Historical research is mostly done from written sources. The three main classifications of sources are tertiary, secondary, and primary (historians are not known for creative classification names).
Tertiary sources are the most common and the most easily accessible. A tertiary source is one that is not written in the period in question. Tertiary sources discuss current research and current attitudes about that particular topic or time period. Tertiary sources include text books, book reviews, timelines, and encyclopedias. They are very useful places to start research.
Secondary sources are still written ou
t of period, but refer to period sources. They are often specialized books, dissertations, or theses that look at available period evidence about a person, place, thing, or idea. They are a good place to grasp a complete view of a culture. They also vary greatly in quality, complexity, and scope (this is where you use the book reviews and abstracts to determine which one). This is King John by W.L. Warren, one of my very favorite secondary sources.
A primary source is a source created at the time you are studying by a contemporary of the action or person. They are more scarce and more difficult to understand, but a whole lot more fun to work from. Examples are coins, inscriptions, buildings, portraits.Secondary and tertiary sources are often blended sources; they have pictures, quotes, graphics, and facsimiles of primary sources in them. This is extraordinarily helpful - you can get feel for a primary source without having to find it in its entirety.
Frequently, primary sources are published in collections or in thematic arrangements with introductions. Primary sources are not limited to written material; paintings, coins, carvings, artifacts (surviving physical evidence), tapestries, buildings, and photographs and photocopies of any of these are primary sources.
The best and hardest way to write history is from primary sources. The further away a text is from the original actions, recorded by contemporaries, the deeds and thoughts recorded lose their freshness and immediacy. Secondary and tertiary sources are often the cause behind the "history is boring" reputation. After all, novels are exciting for their attention to detail, their focus on action and consequence.
History is the story of murder, betrayal, love, greed, tenderness, and lofty dreams for humanity. Well- researched, well-written history is "edge of the seat" exciting and explains where modern attitudes and problems came from.
Next time, I promise, I'll talk about Dracula himself.
How does that quote from I Claudius go?
ReplyDelete"For beauty of language I read Livy, for historical accuracy I read Polio..."
I also love that a secondary source can become a primary source over time. Like Margaret Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind" is historical fable. But it is also a primary source document if you want to study 1930's America and how people felt about the social change that was taking place at the time.
I absolutely agree! Sometimes I love watching movies (both modern and classic) just to figure out what we fear, what we love, and what is moving us.
ReplyDeleteOf course, that usually means the story isn't that compelling, but it's a good way to redeem a bad film. ;)