Primary sources are things that give first-hand or direct information about the past. For the historian, primary sources are the 'nuts and bolts' of their trade, from which all secondary texts are produced. Primary materials include
- first hand accounts
- oral records
- diaries
- memoirs
- correspondence
- documents
- correspondence
- treaties
- laws
- speeches
- images
- maps
- photographs
- drawings
- paintings
- data
The value of primary sources
- they were produced at the same time as the events they describe, so the information they contain is original
- they were not written separately from the events they documented
- they rarely contain someone else's view of the events
- they allow historians to make their own analyses and judgments of the information without having to consider someone else's interpretation and/or opinions
Using primary sources
A number of issues have to be considered when using primary sources:
- when was the document produced: was is close to the time and place of the event?
- why was it produced?
- for whom was it produced? (for private 'consumption' or for public/propaganda reasons)
- are there any clues in the document through which the content may be cross-checked?
- is there any obvious bias? - all documents are biased in some way or another
- are the values of the writer, inherent in the document, different from those of the reader? (this is going to be more than likely)
And then?
Sometimes, it is possible to put a document into its historical context without too much difficulty. Events such as the trial of Lord Oxford are easy to track down. When writers talk about the effects of the poor law or political affairs then secondary materials will give further information. To track down individuals, one has to be a detective with a lot of patience.
The internet has brought the opportunity for people to share their knowledge: many people have added to the information available from the "Letters from the Past" for example. However, electronic media of all kinds — internet, e-mail, document attachments — do give cause for concern to an historian. What will be left, in another hundred years' time, for historians to use as sources?
Last modified 19 December 2002