2 Working with Primary Sources

Primary sources and secondary sources

A primary source is an original document, object, image, recording, or other piece of evidence connected to the time or people being studied. Examples include letters, laws, newspapers, photographs, maps, oral histories, government records, tools, and buildings. A secondary source is a later account that interprets or explains the past, such as a history textbook.

Whether an item counts as a primary source depends on the historical question. A newspaper article is primary evidence for what that newspaper reported, but it may be secondary evidence for an event it describes without firsthand knowledge.

Primary sources are partial rather than complete or neutral accounts of the past. Each provides particular evidence, was created for particular reasons, and reflects a point of view. Historians use sources alongside other evidence rather than treating any one source as the whole story.

Finding and identifying sources

Begin with a focused question, then identify useful search terms. Include older names, spellings, and terms people used at the time. Search reliable archives, libraries, museums, and historical collections.

The Library of Congress and National Archives provide searchable collections and curated source sets. Catalog records can help identify an item’s title, creator, date, format, and collection. When you find an item, record its full identifying information and where it came from, and read the catalog description and any collection notes.

A scan or photograph is a copy of an original item. Check whether it is complete, cropped, transcribed, translated, or otherwise edited. Online availability does not mean a collection represents everyone or every perspective: what survives, was collected, and was digitized shapes what researchers can find.

Establishing historical context

Establish the historical context before interpreting a source: when and where it was made, what was happening, and what circumstances shaped its creation. Separate what you can directly observe from what you infer. For example, “the poster shows a uniformed figure” is an observation; “the poster was designed to encourage enlistment” is an interpretation to test against the wording, creator, and context.

Ask who created the source and what you can learn about the creator’s role, experiences, and position in society. Consider whether it was made by one person, an organization, or a government office. Ask when and where it was created, and whether it was made during the event, later from memory, or at a distance from it.

Consider why the source was created: its creator may have been recording events, persuading, informing, entertaining, defending a decision, or fulfilling an official task. Ask who it was made for, since the intended audience may shape its language, content, or format. Examine its perspective, including assumptions, values, interests, word choices, and details included or left out.

Contextual clues may come from the source itself, its archival description, or other reliable sources. Avoid assuming that people in the past shared present-day knowledge, beliefs, or language.

Evaluating evidence and reliability

Reliability is not a simple label that applies equally to every claim. Ask how well a source supports the specific point you want to make. A government report may be strong evidence of what an agency officially recorded but less conclusive evidence of what every person experienced. A persuasive poster may reveal the message its creator wanted audiences to accept, but cannot by itself show whether audiences believed that message.

Evaluate evidence by considering these connected questions:

• Origin and authorship: Is the creator identifiable? How close were they to the people or events described? Is the item an original, a copy, a later recollection, or an edited excerpt?

• Purpose and audience: What was the source meant to do, and how might that purpose affect what it says or shows?

• Perspective and limits: What could the creator know? What might they misunderstand, emphasize, conceal, or leave out? Whose voices are absent?

• Corroboration: How does the source compare with other evidence, ideally from different creators, formats, and perspectives? Look for agreement, disagreement, and details that need further checking.

A source can be weak evidence for one claim yet valuable evidence for another. A recruitment poster may not reliably describe soldiers’ actual experiences, but it can show how an organization tried to persuade people. Contradictions between sources are not merely problems to remove; they can reveal differences in knowledge, interest, experience, or interpretation.

Building a historical argument

Use the routine observe, question, investigate. First, note concrete details. Next, ask what they might mean and what you still need to know. Then seek context and compare evidence. Keep observations separate from inferences, and revise your interpretation when additional evidence challenges it.

To make a historical argument, state a focused claim, support it with specific details from sources, and explain how those details support the claim. Identify important limitations and consider evidence that complicates your conclusion. Cite sources so readers can trace the evidence. A careful argument does not claim more than the sources can establish.