[Document Analysis] HIPP/HAPPY Practice, Part 1

One of the skills AP World History: Modern holds you accountable for is document analysis - the ability not to only introduce a document but to deconstruct and break it down to smaller components to explore separately.

Here are three documents from the Early Modern Period, c. 1450 to 1750. With your historical knowledge of Unit 3 (land empires), try to analyze at least 2 out of 3 documents. The more documents you practice analyzing, the more confident you’ll be in doing so in a timed fashion!

Recap: We use the HIPP strategy. You might also know it as HAPPY but worry not, it has pretty much the same idea.
H: Historical Context - what was going on at this time period?
I: Intended Audience - who/whom is the document meant for?
P: POV - who/what is the document representing?
P: Purpose - why is the document created?

When responding below, please specify which document number you are analyzing (e,g. #1, 1, Doc 1). Good luck!

For a guaranteed response: April 23, 2020

Document 1
This document was compiled near the height of the Protestant Reformation, a time during which many countries and peoples in Europe began to break away from the Catholic Church on the basis of disputes of theological doctrine. To such examples are mentioned by Martin Luther in the passage, one being that the Catholic church had new practices that differed from that of traditional Christianity, such as indulgences and simony, and the second being that the Pope utilized the church as a means to accumulate power for himself rather than to glorify Jesus Christ. Martin Luther made these claims and speeches in private to his followers, whom he trusted. This trust allowed him to speak truly on his opinions of the Catholic Church, making more clear exactly how he believed Catholicism differed from true Christianity. However, this document was not written by Martin Luther himself, but rather his followers, who likely wrote it with the intent of distributing it to the peoples of Europe. This may have resulted in some inaccuracy and dramatization of Luther’s views towards the Catholic church in the document. His followers likely would have done this, with the goal of rallying more Christians to join the Protestant Movement and break away from the Catholic church.

Document 2
This document was written at the height of the Sunni-Shia conflict between the Ottoman and Safavid Empires. Both the Ottomans and Safavids practiced slightly different versions of the Islamic faith, Sunni and Shia respectively. This document was written by the Ottoman sultan (Sunni) to the Safavid Shah (Shia). Because he believes that his own brand of Islam is superior, he attempts to downgrade Shia views by depicting them as sacrilegious while also attempting to uphold Sunni views by depicting them as righteous and holy. However, because the Safavid ruler is also Muslim, the Ottoman sultan makes sure to honor Muhammad, the undisputed founder of the faith, in his letter. Ultimately, his goal is to convince the Safavid sultan to convert to Sunni Islam, and he uses religious writing and sentiment to do so.

Document 3
During this time, King Louis XIV ruled over France with the power of an absolute monarch. Under his supreme powers, he demanded that areas under French influence pay him reverence periodically. One of the areas was Siam, or modern-day Thailand, the king of which is depicted offering gifts to Louis in the document. The picture was created by a French artist, Nicolas Larmessin, who attempted to convey his own king’s, as well as France’s, power and sovereignty in this image. He likely intended the audience of this image to be both the people of France and foreign peoples under French influence. By showing it to these groups of people, its purpose would effectively be completed in that it would allow King Louis to legitimize his own power through an engraving him that depicted him and France as superior over other kings and nations.

Document 1 was compiled during the Protestant Reformation when many people began to break away from the Catholic Church because of its wrongdoings. It is in the point of view of Martin Luther supporters; therefore, we can recon that they may be potentially biased against the Church, for Martin Luther believed the popes were changing the way of Christianity in the bible and protecting themselves by participating in acts such as the sale of indulgences or partaking in simony. The Purpose of this document was likely to inform the audience, other supporters of Martin Luther and people who didn’t know of the popes wrongdoing, to gather and spread the word of the the churche’s injustice throughout Europe.

Document 2:
This document was compiled while there was a harsh split in Islamic beliefs in the Middles East, and a rival period was occurring between the Ottoman and Safavid empires over who should descend the prophet Muhammad. In this document The Ottoman empire addresses the Safavid. This is significant because the writing will try to persuade the Safavids that their beliefs are invalid and therefore should be scrapped for the Ottoman Sunni beliefs. The purpose of this document is to have the Shi’a Safavids convert to Sunni Islam while still respecting the words of the prophet Muhammad. Perhaps, this document even hints as a threat to the Safavids with its authoritative voice. The Ottomans and Safavids would often go to war, and towards the end of the document the Ottomans say that the Safavids will be granted royal favor once they become part of Ottoman land. This hints as a threat that if the Safavids don’t comply with Ottoman word, they will go to war with them over Islamic land and force the submission of their people towards the right branch of Islam.

Doc 3:
In this document, King Louis XIV is shown in a throne and the King of Siam and the Siamese (Siam was a territory of France) are shown in grovelling postures. They seem to be bowing down to and almost worshiping King Louis XIV who ruled with divine right (claimed he was chosen to rule by God). But, since the painter is French, it stands to reason that the scenario depicted may not be entirely factual since the painter of this scenario would not want to insult King Louis XIV who had a significant amount of power over him and therefore portrayed the King as more powerful than he actually was in this painting.

Doc 2:
In this document, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire is insulting the Shah of the Safavid Empire over not being faithful to Islam and is imploring the Safavids to join the Ottoman Empire and repent for sins. The purpose of this work is to get the Safavids to merge into the Ottoman Empire and therefore eliminate the Sh’ia Islam minority who make up the Safavid Empire since the Sunni (Ottoman Empire) have been in conflict with Sh’ia ideologies. If the Safavids join the Ottoman Empire, then a huge part of the Sh’ia population will become Sunni and that is what the Ottoman leader wants. The Ottoman sultan also will become politically more successful if he gets the Safavids to merge into his empire since he will rule a much larger territory.

Hi @2022nielswil!
As usual, this response shows thoughtfulness and depth of understanding. Each HIPP category is present in your response to each document, and you’ve even developed each response to come to a conclusion about the document. Great job!

On the actual DBQ, you won’t need to be this thorough. This prompt is good practice with all of the different HIPP/HAPPy categories, but on the AP Exam you will be free to pick just one of these categories to describe and explain its relevance to your argument. That should save you time and energy on your final essay!

Hi @adzankovic!
It’s great to see you practicing with us on Fiveable! Your responses here show that you have a good understanding of these documents and the history around them. Of the HIPP categories, your responses are strongest in terms of historical situation and POV.

On the actual DBQ, you won’t need to analyze all of the HIPP categories for any one document. This prompt is good practice with all of the different HIPP/HAPPy categories, but on the AP Exam you will be free to pick just one of these categories to describe and explain its relevance to your argument. That should save you time and energy on your final essay!

Hi @varun.hariprasad!
This is a great example of what sourcing analysis might look like on the AP exam! I know that Jed was encouraging folks to try using all of the HIPP/HAPPy categories for each document, and your responses focused in on just one category each. This is actually the way you’ll write it on the exam, so that’s great!

I would encourage you to try on some additional HIPP categories in your practice so you’re prepared to use any category on your DBQ essay. Some documents lend themselves more to purpose or POV, while others make more sense in their historical situation. Try practicing with all of these so nothing throws you for a loop!

Document 3) The purpose of this engraving is significant because it shows the attempts to which both Kings wanted to legitimize thier rule?

  1. The historical context of both empires struggling over territorial possesions and differences in beliefs influence the documents because it allowed them to write in very aggressive tones?

I’m really struggling with this, so didn’t do much on account of not really “getting it”. I apologize if this is a waste of your time!

@hania-timek, it’s never a waste of time for us to read your hard work and help you improve. That’s literally what Fiveable Community is all about! I’m so glad you attempted this prompt and came to practice with us this week!!

Jed asked for a really ambitious response in this prompt - he asked for analysis in all four categories of sourcing: historical situation, audience, purpose, and POV. You wouldn’t actually do such robust analysis in your DBQ! Instead, you would choose one characteristic to describe about a document and then explain why that characteristic is relevant to know about in terms of understanding the document or your argument in response to the prompt. This is a really tricky skill!

Let’s talk about Document 3 - you have a good idea about purpose. The purpose of art like this was to legitimize the rule of the monarch. William does a good job in his response of briefly describing this purpose and connecting it to analysis of the document.

Does that help? If you want to try again, Jed posted another prompt like this with documents from 1750-1900 on Community. You could either try to analyze each category, just for practice, or just pick one HIPP/HAPPy category for each document and explain it fully like you would in a DBQ essay.

There’s no wrong response, and no “wasted time.” We’re really happy you’re here and trying this out! Keep up the good work!!

Document 1: This document was written by Martin Luther’s followers. This document was representative of Martin Luther’s criticisms of the Christian Church. Martin Luther emphasizes the mistakes of the Church because him and his supporters believed that the Pope and the rest of church weren’t following the scriptures in the Bible because of the Church’s selling of indulgences. His followers wrote in this manner to spread the wrongdoings of the church to the world.

Document 2: One of the letters comes from the Ottoman sultan and the other is from the Safavid shah. The Ottoman sultan’s letter is representative of their firm belief in Sunni Islam. He writes in a manner that is attacking the Safavid’s shah for being Shi’a Muslims. In the Safavid shah’s letter, he asks the Ottoman sultan to return to the path of righteousness, which in their belief is Shi’a Islam. Both of these documents are representative of how both the Ottomans and Safavid empires despised each other because of their opposition in religious beliefs.

Document 3: The image of the Siamese embassy visiting King Louis XIV is drawn by a French artist. He depicts the Louis XIV as superior and the Siamese embassy as inferior. The artist likely intended the audience to be the subjects of French rule and French people. He wanted to legitimize the power of the French by demonstrating them more powerful than other nations.

Hi @salma!
Thanks for joining in with this HIPP/HAPPy practice! Your responses show a good understanding of the different characteristics of HIPP/HAPPy, which will be really important on your exam DBQ. I also see you making an effort to explain why the HIPP/HAPPy characteristics matter, or their significance, which is critical, so great work!

While this exercise was about practicing all of the categories, remember that your job on the real DBQ is somewhat simpler: you just need to pick one HIPP/HAPPy category to describe and explain for each of the documents you decide to complete sourcing. You can earn up to two points this year for doing it well, so keep up the good work!

Doc 1
This Document was written during the Protestant Reformation. This is a split between believers who believe the Bible is the real mouth of God and that the Pope is just a corrupt figure. Then there were believers that believed that the pope was the mouth of God. This shows why the Protestants believe the Pope was so seen as power hungry and a liar and that if he would’ve been honest he would have been okay
The POV of this document is that it was written by Luthers followers, which meant that they were under his teachings and learned on why the pope is seen as very corrupt through use of simony and indulgences, which could explain the reason why this document has such as a low view on the Pope

Doc 2
This document was written during the Ottoman vs Safavid rivalry. This was a rivalry that was formed due to the 2 empires being part of 2 different branches of Islam. The Safavid were Shi’a (minority) and the Ottomans were Sunni(majority). These 2 branches formed due to a disagreement about who should have been the proper ruler after Muhammad’s death. This shows why the Ottomans are so hurtful towards the Safavids in their letter by saying they were violators in the Quran’s rules.
The purpose of this doc is to try to persuade the Safavids to join the Ottomans by trying to say that the Islam they are following is wrong and that if they join them then they will be on the right path

Doc 3
The purpose of this document was to try to legitimize the power of the king of France by showing the king on top(showing superiority) and as a figure of good divine right while also showing the Thai bowing as well (showing inferiority)
The intended audience for this document is for European monarchs and to show them that France is a country not to be messed with due to them having the ability to rule with good divine right( through them on top and the Thais on the bottom bowing)

Document 1: As described by the followers, Martin Luther fervently demands his point of view that the Pope had too much authority and power in Christianity by having too much power mainly over the Christian Church and Holy Scriptures. Luther was not in agreement with the Pope’s power, so he rebelled against this, creating another branch of Christianity, Protestantism. Luther’s purpose is to make Christianity not have a head of a fundamentally religious organization, and give the Pope the right amount of power he deserves by telling his followers the following in private.

Document 2: Sultan Selim I fervently demands his point of view that the Safavid Empire no longer follows the Divine Law of Islam. Selim I’s purpose of writing this letter is to stop the Sunni/Shia split in Islam between the Ottoman and Safavid Empires as he writes how the Safavid Empire does not follow Islam correctly.

Document 3: Shah Isma’il passionately addresses his purpose that if the Ottoman Empire starts to follow Shia Islam, the Safavid Empire will back the Ottoman Empire and stop the split in Islam. The Safavid Empire says that they will become allies with the Ottoman Empire and the Ottoman Empire “will be guided alright” if they follow Shia Islam. Ismail’s purpose is to make the Ottoman Empire convert to Shia Islam as the Shias think that Shia Islam is better than Sunni Islam.

Document 4: Nicolas Larmessin addresses his purpose in this painting that the Siamese embassy of King Nadia visiting Louis XIV was inferior to the French Empire as he portrays the embassy lower and bowing down to Louis XIV while Louis XIV is on an elevated, royal chair. Larmessin could be over exaggerating Louis XIV’s power and superiority if he were French himself. This painting could have also been requested by Louis XIV to portray himself as superior to the Siamese.

I would really appreciate it if I could please have feedback.

Document 2:
During the time that this document was written as well as all throughout history, the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims were always at conflict mostly due to differences in religious beliefs. These differences included different opinions about who the ruler should be, which was after Muhamad’s (the founder of the religion Islam) death. The Sunni, which are the minority group, believed that the leader should come from experience and ability while the Shi’a, the majority, believed that leader should be a result of Muhammad’s bloodline. This explains the harshness and anger portrayed in this letter to the ruler of the Safavid Empire, Shah Isma’il.

Document 1:
The purpose of this document written by Martin Luther’s followers was to illuminate the public with Luther’s new revelations about the Roman Catholic Church. At this time in history, the Catholic Church was twisting the ways of religion in order to accumulate wealth. Things like indulgences, which were bought to diminish sins, were sold. Martin Luther believed that the way to obtain genuine salvation was only through praising god. Therefore, by writing this document, Luther’s words were spread and the public was enlightened on the Church’s evil doings. These realizations eventually led to the Protestant Reformation, a split between the Roman Catholic Church and the newly formed Protestant Church, which Martin Luther led.

Document 3:
The purpose of this document was to legitimize the authority of the King of France at the time, Louis XIV. This was shown by the king being settled on a platform and clearly above the Thai, who are bowing to the king as a sign of worship. Therefore, by King Louis XIV had a painting engraved of this moment, it proves to the world that he and his kingdom of France have power and authority greater than anyone else (divine right of kings).

Instead of writing Document 2 and 3 as two separate documents, I meant to make them one document.

Hi John! Thanks so much for posting-- welcome to the Fiveable community! I’m Katie, and I’m an intern here. I took AP World last year (and APUSH now), so I know how tricky it can be to source documents, but you’re doing great!

Doc 1: On the AP World exam, you won’t have to do HIPP/HAPPy for every document (you’ll just have to choose one and explain how it supports your argument) but since this prompt asks you to identify HIPP/HAPPy for all of them, this looks good! Your purpose might be able to be edited-- the purpose of the document is not so much to give the Pope the right amount of power as it is to describe the faults of the Catholic Church and why he developed Protestantism, but I can see how you started to address that with talking about reforming Christianity earlier in the response. However, the rest look good! If you wanted to challenge yourself even more and practice, you could try to do the I (Intended Audience) as well, but that’s a little tough here, and your Historical Context/POV look awesome.

Doc 2/3: The wording is tricky here-- although the title says, "Letter from Sultan Selim I and Shah Isma’il, it’s actually from the Sultan to the Shah-- they’re two paragraphs of the same letter, not two separate letters. Thus, your ‘doc 3’ part wouldn’t be correct, because Shah Isma’il isn’t the speaker but rather the audience. That being said, your first part (“doc 2”) looks like a really good start! The purpose looks great and with connection to whatever argument there could be, would make for awesome DBQ sourcing. You could expand on the POV in the future for this, but it’s still an awesome beginning.

Doc 4: Wow, your purpose here is really well done-- you even describe the document really succinctly and connect that back to how it shows that King Nadia is inferior. Really awesome job! Your POV about if he were French also touches on the significance of the POV, which is key for a DBQ. Really nice!

Hey there! Thanks for posting! I’m Katie, an intern here at Fiveable, and I took AP World last year, so I know that sourcing is tough, but you’re doing some great work!

Doc 1: Your historical context looks really good here. I particularly like how you describe the Pope vs. the Bible as “the mouth” of God-- putting docs into your own words is always a great start! You also start to get into the significance (explaining how this demonstrates Protestant’s views) so that’s awesome! Your POV, too, explains this significance, but I’d focus on the actual POV, too-- what the document is saying. You touch on it in the very last bit (the low view of the Pope) but there’s probably room to expand, such as what the Pope did wrong. Other than that, nice job!

Doc 2: Really great Historical Context here-- the way you bring in the proper ruler part after Muhammad’s death is particularly nice. Your purpose is also nice. If you wanted to keep practicing, I’d challenge you to try and do Intended Audience and POV, too!

Doc 3: Nice work on the purpose! Describing the document as you do with the king and Thai embassy will also earn you another DBQ point. If you wanted, you could expand this a little-- the audience could also be the French people themselves, or you could explain how this might show divine right-- but it’s definitely a strong start.

Good work! Thanks for commenting!

Hey Victoria! Thanks so much for replying! I’m Katie, an intern and ex-AP World student here at Fiveable. You’re rocking this so far!

Doc 2: Really nice historical context. You provide lots of details and explanation that would lead to this division and anger, which shows a really mature understanding of the documents. If you wanted to do more, you could also try POV, Purpose, or Intended Audience for this document. However, since in the real DBQ you’ll only need to do one, this would be an amazing sourcing.

Doc 1: Again, excellent sourcing, and the way you worded this was really clear and easy to follow, so kudos! The only thing I’d caution against is mixing two sourcing skills-- in this case Purpose and Historical Context. You venture a little bit into HC when you talk about the Catholic Church in your second sentence. It still works, but I’d be a little cautious in the future.

Doc 3: Really nice! I like that you add on the divine right. Your line of reasoning is really clear here. Keep up the good work!

1 Like


1 Like

No problem!

1 Like
Fiveable Logo

2550 north lake drive
suite 2
milwaukee, wi 53211

✉️ help@fiveable.me


about for students for parents for teachers for schools & districts content team privacy contact


🥇 2020 Fiveable Olympics study plans upcoming events trivia hypertyper resources cram passes


community tiktok discord twitter instagram facebook careers

*ap® and advanced placement® are registered trademarks of the college board, which was not involved in the production of, and does not endorse, this product.

© fiveable 2020 | all rights reserved.