History Research Guide

Primary Sources

"Primary sources are materials in a variety of formats, created at the time under study, that serve as original evidence documenting a time period, event, people, idea, or work."  --Guidelines for Primary Source Literacy (2018)

Examples of Primary Sources:

• first-hand accounts (diaries, journals, correspondence, interviews, speeches...)
• material artifacts (artwork, archaeological finds, clothing...)
• newspapers and magazines from the time of an event
• audio/visual materials (films, audio recordings, photographs)
• records and statistics (opinion polls, census data, government records...)
• born digital items (emails, chat transcripts, digital photographs...)

Secondary Sources

Secondary sources offer a commentary, description, criticism, evaluation, or analysis of a primary or other secondary source. 

Examples of Secondary Sources:

• textbooks
• reference works (encyclopedias, handbooks...)
• most scholarly books
• most journal and magazine articles

Can a source be both?

Yes, a source can be both a primary and secondary source. How we define a source will vary depending upon ones research interest or intended use of a source. Therefore, while these definitions are helpful, they are not absolute distinctions. Here are some examples: 

Textbook from the 1990s on the history of the United States:  

• Secondary Source: researcher wants a scholarly perspective of the civil rights movement.
• Primary Source: researcher wants evidence of educational curriculum in the 1990s

Newspaper Editorial/Opinion piece

• Primary Source: researcher is interested in how people were affected by a specific event
• Secondary Source: researcher is interested in the event itself

Scholarly book from 1850 interpreting the meaning of Hadrian's Wall.

• Primary Source: researcher is interested in evidence of how people interpreted the archaeology in 1850
• Secondary Source: research is interested in a scholarly perspective of the monument.

Why use a primary source?

Secondary sources are amazing tools on synthesizing existing research and scholarship on a topic. So why bother going to a primary source directly? What can they offer that secondary sources cannot?

• Perspectives: When you read a secondary source analyzing or interpreting a primary source, you are getting the perspective from a scholar with a specific purpose and background (both academically and personally). If you go directly to a primary source, you may be the first person to look at it from your background or perspective. What do you think you'll find that others have ignored? Whose voices have been ignored by other historians?
• Empathy: Secondary sources, no matter how much they quote, will always remove you from a first hand account of an event or experience. Your reaction and understanding from an era or event will change depending upon how you learn about it. There is no comparison to reading The Diary of Anne Frank versus a history tome on World War II written 40 years after the War.

How to evaluate a primary source?

As with all sources, you want to make sure your primary source is both credible and relevant to your research needs. Here are five key steps in evaluating a primary source. These are not all-encompassing and will change depending upon your needs and the type of source. However, the critical component in evaluation is to first answer the question and then to next follow up with, "what does that tell me?" or "why is this important?"

1.  First Impressions

• Identify the type of primary source. (what is it? a letter, memo, speech, advertisement...)
• Before reading the primary source’s content: how can you describe it? (is it typed or handwritten, are there other marks like postage or office stamps, how many types of handwriting, is it edited, was it published, seals…)
• This gives you a wider picture of the item before looking at the details. What do the above questions tell you about your source?

2.  Observe  (who, where, when)

• Who created the primary source? (author, secretary, do they have a title)
• Who was the source's intended audience? (scholars, shoppers, sailors, public, aristocracy...)
• Where was the source created?
• When was the source created?

3.  Analyze  (what)

• What is the source discussing?
• Summarize the contents. (briefly, 2-3 sentences)

4.  Interpret  (why and how)

• Why was it created?
  • What is the creator’s purpose or motivation. (agenda)
  • What is the creator’s point of view? (bias, perspective, opinion)
• Does the source reflect historical events, either implied or explicit?
  • Sources are not created in a bubble, they will be directly or indirectly affected by events surrounding them.
• Did you notice anything left unsaid in the document? 
  • What is not said is often more important (and more interesting) than what is said. It reveals a lot about a place, time, event, and people. This is where you learn about assumed knowledge or social norms for the creator or audience of the source.

5.  Reflect

• Do you have any questions or comments after reviewing the source?
  • What sparked your interest, surprised you, or confused you?
  • This is the fun part! Take your interest and use it to craft your research question.