Every document serves some kind of purpose. It might be trying to convince people to do something, or maybe it's meant to describe events that took place somewhere. By carefully reading through the document, you should get a sense of why the author created it in the first place.  Documents that tell people what to do are called prescriptive documents. Documents that describe events are called descriptive documents. For example, an early twentieth-century book of manners - which tells women how to behave in public - is an example of a prescriptive document. A newspaper article that covers the events of the Boston Tea Party is an example of a descriptive document. What is the point the author is trying to get across? Their argument can help you understand where the author is coming from and whether they might have a vested interest in people accepting their argument as true.  Keep in mind that the author's argument might be obvious or it might be subtle. For example, the author of a publicity flyer that asks the public to come to a pro-union meeting might say, "Joining the UAW will make your family more financially secure!" That author's argument is pretty obvious - that the United Auto Workers union will help working families. By contrast, the author of a newspaper article about civil rights protests might say "The protesters were met with violence when police officers turned water hoses on them. Many protesters were injured, while the police seemed unconcerned." This sounds like a description of what happened. However, the author's description of injured protesters and unconcerned police suggests that the author's subtle argument is that the protesters were right and the police were wrong. In historical documents, silence often says as much as actual words. Figuring out what gets left out is often called “reading between the lines,” and it’s something historians do to determine an author’s real motivation. For example, if the source is an obituary of Benedict Arnold, what do you know about him that gets left out of the obituary? Does it mention the fact that Americans consider him a traitor? Does it only focus on Americans’ perception of him? The things that get left out can tell you a lot about who wrote the document and why. Corroborating the historical document with other sources will help you determine whether the information presented in the document is factual. Look through other sources and note any points of agreement or disagreement between the sources and the historical document you're analyzing.If a variety of sources are in disagreement with the historical document, then it's a sign that the information presented in the document isn't correct. Once you’ve analyzed a historical document, you need to decide if the document is credible or not. You can determine if a historical document is credible using a variety of methods, like:  Verifying any evidence that the document gives for its claims. If you're able to back up the evidence using other sources, then you know the document's claims are valid. Considering the credibility of the author. If your research finds that the author of the document was unreliable or extremely biased, it's a clue that the document isn't credible.
++++++++++
One-sentence summary -- Figure out the author's purpose. Determine the author’s argument. Pay attention to what isn’t said. Corroborate the document with other sources. Determine the document’s credibility.


If you want to describe a current state of being that is in doubt or is hoped for, you would use the present subjunctive. This tense is used far more often in Spanish than it is in English. While a literal translation is "to be," in this tense and mood it means more like "may be." For example, you might say, "Dudo que ella sea rica" to mean "I doubt that she is rich."   Yo sea: I am/may be.  Tú seas: You are/may be.  Él/ella/usted sea: He/she/you are/may be.  Nosotros/-as seamos: We are/may be.  Vosotros/-as seáis: You all are/may be.  Ellos/ellas/ustedes sean: They/you all are/may be. Just as with the perfect tenses in the indicative mood, you form past, present, and future subjunctive tenses with the helping verb haber. To form present perfect subjunctive (in Spanish know as pretérito pluscuamperfecto/antepretérito), use the present subjunctive of haber along with sido. Use this tense to describe a state of being in the past that is connected to one in the present, or will have happened at some point in the future. For example, you might say, "Dudo que hubiera sido rica" to mean "I doubt that she has been rich." The past perfect subjunctive is used for hypothetical or conditional states of being in the past. Use the imperfect subjunctive (in Spanish know as pretérito perfecto compuesto/antepresente) conjugation form for haber along with sido. For example, you might say, "Haya sido rico," or "I have been rich."  The future perfect subjunctive (in Spanish know as futuro compuesto/antefuturo) form of ser is used to talk about a state of being that will have been in existence in the future, or might have or could have existed in the future. Combine the simple future conjugation form of haber with the past participle sido. For example, you might say, "Yo habré sido rico," to mean "I will have been rich."
++++++++++
One-sentence summary --
Start with present subjunctive. Combine the correct conjugated form of haber with “sido” for perfect subjunctive tenses.