I feel lucky in the fact that I have the opportunity to engage in projects which have open ended outcomes, for this gives me the flexibility to examine issues from an aspect of interest. I have never felt confident teaching reliability; this may be because it is linked to many similar concepts, such as validity and accuracy, therefore I am trying to improve my own understanding.
When working on a narrative of an historical event, I want the information to be as accurate as possible; therefore I test the source materials, If I am to use it, I must trust it, I must believe in it’s reliability. Maybe because I don’t feel confident, I have always found reliability a complex issue to teach, it is a term I, like many others, have used in the classroom many times; I ask students to assess the reliability of a source in assessments.
One aid to understanding reliability is demonstrated by one of my old starter activities entitled ‘As reliable as a Volkswagen’, which used an old Volkswagen advert. More recently I came across a Tweet from Dan Snow (@thehistoryguy) –‘You know, there’s this subject you can take in school which teaches how to evaluate information and the reliability of sources. . . . . . It’s called history.’ , and then we get the annual Horace Greasley story – (https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/himmler-prisoner-staring-defiance-1941/) reappeared on social media, accompanied by the multiple comments confirming the ‘truth’ of the story. The confirmation is usually based the assertion that Greasley’s widow was certain it was him in the photograph face to face with Himmler, and faith trumps analysis. I have also spent some time re-reading Chris Edwards’ 2010 article Down the foggy ruins of time: Bob Dylan and the concept of evidence ((Teaching History 140) https://www.history.org.uk/publications/resource/3622/teaching-history-140-creative-history) reviewing his practical approach to misconceptions and reliability. I had been speaking to a colleague about a series of lessons on Civil Rights, and how I got students to compare and contrast two accounts; one the song The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll, and one a contemporary newspaper report. As you can see I seem to be seeing reliability all over the place, I am lucky enough to be doing some ‘proper History’ research; actually going into the archives and studying Police records and local newspapers, as opposed to my usual research – flicking through a textbook and using the best sources I find.
I’m doing this research for The Battle of Stockton campaign (http://www.battleofstockton.co.uk). The campaign is only a few months old, and in this time we have been remarkably successful’ on 9th September 2018, the Mayor of Stockton-on-Tees herself will be unveiling a plaque, in the High Street, commemorating this little-known event. Along with the unveiling, there will be a number of other events, we have speakers: our local MP, Marlene Sidaway of the IBMT (http://www.international-brigades.org.uk/) and the Historian David Rosenburg. The huge publicity from The Battle of Stockton Ale launch in January generated momentum for the campaign, so much so that we are already planning the 2019 commemoration.
We found that the events of the 10th September 1933 are not well known locally, and even less so nationally, there are very few written accounts, and of these, most are very similar, if not identical. The earliest account is from the North East Daily Gazette newspaper’s report of Monday 11th September, with the dramatic tabloid style ‘Razor blades thrown in Stockton clash’ banner headline top and centre of their front page. This appears to be the basis for all subsequent accounts, thus as this is the primary account, its reliability is well worth investigating.
I’m confident that the majority of students, when asked to analyse a text, such as the Gazette account, and the, near identical, Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail report; also of 11th September 1933, will spot bias. These valuable reports are useful and can also be judged on reliability, especially through an enquiry of the eyewitness’s accounts. Take the quotes in the newspaper reports, for example, all the quotes come from BUF members, telling us something about the membership of this new grouping; their priorities and outlook. There is an issue in the newspaper reports with the blurring of the boundary between direct quotes and the writers report of events, giving the impression that the reporter witnessed the ‘lawful parade’ first hand. It is quite clear, however, which side the reporter favours:
“A coloured man brandishing a heavy pole struck down a young Fascist, who, at the time, was facing the other way.”
and
“The actual fighting did not begin until a member of the crowd poked his two forefingers into the eyes of a blackshirt.”
both Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail, 11th September 1933
For me these accounts are simply wonderful; the details seems to be taken straight out of a Laurel and Hardy film, in fact it makes one wonder if the comic violence shown in Sons of the Desert; released just four months later, was inspired by such reports as these. I can imagine a sneaky Communist stealing all the Blackshirts’ shoes and then laying tin tacks in their path, or someone handing out exploding cigars.
The major drawback with these reports is that they are so one-sided, the individuals are drawn as crude caricatures, underlain with a simplistic good versus evil foundation – however this time the good guys are dressed in black. The challenge for us in the History classroom, is that all subsequent accounts of the events are based upon these reports, the narrow focus of the narrative, with its glorification of the violence, detracts from an understanding of the sequence of events. In an enquiry, when we ask students to consider the source of the information, consider the evidence that is presented, think about how the evidence fits into an explanation, and evaluate the information with respect to prior knowledge, we can usually give them plenty of sources with which to compare. Here there appears to be just the one biased account, with no alternative narrative to measure against, judging and assessing reliability with this in mind seems a tricky task.
After a colleague suggested “seems to me if it’s on wiki that will be a reliable source.” I decided to see what this could produce, I find that Wikipedia is customarily an entertaining source to use, therefore I was initially surprised to find an entry for The Battle of Stockton, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stockton) with a handful of references, I was disappointed to find these references are either based on the 2011 Chris Lloyd article for the Northern Echo (http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/9309751.The_Battle_of_Stockton__1933/) and the associated radio broadcast, or The Telegraph’s 2004 obituary for John Warburton (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/1470744/John-Warburton.html). Disappointing not because of the quality of the reports, but rather because the references are so limited, and in the case of The Telegraph too brief. I was left, in reality, with comparing a 1933 newspaper report to a 2011 newspaper report. As this is not ideal for measuring reliability or utility, it led me to abandon my plans for the time being.
Fear not, this was only temporary, I’ll write about how this difficulty was overcome in a later post.