Scribd
Upload
22 views4 pages

Study Skills Lecture On Using Sources

This document provides an overview and definitions for using primary and secondary sources in historical research and analysis. It discusses the importance of sources, defines primary sources as "contending voices" and relics from the past, and secondary sources as "contested meanings" or interpretations about the past. The document also outlines how to analyze sources for information, addresses the issue of bias, and provides examples of different types of primary sources and questions to consider when evaluating any source.

Uploaded by

eugen claudiu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
22 views4 pages

Study Skills Lecture On Using Sources

This document provides an overview and definitions for using primary and secondary sources in historical research and analysis. It discusses the importance of sources, defines primary sources as "contending voices" and relics from the past, and secondary sources as "contested meanings" or interpretations about the past. The document also outlines how to analyze sources for information, addresses the issue of bias, and provides examples of different types of primary sources and questions to consider when evaluating any source.

Uploaded by

eugen claudiu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Study Skills Lecture on Using SourcesDAVID HART'S STUDY GUIDES

My Home Page: /personal/DHart/


Email me: [email protected]

STUDY SKILLS LECTURE: USING PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES


OR, MAKING SENSE OF "CONTENDING VOICES" AND "CONTESTED MEANINGS"
Updated: 28 February, 2001

LECTURE EXERCISE
Why are historians so concerned about sources?
What is a "primary source"? why is it "primary"?
Why do I call primary sources "contending voices" from the past?
What is a "secondary source"? "secondary" to what?
Why do I call secondary sources "contested meanings" about the past?
How do we get information from a source?
What do we do when the sources contradict each other?
What is "bias" and how do we handle it?

STUDY SKILLS TUTORIAL "USING PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES"


The Subject Guide - Reading and Discussion Questions
My general Guide to Using Sources

I. SOME DEFINITIONS
A. Sources I Used
Arthur Marwick, The Nature of History (3rd edition) (London: Macmillan, 1991).
Chap. 5 "The Historian at Work: Historical Facts and Historical Sources", pp.
193-34.
Richard Marius, A Short Guide to Writing About History (2nd edition ) (New York:
HarperCollins, 1995).
Chap. 2 "Thinking About History - Questioning Your Sources", pp. 29-45
Chap. 4 Part III "Do Research".

B. History and Sources


myths
facts
interpretations
stories about the past

C. The Problem of "Bias"


"bias"
perspective
theoretical and interpretative framework
Weltanschauung ("Worldview")
recognise the existence of your own bias (gender, social origin, nationality,
religion, ethnicity, and historical context)
accept the universality of this problem
look for bias as you read
work out the relationship between your own bias and that of others
conduct a "debate" between the various interpretations of the authors you have
read:
On the one hand, author A says ... (statement)
On the other hand author B says... (contrast)
The strengths and weakness of A and B are... (evaluation)
My opinion is ... (conclusion)

D. Primary Sources - the "Opposing Voices" from the Past


Marwick's definitions
"relics and traces left by the past" (p. 198-9)
"raw material"
"anything which came into existence during the particular period the historian
is studying" (p. 210)
all contemporaries (eye-witnesses) have a "bias" or perspective which "colours"
their view of what is happening around them
slave vs slave owner
many contemporaries (eye-witnesses) have a theory of "how the world works" which
they use to interpret or give meaning to what is happening around them

E. Secondary Sources - the "Contested Meanings" about the Past


Marius p. 14 - "Primary sources are the texts nearest to any subject of
investigation; secondary sources are always written about primary sources."
All interpretations about the past are "contested" (i.e. argued about):
disagreement about what happened (problem of knowledge)
disagreement about why it happened (problem of theoretical explanation)
different reasons for writing history
All historians have a "bias" or perspective which "colours" their interpretation
of the past
Many historians have a theory of "how the world works" which they use to
interpret or give meaning to the past

F. Hybrid Sources
autobiography
contemporary history - e.g. Friedrich Engels, The Condition of the Working
Class in England (1845)

II. HIERARCHY OF SOURCES - "SOME SOURCES ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS"
Orwell's Animal Farm - "All sources are created equal but some sources are more
equal than others"

A. Traditional Hierarchy of Primary Sources


"more immediate to historical reality"
handwritten documents
contemporary printed sources
later "collected" works
later "selected" works

B. Hierarchy of Secondary Sources


academic monographs, dissertations, learned articles
general histories
scholarly reference works
textbooks and popular encyclopaedias
sensational popular history

III. TYPES OF PRIMARY SOURCES


Documents of Record (Government records) - laws, parliamentary records, police,
international treaties, births and deaths and marriages

Surveys and Reports - Royal and parliamentary commissions of inquiry, opinion


polls

Chronicles and Histories - Contemporary histories, autobiographies, memoirs

Family and Personal Records - Letters and diaries

Polemical Documents - Political pamphlets, sermons

Media and Popular Culture - Newspapers, cartoons, advertisements, film, radio,


TV

Images - photographs and documentary film

Guides and Works of Reference - Codifications of the law, education manuals.

Archeology and Physical Artefacts - Inscriptions, ruins, pottery, coins, old


machines, household items.

Literary and Artistic Sources - Novels, operas, film, art, statues.

Place Names and Maps - Conservative nature of language and "naming" - reveal
extent of invasion and occupation. Aerial maps of settlements.

Oral History - Interviews of survivors, eyewitnesses, folk songs, sayings,


jokes.

Observed Behaviour - Continuation of traditional practices today (e.g. use of


ploughs, marriage ceremonies, children's games)

IV. GETTING INFORMATION FROM PRIMARY SOURCES - "INTERROGATING THE SOURCES"


A. Forensic Metaphors -Detectives, Trial Lawyers, Journalists
"interrogating" the sources
"legends and lies" in history
"the tricks memory plays even on eyewitnesses"
"time the devourer of all things"
"reasonable inferences"

B. "Witting" Testimony
the deliberate or intentional message conveyed in the document

C. "Unwitting" Testimony or Reading between the Lines


the unspoken assumptions which lie behind what is written
"reading between the lines"

D. The Critical Study of Fragmentary and Imperfect Sources


Marwick (p. 208) - the "analysis of one source in the perspective of what is
contained in all the other relevant sources"
corroboration of information:
incomplete nature of the source material
unreliability of sources

E. Questions to "Ask" of any Primary Source - Who, What, When, Where, Why
is it authentic?
what is its provence?
when was it produced?
what kind of source is it?
who created it and why?
is the information "first hand"?
how was the document received or interpreted by contemporaries?
Questions to ask when "interrogating"a primary source:
Who is the "speaker" or author of the text?
Were they an eyewitness to what is described?
When, where, why, and for whom was this text written?
Are they a defender or critic (or beneficiary or victim) of what they are
describing?
What do they tell us about the institutions, values and customs of the old
regime/Enlightenment/Revolution?
What don't they tell us?
Is their account believable or trustworthy? If not, why not?

F. Questions to "Ask" of any Secondary Source


what primary sources did the historian (filmmaker) use?
have you checked any of these sources to see if they are correct?
what primary sources did the historian NOT use?
did the historian favour sources from a particular class, gender, country,
period over other possible sources?
did the historian favour a particular kind of source (such as official
government records, memoirs of the educated elite, works of art, political
iconography)?
what secondary sources (i.e. the works of other historians) did the historian
use?
to what extent is the work based upon "original research" or the work of other
historians?
what is the perspective (bias) of the historian?
does the historian belong to a particular "school of thought"? if so, does
this matter?

V. EXAMPLES OF OTHER SOURCES


A. Works of Art as Primary Sources
Th�odore G�ricault, "The Raft of the Medusa" (1818-19)
Albert Boime, The Art of Exclusion: Representing Blacks in the 19th Century
(London: Thames and Hudson, 1990).
1. Bibliography
Francis Haskell, History and its Images: Art and the Interpretation. of the Past
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993).
Susan Woodford, Looking at Pictures (Cambridge University Press, 1995).
Art and History: Images and their Meaning, ed. Robert I. Rotberg and Theodore K.
Rabb (Cambridge University Press, 1988).
Albert Boime, A Social History of Modern Art (University of Chicago Press)
Volume 1 - Art in an Age of Revolution, 1750-1800 (1987)
Volume 2 - Art in an Age of Bonapartism, 1800-1815 (1990)

B. Music as a Primary Source


Mozart
Hector Berlioz

C. The Novel as a Primary Source


Voltaire
Emile Zola

You might also like