Question

historians use primary sources to interpret the boston massacre. in other words, they use evidence to tell a story of what happened and to explain why it matters.
match each source to the interpretation of the boston massacre that it could be used to support.
eyewitness testimony that colonists threatened soldiers before violence broke out
a speech by a revolutionary war leader who claimed that the boston massacre inspired americans to fight for independence
a widely viewed print made in boston that shows british soldiers firing on helpless colonists at the boston massacre
source
interpretation of the boston massacre
by threatening soldiers, american colonists forced british soldiers to fire their guns.

Explanation:

Eyewitness testimony is a direct account of an event. If the testimony states that colonists threatened soldiers before violence, it supports the interpretation that colonists' actions (threatening) led to British soldiers firing (as per the interpretation "By threatening soldiers, American colonists forced British soldiers to fire their guns"). The other sources (the print showing British soldiers firing on helpless colonists would support a different interpretation like British aggression, and the speech about inspiring independence is about a different aspect - the impact on the independence movement, not the immediate cause of the violence).

Answer:

Eyewitness testimony that colonists threatened soldiers before violence broke out.