ia_2010_hag_c

=Evaluation of Sources (250-400 words) Tips]=

=   = C. Evaluation of Sources Sufficient materials are still not available, more than twenty years after the over-throw of the Pahlavi monarchy. Research has instead followed two tracks, the publication of documentary collections and the analysis of these documents [|[i]] ==Appendix A. (describe what the source IS - e.g. "Speech by Khomeni to the Army, 1979" (or whatever) == Source VII **(what do you mean, Source VII?!) q**uotes a student "this is not a people that is hungry, it's a spiritual revolution. Look at the people breaking [windows]. They are breaking everything. They're not keeping anything for themselves." In terms of purpose, the source is valuable as it clearly demonstrates the opinion of one directly involved within the strikes. It shows that the Iranians did not want a materialistic revolt but what they quote to be a spiritual one. But in his calls to Action Khomeini also made a point of remarking on the poverty Iranians suffered, as a sign of spiritual corruption of the regime and its western supporters. [|[ii]] With regards to origin, this source comes from Autumn 1978 by a student in support of Khomeini. We therefore have firsthand knowledge and experience of the strikes and conditions. However the origin of this source can be considered a limitation as the student would have been in the middle of Strike and wrapped up within the energy, excitement and anger of the situation. The student is also a supporter of Khomeini therefore the source is likely to be biased towards the ideas and aims of Khomeini. The Purpose of this source is also limited due to the fact that it is only the view of one young man. Students, being at young ages, are likely to be susceptible to the power and control of views of Khomeini. **(this is not really its PURPOSE, you are commenting again on its ORIGIN. For PURPOSE you need to consider why the student was recording his thoughts at this time - were they for television, a newspaper? Who was interviewing him? Why?)**

==Appendix B .(as source A - summarise what it is)  == The second source is IV **(WHAT?!!!!!)**. Taken from the SAVAK (the domestic security and intelligence service of Iran from 1957 to 1979) just after the 5 killings **(What 5 killings are you talking about?!)**. This source is valuable in terms of purpose as it depicts an inside aspect of the political/ military view towards the Khomeini followers and strikes. It was also written only days after the killings suggesting therefore there was very little time for the story to be altered. In terms of Origin this source is also valuable in the fact that it was written as a government memorandum of the SAVAK and kept only for government use. This suggests reliability in the source as one would not expect alterations for government only information, the government would need to know the whole truth. “The lack of documentation in recently published SAVAK files makes it unlikely [to be false information]” [|[iii]]


 * This is only half an answer - you only consider VALUABLE qualities in the source. You MUST consider LIMITATIONS too. This is a weak analysis for (b) because I get no idea about what the source is, and what it basically tries to say.**

[|[i]] Charles Kurzman "The unthinkable revolution in Iran" 175 [|[ii]] Charles Kurzman "The unthinkable revolution in Iran" 79 [|[iii]] Charles Kurzman "The unthinkable revolution in Iran" 37