Original Sources

Here is an answer to a question that comes up all the time: What is an original source?

In a way it is easier to start with what is not an original source, that is, what a secondary source is. Secondary sources are things like textbooks, biographies, encyclopedias, articles in contemporary magazines or journals, or anything else written about an event or person, usually at a later date. Most books are secondary sources, exceptions being books such as collections of letters or other documents, autobiographies and the like.

Primary sources are writings or other objects that connect directly to the person or event about which you are writing. Common examples of written original sources would be: letters, speeches, Supreme Court decisions, contemporary newspaper or magazine articles, original writings by the person you are describing, and so on. Non-written primary sources would be objects found in museums, historic sites such as battlefields or homes of famous persons.

Some specific examples of primary sources would include: John Marshall's biography of George Washington; Theodore Roosevelt's Autobiography; anything you might see at Mount Vernon, the Smithsonian American History Museum, or at the National D-Day Memorial in Bedford, Virginia. Books such as Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America, Henry George's Progress and Poverty or Jacob Riis's The Shame of the Cities would also constitute primary sources since they were written at the time when the events described were happening. What you need to avoid is things like Wikipedia, or many other Internet sites that have contemporary descriptions of people or events. My textbook consists of secondary sources (everything I wrote) and primary sources (the documents at the end of each section.)

There are gray areas, of course, and one in particular is film. Films that depict historic events or figures generally try to portray things accurately. (See my film essay instructions for more details on this point.) So within reason, films can be considered original sources if they are based on real events. There are limits: The Crossing with Jeff Daniels tells the story of Washington's crossing the Delaware River and attacking the Hessians at Trenton. Real event—okay as a primary source. Contrast that with The Patriot with Mel Gibson: not a real person, not real events. The film has value for understanding the war in the Carolinas, but is not a primary source in the way the The Crossing is. If you were writing an essay about fighting in the South during the American Revolution, and if you had done some research to discover that the last battle in the film was based loosely on Cowpens, you would be ok, but it still wouldn't be an original source.

An example from History 122. The Rough Riders with Tom Berenger as Theodore Roosevelt tells the story of a real person and real events fairly accurately. Some of Roosevelt's actual words (during a speech shown early in the film) are true. Real person, real events, primary source. Counter example: The Best Years of Our Lives shows very accurately many of the problems faced by veterans returning from World War II, but there are no real people or real events in the film, with one exception. The sailor who lost both his hands was played by an actor who really had lost his hands.

Here's a tip. Over the years I have read many biographies of great people, from Washington and Adams and Jefferson to Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt's, Harry Truman and other modern figures. The best of those biographies—the most interesting and readable—are the ones whose authors rely heavily on primary sources rather than what on on what someone else has written. The best example I can think of is Lincoln, by David Herbert Donald. It has been said that everything about written about Lincoln could not fit into a single large room. So when Professor Donald was asked how he went about writing a biography of Lincoln when so much already existed, he explained that he had limited himself to using only materials written during Lincoln's lifetime. He made one exception: He used a biography of Lincoln written by John Hay and John Nicolay after Lincoln's death because those two gentlemen were Lincoln's private secretaries during the Civil War and had personally observed most of what they wrote about. So even though their biography was written after the fact, it can be considered a primary source.

I hope this explains the difference. If you have any questions please get in touch.

Academic American Home | Sage History Home | History 121 | History 122 | Email link