Types of Sources for History Trivia Quiz

Answer: False

The meanings of the terms vary from one branch of knowledge to another and are more widely used in the Humanities than, for example, in the natural sciences and social sciences.

The terms 'primary' and 'secondary literature' (rather than 'sources') are probably simplest in literary scholarship, where 'primary literature' refers to actual literary works (and letters, diaries, etc.) and 'secondary literature' to writings about them. This applies even if the actual original text is uncertain, as for example with Shakespeare's plays and medieval epics. (In such cases one will have to use a modern edition).

The distinction is useful: primary sources are, as it were, the 'raw material' of research, while secondary sources are the published products of research and scholarship.

Answer: A book on 17th century England written in the 20th century

A book written long after the time cannot be a primary source. Obviously, if you read Pepys' diary you will do so in a modern edition, probably with modernized spelling and helpful notes, but provided the editor's job has been done properly, you will be reading a primary source.

Note that a primary source can also be read and used in translation.

Answer: Editorials in newspapers

Routinely compiled reports, transcripts of legal proceedings, chronicles, letters, diaries, photographs and so on are primary sources (provided they have not been tampered with). Artefacts produced at the time are also primary: these can be as diverse as coins, cooking utensils, furniture and weapons.

Editorials are statements of opinion and are therefore secondary sources.

(Obviously, if you are actually studying editorials that appeared on the outbreak of World War I, for example, relevant editorials would be your primary source).

Answer: That it is considered a worthwhile contribution to academic discussion of the topic

There are sometimes misunderstandings about the significance of a peer review. It is *not* an endorsement of accuracy, but an assessment of the value (or otherwise) of the work as a contribution to knowledge or academic debate.

In practice, there are variations in the level of thoroughness of peer reviews.
It is common for students and others to take into account the reputation of the journal or publisher.

Answer: In a study of Victorian portrayals of the Crusades

For most purposes, however, such a book would be an out of date secondary source of rather limited usefulness, though it might provide a useful timeline.

Unlike primary sources, secondary sources become out of date over time.

Answer: Primary but needs treating with caution

An eye-witness remains an eye-witness, but obviously, one needs to assess autobiographies carefully. Key questions to ask include things like: How long after the events was the autobiography written? Did the author write from memory or are there quotations from sources such as letters and archive material? Is the author trying to justify himself/herself?

Just as there are 'biographies romancées' ('novelized biographies') there are also autobiographies that have been embroidered and spiced up in order to entertain the reader and help sell the book. The boundary between autobiography and the novel can be very fluid in some cases.

Note that some 'autobiographies', especially of celebrities, are ghostwritten.

Answer: Tertiary

Such articles are generally an overview based on key secondary works. Their main function is to produce an introductory outline. They can also be very useful for checking facts.

School and undergraduate textbooks are also tertiary sources, being based mainly on information derived from secondary sources. Some history course-books reprint a few carefully selected, short primary texts for students to use in their work, but this does not alter the tertiary status of such books.

Scholarship does not recognize a fourth (quarternary) level of sources. However, a case can be made for regarding abstracting journals - that is, journals that only publish short summaries of articles and books - as a special category in their own right.

Answer: False

This is a myth that can be found on the internet - for example, on some question-and-answer sites and in various other places, too. Even where there is no deliberate distortion, eye-witness accounts give *perceptions*, which may or may not accord with facts.

In practice, eye-witness accounts often include various stories circulating at the time in addition to what the eye-witness actually saw. A good secondary source, however, will often include evaluations of primary sources.

Answer: His own experiences during the Normandy landings

A tendency in some kinds of History teaching to get pupils to interview veterans and others seems to have encouraged a tendency to credit people with personal experience of key events in the past with more expertise than they normally have.

Answer: For all of these reasons

Quite apart from the matter of plagiarism, a teacher or other reader may, for example, wonder whether you have misunderstood something in your source(s). If details of the sources are not given, the reader has to try to guess where you got your information from or may simply suspect that you used some unreliable source.