Template:Secondary source: Difference between revisions
Sources>Tifego m →External links:: fmt |
Sources>SlimVirgin light copy edit |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Secondary sources''' are texts written by someone who was not present at an event. For example, a book by a historian | '''Secondary sources''' are texts written by someone who was not present at an event. For example, a book written by a historian long after an event is regarded as a secondary source. Good secondary sources are based on [[primary source|primary]] and the best secondary sources, and involve generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation. Popular writing does not pretend to be authoritative and is usually based on a reading of secondary sources or encyclopedias. | ||
A primary source is a form of information that can be regarded as an artifact of its time. A secondary source is often a commentary or analysis of a primary source. For examples, the ''Memoirs'' of General [[Ulysses S. Grant]] is a primary source, because it was penned in its time and can be taken as a raw, original source of information (which does not say anything about its veracity or completeness). A book | A primary source is a form of information that can be regarded as an artifact of its time. A secondary source is often a commentary on, or analysis of, a primary source. For examples, the ''Memoirs'' of General [[Ulysses S. Grant]] is a primary source, because it was penned in its time and can be taken as a raw, original source of information (which does not say anything about its veracity or completeness). A book about Grant, which uses Grant's memoirs, would normally be regarded as a secondary source. | ||
A primary source is not | A primary source is not necessarily more authoritative or accurate than a secondary source. Secondary sources are often [[peer review]]ed, well documented, and produced by institutions where methodological accuracy is important to the author's and publishing house's, or research institute's, reputation. A primary source like a journal entry at best only reflects one person's take on events, which may or may not be truthful, accurate, or complete. Historians subject both primary and secondary sources to a high level of scrutiny. | ||
As a general rule | As a general rule, modern historians prefer to go back to primary sources, if available, as well as seeking new ones, because primary sources, whether accurate or not, offer new input into historical questions, and most modern history revolves around heavy use of [[archive]]s for the purpose of finding useful primary sources. A work of history is not likely to be taken seriously if it only cites secondary sources, because that would indicate that no original research had been conducted. | ||
==Secondary sources in law== | ==Secondary sources in law== | ||
Secondary sources are often used in [[common law]], to allow judges to determine what is actually meant by the language of a particular [[statute]]. See [[legislative intent]]. | Secondary sources are often used in [[common law]], to allow judges to determine what is actually meant by the language of a particular [[statute]]. See [[legislative intent]]. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
* Jules R. Benjamin. ''A Student's Guide to History'' (2003) | * Jules R. Benjamin. ''A Student's Guide to History'' (2003) | ||
| Line 15: | Line 16: | ||
* Richard A. Marius and Melvin E. Page. ''A Short Guide to Writing About History''(5th Edition) (2004) | * Richard A. Marius and Melvin E. Page. ''A Short Guide to Writing About History''(5th Edition) (2004) | ||
== | ==Further reading== | ||
*[http://www.ithaca.edu/library/course/primary.html Primary and secondary sources] | *[http://www.ithaca.edu/library/course/primary.html Primary and secondary sources] | ||
Revision as of 14:44, 5 May 2006
Secondary sources are texts written by someone who was not present at an event. For example, a book written by a historian long after an event is regarded as a secondary source. Good secondary sources are based on primary and the best secondary sources, and involve generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation. Popular writing does not pretend to be authoritative and is usually based on a reading of secondary sources or encyclopedias.
A primary source is a form of information that can be regarded as an artifact of its time. A secondary source is often a commentary on, or analysis of, a primary source. For examples, the Memoirs of General Ulysses S. Grant is a primary source, because it was penned in its time and can be taken as a raw, original source of information (which does not say anything about its veracity or completeness). A book about Grant, which uses Grant's memoirs, would normally be regarded as a secondary source.
A primary source is not necessarily more authoritative or accurate than a secondary source. Secondary sources are often peer reviewed, well documented, and produced by institutions where methodological accuracy is important to the author's and publishing house's, or research institute's, reputation. A primary source like a journal entry at best only reflects one person's take on events, which may or may not be truthful, accurate, or complete. Historians subject both primary and secondary sources to a high level of scrutiny.
As a general rule, modern historians prefer to go back to primary sources, if available, as well as seeking new ones, because primary sources, whether accurate or not, offer new input into historical questions, and most modern history revolves around heavy use of archives for the purpose of finding useful primary sources. A work of history is not likely to be taken seriously if it only cites secondary sources, because that would indicate that no original research had been conducted.
Secondary sources in law
Secondary sources are often used in common law, to allow judges to determine what is actually meant by the language of a particular statute. See legislative intent.
References
- Jules R. Benjamin. A Student's Guide to History (2003)
- Wood Gray, Historian's handbook, a key to the study and writing of history (Houghton Mifflin, 1964).
- Martha C. Howell and Walter Prevenier. From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods (2001)
- Richard A. Marius and Melvin E. Page. A Short Guide to Writing About History(5th Edition) (2004)
Further reading
See also
de:Sekundärquelle es:Fuente secundaria hu:Másodlagos forrás ja:二次資料 zh:史料