What might be the limitations on the usefulness of the sources for supporting their arguments? After looking at the primary sources about annexation, which historian’s argument do you find more compelling, and why do you find it so? If you find both arguments equally compelling, how could you combine the arguments?
Using Primary Sources to Evaluate Secondary Sources When historians are faced with competing interpretations of the past, they often look at primary source material to help evaluate the different arguments. Four speeches follow, each by an American politician who supported U.S. annexation and rule over the Philippines. The first is from President William McKinley’s State […]