Historians use different types of sources to make sense of the past. Variety is the spice of life, but it can be more than a little mind-boggling to keep them straight. If you're not sure what sources are for, or why we use them in AP World History, you are in the right place.
Read on for everything you need to know about sources for the AP World History exam and research papers!
Note: This article is going to use examples from AP World History. If you'd like an article with AP US History examples, click here!
What Is A Source?
This article assumes that you are familiar with the different types of historical sources and their uses. I will do a brief overview in this section, but I have a more comprehensive guide to different types of historical sources. It's a great resource if you're brand new to historical sources, or if you're feeling a little rusty. You can view that guide here.
In brief, historians use sources to make sense of the past. This includes determining the facts of what happened in history. It also includes making meaning of history. For example, in AP US History you will make several kinds of connections between events and periods. For example, you may examine how one event caused other events to happen. You may also look at how two time periods are similar or different. Professional and amateur historians use a similar process.
These arguments must have evidence to back them up. Otherwise, they are works of fiction or propaganda.
There are different kinds of evidence, which historians refer to as sources. In AP classes, you may hear the term "document" or "stimulus" used instead of source. For our purposes, these words all mean the same thing. I will use source for clarity in this resource.
Finally, remember that there is some blur between categories. Some sources are clearly secondary, and others are muddier. I have included examples here that I think best represent this type of source. I've also noted where you may need to use your best judgement.
What is a Secondary Source?
The Basics
Secondary sources are created by studying several primary sources and drawing conclusions based on research. Secondary sources focus on one or more historical arguments. That means the writer is trying to assert that there is a specific connection between events or that a specific trend occurred within a time period. Historians may also consult other secondary sources during their research. Historians may also use secondary sources when they are creating a new secondary source.
Secondary sources are typically made by experts in a topic. This is often a historian, but it could be a journalist, writer, amateur historian, or any other person who has done sufficient research on the topic.
"Secondary" means that something follows the first item in a sequence. Primary sources are created at the time of an event. They are first in line. Secondary sources build on primary sources, so they are next in line. Without primary sources, there can be no secondary sources.
This is a key difference between the two items. Secondary sources are usually made by people who did NOT witness the events firsthand. Their research and expertise is the basis of their credibility.
Examples
All of the following can be secondary sources. I've included an example in parentheses that's relevant to the AP World History curriculum.
- Newspaper articles, especially opinion pieces (The Green Revolution is a Warning, Not A Blueprint for Feeding A Hungry Planet - Glen Davis Stone)
- Topical history books (The Mongol Queens - Jack Weatherford)
- Biographies (Barracoon - Zora Neale Hurston)
- Interviews with experts (Interview: Andrew Roberts/World War II Historian)
- Documentaries (Fly With Me)
- Charts, graphs, or maps based on compiled or selected data (Our World In Data: Women Live Longer Than Men In Every Country In The World)
Viewer Discretion is Advised
Some types of sources are almost always secondary sources. Books by historians and journalists are good examples of texts that are almost always secondary sources.
The biggest thing to remember is that secondary sources must cite evidence to support their claims. If the "History" Channel runs a "documentary" on how aliens built the pyramids, that is not a valid secondary source. That claim cannot be proved with evidence.
Like all sources, the definition determines what type of source it is. This means that looking a secondary source is not enough to make a it a secondary source.
Limitations of Secondary Sources
Limitation 1: Arguments and interpretations, not facts.
We should be critical readers of secondary sources.
The most important thing to remember about a secondary source is that it not intended to be a catalogue of facts. It is intended to be an argument or interpretation of the meaning of those facts. Just because someone asserts a pattern exists doesn't mean that it does. In addition, just because one pattern exists doesn't mean that all other patterns don't exist.
All historians will select examples that they think best prove their point. They will leave out examples that don't fit into their pattern as well. Often, that's because not all facts are relevant to a particular topic. No reasonable person would hold a historian to the standard of incorporating every primary source into a secondary source.
But, this process of selecting is subject to all of the common human foibles and weaknesses. Let's look at a few in more detail.
Historians can be mistaken. They can misinterpret a document. They may see a pattern that does not really exist. They may not know about contradicting opinions or evidence.
Because they are experts, they have developed an understanding of a topic before they start their research. This means that they may start with a preconceived notion of what they might find. Then, lo and behold, all the evidence confirms their claim is correct! None of this requires any malice, but it does mean the conclusion is flawed.
Unfortunately, more active forms of fraud also exist. Researchers have fabricated data and intentionally misrepresented a source's view. Some writers set out with the goal of proving their particular view of the world must be correct. They are less likely to arrive at an unbiased conclusion. Finally, some historians are writing propaganda. Their job is to portray something is a positive (or negative) light, and they have little interest in objectivity.
In academia, secondary sources go through a peer review process. That means other historians critique before it is published. Most of the time, this processes requires the original author to rewrite portions of their work. Historians can comment on any flaws they see with the research or conclusions. Likewise, credible media organizations employ fact-checkers and historical consultants to review works before publication.
Limitation 2: Did it age like a nice cheese, or like moldy bread?
The age of a secondary source matters.
This may seem counterintuitive. After all, if you're studying something that has already happened, then why does age matter? It's not like the past event is going to suddenly be different.
For good or bad, history is not immutable. Sometimes, we do discover new things about the past. Historians don't have every primary source that has ever been created. Some of these sources are stashed away in attics, basements, or even buried underground. In this interview, historian Andrew Roberts talks about how he was the first historian to view a significant collection of documents from World War II. He found one letter (among 100,000 other pieces of paper), that he felt permanently answered a question about Dunkirk that historians have debated for decades. Lucky him!
In addition, sometimes people start thinking about things differently. For example, this articles discusses horse bones found in archaeological digs throughout the United States. Historians assumed those bones could not belong to horses owned by Native Americans. This assumption was based on primary and secondary sources. But, it also ignored oral traditions from Native American people. It also meant that historians did not bother to have the horse remains tested to determine how old they were. Historians judged which sources were worth spending time on, and that led to a false conclusion about history. Time, research, and advocacy have changed how historians think about archaeological methods and oral traditions. As a result, it is now clear that Native Americans were caring for horses long before Europeans arrived in many areas of the American West.
There is a whole sub-field of history that's dedicated to studying how historical interpretation changes over time. It's called historiography. It's not a major focus in AP World History, but it does exist.
Now, to be clear, there are many secondary sources that have stood the test of time. Researchers lay the groundwork that other historians can follow. Sometimes, truly remarkable research can be read and critiqued for decades without being displaced. This type of source is often referred to as a "seminal" source. Seminal sources may be old, and yet still valid.
Secondary Sources in AP World History
In AP World History, you learn to think like historians think.
This includes all sorts of fun things!
- Develop arguments that show causation, change over time, and similarities between historical events.
- Use evidence to prove your arguments are based in history and logic.
- Analyze the background of your text to strengthen your argument.
- Compare arguments made by different people.
All blog posts are licensed using a CC-BY-SA 4.0 license. You are free to copy or share this information in any form. You may also adapt and build upon this material for commercial and noncommercial. If you chose to share, adapt, or use this information, you must give credit to Spring Learning Services, LLC and indicate if changes were made. All material must be shared using the same terms
This material is based on my interpretation of the AP World History Course and Exam Description and my experience working in education for the past decade. The views expressed on this page are my own. AP® and Advanced Placement® are trademarks registered and owned by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, this site.