Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
If you are reading the actual letter, or an exact quote from that letter, it is a primary source.
No peace treaty officially ended World War II to document what went wrong in the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union.
It was involve by contributing to the cold war
The Cold War was not "cold" per say, but was simply the name of a war that took place.
World War Two was an origin of the Cold War.
A primary source comes from the time the person/subject was from (e.g newspapers from World War II, materials used by ancient tribes etc.) while a secondary source comes from after the person/subject was from
A declaration of war
A declaration of war
If you know what a secondary source is, then you should know that everything is both a primary and a secondary source, but on what is always the question. So, if you are wondering if it is a primary source on the war crimes trials, then clearly it is not as Marrus was not there. But there may be primary source material used in the book.
Tom used a magazine article as a secondary source in his report about the US Civil War. A secondary source should describe, discuss, interpret, comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and process primary sources.
A documentary on medical treatments used during the war
The Eisenhower and Truman Doctrines
If you are reading the actual letter, or an exact quote from that letter, it is a primary source.
When researching recent theories about the Cold War.
General Grant's Journal is a primary source. A primary source is an eye witness. It is what the person who was there actually saw. Such accounts are extremely important because they give a feel for the era. A secondary source would be what you would hear if one of your parents told you what they heard about World War 2. They would be passing on a story. Also, Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy, also wrote his memoirs. If someone took Grant's Journal and Davis' Memoirs and made a book, that would be a secondary source. Still, it might give a better overall picture of the war. So a primary source is one written by someone who saw what was going on.
a Charleston Mercury editorial published in 1860
a Charleston Mercury editorial published in 1860