RH.11-12.3: Evaluating Explanations for Historical Events Against the Evidence

Overview

Lesson Procedure

60-75 minutes of class time across 5 phases.

1. Warm-Up5-10 minutes
2. Direct Instruction20 minutes
3. Guided Practice15 minutes
4. Independent Practice15-20 minutes
5. Closure5-10 minutes

1. Warm-Up5-10 minutes

   Start with a small mystery that has more than one explanation.

   Warm-Up Prompt

   "On Monday morning a classroom window is found broken. Three explanations go around: a baseball from the field, the weekend windstorm, or a break-in. A custodian says the glass is on the inside floor. Nothing is missing. Which explanation fits these two facts best? Which explanation do they not rule out? What one piece of evidence would settle it?"

   Collect answers. Glass on the inside fits a blow from outside (a ball or the wind), and nothing missing weakens the break-in explanation without ruling it out. Name the moves: students evaluated several explanations, chose the one that best accords with the evidence, and said what stays uncertain. Tell students that RH.11-12.3 asks for these three moves with historical sources, where the witnesses often disagree.

2. Direct Instruction20 minutes

   Part 1: Four tests for an explanation. Put this table on the board and keep it up all period. Use Diagram 2 to show the routine and the verdict scale.

   Four tests for an explanation of a historical event

   Test	Question to ask	Warning sign
   Fit	Does it account for all the key details, or only some?	It ignores a detail that points the other way
   Contradiction	Does any detail in the texts contradict it?	A contradicting detail is explained away
   Source	Who reports the evidence, when, and did they see, hear or infer it?	All the evidence comes from one side or one witness
   Uncertainty	What would we need to know that the texts do not tell us?	The verdict claims more than the evidence shows

   Part 2: Model with Lexington. Read T1, the British account, then T2, Coburn's narrative. T1 was printed in Boston in 1779 from papers a British officer left behind; its author, like the troops, calls the militia "rebels." Coburn published his history in 1912, and his footnote 124, printed at the end of T2, answers the British version directly. Students mark each claim about the first shot in both texts, then work the four examples.

   On the night of the 18th of April, 1774 at nine o'clock, the grenadiers and light-infantry of the army at Boston, received orders to embark immediately under the command of Col. Smith, in the men of war's boats, and proceed according to his directions. They embarked at the common in Boston, and crossed to the shore lying between Charlestown and Cambridge, where they landed and received a day's provisions: They began their march about twelve o'clock for Concord, that being the place they were ordered to go to, for the purpose of destroying some military stores laid up there by the rebels. The troops received no interruption in their march until they arrived at Lexington, a town eleven miles from Boston, where there were about 150 rebels drawn out in divisions, with intervals as wide at the front of the divisions; the light-infantry who marched in front halted, and Major Pitcairn came up immediately and cried out to the rebels to throw down their arms and disperse, which they did not do; he called out a second time, but to no purpose; upon which he ordered our light-infantry to advance and disarm them, which they were doing, when one of the rebels fired a shot, our soldiers returned the fire and killed about fourteen of them; there was only one of the 10th light-infantry received a shot through his leg; some of them got into the church and fired from it, but were soon drove out.

   1In the brief moments which followed others were hastening to join the ranks, and as they arrived Orderly Sergeant William Munroe attempted to form them into a second line, and partially succeeded. Even later still a few more reached the Common, and were back to the British as they wheeled grandly around the easterly end of the meeting-house and at last stood on Lexington Common. Captain Parker's entire force then numbered between sixty and seventy men, ununiformed, scantily armed, poorly disciplined, pitifully few as compared with the three or four hundred of the British.

   2It is no wonder that one minute-man exclaimed:

   3"There are so few of us it is folly to stand here."

   4Captain Parker heard the remark, and answered:

   5"The first man who offers to run shall be shot down."

   6On came the British, almost on the run, the light companies of the Tenth Regiment in advance. At their head rode Major John Pitcairn and two other mounted officers.

   7"Stand your ground," exclaimed Parker; "don't fire unless fired upon. But if they want to have a war let it begin here!"

   8Major Pitcairn galloped up to within six rods of Captain Parker's foremost line, and exclaimed:

   9"Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, and disperse."

   10Captain Parker, seeing the utter hopelessness of armed resistance, gave the order to disperse and not to fire. He did not, however, order his men to lay down their arms. Evidently Pitcairn wished to disarm them, for while they were dispersing he shouted again:--

   11"Damn you, why don't you lay down your arms?"

   12But no answer came back, and each one of Capt. Parker's little band retiring from the field, carried his gun with him.

   13Then one of the other mounted officers, about two rods behind Pitcairn, name unknown, brandished his sword and the regulars huzzaed in unison. He then pointed his pistol towards the minute-men and fired.

   14Pitcairn was back to that officer, so did not see him fire. He heard the discharge, and easily might have mistaken it as coming from an enemy, for he had not authorized it himself.[124] Furious with passion he gave the order:

   15"Fire!"

   16There was hesitation to obey from his men, for he repeated:

   17"Fire, damn you, fire!"

   18The first platoon of eight or nine men then fired, evidently over the heads of the minute-men, for none were killed or wounded. Pitcairn saw the effects of that volley and realized that his men did not aim to kill. Then came his next order:

   19"G----d d----n you, fire at them!"

   20The second volley surely was fired to kill.

   [...]

   21[124] The English contention is that the Americans fired first. See letter of W. S. Evelyn, who was with Percy; De Bernicre's Account, and Lieut.-Col. Smith's Report. It seems to me of but little moment as to who fired first. The council of war, convened by Gen. Gage, April 18, wherein it was determined to march out and destroy the public stores of Massachusetts was the first real hostile act and could only lead to war. Major Pitcairn has denied that he authorized that first shot. I believe him to have been gruff and profane, but honest, brave, and faithful to his King. He died from wounds received in the Battle of Bunker Hill.

   • Explanation A: the militia fired first (T1)

     The British account: "one of the rebels fired a shot, our soldiers returned the fire."

     Result: Evaluate the source. The author marched with the troops ("our light-infantry"), so he may have been close to the event, but he writes for his own side and does not say whether he saw the shot himself. One of his details disagrees with T2: he counts "about 150 rebels," while Coburn counts "between sixty and seventy men." Verdict: possible, but it rests on one side's report.

   • Explanation B: a British officer fired first (T2)

     Coburn: "one of the other mounted officers, about two rods behind Pitcairn, name unknown, brandished his sword ... He then pointed his pistol towards the minute-men and fired."

     Result: Evaluate the source. Coburn gives a detailed scene, but he wrote 137 years after the event, the excerpt does not show which witness saw the pistol shot, and the officer is "name unknown." He also marks his own inference about Pitcairn: he "easily might have mistaken it." Verdict: consistent with T2's narrative, but its evidence is not visible in the excerpt.

   • Where opposed sources agree (T1 and T2)

     T1: Pitcairn "cried out to the rebels to throw down their arms and disperse." T2: "Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, and disperse."

     Result: Both accounts report the same order, and both report that the militia kept their arms: T1 says the order was given twice "to no purpose," and T2 says each man "carried his gun with him." Both report British soldiers firing on the militia. When sources from opposite sides agree on a detail, that detail is the strongest evidence the texts offer.

   • A model verdict (86 words)

     Task: in 100 words or fewer, state which explanation of the first shot best accords with T1 and T2, and what they leave uncertain.

     Result: Both accounts agree that Pitcairn ordered the militia to lay down their arms, that the men kept them, and that British soldiers fired on them. On the first shot they conflict, and each rests on one side's report: T1's British officer blames "one of the rebels," while Coburn blames a mounted officer, "name unknown." Neither excerpt names the witness who saw the first shot, so the texts leave that question open. The best-supported conclusion is narrower: whoever fired first, the volleys that killed militiamen were British.

   Show Diagram 1, which sets the two explanations side by side. Point out that the verdict in example 4 does not choose A or B; it chooses a narrower claim that both texts support and says openly that the first shot is uncertain.

3. Guided Practice15 minutes

   Return to Coburn's footnote at the end of T2. It adds two claims: that Major Pitcairn "has denied that he authorized that first shot," and that the council of war in Boston "was the first real hostile act and could only lead to war." In pairs, students apply the four tests to each claim. Stop and ask: Does Pitcairn's denial tell us who fired first? What kind of explanation is the council of war?

   Teacher model: Pitcairn's denial concerns his own orders. It fits explanation B, but it fits explanation A just as well, since a militiaman's shot would also be one Pitcairn did not authorize; and it is a participant's statement about his own conduct. The council of war is a different kind of explanation: it answers why fighting began that day at all, not who pulled the first trigger. Coburn treats it as the explanation that matters ("It seems to me of but little moment as to who fired first"), which is his judgment as a historian. Both kinds of explanation can be true at once; a verdict should say which question it answers.

   Practice verdict for Activity 2. The passage below was written for this page and contains deliberate errors. Pairs will test it against T1 and T2.

   The evidence proves that a British officer fired the first shot at Lexington. Coburn names the officer and shows him firing his pistol at the minute-men (T2). The British account cannot be trusted at all, because a British officer wrote it, while Coburn, as a historian, has no point of view.

   Pitcairn himself denied that he authorized the first shot, which proves that the Americans could not have fired it. The two accounts also agree about the size of Captain Parker's company, about 150 men, so the numbers are not in doubt.

   Therefore the question of who fired first at Lexington is settled, and no part of it remains open.

4. Independent Practice15-20 minutes

   Students read T3 on their own. John White, governor of the Roanoke colony, sailed to England for supplies in 1587 and could not return until August 1590. His account was first printed in Richard Hakluyt's collection of voyages in 1600; T3 uses the modernized text in Thomas Wentworth Higginson's A Book of American Explorers (1877), and its last paragraph, in brackets, is Higginson's note. Students list every explanation for the colonists' absence that the text allows, then take the quiz, which uses T3 together with T1 and T2.

   1In all this way we saw in the sand the print of the savages’ feet, of two or three sorts, trodden [in] the night; and as we entered up the sandy bank, upon a tree, in the very brow thereof, were curiously carved these fair Roman letters, C R O: which letters presently we knew to signify the place where I should find the planters seated, according to a secret token agreed upon between them and me at my last departure from them. Which was, that in any ways they should not fail to write or carve upon the trees or posts of the doors the name of the place where they should be seated; for at my coming away they were prepared to remove from Roanoke fifty miles into the main. Therefore at my departure from them in 1587, I willed them, that, if they should happen to be distressed in any of those places, then they should carve over the letters or name a cross ＋ in this form; but we found no such sign of distress. And, having well considered of this, we passed toward the place where they were left in sundry houses; but we found the houses taken down, and the place very strongly enclosed with a high palisado of great trees, with curtains and flankers, very fort-like. And one of the chief trees or posts at the right side of the entrance had the bark taken off; and five feet from the ground, in fair capital letters, was graven C R O A T O A N, without any cross, or sign of distress. This done, we entered into the palisado, where we found many bars of iron, two pigs of lead, four iron fowlers, iron saker-shot, and such like heavy things, thrown here and there, almost overgrown with grasses and weeds.

   2From thence we went along by the water-side, toward the point of the creek, to see if we could find any of their boats or pinnace; but we could perceive no sign of them, nor any of the last falcons and small ordnance which were left with them at my departure from them. At our return from the creek, some of our sailors, meeting us, told us they had found where divers chests had been hidden, and long since digged up again, and broken up, and much of the goods in them spoiled and scattered about, but nothing left, of such things as the savages knew any use of, undefaced. [...] This could be no other but the deed of the savages, our enemies, at Dasamonguepeuk, who had watched the departure of our men to Croatoan, and, as soon as they were departed, digged up every place where they suspected any thing to be buried. But although it much grieved me to see such spoil of my goods, yet on the other side I greatly joyed that I had safely found a certain token of their safe being at Croatoan, which is the place where Manteo was born, and the savages of the island our friends....

   [...]

   3[No trace of this lost colony has ever been discovered; and we can only guess at the fate of the first white child born in America, Virginia Dare. Strachey, the secretary of the Jamestown (Virginia) colony, twenty years after, was told by the Indians that seven of the English, “who escaped the slaughter at Roanoke,” were preserved alive by a certain chief; but neither he nor Captain John Smith has left on record any thing more.]

5. Closure5-10 minutes

   Exit ticket: On an index card, write the verdict you would give on the first shot at Lexington in one sentence, and one sentence naming a piece of evidence, not in T1 or T2, that would change your verdict.

   Teacher note on language and point of view: The sources are quoted exactly as published. T1 calls the militia "rebels," the British term, and so does Major Pitcairn as Coburn quotes him. T2 also prints Pitcairn's profanity as Coburn reported it ("damned," "Damn you" and a partly blanked oath); you may read those lines aloud without the oaths. Coburn's footnotes, left out of this excerpt, cite sworn depositions of Lexington witnesses for these scenes, so when the lesson says the excerpt does not show his witnesses, it means only the excerpt. Coburn's own wording ("little band," "pitifully few") shows sympathy with the Lexington men, just as T1 shows the British side. White calls the Native peoples of the region "savages," a term of his time that is now recognized as dehumanizing. It is kept only because the passages are quoted exactly and the word shows White's point of view; in discussion and in writing, students should use it only inside a quotation and otherwise name the peoples (the Croatoan, or the people of Secota, Aquascogoc and Dasamonguepeuk) or say "Native people." In T3 White uses the word both for people he calls "our enemies" and for the people of Croatoan, whom he calls "our friends," and Manteo, named in T3, was a Croatoan man who had traveled to England and worked with the colonists. Higginson's phrase "the first white child born in America" repeats a nineteenth-century claim; Virginia Dare is usually described today as the first child born to English parents in the Americas. Ask students, whenever a passage judges a person or group, to name whose judgment it is.

   Homework passage. John White's account, from 1587, of what happened to fifteen Englishmen left at Roanoke the year before, used for the homework problems.

   1We understood by them of Croatoan, how that the fifteen Englishmen left at Roanoke the year before by Sir Richard Grenville were suddenly set upon by thirty of the men of Secota, Aquascogoc, and Dasamonguepeuk in manner following. They conveyed themselves secretly behind the trees, near the houses where our men carelessly lived. And, having perceived that of those fifteen they could see but eleven only, two of those savages appeared to the eleven Englishmen, calling to them by friendly signs, that but two of their chiefest men should come unarmed to speak with those two savages, who seemed also to be unarmed. Wherefore two of the chiefest of our Englishmen went gladly to them; but, whilst one of those savages traitorously embraced one of our men, the other with his sword of wood, which he had secretly hidden under his mantle, struck him on the head, and slew him; and presently the other eight and twenty savages showed themselves.

   2The other Englishman, perceiving this, fled to his company, whom the savages pursued with their bows and arrows so fast, that the Englishmen were forced to take the house, wherein all their victuals and weapons were; but the savages forthwith set the same on fire, by means whereof our men were forced to take up such weapons as came first to hand, and without order to run forth among the savages, with whom they skirmished above an hour. In this skirmish, another of our men was shot into the mouth with an arrow, where he died; and also one of the savages was shot into the side by one of our men, with a wildfire arrow, whereof he died presently.

   3The place where they fought was of great advantage to the savages, by means of the thick trees, behind which the savages, through their nimbleness, defended themselves, and so offended our men with their arrows, that our men, being some of them hurt, retired fighting to the water-side, where their boat lay, with which they fled towards Hatorask. By that time they had rowed but a quarter of a mile, they espied their four fellows coming from a creek thereby, where they had been to fetch oysters. These four they received into their boat, leaving Roanoke, and landed on a little island on the right hand of our entrance into the harbor of Hatorask, where they remained a while, but afterward departed, whither as yet we know not.

Differentiation Strategies

Assessment Guidance

1. Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   According to paragraph 1 of T3, what had White and the colonists agreed the carved name would mean?

   AThe place where the planters would be living BA warning that the colony had been attacked CThe name of a chief who had taken them in DA spot where supplies had been buried for him

2. Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In paragraph 1 of T3, what sign were the colonists to add if they were in distress?

   AThe name carved upside down on the post BA fire kept burning on the shore at night CA cross carved over the letters or name DA chest buried at the foot of the carving

3. Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which detail from T3 is the strongest evidence that the colonists left Roanoke by choice rather than under attack?

   AThe print of feet "of two or three sorts" along the way in the sand B"CROATOAN" carved "without any cross, or sign of distress" CThe chests "long since digged up again, and broken up" DThe heavy goods "almost overgrown with grasses and weeds"

4. Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In paragraph 1 of T3, White finds "the houses taken down, and the place very strongly enclosed with a high palisado." Which evaluation of this detail is best?

   AIt proves the colony was destroyed in a sudden attack at the site BIt proves the colonists never felt in any danger on the island CIt shows that White's own men built the fort when they landed in 1590 DIt fits two explanations: orderly work and a felt need for defense

5. Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   White finds iron bars, lead and small cannon "thrown here and there" but no boats. Which explanation of these details is most reasonable?

   AThe colonists left by boat and left heavy goods behind (an inference) BWhite says the goods were left as a signal of where the colonists went CThe goods prove that the colonists were killed there by attackers DThe goods show that the colonists planned to return within a week

6. Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In paragraph 2 of T3, what does White conclude about the chests that had been dug up, and how does he present it?

   AHis own sailors dug them up, which he saw happen that morning BThe colonists dug them up themselves before leaving, as he guesses CThe people of Dasamonguepeuk, a claim he makes without seeing it DNo one can ever know who dug them up, as he openly admits

7. Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Which detail in T3 most weakens White's certainty that one particular group dug up the chests?

   AThe chests had been "carefully hidden of the planters" BThe print of feet in the sand was "of two or three sorts" CThree of the five chests were White's own property DThe goods were "spoiled and scattered about" near the trench

8. Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   In paragraph 1 of T3, White recalls that when he left in 1587 the colonists "were prepared to remove from Roanoke fifty miles into the main." How does this detail bear on the carved name CROATOAN?

   AIt confirms the carving, since Croatoan lay fifty miles into the main BIt shows White had told them to go to Croatoan and nowhere else CIt proves the colonists never left Roanoke Island at all DIt records an earlier plan for the mainland, a second possible place

9. Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice

   Why can T3 not settle whether the colonists reached Croatoan?

   AThe name records a plan, but T3 has no report from Croatoan BWhite admits the carving was in a hand he did not know CThe carving had been cut through with a cross of distress DHigginson says the colonists were found alive in 1610

10. Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    Higginson's note in paragraph 3 of T3 reports what Strachey was told. Which explanation of the colony's fate does that report suggest?

    AThat the colonists all reached Croatoan safely and stayed BThat the colonists found a ship and sailed home to England CThat many were killed and seven survived with a chief DThat Virginia Dare led the survivors inland to the mainland

11. Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    How strong is Strachey's report as evidence of what happened to the colonists, judging from paragraph 3 of T3?

    AStrong: Strachey saw the seven survivors with his own eyes BWeak: secondhand, twenty years late, and not recorded further CStrong: John Smith recorded the same story in careful detail DWeak: Higginson says that Strachey invented the whole story

12. Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    White writes that he "greatly joyed" to have "found a certain token of their safe being at Croatoan." Which evaluation is best?

    AThe token proves that the colonists arrived there and were safe BThe token is worthless, because anyone could have carved it CThe token shows the colonists were in distress when they left DIt is certain evidence of the agreed signal, not proof of safety

13. Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    According to T1, what were the British soldiers doing when, in that account, the first shot was fired?

    AAdvancing to disarm the militia on Pitcairn's order BResting on the Common after the long night march CFiring a warning volley over the militia's heads DMarching past the militia on the road toward Concord

14. Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice

    In T2, how does Coburn explain why the first British volley killed or wounded no one?

    APitcairn told the first platoon to aim high, over the militia BThe militia had already left the Common before the volley CHe infers from the result that it went "evidently over the heads" DThe first volley was only powder, as John Munroe saw it

15. Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer

    List three explanations for the colonists' absence that T3 allows. For each, give the strongest piece of evidence for it and one piece of evidence against it or one gap.

    Show model answer

16. Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer

    Which explanation of the colonists' absence best accords with T3? Write a claim, support it with two quotations, and name one thing the text leaves uncertain.

    Show model answer

17. Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer

    Evaluate White's reasoning about the chests in paragraph 2 of T3. What did he observe, what did he infer, and is his inference justified?

    Show model answer

18. Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer

    Higginson writes that "we can only guess" at Virginia Dare's fate. Name two questions T3 leaves uncertain, and for each, the kind of evidence that would settle it.

    Show model answer

19. Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer

    T1 says Pitcairn called on the militia to throw down their arms and disperse, "which they did not do." T2 says that Parker "gave the order to disperse" and that Pitcairn shouted "while they were dispersing." How should a reader handle this conflict when judging who fired first?

    Show model answer

20. Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer

    T1 dates the troops' orders to "the 18th of April, 1774," although the march took place in 1775. Should a slip like this lead you to reject T1's explanation of who fired first? Explain which kinds of errors should lower your trust in a source and which should not.

    Show model answer

These standards connect to RH.11-12.3: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.

Standard text: Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy. © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.