction or history?
• If the portrait of the African - American experience is accurate, does it matter if Haley's research is not?
• What other historical evidence could Haley have used to back up his claims?
• What sources does Haley use?

6. Holocaust deniers make claims that the holocaust never happened and that Hitler had no official policy to exterminate the Jews. David Irving has been a vocal supporter and prolific publisher of such "evidence". View the video, "Holocaust on Trial" which re-inacts his court case in which he claimed another scholar libeled him. Take a look at several articles in the packet, "Holocaust on Trial" as well as Mr. Irving's web site, http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/index.html the International Campaign for Real History. (You may also want to look at his publications about his trial at : http://www.focal.ort/lipstadt/judgement/. Discuss what evidence is used either in the trial or in Mr. Irving's writings. Some questions that may help your thoughts:

• Does David Irving's evidence seem credible?
• Does the evidence against David Irving seem credible?
• What evidence is missing in either arguement?