Checking Sources in Biography and Nonfiction: Reading Documents Critically
Checking sources is the foundation of every biography and every historical reportage. Two independent sources confirming the same statement make it more credible than a single one, however detailed. But can a reader judge for herself how solid a book is? Yes, if the author discloses the method and she knows what to look for. We show step by step how that works.
What Is Source Criticism?
Source criticism begins with questions put to a document before we use it as the basis for a statement in a book. Who wrote it? When was it made? For what purpose was it written, and whom did it address? The answers show what the source can do and what cannot be drawn from it. These four questions are the basis of every check.
The same piece of information can carry very different weight depending on the author and the occasion. Checking a source is therefore not simply a choice between true and false. What counts is which perspective a document reflects and which of its statements can be relied on.
Checking Memoirs and Official Documents
Memoirs written down years later are worth reading because they show how a participant kept events in mind. Memory can, however, distort what was lived. Knowing how things turned out also subtly changes the account of earlier decisions. That does not mean the writer is lying. Often he simply arranges the past so that it makes sense to him.
An official document seems more neutral but has its limits too. It reports facts from the viewpoint of the authority that produced it. It records what mattered to the office and leaves out the rest. As a source it is therefore significant, yet it offers only one perspective. Comparing the two kinds of source is worthwhile, since their weaknesses mostly do not overlap.
Reliability and Footnotes
When two independent sources confirm a statement, its credibility rises. The word “independent” is key here. If the second document relies on the first, it only creates the appearance of confirmation.
This is where footnotes help. They show the reader where a piece of information comes from and whether the author used a document from the time or a later account. A book without footnotes can be well written but is hard to verify. When checking sources, footnotes are therefore the first place to look: they make it easiest to see what the author bases the account on.
Finding or Interpretation?
Anyone writing nonfiction should make clear where the finding ends and the interpretation begins. The sentence “On that day he left” rests on a document. “He left because he felt cornered” is a hypothesis, even if it sounds convincing. Readers have a right to see this difference. It is also a matter of honesty in dealing with the source.
The same goes for reconstructed dialogue or a character's thoughts. A reconstruction can bring the story to life as a narrative device, but it does not replace a source. It should therefore be flagged, for example with a brief note in the text or in a footnote. That does not disturb the story, and it helps the reader tell documented statements from imagined ones. Checking sources thus includes a look at how the author talks about those sources.
Careful source checking takes nothing away from a book's literary appeal. It builds trust with readers and makes nonfiction better for all of us.