A history book claims that a town's mill closed after a flood and cites a mill record. You want to check the evidence for its claim. What should you do next?

• Count later summaries that repeat the same claim about the mill.
• Read the cited mill record and check its support for the claim.
• Check the book's recent date instead of its cited evidence.

An archaeologist sees a crack running down one side of an old jug. Which statement is an observation rather than an explanation?

• The jug cracked when it fell onto the floor.
• The jug has a visible crack running down its side.
• The jug was discarded after water leaked through it.

If two interpretations use the same photograph, both must be equally well supported.

What is historical interpretation?

• An exact copy of the words found in a historical document
• A record made at the time, before historians examine it
• An explanation built by judging clues from historical sources

A farmer's diary says, 'Our harvest was poor.' Which statement reports this evidence without turning it into a wider conclusion?

• The diary records the farmer's report of a poor harvest.
• Every farm in the region had a poor harvest that year.
• The farmer's family went hungry after the poor harvest.

A museum coin shows a king's face. Its label says, 'Everyone loved this king.' How should you distinguish the coin from the label's claim?

• The coin proves public love; the label explains that proof.
• The coin is evidence; the label's claim needs no further checking.
• The coin is evidence; the love claim is an interpretation.

Any interpretation that mentions evidence must be correct.

Town records list 2,000 people in 1900 and 900 in 1910. One historian suggests disease caused the decrease; another suggests a factory closure. What do these figures alone establish?

• Disease caused the fall; fewer residents must mean more people died.
• The recorded population fell; these totals do not identify the cause.
• A factory closed; fewer residents must mean that jobs disappeared.

A harbour record says a supply ship arrived four days late. Local weather records report a storm during those four days. A historian suggests the storm delayed the ship. Which detail in these records supports the suggestion?

• The harbour record says the captain blamed the storm for the delay.
• The weather record says the ship could not sail during the storm.
• The storm and the ship's recorded delay cover the same four days.

A historian says, 'This crown proves every subject loved the queen.' Which pair of questions best tests the link between the crown and that claim?

• Who owned the crown, and how much did its materials cost to buy?
• What evidence supports it, and what else could that evidence mean?
• How old is the crown, and how many later books repeat the claim?