|
Dear Jane (and everyone),
If you define a primary source as contemporary with the events they provide evidence for, then there is the question of how oral history interviews are viewed, as they generally are not contemporary with the events they describe. They can provide first-hand accounts of events, but mediated through memory that may have changed over time.
As MA students may come across oral history projects, it would be good to cover this, even if it's just to point out the additional considerations that are needed in critically examining oral history interviews.
Best wishes,
Debbie.
Debbie Usher, Archivist RMARA
Middle East Centre Archive
St Antony's College
Oxford OX26JF
UK
tel. +44 1865 284706
tel. UK 01865 284706
email: [log in to unmask]
web: http://www.sant.ox.ac.uk/mec/meca.shtml
St Antony's College is a Registered Charity (Number 1141293)
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Judy Burg
Sent: 18 February 2013 15:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: FW: Defining primary and secondary sources
Hi Jane (and everyone)
I would keep to a very simple definition of a primary source - which is that they are contemporary with the events that they provide evidence about. Therefore a single source can be a primary source material for one event and secondary source material for a different event. The definition is relative (date of writing relative to date of evidence sought).
So an account (whether in an archive or newspaper or other) of the politics of the 1832 Reform Act written in 1832 is a primary source for
the 1832 Reform Act. A similar account written in 1867 is not a
primary source for the 1832 Reform Act, but might be used as a primary source for the 1867 Reform Act (how did opinions about one affect views on the other?) This is the same as your 'Eminent Victorians' example below.
Archives (within the narrow definition of papers of administration etc) are a sub-set of primary sources. You can then talk about the essential characteristics of archives and how they differ from other primary sources - this is an important distinction for MA students - particularly those going on to study for a PhD.
And I would write your guide with your specific audience in mind (ie, in this case MA students) - and leave someone else to write a guide for family historians and others.
Best wishes
Judy
Judy Burg
University Archivist
Hull History Centre
Worship Street
Hull
HU2 8BG
T: (01482) 317502
[log in to unmask]
www.hullhistorycentre.org.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane Stevenson
Sent: 14 February 2013 15:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Defining primary and secondary sources
Hi Sue,
I take your points, but I'm asking this question simply because it is a question students will ask. As long as we talk about primary and secondary sources, which many people do, then it is a valid question.
Whether or not we should be framing things in this way is a whole different question - and probably not one for a fairly simple guide to help people get started with using archives. I just thought I could do a bit to point students in the right direction and clear up any confusions they have about archives.
I don't think anyone would wish to sideline the genealogy community in any way, but I was specifically interested in advice that could be give to students, typically MA or undergrad students, which is why I framed my original question in the way I did. I thought that there were quite a few good guides for those undertaking family history, but it is not so easy to find guides aimed at those undertaking dissertations who have not used archives before.
> Everything in the discussion about students applies to genealogists as
well, so can I make a plea not to ignore them?
I'm not sure that I agree with this, as a research question is a different thing from a focused exploration of your own family history.
There are things in common, but I think there are differences. Still, I'm not an expert here - which is why it is useful to get the feedback from the community.
cheers,
Jane.
On 14 Feb 2013, at 14:49, Sue Adams <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Hi Jane
>
> You would do well to look at how the genealogy and family history
community deals with evaluating archival and published materials.
Defining sources and primary and secondary is an inadequate tool for
proper evaluation for genealogical purposes and is now outdated.
American genealogists are way ahead with their models for the analysis of evidence. They categorise sources as original or derivative, information contained in the source as primary for secondary, and evidence for each assertion made as direct or indirect. There is a succinct explanation at http://www.bcgcertification.org/skillbuilders/skbld085.html . This evaluation provides the building blocks for developing conclusions that can be defended using the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS).
>
> Elizabeth Shown Mills and Tom Jones, two very prominent proponents of
the GPS, are influential educators in the US.
>
> As a 2012 graduate from Strathclyde University's MSc in Genealogical,
Palaeographic and Heraldic Studies, I read the thread on "MA Students using archives for the first time" with interest, but also with a sense of exasperation. Genealogists and family historians were mentioned only in passing with one person's comment "many people assume that archives is family history, genealogy or ancient manuscripts". As a non-archivist, I have long thought that genealogists and family historians form the majority of archive users. Am I completely wrong?!
Everything in the discussion about students applies to genealogists as well, so can I make a plea not to ignore them?
> Sue Adams
> Family Folk
> Blog:
> http://familyfolklore.wordpress.com/
> On 14/02/2013 11:47, Jane Stevenson wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Following the flurry of emails about starting to use archives, i'm
attempting to bring together advice in a guide to archives for the inexperienced.
>>
>> But, as is the way so often, once you really start to try to pin
things down you raise more questions!
>>
>> I want a short definition of the difference between primary and
secondary sources, and I came across this from Yale:
>>
>>
>>> Determining what is a primary source can be tricky, and in no case
is this more apparent than with books and pamphlets. From one vantage point, books are the quintessential secondary source: scholars use primary source materials such as letters and diaries to write books, which are in turn secondary sources. However, books can also be a rich source of primary source material. In some instances, as in the case of published memoirs, autobiographies, and published documents, it is easy to determine when a book functions as a primary source.
>>>
>>> But even secondary source materials can function as primary sources.
Take, for instance, Lytton Strachey's famous history of nineteenth century England, Eminent Victorians, first published in 1918. On one hand, Eminent Victorians is a secondary source, a history of English society and culture in the 1800s based on Strachey's research and analysis of primary sources. On the other hand, a present-day scholar could treat Eminent Victorians itself as a primary source, using it to to analyze the mores and attitudes of Lytton Strachey and the early twentieth century English intelligentsia of which he was a part.
>>>
>> Are we generally agreed that books can be primary sources, if you use
them as direct evidence about the author and the context of the time in which it was written?
>>
>> This is what I've drafted so far:
>>
>> What are primary sources and what are secondary sources?
>> Primary sources are contemporary with the time that they are written
>> in. Letters, diaries, minutes of meetings and account books are good
examples of primary sources Secondary sources are published sources that are consciously about a topic, and they will often use primary sources in order to make observations and conclusions. Typical secondary sources include articles and books.
>> You can think of secondary sources as having the benefit of
hindsight, wheras primary sources were created by the people involved, at the time being studied, so they can provide direct evidence of an event. This is why they are considered to be essential for historical research.
>> It is worth remembering that the terms 'primary' and 'secondary' are
not clear cut. It may depend what you are using the source for. A published article can be read as a primary source that reveals something about how a topic was reported at that time.
>>
>> I added the last bit after reading a few definitions such as the Yale
piece, but I don't know now whether to state that books and periodicals are secondary sources....I don't want it to get too complicated!
>>
>> It would be helpful to reply to list please - and I think a
discussion might be helpful.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Jane
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jane Stevenson
>> The Archives Hub
>> Mimas, The University of Manchester
>> Devonshire House, Oxford Road
>> Manchester M13 9QH
>>
>>
>> email:[log in to unmask]
>>
>> tel: 0161 275 6055
>> website: archiveshub.ac.uk
>> blog: archiveshub.ac.uk/blog
>> twitter: twitter.com/archiveshub
>>
>> Contact the list owner for assistance at
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during
>> a holiday) see the list website at
>>
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
>>
>>
>>
>
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a
holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
|
