secondary sources history research paper

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

Library Research Guide for the History of Science: Introduction

• What is a Secondary Source?
• Senior Theses 2023
• Background and Context/Biography
• Exploring Your Topic
• Using HOLLIS

Page Contents

Recognizing secondary sources, find secondary sources, finding bibliographies.

• What is a Primary Source?
• Exploring the Special Collections at Harvard
• Citing Sources & Organizing Research
• Recognizing Secondary Sources
• Finding Secondary Sources

Secondary sources were created by someone who did not experience first-hand or participate in the events or conditions you’re researching. For a historical research project, secondary sources are generally scholarly books and articles.

A secondary source interprets and analyzes primary sources. These sources are one or more steps removed from the event. Secondary sources may contain pictures, quotes or graphics of primary sources.

Some types of secondary source include:  Textbooks; journal articles; histories; criticisms; commentaries; encyclopedias 

Examples of secondary sources include:

• A scholarly article about water and bathing in Mexico City, 1850-1920
• A book about the psychological effects of WWI
• A 2019 U.S. government document examining the work of African Americans at two Manhattan Project sites
• An NPR piece on race and vaccine skepticism

For a historical research project, secondary sources are usually scholarly books and articles, but as you can see from this list there are other possibilties.

History of Science, Technology and Medicine (Harvard Login)  (1975- ) is an index of books, book chapters, and journal articles. Some social sciences material is included. 

• HSTM is an amalgamation of four separate indexes with four different subject term systems; study the results of keyword searches to be sure that you know the proper subject terms for your topic in each of the, possibly four, relevant component databases. For example, the Wellcome Bibliography uses "Contraception" but the Isis Current Bibliography uses "Birth control".
• If you want to limit the coverage of your sources to a particular era, put one of these terms in a search box:  Antiquity or Ancient - “Greek and Roman” - “Middle Ages” or medieval - 13th  century - 14th century - 15 th  century - 16 th  century - 17th century - 18th century - 19th century - 20th century
• More detailed information about the use of this complex database.

ISISCB Bibliographic Resources in the History of Science, Technology and Medicine  indexes the Isis Current Bibliography.  Search results extend back to 1970.  It also offers a browse of the  Isis Cumulative Bibliographies  (1913-1975).  Search ISISCB Explore

PubMed (Harvard Login for full text access)  (1947- ) is the National Library of Medicine's index to biomedical journal articles.

• To limit to historical sources, attach the phrase (in"") "historical article" to your search. Example: "Psychology, clinical" and "historical article".
• Be sure to look for MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) on pertinent records by scrolling down past the abstracts. (Not all records in PubMed have MeSH terms.) Subject headings can help you get to more relevant records and/or can be helpful keyword suggestions.

America: History and Life (Harvard login)  is the primary bibliographic reference to the history of the United States and Canada from prehistory to the present.

Historical Abstracts (Harvard Login)  is a reference guide to the history of the world from 1450 to the present (excluding the United States and Canada, which are covered in America: History and Life, above).

• Both allow coverage date limitations as well as publication date limitations, Can usually use LC terms, not always 

Bibliography of British and Irish History (Harvard Login)  provides bibliographic data on historical writing dealing with the British Isles, and with the British empire and commonwealth, during all periods for which written documentation is available - from 55BC to the present.

• At the link above, choose BBIH from the top row of options.

The Forest History Society Research Portal  offers over 45,000 citations to published items on environmental history, over 30,000 photographs, and other material.

Web of Science Citation Indexes (Harvard Login)  (for historical articles1956- ) includes articles in all areas of science. You can use the Cited Reference Search in Web of Science to find secondary source articles that cite a specified secondary or primary source article or book. More information .

Library Guide to the History of Science Your guide to the History of Science at Harvard. It has more extensive lists of resources and tools than this introductory guide does.

There may already be a detailed list of sources, a bibliography, for your topic. Bibliographies don't always come at the end of a paper- many are independent works of their own, full of recommended sources on any given topic.

For example:

• Microbes and Minie Balls: An Annotated Bibliography of Civil War Medicine (Print Only) , by F. R. Freemon. Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1993, 253 pp.                          
• Annotated Bibliography on Medical Research in the South Pacific (Harvard login for HathiTrust full text), by Norman-Taylor, William, South Pacific Commission, 1963. 371pp.

Look for specialized subject bibliographies: search, e.g., <"science and state" AND China AND bibliography>   in HOLLIS  and WorldCat (advanced search). Note:The word Bibliography must be searched as a Subject keyword.

If you find an older article or book in a bibliography, you can use the Cited Reference Search in Web of Science to find more recent articles by seeing who has cited it.   If you have a bibliography of primary sources, then the Web of Science can be used to find secondary sources that cite a specified primary source. See Searching the Citation Indexes (Web of Science) .

• << Previous: Using HOLLIS
• Next: What is a Primary Source? >>
• Last Updated: Apr 14, 2024 9:25 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/HistSciInfo

Harvard University Digital Accessibility Policy

Primary & Secondary Sources

What are primary sources.

Primary sources are original materials used by historians to reconstruct a certain event in the past or moment in history. They are original documents, physical objects, relics, or artifacts created during the time under study by witnesses who lived through the event.  These sources were either produced at the time of the event, or (as in the case of memoirs and autobiographies) published at a later date.

The following are only a few examples of primary sources and are by no means exhaustive:

• Original documents such as letters, diaries, manuscripts, official documents, maps, pictures, and original film footage.  Examples:  the original Constitution of the United States, an original treaty between two states, diaries of travelers who document their journeys and experiences on the road, maps of cities or first-hand descriptions of battles.
• Relics and artifacts such as arrowheads, pottery shards, remains of buildings, clothing, and statues.
• Literature, poetry, drama, music, drawings, and other kinds of art; such as Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, cave paintings, poetry written by courtiers or bards.

Primary sources should be read critically and should not be taken as the literal truth.  When analyzing a primary document, one should take into account who the author was, why he or she was writing the document, and who (if anyone) was its target audience.  Did the author have any biases that influenced the way the document was written?  How reliable is the author?  Start by reading for content, then ask yourself the above questions — how do they affect your understanding of the document?

It is essential to place the document into historical context and not judge its content by today’s standards, always keeping in mind differences between the time it was written and the present.

What Are Secondary Sources?

A secondary source is a contemporary document, book, or article that analyzes, evaluates, and synthesizes information from primary sources.  Most secondary sources refer back to or have quotes and pictures from the primary source(s), but are written after the event in question.  Secondary sources are commentaries on and discussions of primary sources.  When using secondary sources, it is important to strive to be objective, even though this may not always be completely possible.  A few examples of secondary sources include books, articles, histories, encyclopedias, dictionaries, bibliographies, textbooks, and (most) websites.

When writing a history research paper, primary sources are used in conjunction with secondary sources.  It is important to evaluate the importance and relevance of the primary document to the assignment.  It is also very important to assess the document critically and evaluate its authenticity, authorship, language, and reliability.  Who was the author?  What were his or her motives for writing the document?  How reliable do you think he/she is?  What kind of language is the author using?  Who is her/her target audience?  How relevant is this document to your topic?  Once you have answered these questions to your satisfaction, you can begin constructing your argument.

6265 Bunche Hall Box 951473 University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095-1473 Phone: (310) 825-4601

Other Resources

• UCLA Library
• Faculty Intranet
• Department Forms
• Office 365 Email
• Remote Help

Campus Resources

• Maps, Directions, Parking
• Academic Calendar
• University of California
• Terms of Use

Social Sciences Division Departments

• Aerospace Studies
• African American Studies
• American Indian Studies
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Asian American Studies
• César E. Chávez Department of Chicana & Chicano Studies
• Communication
• Conservation
• Gender Studies
• Military Science
• Naval Science
• Political Science

University Library

History research seminar: best practices for students.

• Choosing Topics
• "Unconventional" Primary Sources
• The Role of Secondary Sources
• Should I use a Block Quote?

Secondary Sources

As upper-level history students, you will have learned about, searched for, and used secondary sources in previous research assignments. Building on your previous experience, finding secondary sources for History Research Seminars papers on independent/original topics will feel a little bit different.

Why is this? This is because secondary sources here should be centered within the discipline of History and this will requires that you use unfamiliar Library Databases and some advanced search and filter settings. This is also because your research question and arguments will be narrower than in previous papers, for example Women Artists situated with Irish History, and this may make it difficult to notice useful books or journal articles by their titles or abstracts alone. Finally, your professors may recommend scholarly authors to read, and and this may require some additional skills in finding and accessing these specific sources. 

More about the types of secondary sources we're talking about:

Scholarly books are written by a specialist and intended for other specialists in the field. They provide In-depth research on large topics, which can include analysis of an issue's context and consequences, comparison of multiple views, or broad interdisciplinary approaches to a topic as well as historical information. You can identify these by their publishers, usually a university press (like our own UC Press) or a dedicated academic publishing company. However, even mainstream popular presses occasionally publish academic works. Look for these signs of "scholarliness:"*

Before you start searching databases: Explore your syllabus for recommended books. Your professor, once they know the topic you're workign on, may recommend authors or books to start with. This is something to work on right away: Finding these right away and quicky aquinat yourself with the book looking for background information; primary sources they uses; their questions and arguments. You can do this by skimming.

Likewise, you can also get a background by reading a relevant and short encyclopedia entry. Wikipedia is okay, but its entries often do not reference the most recent scholarship and its bibliography frequently leaves out key sources. you will be better served by an encyclopedia from an Academic Press, which will be written by a scholar familiar with all the most important works for you to know. This is a quick way to read an overview of the topic and quickly shift to getting started on your research.

From there, you can expand your search for books by using UC Library Search . Sign in for full access. Some books will be in the Library, and you'll need to pick these up off the shelf. Some books will be availabel as eBooks (if you have problems, use the Ask Us button to report problems). Some books might need to be "Requested through InterLibrary Loan." Use the opens on the left of the page to see books at other UCs, like Berkeley or Los Angeles.

Articles in Peer Reviewed Journals are shorter in length because they often exclude background information and explanations. These provide narrowly focused analysis, detailed findings from individual studies, and the latest information on a topic. Because of this, they can prove useful, after you've narrowed down your topic and need to find very specific information.*

Journal articles are interesting because they're more closely aligned with the research you're doing in this course. The main exception is that the authors have, to an extent, mastered the core texts in their field study (as part of their PhD work and beyond), and their interaction with primary sources are deeper (they may travel to archives and they may have extended time with the primary sources under study).

Their narrowness and uniqueness sometimes makes them harder to engage with for use in research papers. The ways they are useful is that they can inform use of methods they used to read or evaluate primary sources; they can shed light on the topic through their interpretations and arguments; or you can read these and think about what's missing in their work that you'd like to show in your work or analysis. Therefore, a journal article need not be exactly on your topic, for example they could an approach to reading primary sources that you want to mirror or they could make an argument that you agree with or disagree with and so on. This is more than just mining for quotes to make your paragraph sound better. Read and reflect on their research and where your work sits in comparison.  

For finding, you may already have go tos. What are these for you? For some it's often just Google (in which case, have you heard of Google Scholar ) or JSTOR . Some other database search engines to use include Web of Science (which includes a very neat "cited by" tool); the new UC Library Search allow you to narrow to peer reviewed articles (but this is a good last resort tool); America History and Life or Historical Abstracts or Periodicals Archive Online are also quite useful. Depending on the area of study of your course, there may be other databases out there, for example HAPI (Hispanic American Periodicals Index) . 

*Borrows from  Articles, Books, and . . . ? Understanding the Many Types of Information Found in Libraries

• How to Read an Academic Paper
• << Previous: "Unconventional" Primary Sources
• Next: Should I use a Block Quote? >>

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License except where otherwise noted.

Land Acknowledgement

The land on which we gather is the unceded territory of the Awaswas-speaking Uypi Tribe. The Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, comprised of the descendants of indigenous people taken to missions Santa Cruz and San Juan Bautista during Spanish colonization of the Central Coast, is today working hard to restore traditional stewardship practices on these lands and heal from historical trauma.

The land acknowledgement used at UC Santa Cruz was developed in partnership with the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Chairman and the Amah Mutsun Relearning Program at the UCSC Arboretum .

University Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Library Research for Undergraduate History Students: An Introduction

• Starting Points

What are Secondary Sources?

How do i find secondary sources, sources from other subject areas.

• Primary Sources
• Constructing Your Paper
• Video Tutorials
• Return to HPNL Website

Ask a Librarian

Secondary sources   are the published work of scholars specializing in the topic. Secondary sources include scholarly books, articles, and essays (both analyses by contemporary scholars as well as older analyses), surveys, criticism, comparative studies, reference sources, and works on theory and methodology; this is also termed the secondary literature . Eventually you will need to decide which interpretation makes the most sense to you and seems consistent with your primary sources, or if you wish to offer a new interpretation. 

When we talk about secondary sources, most of the time we are referring to published scholarship on a subject, rather than supplemental material (bibliographies, encyclopedias, handbooks, etc.). Secondary literature is published in both book form and as articles in periodicals, either in print or digital format. (Digital format includes both reproduction of print material online and original e-text.) This scholarship is analytical and interpretive. It may synthesize the work of other historians to present a totally new interpretation. More likely, it offers a new reading of previously analyzed sources or presents an analysis of previously unknown sources.

Hence, you use secondary sources to identify the main currents of thought on your topic . Which historians have taken up this topic and what were their main arguments? How has our understanding of the subject changed with shifts in the predominant methodologies and theoretical perspectives in the historical profession?

To identify secondary literature, you can search the  online library catalog  to find books or search  article databases and online bibliographies  to find journal articles, book chapters, dissertations and more. Some useful article databases for history are:

• L'Année philologique This link opens in a new window Online searchable database comprised of the print index begun in 1928 by Jules Marouzeau. Vols. 20- of the original print index are currently, with earler vols. to be digitized in the future. Indexes periodical articles as well as articles in collections and conference papers in classics and classical studies. Covers Greek and Latin linguistics and literature and Greek and Roman archaeology, history, mythology, religion, epigraphy, numismatics and palaeography: all aspects of the ancient Mediterranean world.
• Brepolis Medieval and Early Modern Bibliographies This link opens in a new window The Brepolis Medieval and Early Modern Bibliographies are multidisciplinary bibliographies of Europe, North Africa and the Near East (300-1500), founded in 1967 with the aim of providing a comprehensive, current bibliography of articles in journals and miscellany volumes (conference proceedings, essay collections or Festschriften) worldwide. The bibliographies comprise 365,000 articles, all of which are fully classified by date, subject and location, and provide full bibliographical records.
• Historical Abstracts with Full Text This link opens in a new window Covers the history of the world (excluding the United States and Canada) from 1450 to the present, including world history, military history, women's history, history of education, and more. Provides indexing of more than 1,700 academic historical journals in over 40 languages back to 1955. more... less... Alternate Access Link
• America: History & Life with Full Text This link opens in a new window Index of literature covering the history and culture of the United States and Canada, from prehistory to the present. The database indexes journals from 1964 to present and includes citations and links to book and media reviews. more... less... Alternate Access Link
• Hispanic American Periodicals Index (HAPI) This link opens in a new window Contains citations to articles in more than 400 scholarly journals published in Latin America or treating Latin American and U.S. Hispanic topics.
• Bibliography of Asian Studies This link opens in a new window This on-line version of the Bibliography of Asian Studies (BAS) contains 787,165 records on all subjects (especially in the humanities and the social sciences) pertaining to East, Southeast, and South Asia published worldwide from 1971 to the present... In addition to entries compiled since 1997, the online BAS includes the full data of all of the printed volumes of the BAS issued from the 1971 up to the 1991 volumes (published in 1997)... Through the 1991 printed volume, the BAS included citations to Western-language periodical articles, monographs, chapters in edited volumes, conference proceedings, anthologies, and Festschriften, etc. Monographs published since 1992, however, have not been added to the database, and users seeking such monographs are urged to consult other general resources and databases such as WorldCat.. more... less... Alternate Access Link
• American Bibliography of Slavic and East European Studies This link opens in a new window Covers North American scholarship on East-Central Europe, Russia, and the former Soviet Union. Contains bibliographic records for journal articles, books and book chapters, book reviews, dissertations, online resources, and selected government publications. more... less... Alternate Access Link

Additional suggestions can be found in the research guides created for history classes and special topics .

You can also consult book-length bibliographies , either general overviews such as the American Historical Association Guide to Historical Literature, or specialized bibliographies such as  The Harvard Guide to African-American History .

You can use the article databases listed above to look for review essays (also called review articles ) in which a historian who specializes in the subject analyzes recent scholarship; you may find helpful overviews that appear as chapters in collections, journal articles, or even monographs by using the keyword historiography or historiographic ; you can read about the topic in a subject encyclopedia and look at the bibliography at the end of the entry; and you can find a major work of scholarship on the topic and follow up on the sources used by the author ( footnote tracking ).

Most of the time you will find the secondary literature you need by using the online catalog, the appropriate article databases, subject encyclopedias or bibliographies, and by consulting your instructor.

Most academic research today is at least somewhat interdisciplinary . For historians, theories and methods are sometimes borrowed from other disciplines such as philosophy, literary criticism, and anthropology.

Furthermore, the publications compiled in the service of other disciplines very often serve as valuable source material for historians .

Check these links for helpful introductions to research resources for related disciplines:

African American Research Center

Online Resources for Religious Studies

Philosophy Library Resource Guide

Social Sciences, Health, and Education Library (SSHEL) :

• American Indian Studies
• Anthropology
• Asian American Studies
• Biomedical Sciences
• Community/Public Health
• Gender & Women's Studies
• Geography & Geographic Information Science
• Library & Information Science
• Political Science
• Recreation, Sport & Tourism
• Social Work

International and Area Studies Library

Literatures and Languages Library (includes Classics Collection)

Map Library

Music and Performing Arts Library

Ricker Architecture and Art Library

Funk (ACES) Library

• Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES)
• City Planning and Landscape Architecture
• Prairie Research Institute
• Agricultural Communications Documentation Center
• << Previous: Starting Points
• Next: Primary Sources >>
• Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 1:02 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.illinois.edu/historicalresearch

Research Help for History Students: Secondary Sources

• Focusing Your Topic
• Finding Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources - Books
• Secondary Sources - Articles
• Finding Secondary Sources
• Historiography
• Need More Help?
• Citation Resources This link opens in a new window

What is a secondary source?

While the bulk of your research will often come from  primary  sources,  you will also need  secondary sources  to support your arguments and claims in your paper.  

Secondary sources use primary sources to analyze and make arguments about the past.  They are generally written by a scholar who did  not  experience the event they are describing. These sources can take many forms depending on the discipline, but for history they are generally books and articles.  

Now, as you may already know, not all books and articles are considered worthy sources for a paper.  The sub-pages to this section will go in to more detail on what is considered a good source and what should be pushed aside.

                                    BOOK                                                                                                                              ARTICLE

• << Previous: Finding Primary Sources
• Next: Secondary Sources - Books >>
• Last Updated: Apr 30, 2024 9:52 AM
• URL: https://libguides.hartford.edu/researchhelpforhistory

A-Z Site Index | Contact Us | Directions | Hours | Get Help

University of Hartford | 200 Bloomfield Avenue, West Hartford, CT 06117 Harrison Libraries © 2020 | 860.768.4264

University Library

Types of Sources and Where to Find Them: Secondary Sources

This is the second video in a two-part tutorial on primary and secondary sources. Historians and other scholars classify sources as primary or secondary. Whereas primary sources are considered the raw material of the historical record, and are usually created around the same time as the events they purport to document, secondary sources are further removed from these historical events or circumstances. Typically, secondary sources offer an interpretation of the past based on analysis and synthesis of primary sources.

Examples of secondary sources include:

• surveys of broad historical periods,
• works that focus on specific events or topics,
• literary and cultural criticism,
• and works on theory and methodology.

Secondary sources can be found in books, journals, or Internet resources.

When we talk about secondary sources, most of the time we are referring to the published scholarship on a subject, rather than supplementary material like bibliographies, encyclopedias, handbooks, and so forth. These supplementary materials are sometimes referred to as tertiary sources.

A secondary source is analytical and interpretive. It may offer a new reading of historical events and primary sources that have been analyzed before, or present an analysis of events and sources that were previously unknown or not written about. A secondary source might also synthesize the work of other historians in order to formulate a totally new interpretation. You will use secondary sources to identify the main currents of thought on your topic, and to answer questions, like:

• Which historians have taken up this topic?
• What were their main arguments?
• How have historians’ understanding of the topic changed over time?

To identify secondary literature, you can do subject searches in the library catalog to find books, or subject searches in article databases to find articles. The most important databases for finding peer-reviewed articles by historians are: America: History and Life, which covers the history of North America and Historical Abstracts, which covers the rest of the world since 1450. You can also consult standard published bibliographies, like the American Historical Association’s Guide to Historical Literature, or specialized bibliographies, like this bibliography of medieval warfare. You may find more lengthy treatments of the topic published as book chapters, journal articles, or even as individual monographs. You can read about the topic in a subject encyclopedia and look at the bibliography at the end of the entry. You can find a major work of scholarship on the topic, and follow up on the sources used by the author.

Most of the time you will find the secondary literature you need by using

• the library catalog,
• the appropriate article databases,
• subject encyclopedias,
• bibliographies,
• and by consulting with your instructor.

Remember to keep track of all the sources you’ve used. At some point, you’ll want to list them in a bibliography of your own.

Writing a Good History Paper

• Top Ten Reasons for Negative Comments
• Making Sure your Paper has Substance

Common Marginal Remarks on Style, Clarity, Grammar, and Syntax

Word and phrase usage problems, analyzing a historical document, writing a book review, writing a term paper or senior thesis, top ten reasons for negative comments on history papers.

(Drawn from a survey of the History Department ) 10. You engage in cheap, anachronistic moralizing .  9. You are sloppy with the chronology .  8. You quote excessively or improperly .  7. You have written a careless “one-draft wonder.” (See revise and proofread)  6. You are vague or have empty, unsupported generalizations .  5. You write too much in the passive voice.  4. You use inappropriate sources .  3. You use evidence uncritically.  2. You are wordy .  1. You have no clear thesis and little analysis.

Making Sure your History Paper has Substance

Get off to a good start..

Avoid pretentious, vapid beginnings. If you are writing a paper on, say, British responses to the rebellion in India in 1857, don't open with a statement like this: “Throughout human history people in all cultures everywhere in the world have engaged in many and long-running conflicts about numerous aspects of government policy and diplomatic issues, which have much interested historians and generated historical theories in many areas.” This is pure garbage, bores the reader, and is a sure sign that you have nothing substantive to say. Get to the point. Here’s a better start: “The rebellion in 1857 compelled the British to rethink their colonial administration in India.” This sentence tells the reader what your paper is actually about and clears the way for you to state your thesis in the rest of the opening paragraph. For example, you might go on to argue that greater British sensitivity to Indian customs was hypocritical.

State a clear thesis.

Whether you are writing an exam essay or a senior thesis, you need to have a thesis. Don’t just repeat the assignment or start writing down everything that you know about the subject. Ask yourself, “What exactly am I trying to prove?” Your thesis is your take on the subject, your perspective, your explanation—that is, the case that you’re going to argue. “Famine struck Ireland in the 1840s” is a true statement, but it is not a thesis. “The English were responsible for famine in Ireland in the 1840s” is a thesis (whether defensible or not is another matter). A good thesis answers an important research question about how or why something happened. (“Who was responsible for the famine in Ireland in the 1840s?”) Once you have laid out your thesis, don’t forget about it. Develop your thesis logically from paragraph to paragraph. Your reader should always know where your argument has come from, where it is now, and where it is going.

Be sure to analyze.

Students are often puzzled when their professors mark them down for summarizing or merely narrating rather than analyzing. What does it mean to analyze? In the narrow sense, to analyze means to break down into parts and to study the interrelationships of those parts. If you analyze water, you break it down into hydrogen and oxygen. In a broader sense, historical analysis explains the origins and significance of events. Historical analysis digs beneath the surface to see relationships or distinctions that are not immediately obvious. Historical analysis is critical; it evaluates sources, assigns significance to causes, and weighs competing explanations. Don’t push the distinction too far, but you might think of summary and analysis this way: Who, what, when, and where are the stuff of summary; how, why, and to what effect are the stuff of analysis. Many students think that they have to give a long summary (to show the professor that they know the facts) before they get to their analysis. Try instead to begin your analysis as soon as possible, sometimes without any summary at all. The facts will “shine through” a good analysis. You can't do an analysis unless you know the facts, but you can summarize the facts without being able to do an analysis. Summary is easier and less sophisticated than analysis—that’s why summary alone never earns an “A.”

Use evidence critically.

Like good detectives, historians are critical of their sources and cross-check them for reliability. You wouldn't think much of a detective who relied solely on a suspect’s archenemy to check an alibi. Likewise, you wouldn't think much of a historian who relied solely on the French to explain the origins of World War I. Consider the following two statements on the origin of World War I: 1) “For the catastrophe of 1914 the Germans are responsible. Only a professional liar would deny this...” 2) “It is not true that Germany is guilty of having caused this war. Neither the people, the government, nor the Kaiser wanted war....”  They can’t both be right, so you have to do some detective work. As always, the best approach is to ask: Who wrote the source? Why? When? Under what circumstances? For whom? The first statement comes from a book by the French politician Georges Clemenceau, which he wrote in 1929 at the very end of his life. In 1871, Clemenceau had vowed revenge against Germany for its defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War. As premier of France from 1917 to 1920, he represented France at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. He was obviously not a disinterested observer. The second statement comes from a manifesto published by ninety-three prominent German intellectuals in the fall of 1914. They were defending Germany against charges of aggression and brutality. They too were obviously not disinterested observers. Now, rarely do you encounter such extreme bias and passionate disagreement, but the principle of criticizing and cross-checking sources always applies. In general, the more sources you can use, and the more varied they are, the more likely you are to make a sound historical judgment, especially when passions and self-interests are engaged. You don’t need to be cynical as a historian (self-interest does not explain everything), but you do need to be critical and skeptical. Competent historians may offer different interpretations of the same evidence or choose to stress different evidence. You will not find a single historical Truth with a capital “T” on any matter of significance. You can, however, learn to discriminate among conflicting interpretations, not all of which are created equal. (See also: Analyzing a Historical Document )

Be precise.

Vague statements and empty generalizations suggest that you haven't put in the time to learn the material. Consider these two sentences: “During the French Revolution, the government was overthrown by the people. The Revolution is important because it shows that people need freedom.” What people? Landless peasants? Urban journeymen? Wealthy lawyers? Which government? When? How? Who exactly needed freedom, and what did they mean by freedom? Here is a more precise statement about the French Revolution: “Threatened by rising prices and food shortages in 1793, the Parisian sans-culottes pressured the Convention to institute price controls.” This statement is more limited than the grandiose generalizations about the Revolution, but unlike them, it can open the door to a real analysis of the Revolution. Be careful when you use grand abstractions like people, society, freedom, and government, especially when you further distance yourself from the concrete by using these words as the apparent antecedents for the pronouns they and it. Always pay attention to cause and effect. Abstractions do not cause or need anything; particular people or particular groups of people cause or need things. Avoid grandiose trans-historical generalizations that you can’t support. When in doubt about the appropriate level of precision or detail, err on the side of adding “too much” precision and detail.

Watch the chronology.

Anchor your thesis in a clear chronological framework and don't jump around confusingly. Take care to avoid both anachronisms and vagueness about dates. If you write, “Napoleon abandoned his Grand Army in Russia and caught the redeye back to Paris,” the problem is obvious. If you write, “Despite the Watergate scandal, Nixon easily won reelection in 1972,” the problem is more subtle, but still serious. (The scandal did not become public until after the election.) If you write, “The revolution in China finally succeeded in the twentieth century,” your professor may suspect that you haven’t studied. Which revolution? When in the twentieth century? Remember that chronology is the backbone of history. What would you think of a biographer who wrote that you graduated from Hamilton in the 1950s?

Cite sources carefully.

Your professor may allow parenthetical citations in a short paper with one or two sources, but you should use footnotes for any research paper in history. Parenthetical citations are unaesthetic; they scar the text and break the flow of reading. Worse still, they are simply inadequate to capture the richness of historical sources. Historians take justifiable pride in the immense variety of their sources. Parenthetical citations such as (Jones 1994) may be fine for most of the social sciences and humanities, where the source base is usually limited to recent books and articles in English. Historians, however, need the flexibility of the full footnote. Try to imagine this typical footnote (pulled at random from a classic work of German history) squeezed into parentheses in the body of the text: DZA Potsdam, RdI, Frieden 5, Erzgebiet von Longwy-Briey, Bd. I, Nr. 19305, gedruckte Denkschrift für OHL und Reichsleitung, Dezember 1917, und in RWA, Frieden Frankreich Nr. 1883. The abbreviations are already in this footnote; its information cannot be further reduced. For footnotes and bibliography, historians usually use Chicago style. (The Chicago Manual of Style. 15th edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.) On the Writing Center’s website you can find a useful summary of Chicago citation style prepared by a former history major, Elizabeth Rabe ’04 ( Footnotes ). RefWorks (on the library’s website) will convert your citations to Chicago style. Don’t hesitate to ask one of the reference librarians for help if you have trouble getting started on RefWorks.

Use primary sources.

Use as many primary sources as possible in your paper. A primary source is one produced by a participant in or witness of the events you are writing about. A primary source allows the historian to see the past through the eyes of direct participants. Some common primary sources are letters, diaries, memoirs, speeches, church records, newspaper articles, and government documents of all kinds. The capacious genre “government records” is probably the single richest trove for the historian and includes everything from criminal court records, to tax lists, to census data, to parliamentary debates, to international treaties—indeed, any records generated by governments. If you’re writing about culture, primary sources may include works of art or literature, as well as philosophical tracts or scientific treatises—anything that comes under the broad rubric of culture. Not all primary sources are written. Buildings, monuments, clothes, home furnishings, photographs, religious relics, musical recordings, or oral reminiscences can all be primary sources if you use them as historical clues. The interests of historians are so broad that virtually anything can be a primary source. (See also: Analyzing a Historical Document )

Use scholarly secondary sources.

A secondary source is one written by a later historian who had no part in what he or she is writing about. (In the rare cases when the historian was a participant in the events, then the work—or at least part of it—is a primary source.) Historians read secondary sources to learn about how scholars have interpreted the past. Just as you must be critical of primary sources, so too you must be critical of secondary sources. You must be especially careful to distinguish between scholarly and non-scholarly secondary sources. Unlike, say, nuclear physics, history attracts many amateurs. Books and articles about war, great individuals, and everyday material life dominate popular history. Some professional historians disparage popular history and may even discourage their colleagues from trying their hand at it. You need not share their snobbishness; some popular history is excellent. But—and this is a big but—as a rule, you should avoid popular works in your research, because they are usually not scholarly. Popular history seeks to inform and entertain a large general audience. In popular history, dramatic storytelling often prevails over analysis, style over substance, simplicity over complexity, and grand generalization over careful qualification. Popular history is usually based largely or exclusively on secondary sources. Strictly speaking, most popular histories might better be called tertiary, not secondary, sources. Scholarly history, in contrast, seeks to discover new knowledge or to reinterpret existing knowledge. Good scholars wish to write clearly and simply, and they may spin a compelling yarn, but they do not shun depth, analysis, complexity, or qualification. Scholarly history draws on as many primary sources as practical. Now, your goal as a student is to come as close as possible to the scholarly ideal, so you need to develop a nose for distinguishing the scholarly from the non-scholarly. Here are a few questions you might ask of your secondary sources (bear in mind that the popular/scholarly distinction is not absolute, and that some scholarly work may be poor scholarship). Who is the author? Most scholarly works are written by professional historians (usually professors) who have advanced training in the area they are writing about. If the author is a journalist or someone with no special historical training, be careful. Who publishes the work? Scholarly books come from university presses and from a handful of commercial presses (for example, Norton, Routledge, Palgrave, Penguin, Rowman & Littlefield, Knopf, and HarperCollins). If it’s an article, where does it appear? Is it in a journal subscribed to by our library, listed on JSTOR , or published by a university press? Is the editorial board staffed by professors? Oddly enough, the word journal in the title is usually a sign that the periodical is scholarly. What do the notes and bibliography look like? If they are thin or nonexistent, be careful. If they are all secondary sources, be careful. If the work is about a non-English-speaking area, and all the sources are in English, then it's almost by definition not scholarly. Can you find reviews of the book in the data base Academic Search Premier? If the book was published within the last few decades, and it’s not in there, that’s a bad sign. With a little practice, you can develop confidence in your judgment—and you’re on your way to being a historian. If you are unsure whether a work qualifies as scholarly, ask your professor. (See also: Writing a Book Review )

Avoid abusing your sources.

Many potentially valuable sources are easy to abuse. Be especially alert for these five abuses: Web abuse. The Web is a wonderful and improving resource for indexes and catalogs. But as a source for primary and secondary material for the historian, the Web is of limited value. Anyone with the right software can post something on the Web without having to get past trained editors, peer reviewers, or librarians. As a result, there is a great deal of garbage on the Web. If you use a primary source from the Web, make sure that a respected intellectual institution stands behind the site. Be especially wary of secondary articles on the Web, unless they appear in electronic versions of established print journals (e.g., The Journal of Asian Studies in JSTOR). Many articles on the Web are little more than third-rate encyclopedia entries. When in doubt, check with your professor. With a few rare exceptions, you will not find scholarly monographs in history (even recent ones) on the Web. You may have heard of Google’s plans to digitize the entire collections of some of the world’s major libraries and to make those collections available on the Web. Don’t hold your breath. Your days at Hamilton will be long over by the time the project is finished. Besides, your training as a historian should give you a healthy skepticism of the giddy claims of technophiles. Most of the time and effort of doing history goes into reading, note-taking, pondering, and writing. Finding a chapter of a book on the Web (as opposed to getting the physical book through interlibrary loan) might be a convenience, but it doesn’t change the basics for the historian. Moreover, there is a subtle, but serious, drawback with digitized old books: They break the historian’s sensual link to the past. And of course, virtually none of the literally trillions of pages of archival material is available on the Web. For the foreseeable future, the library and the archive will remain the natural habitats of the historian. Thesaurus abuse. How tempting it is to ask your computer’s thesaurus to suggest a more erudite-sounding word for the common one that popped into your mind! Resist the temptation. Consider this example (admittedly, a bit heavy-handed, but it drives the point home): You’re writing about the EPA’s programs to clean up impure water supplies. Impure seems too simple and boring a word, so you bring up your thesaurus, which offers you everything from incontinent to meretricious. “How about meretricious water?” you think to yourself. “That will impress the professor.” The problem is that you don’t know exactly what meretricious means, so you don’t realize that meretricious is absurdly inappropriate in this context and makes you look foolish and immature. Use only those words that come to you naturally. Don’t try to write beyond your vocabulary. Don’t try to impress with big words. Use a thesaurus only for those annoying tip-of-the-tongue problems (you know the word and will recognize it instantly when you see it, but at the moment you just can’t think of it).  Quotation book abuse. This is similar to thesaurus abuse. Let’s say you are writing a paper on Alexander Hamilton’s banking policies, and you want to get off to a snappy start that will make you seem effortlessly learned. How about a quotation on money? You click on the index of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations , and before you know it, you’ve begun your paper with, “As Samuel Butler wrote in Hudibras ,  ‘For what is worth in anything/ But so much money as ’t will bring?’” Face it, you’re faking it. You don’t know who Samuel Butler is, and you’ve certainly never heard of Hudibras , let alone read it. Your professor is not fooled. You sound like an insecure after-dinner speaker. Forget Bartlett’s, unless you're confirming the wording of a quotation that came to you spontaneously and relates to your paper.  Encyclopedia abuse. General encyclopedias like Britannica are useful for checking facts (“Wait a sec, am I right about which countries sent troops to crush the Boxer Rebellion in China? Better check.”). But if you are footnoting encyclopedias in your papers, you are not doing college-level research.

Dictionary Abuse. The dictionary is your friend. Keep it by your side as you write, but do not abuse it by starting papers with a definition. You may be most tempted to start this way when you are writing on a complex, controversial, or elusive subject. (“According to Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary , liberalism is defined as...”). Actually, the dictionary does you little good in such cases and makes you sound like a conscientious but dull high-school student. Save in the rare case that competing dictionary definitions are the subject at hand, keep dictionary quotations out of your paper.

Quote sparingly

Avoid quoting a secondary source and then simply rewording or summarizing the quotation, either above or below the quotation. It is rarely necessary to quote secondary sources at length, unless your essay focuses on a critical analysis of the author’s argument. (See also: Writing a Book Review ) Your professor wants to see your ability to analyze and to understand the secondary sources. Do not quote unless the quotation clarifies or enriches your analysis. When in doubt, do not quote; instead, integrate the author’s argument into your own (though be sure to acknowledge ideas from your sources, even when you are paraphrasing). If you use a lot of quotations from secondary sources, you are probably writing a poor paper. An analysis of a primary source, such as a political tract or philosophical essay, might require lengthy quotations, often in block format. In such cases, you might need to briefly repeat key points or passages as a means to introduce the author’s ideas, but your analysis and interpretation of the text’s meaning should remain the most important aim. (See also: Using primary sources and Use scholarly secondary sources .)

Know your audience

Unless instructed otherwise, you should assume that your audience consists of educated, intelligent, nonspecialists. In fact, your professor will usually be your only reader, but if you write directly to your professor, you may become cryptic or sloppy (oh well, she’ll know what I’m talking about). Explaining your ideas to someone who doesn't know what you mean forces you to be clear and complete. Now, finding the right amount of detail can, admittedly, be tricky (how much do I put in about the Edict of Nantes, the Embargo Act, or President Wilson’s background?). When in doubt, err on the side of putting in extra details. You’ll get some leeway here if you avoid the extremes (my reader’s an ignoramus/my reader knows everything).

Avoid cheap, anachronistic moralizing

Many of the people and institutions of the past appear unenlightened, ignorant, misguided, or bigoted by today’s values. Resist the temptation to condemn or to get self-righteous. (“Martin Luther was blind to the sexism and class prejudice of sixteenth-century German society.”) Like you, people in the past were creatures of their time; like you, they deserve to be judged by the standards of their time. If you judge the past by today’s standards (an error historians call “presentism”), you will never understand why people thought or acted as they did. Yes, Hitler was a bad guy, but he was bad not only by today’s standards, but also by the commonly accepted standards of his own time. Someday you’re going to look pretty foolish and ignorant yourself. (“Early twenty-first century Hamilton students failed to see the shocking inderdosherism [that’s right, you don’t recognize the concept because it doesn’t yet exist] implicit in their career plans.”)

Have a strong conclusion

Obviously, you should not just stop abruptly as though you have run out of time or ideas. Your conclusion should conclude something. If you merely restate briefly what you have said in your paper, you give the impression that you are unsure of the significance of what you have written. A weak conclusion leaves the reader unsatisfied and bewildered, wondering why your paper was worth reading. A strong conclusion adds something to what you said in your introduction. A strong conclusion explains the importance and significance of what you have written. A strong conclusion leaves your reader caring about what you have said and pondering the larger implications of your thesis. Don’t leave your reader asking, “So what?”

Revise and proofread

Your professor can spot a “one-draft wonder,” so don't try to do your paper at the last moment. Leave plenty of time for revising and proofreading. Show your draft to a writing tutor or other good writer. Reading the draft aloud may also help. Of course, everyone makes mistakes, and a few may slip through no matter how meticulous you are. But beware of lots of mistakes. The failure to proofread carefully suggests that you devoted little time and effort to the assignment. Tip: Proofread your text both on the screen and on a printed copy. Your eyes see the two differently. Don’t rely on your spell checker to catch all of your misspellings. (If ewe ken reed this ewe kin sea that a computer wood nut all ways help ewe spill or rite reel good.)

Note: The Writing Center suggests standard abbreviations for noting some of these problems. You should familiarize yourself with those abbreviations, but your professor may not use them.  

Remarks on Style and Clarity

Wordy/verbose/repetitive..

Try your hand at fixing this sentence: “Due to the fact that these aspects of the issue of personal survival have been raised by recently transpired problematic conflicts, it is at the present time paramount that the ultimate psychological end of suicide be contemplated by this individual.” If you get it down to “To be or not to be, that is the question,” you’ve done well. You may not match Shakespeare, but you can learn to cut the fat out of your prose. The chances are that the five pages you’ve written for your history paper do not really contain five pages’ worth of ideas.

Misuse of the passive voice.

Write in the active voice. The passive voice encourages vagueness and dullness; it enfeebles verbs; and it conceals agency, which is the very stuff of history. You know all of this almost instinctively. What would you think of a lover who sighed in your ear, “My darling, you are loved by me!”? At its worst, the passive voice—like its kin, bureaucratic language and jargon—is a medium for the dishonesty and evasion of responsibility that pervade contemporary American culture. (“Mistakes were made; I was given false information.” Now notice the difference: “I screwed up; Smith and Jones lied to me; I neglected to check the facts.”) On history papers the passive voice usually signals a less toxic version of the same unwillingness to take charge, to commit yourself, and to say forthrightly what is really going on, and who is doing what to whom. Suppose you write, “In 1935 Ethiopia was invaded.” This sentence is a disaster. Who invaded? Your professor will assume that you don't know. Adding “by Italy” to the end of the sentence helps a bit, but the sentence is still flat and misleading. Italy was an aggressive actor, and your passive construction conceals that salient fact by putting the actor in the syntactically weakest position—at the end of the sentence as the object of a preposition. Notice how you add vigor and clarity to the sentence when you recast it in the active voice: "In 1935 Italy invaded Ethiopia." I n a few cases , you may violate the no-passive-voice rule. The passive voice may be preferable if the agent is either obvious (“Kennedy was elected in 1960”), irrelevant (“Theodore Roosevelt became president when McKinley was assassinated”), or unknown (“King Harold was killed at the Battle of Hastings”). Note that in all three of these sample sentences the passive voice focuses the reader on the receiver of the action rather than on the doer (on Kennedy, not on American voters; on McKinley, not on his assassin; on King Harold, not on the unknown Norman archer). Historians usually wish to focus on the doer, so you should stay with the active voice—unless you can make a compelling case for an exception.

Abuse of the verb to be.

The verb to be is the most common and most important verb in English, but too many verbs to be suck the life out of your prose and lead to wordiness. Enliven your prose with as many action verbs as possible. ( “In Brown v. Board of Education it was the opinion of the Supreme Court that the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.”) Rewrite as “ In Brown v. Board of Education the Supreme Court ruled that the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ violated the Fourteenth ”

Explain/what’s your point?/unclear/huh?

You may (or may not) know what you’re talking about, but if you see these marginal comments, you have confused your reader. You may have introduced a non sequitur ; gotten off the subject; drifted into abstraction; assumed something that you have not told the reader; failed to explain how the material relates to your argument; garbled your syntax; or simply failed to proofread carefully.  If possible, have a good writer read your paper and point out the muddled parts. Reading your paper aloud may help too.

Paragraph goes nowhere/has no point or unity.

Paragraphs are the building blocks of your paper. If your paragraphs are weak, your paper cannot be strong. Try underlining the topic sentence of every paragraph. If your topic sentences are vague, strength and precision—the hallmarks of good writing—are unlikely to follow. Consider this topic sentence (from a paper on Ivan the Terrible): “From 1538 to 1547, there are many different arguments about the nature of what happened.”  Disaster looms. The reader has no way of knowing when the arguing takes place, who’s arguing, or even what the arguing is about. And how does the “nature of what happened” differ from plain “what happened”? Perhaps the writer means the following: “The childhood of Ivan the Terrible has provoked controversy among scholars of Russian history.” That's hardly deathless prose, but it does orient the reader and make the writer accountable for what follows in the paragraph. Once you have a good topic sentence, make sure that everything in the paragraph supports that sentence, and that cumulatively the support is persuasive. Make sure that each sentence follows logically from the previous one, adding detail in a coherent order. Move, delete, or add material as appropriate. To avoid confusing the reader, limit each paragraph to one central idea. (If you have a series of supporting points starting with first, you must follow with a second, third , etc.) A paragraph that runs more than a printed page is probably too long. Err on the side of shorter paragraphs.

Inappropriate use of first person.

Most historians write in the third person, which focuses the reader on the subject. If you write in the first person singular, you shift the focus to yourself. You give the impression that you want to break in and say, “Enough about the Haitian revolution [or whatever], now let’s talk about me!” Also avoid the first person plural (“We believe...”). It suggests committees, editorial boards, or royalty. None of those should have had a hand in writing your paper. And don’t refer to yourself lamely as “this writer.” Who else could possibly be writing the paper?

Tense inconsistency.

Stay consistently in the past tense when you are writing about what took place in the past. (“Truman’s defeat of Dewey in 1948 caught the pollsters by surprise.”) Note that the context may require a shift into the past perfect. (“The pollsters had not realized [past perfect] that voter opinion had been [past perfect] changing rapidly in the days before the election.”) Unfortunately, the tense problem can get a bit more complicated. Most historians shift into the present tense when describing or commenting on a book, document, or evidence that still exists and is in front of them (or in their mind) as they write.  (“de Beauvoir published [past tense] The Second Sex in 1949. In the book she contends [present tense] that woman....”) If you’re confused, think of it this way: History is about the past, so historians write in the past tense, unless they are discussing effects of the past that still exist and thus are in the present. When in doubt, use the past tense and stay consistent.

Ill-fitted quotation.

This is a common problem, though not noted in stylebooks. When you quote someone, make sure that the quotation fits grammatically into your sentence.  Note carefully the mismatch between the start of the following sentence and the quotation that follows:  “In order to understand the Vikings, writes Marc Bloch, it is necessary, ‘To conceive of the Viking expeditions as religious warfare inspired by the ardour of an implacable pagan fanaticism—an explanation that has sometimes been at least suggested—conflicts too much with what we know of minds disposed to respect magic of every kind.’” At first, the transition into the quotation from Bloch seems fine. The infinitive (to conceive) fits. But then the reader comes to the verb (conflicts) in Bloch’s sentence, and things no longer make sense. The writer is saying, in effect, “it is necessary conflicts.” The wordy lead-in and the complex syntax of the quotation have tripped the writer and confused the reader. If you wish to use the whole sentence, rewrite as “Marc Bloch writes in Feudal Society , ‘To conceive of...’” Better yet, use your own words or only part of the quotation in your sentence. Remember that good writers quote infrequently, but when they do need to quote, they use carefully phrased lead-ins that fit the grammatical construction of the quotation.

Free-floating quotation.

Do not suddenly drop quotations into your prose. (“The spirit of the Progressive era is best understood if one remembers that the United States is ‘the only country in the world that began with perfection and aspired to progress.’”) You have probably chosen the quotation because it is finely wrought and says exactly what you want to say. Fine, but first you inconvenience the reader, who must go to the footnote to learn that the quotation comes from The Age of Reform by historian Richard Hofstadter. And then you puzzle the reader. Did Hofstadter write the line about perfection and progress, or is he quoting someone from the Progressive era? If, as you claim, you are going to help the reader to judge the “spirit of the Progressive era,” you need to clarify. Rewrite as “As historian Richard Hofstadter writes in the Age of Reform , the United States is ‘the only country in the world...’” Now the reader knows immediately that the line is Hofstadter’s.

Who’s speaking here?/your view?

Always be clear about whether you’re giving your opinion or that of the author or historical actor you are discussing. Let’s say that your essay is about Martin Luther’s social views. You write, “The German peasants who revolted in 1525 were brutes and deserved to be crushed mercilessly.” That’s what Luther thought, but do you agree?  You may know, but your reader is not a mind reader. When in doubt, err on the side of being overly clear.

Jargon/pretentious theory.

Historians value plain English. Academic jargon and pretentious theory will make your prose turgid, ridiculous, and downright irritating. Your professor will suspect that you are trying to conceal that you have little to say. Of course, historians can’t get along without some theory; even those who profess to have no theory actually do—it’s called naïve realism. And sometimes you need a technical term, be it ontological argument or ecological fallacy. When you use theory or technical terms, make sure that they are intelligible and do real intellectual lifting.  Please, no sentences like this: “By means of a neo-Althusserian, post-feminist hermeneutics, this essay will de/construct the logo/phallo/centrism imbricated in the marginalizing post-colonial gendered gaze, thereby proliferating the subjectivities that will re/present the de/stabilization of the essentializing habitus of post-Fordist capitalism.”

Informal language/slang.

You don’t need to be stuffy, but stay with formal English prose of the kind that will still be comprehensible to future generations. Columbus did not “push the envelope in the Atlantic.” Henry VIII was not “looking for his inner child when he broke with the Church.” Prime Minister Cavour of Piedmont was not “trying to play in the major leagues diplomatic wise.” Wilson did not “almost veg out” at the end of his second term. President Hindenburg did not appoint Hitler in a “senior moment.” Prime Minister Chamberlain did not tell the Czechs to “chill out” after the Munich Conference, and Gandhi was not an “awesome dude.”

Try to keep your prose fresh. Avoid cliches. When you proofread, watch out for sentences like these: “Voltaire always gave 110 percent and thought outside the box. His bottom line was that as people went forward into the future, they would, at the end of the day, step up to the plate and realize that the Jesuits were conniving perverts.” Ugh. Rewrite as “Voltaire tried to persuade people that the Jesuits were cony, step up to the plate and realize that the Jesuits were conniving perverts.” Ugh. Rewrite as “Voltaire tried to persuade people that the Jesuits were conniving perverts.”

Intensifier abuse/exaggeration.

Avoid inflating your prose with unsustainable claims of size, importance, uniqueness, certainty, or intensity. Such claims mark you as an inexperienced writer trying to impress the reader. Your statement is probably not certain ; your subject probably not unique , the biggest, the best, or the most important. Also, the adverb very will rarely strengthen your sentence. Strike it. (“President Truman was very determined to stop the spread of communism in Greece.”) Rewrite as “President Truman resolved to stop the spread of communism in Greece.”

Mixed image.

Once you have chosen an image, you must stay with language compatible with that image. In the following example, note that the chain, the boiling, and the igniting are all incompatible with the image of the cold, rolling, enlarging snowball: “A snowballing chain of events boiled over, igniting the powder keg of war in 1914.” Well chosen images can enliven your prose, but if you catch yourself mixing images a lot, you're probably trying to write beyond your ability. Pull back. Be more literal.

Clumsy transition.

If your reader feels a jolt or gets disoriented at the beginning of a new paragraph, your paper probably lacks unity. In a good paper, each paragraph is woven seamlessly into the next. If you find yourself beginning your paragraphs with phrases such as “Another aspect of this problem...,” then you are probably “stacking note cards” rather than developing a thesis.

Unnecessary relative clause.

If you don’t need to restrict the meaning of your sentence’s subject, then don’t. (“Napoleon was a man who tried to conquer Europe.”) Here the relative clause adds nothing. Rewrite as “Napoleon tried to conquer Europe.” Unnecessary relative clauses are a classic form of wordiness.

Distancing or demeaning quotation marks.

If you believe that a frequently used word or phrase distorts historical reality, don’t put it in dismissive, sneering quotation marks to make your point (“the communist ‘threat’ to the ‘free’ world during the Cold War”). Many readers find this practice arrogant, obnoxious, and precious, and they may dismiss your arguments out of hand. If you believe that the communist threat was bogus or exaggerated, or that the free world was not really free, then simply explain what you mean.

Remarks on Grammar and Syntax

Ideally, your professor will help you to improve your writing by specifying exactly what is wrong with a particular passage, but  sometimes you may find a simple awk in the margin. This all-purpose negative comment usually suggests that the sentence is clumsy because you have misused words or compounded several errors. Consider this sentence from a book review:

“However, many falsehoods lie in Goldhagen’s claims and these will be explored.”

What is your long-suffering professor to do with this sentence? The however contributes nothing; the phrase falsehoods lie is an unintended pun that distracts the reader; the comma is missing between the independent clauses; the these has no clear antecedent ( falsehoods? claims? ); the second clause is in the passive voice and contributes nothing anyway; the whole sentence is wordy and screams hasty, last-minute composition. In weary frustration, your professor scrawls awk in the margin and moves on. Buried under the twelve-word sentence lies a three-word idea: “Goldhagen often errs.” When you see awk, check for the common errors in this list. If you don’t understand what’s wrong, ask.

Unclear antecedent.

All pronouns must refer clearly to antecedents and must agree with them in number. The reader usually assumes that the antecedent is the immediately preceding noun. Do not confuse the reader by having several possible antecedents. Consider these two sentences:

“Pope Gregory VII forced Emperor Henry IV to wait three days in the snow at Canossa before granting him an audience. It was a symbolic act.”

To what does the it refer? Forcing the Emperor to wait? The waiting itself? The granting of the audience? The audience itself? The whole previous sentence? You are most likely to get into antecedent trouble when you begin a paragraph with this or it , referring vaguely back to the general import of the previous paragraph. When in doubt, take this test: Circle the pronoun and the antecedent and connect the two with a line. Then ask yourself if your reader could instantly make the same diagram without your help. If the line is long, or if the circle around the antecedent is large, encompassing huge gobs of text, then your reader probably will be confused.  Rewrite. Repetition is better than ambiguity and confusion.

Faulty parallelism.

You confuse your reader if you change the grammatical construction from one element to the next in a series. Consider this sentence:

“King Frederick the Great sought to expand Prussia, to rationalize agriculture, and that the state support education.”

The reader expects another infinitive, but instead trips over the that . Rewrite the last clause as “and to promote state-supported education.” Sentences using neither/nor frequently present parallelism problems. Note the two parts of this sentence:

“After 1870 the cavalry charge was neither an effective tactic, nor did armies use it frequently.”

The sentence jars because the neither is followed by a noun, the nor by a verb. Keep the parts parallel.

Rewrite as “After 1870 the cavalry charge was neither effective nor frequently used.”

Sentences with not only/but also are another pitfall for many students. (“Mussolini attacked not only liberalism, but he also advocated militarism.”) Here the reader is set up to expect a noun in the second clause, but stumbles over a verb. Make the parts parallel by putting the verb attacked after the not only .

Misplaced modifier/dangling element.

Do not confuse the reader with a phrase or clause that refers illogically or absurdly to other words in the sentence. (“Summarized on the back cover of the American paperback edition, the publishers claim that...”) The publishers are not summarized on the back cover. (“Upon finishing the book, many questions remain.”) Who finished the book? Questions can’t read. Avoid following an introductory participial clause with the expletives it or there . Expletives are by definition filler words; they can’t be agents. (“Having examined the origins of the Meiji Restoration in Japan, it is apparent that...”) Apparent to whom?  The expletive it didn’t do the examining. (“After going on the Long March, there was greater support for the Communists in China.”) Who went on the Long March? There didn’t go on the Long March. Always pay attention to who’s doing what in your sentences.

Run-on sentence.

Run-on sentences string together improperly joined independent clauses. Consider these three sentences:

“Galileo recanted his teaching that the earth moved privately he maintained his convictions.” “Galileo recanted his teaching that the earth moved, privately he maintained his convictions.” “Galileo recanted his teaching that the earth moved, however, privately he maintained his convictions.”

The first fuses two independent clauses with neither a comma nor a coordinating conjunction; the second uses a comma but omits the coordinating conjunction; and the third also omits the coordinating conjunction (however is not a coordinating conjunction). To solve the problem, separate the two clauses with a comma and the coordinating conjunction but. You could also divide the clauses with a semicolon or make separate sentences. Remember that there are only seven coordinating conjunctions ( and, but, or, nor, for, so, yet ).

Sentence fragment.

Write in sentences. A sentence has to have a subject and a predicate. If you string together a lot of words, you may lose control of the syntax and end up with a sentence fragment. Note that the following is not a sentence:

“While in Western Europe railroad building proceeded rapidly in the nineteenth century, and in Russia there was less progress.”

Here you have a long compound introductory clause followed by no subject and no verb, and thus you have a fragment. You may have noticed exceptions to the no-fragments rule. Skilful writers do sometimes intentionally use a fragment to achieve a certain effect. Leave the rule-breaking to the experts.

Confusion of restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses.

Consider these two versions of the same sentence:

1. “World War I, which raged from 1914-1918, killed millions of Europeans.” 2. “World War I that raged from 1914-1918 killed millions of Europeans.”

The first sentence has a nonrestrictive relative clause; the dates are included almost as parenthetical information. But something seems amiss with the second sentence. It has a restrictive relative clause that limits the subject (World War I) to the World War I fought between 1914 and 1918, thus implying that there were other wars called World War I, and that we need to distinguish among them. Both sentences are grammatically correct, but the writer of the second sentence appears foolish.  Note carefully the distinction between that (for use in restrictive clauses, with no comma) and which (for use in nonrestrictive clauses, with a comma).

Confusion about who’s doing what.

Remember—history is about what people do, so you need to be vigilant about agency. Proofread your sentences carefully, asking yourself, “Have I said exactly who is doing or thinking what, or have I inadvertently attributed an action or belief to the wrong person or group?” Unfortunately, there are many ways to go wrong here, but faulty punctuation is among the most common. Here’s a sentence about Frantz Fanon, the great critic of European imperialism. Focus on the punctuation and its effect on agency: “Instead of a hierarchy based on class, Fanon suggests the imperialists establish a hierarchy based on race.” As punctuated, the sentence says something absurd: that Fanon is advising the imperialists about the proper kind of hierarchy to establish in the colonies. Surely, the writer meant to say that, in his analysis of imperialism, Fanon distinguishes between two kinds of hierarchy. A comma after suggests fixes the immediate problem. Now look at the revised sentence. It still needs work. Better diction and syntax would sharpen it.  Fanon does not suggest (with connotations of both hinting and advocating); he states outright. What’s more, the comparison of the two kinds of hierarchy gets blurred by too many intervening words. The key point of the sentence is, in effect, “instead of A, we have B.” Clarity demands that B follow A as closely as possible, and that the two elements be grammatically parallel. But between the elements A and B, the writer inserts Fanon (a proper noun), suggests (a verb), imperialists (a noun), and establish (a verb). Try the sentence this way: “Fanon says that the imperialists establish a hierarchy based on race rather than class.” Now the agency is clear: We know what Fanon does, and we know what the imperialists do. Notice that errors and infelicities have a way of clustering. If you find one problem in a sentence, look for others.

Confusion about the objects of prepositions.

Here’s another one of those common problems that does not receive the attention it merits. Discipline your prepositional phrases; make sure you know where they end. Notice the mess in this sentence: “Hitler accused Jewish people of engaging in incest and stating that Vienna was the ‘personification of incest.’” The reader thinks that both engaging and stating are objects of the preposition of. Yet the writer intends only the first to be the object of the preposition. Hitler is accusing the Jews of engaging , but not of stating ; he is the one doing the stating . Rewrite as “Hitler accused the Jews of incest; he stated that Vienna was the ‘personification of incest.’” Note that the wordiness of the original encouraged the syntactical mess. Simplify. It can’t be said too many times: Always pay attention to who’s doing what in your sentences.

Misuse of the comparative.

There are two common problems here. The first might be called the “floating comparative.” You use the comparative, but you don’t say what you are comparing. (“Lincoln was more upset by the dissolution of the union.”) More upset than by what? More upset than who? The other problem, which is more common and takes many forms, is the unintended (and sometimes comical) comparison of unlike elements. Consider these attempts to compare President Clinton to President George H. W. Bush. Often the trouble starts with a possessive:

“President Clinton’s sexual appetite was more voracious than President Bush.”

You mean to compare appetites, but you've forgotten about your possessive, so you absurdly compare an appetite to a man. Rewrite as “more voracious than President Bush’s.” A variation of this problem is the unintended comparison resulting from the omission of a verb:

“President Clinton liked women more than President Bush.”

Re-write as “more than did President Bush.”

A misplaced modifier may also cause comparison trouble: “Unlike the Bush administration, sexual scandal nearly destroyed the Clinton administration.” Rewrite as  “Unlike the Bush administration, the Clinton administration was nearly destroyed by sexual scandal.” Here the passive voice is better than the misplaced modifier, but you could rewrite as “The Bush administration had been free of sexual scandal, which nearly destroyed the Clinton administration.”

Misuse of apostrophe.

Get control of your apostrophes. Use the apostrophe to form singular or plural possessives (Washington’s soldiers; the colonies’ soldiers) or to form contractions (don’t; it’s). Do not use the apostrophe to form plurals. (“The communists [not communists’] defeated the nationalists [not nationalists’] in China.”)

Comma after although.

This is a new error, probably a carryover from the common conversational habit of pausing dramatically after although . ( “Although , coffee consumption rose in eighteenth-century Europe, tea remained far more popular.”) Delete the comma after although . Remember that although is not a synonym for the word however , so you cannot solve the problem in the sentence by putting a period after Europe . A clause beginning with although cannot stand alone as a sentence.

Comma between subject and verb.

This is a strange new error. (“Hitler and Stalin, agreed to a pact in August 1939.”) Delete the comma after Stalin. Finally, two hints: If your word-processing program underlines something and suggests changes, be careful. When it comes to grammar and syntax, your computer is a moron. Not only does it fail to recognize some gross errors, it also falsely identifies some correct passages as errors. Do not cede control of your writing decisions to your computer. Make the suggested changes only if you are positive that they are correct. If you are having trouble with your writing, try simplifying. Write short sentences and read them aloud to test for clarity. Start with the subject and follow it quickly with an active verb. Limit the number of relative clauses, participial phrases, adjectives, adverbs, and prepositional phrases. You will win no prizes for eloquence, but at least you will be clear. Add complexity only when you have learned to handle it.

An historical/an historian.

The consonant “H” is not silent in historical and historian , so the proper form of the indefinite article is “A.”

Avoid the common solecism of using feel as a synonym for think, believe, say, state, assert, contend, argue, conclude, or write. (“Marx felt that the bourgeoisie exploited the proletariat.” “Emmeline Pankhurst felt that British women should be able to vote.”) The use of feel in these sentences demeans the agents by suggesting undisciplined sentiment rather than carefully formulated conviction. Concentrate on what your historical actors said and did; leave their feelings to speculative chapters of their biographies. As for your own feelings, keep them out of your papers. (“I feel that Lincoln should have freed the slaves earlier.”) Your professor will be delighted that the material engages both your head and your heart, but your feelings cannot be graded. If you believe that Lincoln should have acted earlier, then explain, giving cogent historical reasons.

The fact that.

This is a clumsy, unnecessary construction. ( “The fact that Nixon resigned in disgrace damaged the Republican Party.”) Re-word as “Nixon resigned in disgrace, damaging the Republican Party.” Never use the hideous phrase due to the fact that.

In terms of.

This phrase is filler. Get rid of it. (“Bismarck was a success in terms of uniting Germany.) Rewrite as “Bismarck successfully united Germany.”

Attend carefully to the placement of this limiting word. Note, for example, these three sentences:

“The government only interred Japanese Americans during World War II.” “The government interred only Japanese Americans during World War II.” “The government interred Japanese Americans only during World War II.”

The first limits the action to interring (as opposed to, say, killing); the second limits the group interred (i.e., not Italian Americans); the third limits the time of interring (i.e., not during other wars).

Thus and therefore.

More than likely, you have not earned these words and are implying that you have said more than you actually have. Use them sparingly, only when you are concluding a substantial argument with a significant conclusion.

Misuse of instead.

Instead is an adverb, not a conjunction. Consider this sentence: “Charles Beard argued that the framers of the constitution were not idealists, instead they promoted their economic interests.” Revise as “The framers of the constitution, Charles Beard argued, did not uphold ideals; instead , they promoted their economic interests.” Now the instead appears properly as an adverb. (Note also that the two clauses are now parallel—both contain transitive verbs.)

Essentially and basically.

These are usually either filler words (the written equivalent of “uh” or “um”) or weasel words that merely call attention to your vagueness, lack of conviction, or lazy unwillingness to qualify precisely. (“ Essentially , Churchill believed that Nazi Germany presented a grave danger to Britain.”) Delete essentially and basically unless you are writing about essences or bases.

Both share or both agree.

These are redundant. If two people share or agree , they are both involved by definition. (“Stalin and Mao both agreed that capitalism belonged in the dustbin of history.”) Delete both .

This word means one of a kind. It is an absolute. Something cannot be very unique, more unique, or somewhat unique.

Incredible.

In casual conversation incredible often means extraordinary, astonishing, or impressive (“Yesterday’s storm was incredible.”). To avoid confusion in historical prose, you should stick with the original meaning of incredible : not believable. If you write that “William Jennings Bryan gave incredible speeches,” you’re saying that you don’t believe his speeches, or that his audiences didn’t believe them at the time—in other words, that he appeared to be lying or mistaken. You probably mean that he gave great speeches. If you write that “It’s incredible that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor,” you’re calling into question the very existence of a historical event. You probably mean that the Japanese attack was unwise or reckless. English is rich with adjectives. Finding the best one forces you to think about what you really mean.

As a synonym for subject matter, bone of contention, reservation, or almost anything else vaguely associated with what you are discussing, the word issue has lost its meaning through overuse. (“There were many issues involved with Truman’s decision to use the atomic bomb, and some historians have issues with his decision.”) Stop talking about issues and get to the point.

Beware of the word literally . It’s commonly misused, and you almost never need it in historical prose. Literally means actually, factually, exactly, directly, without metaphor. The careful writer would never say, “Roosevelt literally swamped Landon in the election of 1936.” One imagines Roosevelt (in his wheelchair no less!) dumping the hapless Landon off a pier in the Everglades on election night. The swamping was figurative, strictly a figure of speech. The adverb literally may also cause you trouble by falsely generalizing the coverage of your verb. “London was literally destroyed by the blitz.” This suggests that the whole city was destroyed, when, in fact, only parts were destroyed. Rewrite as “The blitz destroyed parts of London.” Now you’ve qualified properly (and gotten rid of the passive).

When you’re tempted to use this word, resist. Like issue , involve tells the reader too little. (“Erasmus was involved in the Renaissance.”) This statement could mean virtually anything. Delete it and discuss specifically what Erasmus said or did.

This is a fine old word with many precise meanings, but as an overused synonym for feature, side, or part, it is usually a sign of insipid prose (“Another aspect of the issues in this area is the fact that...”). Just get directly to the point.

Most good writers frown on the use of this word as a verb.(“Eisenhower’s military background impacted his foreign policy.”) Affected, influenced, or shaped would be better here. Impacted suggests painfully blocked wisdom teeth or feces. Had an impact is better than impacted , but is still awkward because impact implies a collision.

Here is another beloved but vapid word. (“Many factors led to the Reformation.”) Such a sentence usually opens a vague, boring, weaseling paragraph. If you believe (quite reasonably) that the Reformation had many causes, then start evaluating them.

Meaningful.

Overuse has drained the meaning from meaningful . (“Peter the Great took meaningful steps to westernize Russia.”) Just get to the point.

Interesting.

The adjective interesting is vague, overused, and does not earn its keep. (“Burckhardt had an interesting perspective on the Renaissance.”) This sentence is filler. Delete it and explain and analyze his perspective.

The events that transpired.

Your professor will gag on this one. Events take place or happen by definition, so the relative clause is redundant. Furthermore, most good writers do not accept transpire as a synonym for happen. Again, follow the old rule of thumb: Get right to the point, say what happened, and explain its significance. You don’t need any filler about events and transpiring .

The reason is because.

This phrase is awkward and redundant. Replace it with the reason is, or better still, simply delete it and get right to your reason.

For all intensive purposes.

The phrase is for all intents and purposes , and few good writers use it in formal prose anyway.

Take for granite.

This is an illiteracy. The phrase is “ take for granted .”

Should of/could of.

You mean should have or could have .

Center around.

Good writers frown on this phrase because it’s illogical and jarring. Use center on or center in. Attention to a small detail like this indicates that you’re thinking carefully about what you’re saying, so when the big problems confront you, you’ll be disciplined and ready.

Begs the question.

Recently, many people have started to use this phrase to mean raises, invites, or brings up the question. (“Stalin’s purges beg the question of whether he was paranoid.”) Actually, begging the question is the common logical fallacy of assuming your conclusion as part of your argument. (“In the late nineteenth century, many Americans moved to the cities because of urbanization.”) Note that the use of abstractions (e.g., urbanization) encourages begging the question . Understanding this fallacy is central to your education. The formal Latin term, petitio principii, is too fancy to catch on, so you need to preserve the simple English phrase. If something raises a question, just say so.

Historic/historical confusion.

Everything in the past or relating to the past is historical. Resist the media-driven hype that elevates the ordinary to the historic . (“A three-alarm fire last night destroyed the historic site of the first Portuguese-owned dry cleaners in Cleveland.”) Reserve the word historic for the genuinely important events, persons, or objects of the past. The Norman invasion of England in 1066 was indeed historic . Historically , historians have gathered annually for a historical convention; so far, none of the conventions has been historic .

Affect/effect confusion.

The chances are that the verb you want is affect , which means to have an influence on (“The Iranian hostage crisis affected [not effected] the presidential election of 1980”). Effect as a verb means to bring about or cause to exist ( effect change). Effect as a noun means result or consequence (“The effect of the Iranian hostage crisis on the election...”).

While/whereas confusion.

If you’re stressing contrast, the word you want is whereas . While stresses simultaneity. “Hobbes had a dismal view of human nature, whereas [not while] Rousseau believed that man had a natural sense of pity.”

It’s/its confusion.

This is the classic bonehead error. Note that the spell checker won’t help you. And remember— its’ is not a word at all.

Reign/rein confusion.

A queen reigns during her reign. You rein in a horse with reins.

Their/there/they’re confusion.

You do know the difference. Pay attention.

Everyday/every day confusion.

As an adjective, everyday (one word) means routine. If you wish to say that something happened on every successive day, then you need two words, the adjective every and the noun day . Note the difference in these two sentences: “Kant was famous for going on the same constitutional at the same time every day . For Kant, exercise and thinking were everyday activities.”

Refer/allude confusion.

To allude means to refer to indirectly or to hint at. The word you probably want in historical prose is refer , which means to mention or call direct attention to. “In the first sentence of the ‘Gettysburg Address’ Lincoln refers [not alludes ] to the fathers of the nation [he mentions them directly]; he alludes to the ‘Declaration of Independence’ [the document of four score and seven years earlier that comes to the reader’s mind, but that Lincoln doesn’t directly mention].”

Novel/book confusion.

Novel is not a synonym for book. A novel is a long work of fiction in prose. A historical monograph is not a novel —unless the historian is making everything up.

Than/then confusion.

This is an appalling new error. If you are making a comparison, you use the conjunction than . (“President Kennedy’s health was worse than [not then ] the public realized.”)

Lead/led confusion.

The past tense of the verb to lead is led (not lead ). “Sherman led [not lead ] a march to the sea.”

Lose/loose confusion.

The opposite of win is lose , not loose . “Supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment suspected that they would lose [not loose ] the battle to amend the constitution.”

However/but confusion.

However may not substitute for the coordinating conjunction but. (“Mussolini began his career as a socialist, but [not however ] he later abandoned socialism for fascism.”) The word however has many proper uses; however , [note the semicolon and comma] graceful writers use it sparingly.

Cite/site/sight confusion.

You cited a source for your paper; ancient Britons sited Stonehenge on a plain; Columbus’s lookout sighted land.

Conscience/conscious confusion.

When you wake up in the morning you are conscious , though your conscience may bother you if you’ve neglected to write your history paper.

Tenet/tenant confusion.

Your religion, ideology, or worldview all have tenets —propositions you hold or believe in. Tenants rent from landlords.

All are not/not all are confusion.

If you write, “ All the colonists did not want to break with Britain in 1776,” the chances are you really mean, “ Not all the colonists wanted to break with Britain in 1776.” The first sentence is a clumsy way of saying that no colonists wanted to break with Britain (and is clearly false). The second sentence says that some colonists did not want to break with Britain (and is clearly true, though you should go on to be more precise).

Nineteenth-century/nineteenth century confusion.

Historians talk a lot about centuries, so you need to know when to hyphenate them. Follow the standard rule: If you combine two words to form a compound adjective, use a hyphen, unless the first word ends in ly. (“ Nineteenth-century [hyphenated] steamships cut the travel time across the Atlantic.”) Leave out the hyphen if you’re just using the ordinal number to modify the noun century. (“In the nineteenth century [no hyphen] steamships cut the travel time across the Atlantic.”) By the way, while you have centuries in mind, don’t forget that the nineteenth century is the 1800s, not the 1900s. The same rule for hyphenating applies to middle-class and middle class —a group that historians like to talk about.

Bourgeois/bourgeoisie confusion.

Bourgeois is usually an adjective, meaning characteristic of the middle class and its values or habits. Occasionally, bourgeois is a noun, meaning a single member of the middle class. Bourgeoisie is a noun, meaning the middle class collectively. (“Marx believed that the bourgeoisie oppressed the proletariat; he argued that bourgeois values like freedom and individualism were hypocritical.”)

Your professor may ask you to analyze a primary document. Here are some questions you might ask of your document. You will note a common theme—read critically with sensitivity to the context. This list is not a suggested outline for a paper; the wording of the assignment and the nature of the document itself should determine your organization and which of the questions are most relevant. Of course, you can ask these same questions of any document you encounter in your research.

• What exactly is the document (e.g., diary, king’s decree, opera score, bureaucratic memorandum, parliamentary minutes, newspaper article, peace treaty)?
• Are you dealing with the original or with a copy? If it is a copy, how remote is it from the original (e.g., photocopy of the original, reformatted version in a book, translation)? How might deviations from the original affect your interpretation?
• What is the date of the document?
• Is there any reason to believe that the document is not genuine or not exactly what it appears to be?
• Who is the author, and what stake does the author have in the matters discussed? If the document is unsigned, what can you infer about the author or authors?
• What sort of biases or blind spots might the author have? For example, is an educated bureaucrat writing with third-hand knowledge of rural hunger riots?
• Where, why, and under what circumstances did the author write the document?
• How might the circumstances (e.g., fear of censorship, the desire to curry favor or evade blame) have influenced the content, style, or tone of the document?
• Has the document been published? If so, did the author intend it to be published?
• If the document was not published, how has it been preserved? In a public archive? In a private collection? Can you learn anything from the way it has been preserved? For example, has it been treated as important or as a minor scrap of paper?
• Does the document have a boilerplate format or style, suggesting that it is a routine sample of a standardized genre, or does it appear out of the ordinary, even unique?
• Who is the intended audience for the document?
• What exactly does the document say? Does it imply something different?
• If the document represents more than one viewpoint, have you carefully distinguished between the author’s viewpoint and those viewpoints the author presents only to criticize or refute?
• In what ways are you, the historian, reading the document differently than its intended audience would have read it (assuming that future historians were not the intended audience)?
• What does the document leave out that you might have expected it to discuss?
• What does the document assume that the reader already knows about the subject (e.g., personal conflicts among the Bolsheviks in 1910, the details of tax farming in eighteenth-century Normandy, secret negotiations to end the Vietnam war)?
• What additional information might help you better interpret the document?
• Do you know (or are you able to infer) the effects or influences, if any, of the document?
• What does the document tell you about the period you are studying?
• If your document is part of an edited collection, why do you suppose the editor chose it? How might the editing have changed the way you perceive the document? For example, have parts been omitted? Has it been translated? (If so, when, by whom, and in what style?) Has the editor placed the document in a suggestive context among other documents, or in some other way led you to a particular interpretation?

Your professor may ask you to write a book review, probably of a scholarly historical monograph. Here are some questions you might ask of the book. Remember that a good review is critical, but critical does not necessarily mean negative. This list is not meant to be exhaustive, nor is it a suggested outline. Of course, you can ask these same questions of any secondary historical work, even if you’re not writing a review.

• Who is the author, and what are his or her qualifications? Has the author written other books on the subject?
• When was the book written, and how does it fit into the scholarly debate on the subject? For example, is Smith writing to refute that idiot Jones; to qualify the work of the competent but unimaginative Johnson; or to add humbly to the evidence presented by the redoubtable Brown’s classic study? Be sure not to confuse the author’s argument with those arguments he or she presents only to criticize later.
• What is the book’s basic argument? (Getting this right is the foundation of your review.)
• What is the author’s method? For example, does the author rely strictly on narrative and anecdotes, or is the book analytical in some way?
• What kinds of evidence does the author use? For example, what is the balance of primary and secondary sources? Has the author done archival work? Is the source base substantial, or does it look thin? Is the author up-to-date in the scholarly literature?
• How skillfully and imaginatively has the author used the evidence?
• Does the author actually use all of the material in the bibliography, or is some of it there for display?
• What sorts of explicit or implicit ideological or methodological assumptions does the author bring to the study? For example, does he or she profess bland objectivity? A Whig view of history? Marxism?
• How persuasive is the author’s argument?
• Is the argument new, or is it old wine in new bottles?
• Is the argument important, with wide-ranging implications, or is it narrow and trivial?
• Is the book well organized and skillfully written?
• What is your overall critical assessment of the book?
• What is the general significance, if any, of the book? (Make sure that you are judging the book that the author actually wrote, not complaining that the author should have written a different book.)

Here are some tips for those long, intimidating term papers or senior theses:

• Start early. If you don’t, none of these tips will matter. Big trouble is looming if you don’t have a specific topic by the end of the first week. You should be delving into the sources during the second week.
• Keep in mind all of the dos and don’ts in this booklet.
• Work closely with your professor to assure that your topic is neither too broad nor too narrow.
• Set up a schedule with your professor and check his or her policy about reading rough drafts or parts of rough drafts. Then keep your professor informed about what you’re doing. You don’t want any unpleasant surprises. You certainly don’t want to hear, “I haven’t seen you for weeks, and it sounds like you’re way off base. How can you possibly get this done with only two weeks left in the semester?”
• Make an appointment with Kristin Strohmeyer, the history reference librarian in Burke Library. She will help you to find and use the appropriate catalogs and indexes.
• Use your imagination in compiling a bibliography. Think of all of the possible key words and subjects that may lead you to material. If you find something really good, check the subjects under which it is cataloged. Comb the notes and bibliographies of books and articles you’ve already found.
• Much of what you need will not be in our library, so get to know the friendly folks in the Interlibrary Loan department.
• Start early. This can’t be said too often.
• Use as many primary sources as you can.
• Jot down your ideas as they come to you. You may not remember them later.
• Take careful notes on your reading. Label your notes completely and precisely. Distinguish meticulously and systematically between what you are directly quoting and what you are summarizing in your own words. Unintended plagiarism is still plagiarism. Stay clean as a hound’s tooth. Write down not just the page of the quotation or idea, but also the whole run of pages where the matter is discussed. Reread all of your notes periodically to make sure that you still understand them and are compiling what you will need to write your paper. Err on the side of writing down more than you think you will need. Copious, precise notes won’t come back to haunt you; skimpy, vague notes will. Just accept that there is something anal about good note-taking.
• If you take notes directly into your computer, they will be easy to index and pull up, but there are a couple of downsides. You will not be able to see all of them simultaneously, as you can note cards laid out on a big table. What you gain in ease of access may come at the price of losing the big picture. Also, if your notes are in your computer, you may be tempted to save time and thought by pasting many of them directly into your paper. Note cards encourage you to rethink and to rework your ideas into a unified whole.
• Don’t start to write until you have a good outline.
• Make sure that your paper has a thesis. (See the entry State a clear thesis. )
• Check and recheck your facts.
• Footnote properly. (See the entry Cite sources carefully .)
• Save plenty of time to proofread.
• Start early.

Top Ten Signs that you may be Writing a Weak History Paper

10. You’re overjoyed to find that you can fill the required pages by widening all margins.

9. You haven’t mentioned any facts or cited any sources for several paragraphs.

8. You find yourself using the phrase “throughout history mankind has...”

7. You just pasted in another 100 words of quotations.

6. You haven’t a clue about the content of your next paragraph.

5. You’re constantly clicking on The Britannica, Webster’s, and Bartlett’s.

4. Your writing tutor sneaks another look at her watch as she reminds you for the third time to clarify your thesis.

3. Your main historical actors are this, it, they, the people, and society, and they are all involved with factors, aspects, impacts, and issues.

2. You just realize that you don’t understand the assignment, but it’s 3:00 A.M, the paper is due at 9:00, and you don’t dare call your professor.

1. You’re relieved that the paper counts for only 20 percent of the course grade.

Final Advice

You guessed it — start early.

Studying History at Hamilton

Students will learn to use interdisciplinary methods from the humanities and social sciences to probe the sources of the past for answers to present questions. They will learn to draw comparisons and connections among diverse societies across a range of historical eras. They will further learn to convey their findings through writing that is clearly structured, precise, and persuasive.

Tutor Appointments

Peer tutor and consultant appointments are managed through TracCloud (login required). Find resources and more information about the ALEX centers using the following links.

Office / Department Name

Nesbitt-Johnston Writing Center

Contact Name

Jennifer Ambrose

Writing Center Director

Help us provide an accessible education, offer innovative resources and programs, and foster intellectual exploration.

Site Search

Primary and Secondary Sources in History

selimaksan / Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• M.A., Medieval Studies, Sheffield University
• B.A., Medieval Studies, Sheffield University

The concept of ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ sources is key to studying and writing history. A ‘source’ is anything that provides information, from a manuscript where words tell you things to clothes that have survived centuries and provide details on fashion and chemistry. As you can imagine, you can't write history without sources as you would be making this up (which is good in historical fiction, but rather problematic when it comes to serious history.) Sources are usually divided into two categories, primary and secondary. These definitions would be different for the sciences and the below apply to the humanities. It's worth learning them, they are vital if you're taking exams.

Primary Sources

A ‘ Primary Source ’ is a document that was written or an object which was created, in the time period in which you are working. A ‘first hand’ item. A diary can be a primary source if the author experienced the events they recall, while a charter can be a primary source of the act it was created for. Photographs, while beset with problems, can be primary sources. The key thing is they offer a direct insight into what happened because they were created at the time and are fresh and closely related.

Primary sources can include paintings, manuscripts, chancellery rolls, coins, letters and more.

Secondary Sources

A ‘ Secondary Source ’ can be defined in two ways: it is anything about a historical event which was created using primary sources, and/or which was one or more stages removed from the time period and the event. A ‘second hand’ item. For instance, school textbooks tell you about a time period, but they are all secondary sources as they were written later, usually by people who weren’t there, and discuss the primary sources they used when being created. Secondary sources frequently quote or reproduce primary sources, such as a book using a photograph. The key point is that the people who made these sources are relying on other testimony rather than their own.

Secondary sources can include history books, articles, websites like this one (other websites might be a primary source to ‘contemporary history’.) Not everything ‘old’ is a primary historical source: plenty of medieval or ancient works are secondary sources based on now lost primary sources, despite being of great age.

Tertiary Sources

Sometimes you will see a third class: the tertiary source. These are items like dictionaries and encyclopedias: history is written using both primary and secondary sources and shrunk down to the basic points. We've written for encyclopedias, and tertiary is not a criticism.

Reliability

One of the primary tools of the historian is the ability to study a range of sources and assess which is reliable , which suffers from bias, or most commonly which suffers from the least bias and can be best used to reconstruct the past. Most history written for school qualifications uses secondary sources because they are effective teaching tools, with primary sources introduced and, at a higher level, as the dominant source. However, you can’t generalize primary and secondary sources as reliable and unreliable.

There is every chance a primary source can suffer from bias, even photographs, which are not safe and must be studied just as much. Equally, a secondary source can be produced by a skilled author and provide the best of our knowledge. It’s important to know what you need to use. As a general rule the more advanced your level of study the more you'll be reading primary sources and making conclusions and deductions based on your insight and empathy, rather than using secondary works. But if you want to learn about a period quickly and efficiently, selecting a good secondary source is actually best.

• Secondary Sources in Research
• What Is a Primary Source?
• Glossary of Historical Terms
• Understanding Secondary Data and How to Use It in Research
• Writing a History Book Review
• How to Prove Your Family Tree Connections
• Pros and Cons of Secondary Data Analysis
• Understanding Primary and Secondary Groups in Sociology
• 6 Skills Students Need to Succeed in Social Studies Classes
• Documentation in Reports and Research Papers
• How to Determine a Reliable Source on the Internet
• Analyzing a Historical Document
• Ancient Sources on Persian or Iranian History
• Fashion Throughout History
• What Is a Research Paper?
• Primary Sources of Roman History

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Secondary Sources
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

In the social sciences, a secondary source is usually a scholar book, journal article, or digital or print document that was created by someone who did not directly experience or participate in the events or conditions under investigation. Secondary sources are not evidence per se, but rather, provide an interpretation, analysis, or commentary derived from the content of primary source materials and/or other secondary sources.

Value of Secondary Sources

To do research, you must cite research. Primary sources do not represent research per se, but only the artifacts from which most research is derived. Therefore, the majority of sources in a literature review are secondary sources that present research findings, analysis, and the evaluation of other researcher's works.

Reviewing secondary source material can be of valu e in improving your overall research paper because secondary sources facilitate the communication of what is known about a topic. This literature also helps you understand the level of uncertainty about what is currently known and what additional information is needed from further research. It is important to note, however, that secondary sources are not the subject of your analysis. Instead, they represent various opinions, interpretations, and arguments about the research problem you are investigating--opinions, interpretations, and arguments with which you may either agree or disagree with as part of your own analysis of the literature.

Examples of secondary sources you could review as part of your overall study include:     * Bibliographies [also considered tertiary]     * Biographical works     * Books, other than fiction and autobiography     * Commentaries, criticisms     * Dictionaries, Encyclopedias [also considered tertiary]     * Histories     * Journal articles [depending on the discipline, they can be primary]     * Magazine and newspaper articles [this distinction varies by discipline]     * Textbooks [also considered tertiary]     * Web site [also considered primary]

• << Previous: Primary Sources
• Next: Tiertiary Sources >>
• Last Updated: May 30, 2024 9:38 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

•   [email protected]

HIS 200 - Applied History

Primary and secondary sources.

Having trouble keeping primary and secondary sources straight? The differences are important for this project, so we've gathered some information about each for you below.

What is a Primary Source?

Primary sources are original records created during a time or event in history. Examples include letters, speeches, diaries, autobiographies, newspaper articles, interviews, memoirs, and other original documents or artifacts. Usually, primary sources were created during the time period in question, but sometimes, they could be created long afterward (as with memoirs or oral histories). Learn more in Shapiro's FAQ on Primary Sources . 

What is a Secondary Source?

Secondary sources are resources that were created after the fact, where the authors or creators did not experience the events first-hand but rather interprets or analyzes the primary sources. Usually, for history research, secondary sources are scholarly books and articles. Learn more in Shapiro's FAQ on Secondary Sources .

Now that you know about keyword searching, search tips, and source types, you're ready to get started! Choose your topic from the blue menu buttons on the left, or navigate to the Choosing Your Own Topic option for more information and resources.

• << Previous: Search Tips
• Next: Irish Immigration >>

American History: Find Secondary Sources (scholarly articles & books)

• Find Secondary Sources (scholarly articles & books)
• Find Primary Sources

Library Catalog

The Library Catalog is almost always the most useful place to start history research because:

• It will help you find primary AND secondary sources
• The library has a wealth of resources that have been selected by your professors and librarians 
• Library Catalog This link opens in a new window You can also access the Library Catalog via the Books link on the library webpage.

Find Articles (History Quick Search)

Find Articles and Book Chapters: 

The search box above will lead you to articles in JSTOR, Project Muse, Academic Search Complete, and other scholarly research databases.

• << Previous: Home
• Next: Find Primary Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jan 5, 2024 11:14 AM
• URL: https://researchguides.wcu.edu/americanhistory

HUNTER LIBRARY

176 Central Drive Cullowhee, NC 28723 Administration: 828-227-7485 Reference: 828-227-7465 Circulation: 828-227-7485

QUICK LINKS

Ask-A-Librarian Reserve a Study Room My Account Library Catalog Article Databases Interlibrary Loan

• Source Criticism
• Source Kind and Type

Primary and secondary sources explained

Historical sources are central to your study of the past and are important to your success in History assessment pieces.

Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that you learn what they are and in what forms they come.

What is a historical 'source'?

A source is something that provides information about the historical topic you are studying.

They can either be written (e.g., books or websites), or non-written (e.g., photographs or artefacts).

No matter what you're doing in History, you will use sources.

This could be simply learning information from a textbook or website, or actually looking at ancient artefacts made in the past.

Either way, they provide information about the past and are considered 'sources of information'.

The two kinds of sources

There are two kinds of sources: primary and secondary. 

The main difference between a primary and a secondary source is when they were made.

In order to determine whether a particular source is a primary or secondary source, you need to discover its time of creation .

Primary sources

Primary sources were made during the historical period that is being investigated. 

These are often the hardest to find but, as a result, are often the strongest evidence you can use in your assessment pieces .

There are many different types of primary sources:

Watch a video explanation on the History Skills YouTube channel:

Watch on YouTube

Secondary Sources

Secondary sources were made after the time period you are investigating.  As you progress as a History student, you will start to find that some secondary sources are better than others.

As a general rule, value secondary sources that are created by scholars, as they are usually more reliable .

However, whilst m odern scholars aim to produce reliable and unbiased historical accounts, read their writings with the same critical eye as you would primary source creators.

Like primary sources, secondary sources come in different  types : 

For example

Demonstrating source kind and type in your writing:

An ancient Greek sword is a primary source because it was made at the time of the event. 

A modern website is considered to be a secondary source since it was made after the time of the events it describes.

The Gallic Wars is a firsthand, written account of Julius Caesar’s invasion of Gaul.

In a series of letters written in 1914 to the Russian Tsar, German Kaiser Wilhelm II wrote that “the responsibility for the disaster which is now threatening the whole civilised world will not lie at my door” (1914, n.p.).

Test Your Learning

No personal information is collected as part of this quiz. Only the selected responses to the questions are recorded.

What do you need help with?

Download ready-to-use digital learning resources.

Copyright © History Skills 2014-2024.

Contact  via email

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Sources of Historical Study, Primary, Secondary and Tertiary, Written and Oral, Evaluation of Sources

The word History originated from Greek word ἱστορία, historia, meaning "inquiry, knowledge acquired by investigation"1. It is the study of the past, particularly how it relates to humans. It is an umbrella term that relates to past events as well as the memory, discovery, collection, organization, presentation, and interpretation of information about these events.2 In a broader sense, “history is a systematic account of the origin and development of the humankind, a record of the unique events and movements in its life, it is an attempt to recapture however imperfectly, that which is, in a sense, lost forever.3 Any leftover of the past, which adds to our knowledge of that past, can be considered as its source. Hence History definitely has some sources.

Related Papers

William J Dominik

Research Journal of Indian Cultural, Social & Philosophical Stream (ISSN: 0973-8762)

Prakash Narayan

Council of Europe

Chara Makriyianni

Reports of the Workshops and Workshop Materials on: “The use of sources in teaching and learning history” Nicosia, Cyprus 13 – 14 November 2005 & “The use of historical sources in teaching cultural and social history of Cyprus” Nicosia, Cyprus 9 – 10 June 2006

Koldo Ulibarri Orueta

Yosanne Vella

Teaching controversial and sensitive topics in history is always a challenge and Euroclio has devoted several seminars, projects and conferences on how best to teach these subjects at school. The objective of this booklet was to tackle the topic of St. Paul’s Shipwreck in Malta which is controversial on various levels in Maltese history. St. Paul’s shipwreck is mentioned in the bible and Malta a country where the Catholic religion is very strong, has always held this saint in high estime and there has been devotion and feasts dedicated to him since the Order of St John’s time in the 16th century. However, there has been some controversy raised by historians who have questioned whether he did come at all! These argue that apart from the reference in the bible there are no other historical sources which mention this event. This book tries to teach the topic by introducing the history method and how history works versus how mythology is enhanced. This is a sensitive issue because St. Paul is reverred as the one who brought the faith to the islands and the Maltese converted to christianity because of this provincial shipwreck. The popular belief is that from the shipwreck in 60 A.C.E. up to the present day there was a continuity of the Christian faith on the islands. This booklet also explores the validity of this claim of continuity by inviting pupils to look at the available sources and to make their own conclusions and interpretations based on the reliability of these sources. Irrespective of the theme, this booklet is interesting to all history teachers and history learners in any country because understanding the scientific way of how history works is useful in all contexts. While it also offers ideas and ways of using sources in such a way as not to impose judgements in history but to investigate sources and back any historical claims according to the evidence available.

RELATED PAPERS

Aquaculture Research

Sudhir Kumar Das

Camila Kulkamp

Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology

Youssef Elsayed

Radiologia Brasileira

marcos idagawa

BMC Bioinformatics

Harald Martens

Journal of General Physiology

Boris Martinac

IEEE Photonics Technology Letters

Lian Kuan Chen

International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abhineet mehrotra

Journal of Happiness Studies

Charles Martin-Krumm

Transition Metal Chemistry

Ram chandra Maurya

Tiedepolitiikka

Reetta Muhonen

Cytotechnology

Heiko T . Jansen

The Journal of Supercritical Fluids

Rogerio Favareto

La Lettre de l’OCIM

Joël Boustie

International Journal of Chemical Kinetics

Mohan Dongare

IEEE Access

Kenneth Foster

Industria: Jurnal Teknologi dan Manajemen Agroindustri

Yuli Wibowo

Revista Criterios

Luz Shirley Ordoñez Delgado

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Explore millions of high-quality primary sources and images from around the world, including artworks, maps, photographs, and more.

Explore migration issues through a variety of media types

• Part of The Streets are Talking: Public Forms of Creative Expression from Around the World
• Part of The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Winter 2020)
• Part of Cato Institute (Aug. 3, 2021)
• Part of University of California Press
• Part of Open: Smithsonian National Museum of African American History & Culture
• Part of Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Winter 2012)
• Part of R Street Institute (Nov. 1, 2020)
• Part of Leuven University Press
• Part of UN Secretary-General Papers: Ban Ki-moon (2007-2016)
• Part of Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol. 12, No. 4 (August 2018)
• Part of Leveraging Lives: Serbia and Illegal Tunisian Migration to Europe, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Mar. 1, 2023)
• Part of UCL Press

Harness the power of visual materials—explore more than 3 million images now on JSTOR.

Enhance your scholarly research with underground newspapers, magazines, and journals.

Explore collections in the arts, sciences, and literature from the world’s leading museums, archives, and scholars.

Directed by

LSE Environment Week 2024: Call for papers

Past Event From 29 May 2024 at 15:00 to 26 Sep 2024 at 19:00 Sustainable Growth

We are at a critical point in history. Addressing climate change, pollution, and environmental degradation is increasingly urgent, underscoring the need for research. Climate scientists have extensively studied the environmental consequences of global warming, but the greatest source of uncertainty is the decisions humans will make in response. Economists have much to offer. We have tools for designing policies to address externalities, stimulate innovation, and facilitate widespread adaptation. Our models can also help understand the distributional and far-reaching effects of these policies through complex economic linkages such as trade and migration. We are just beginning to apply what we know to this global challenge.

• Learn more and submit your paper here: Register

Achieving a sustainable balance between human activity and the natural environment while maintaining economic growth will require innovation. We need to make economic growth cleaner, control environmental externalities, and protect human populations from environmental change. To identify and explore these innovations, LSE Environment Week and Camp bring together researchers from all fields of economics—including development, macroeconomics, industrial organisation, public, finance, labour, trade, urban, theory, behavioural, and political economy—as well as environmental, energy, and climate experts.

We organise two conferences per year, both taking place in person at the London School of Economics. LSE Environment Week is our flagship conference, running in September, which brings together academics, policy makers and students over the course of 4 days. LSE Environment Camp is our PhD-only conference in May, focused on developing the next generation of researchers working on environmental questions.

Call for Papers: LSE Environment Week 2024

The call for papers for LSE Environment Week 2024 is open now and closes on 28th June 2024. The conference will take place from September 23rd - 26th at the LSE campus in London. Click on the link above to submit your paper.

More from IGC

How farmers in india can be incentivised to save water, environmental and economic impacts of agrivoltaics in bangladesh, how rural poor populations fared in pakistan’s 2022 floods, strengthening urban waste management by empowering waste pickers in ghana.