Notes on Primary vs Secondary Sources, Dred Scott, and the 1860 Election

Primary vs Secondary Sources: Biases, Questions, and Roles in Historical Research

  • Private solution creators are fallible: they are “created by people. People have biases. They have prejudices. They don't always tell the truth, and they don't always see things objectively.” Because of this, we should ask questions of primary sources to uncover context, intent, and reliability.
  • There are five basic questions for evaluating primary sources. The exact five depend on your thesis, but key dimensions to consider include:
    • What kind of document is it? Is it a government document (for example, a census) or a different kind of artifact (e.g., political drawings)?
    • What is the time frame represented by the document, and when was it produced?
    • Who created the document and for what purpose? What was their agenda or perspective?
    • What biases or prejudices are evident, and how might they color the content?
    • How should the source be interpreted in light of your research question and thesis?
  • Primary sources are artifacts from the period being studied. If something was produced during the time of interest, it is a primary source, even if read later. If the source represents the experience of someone who lived through an event, it remains a primary source.
  • Secondary sources provide analysis and interpretation that builds on primary sources and other secondary sources. They are used to interpret, contextualize, and critique primary materials.
  • Examples of primary sources: government documents (e.g., censuses), political cartoons, firsthand letters or diaries, speeches, photographs. Examples of secondary sources: monographs (books focused on a narrow topic), textbooks, peer-reviewed articles.
  • Monographs are a type of secondary source with a narrow, sustained topic. The term is contrasted with more general or broad compilations like some textbooks.
  • The peer-review process in scholarly publishing: after submission, editors send articles to peers who evaluate argument quality, use of sources, and overall rigor. Feedback may call for revisions and resubmission before acceptance.
  • Use of primary and secondary sources in practice: just like primary sources, secondary sources should be analyzed for agenda, context, and reliability. The author’s institutional affiliation (university, historical society, political ties) can reveal potential biases or perspectives.
  • Practical takeaway: always ask who, what, when, where, why, and how when you encounter sources, and triangulate between multiple primary and secondary sources to build a robust interpretation.

The Dred Scott Case and Its Context (1857)

  • Political and legal background: Dred Scott sued for his freedom after living in free territory for several years, arguing that residence in free territory made him free. The underlying legal argument was that his residence in free territory should have conferred freedom.
  • The sequence to the Supreme Court: after events in Missouri, the case rose through the court system and reached the United States Supreme Court.
  • Supreme Court ruling (1857): The Court held that African Americans, including Dred Scott, were not citizens and thus had no rights that the Court was bound to respect. The ruling effectively denied Black citizenship and curtailed federal power to regulate slavery in new territories.
  • Significance: the decision intensified national tensions over slavery and contributed to the polarization that led to the Civil War. The case is noted here as a critical landmark where the Court’s interpretation contradicted growing abolitionist sentiment and the moral/political arguments about citizenship and rights.
  • The teaching point emphasized in the transcript: this case “should have never made it this far,” underscoring a belief that the decision did not align with broader constitutional or ethical progress.

The 1860 Presidential Election: Four Parties and Their Images

  • Timeframe and actors: By 1860, four political options competed in the presidential contest. The chart-like description identifies the major candidates and parties:
    • Abraham Lincoln, Republican Party (newly formed in 1854). The transcript notes Lincoln as the lone candidate pictured dancing with a Black woman in a way the artist uses to signal abolitionist leanings and race-related issues.
    • John Bell, Constitutional Union Party (a faction formed specifically for the 1860 election) advocating compromise to preserve the Union.
    • Stephen A. Douglas, Northern Democrat (often associated with the need to keep the Union intact while addressing slavery in new territories to some extent).
    • John C. Breckinridge, Southern Democrat (aligned with extending slavery, representing Southern interests).
  • The political cartoon’s claimed messages (as presented in the transcript):
    • Lincoln is portrayed as an abolitionist in the cartoon’s depiction, with insinuations about miscegenation (referred to as “race mixing”) and immediate abolitionist aims.
    • The transcript notes a counterpoint: Lincoln was characterized in this caricature as opposing slavery’s expansion in the West and as supporting miscegenation, but this reflects a caricature rather than the historical record (the note explicitly argues that Lincoln was a free-soil advocate rather than an abolitionist, and it contends he did not advocate race mixing).
    • John Bell appears dancing with a Native American figure, signaling a political posture of compromise and union preservation.
    • The depiction of Douglas as Northern Democrat who relies on “debased immigrant vote” is tied to the Know Nothing Party and anti-Irish sentiment prevalent in the era.
    • The Southern Democrat Breckinridge is portrayed, with a reference to the “Breckenridge family” as a familiar political lineage.
  • Immigrant and minority stereotypes in the cartoon: the image includes an Irish stereotype of a man described as zombie-like or a scarecrow, with a whiskey bottle in his jacket pocket. The transcript notes this as a common anti-Irish stereotype from the 1840s–1860s and connects it to the Know Nothing Party, which sought to restrict Irish immigration.
  • Contextual notes:
    • The Know Nothing Party (active in the 1840s) sought to curb Irish immigration and was associated with nativist, anti-immigrant sentiment.
    • The cartoon uses stereotypes to influence political perception and underscores how imagery can shape public opinion and reflect contemporary biases.
  • Important reminder about interpretation: the transcript emphasizes that understanding a political cartoon requires distinguishing between the cartoonist’s intent and the historical record of the candidates’ positions.

Primary Sources, Secondary Sources, and the Role of Interpretation

  • Primary sources: materials created during the period under study. They include the types mentioned (census documents, government documents, political cartoons, etc.). If a source was produced during the time of interest or by individuals who experienced the event, it remains a primary source even if later read or interpreted.
  • Secondary sources: materials produced after the fact that analyze and interpret primary sources and other secondary sources. They help researchers construct arguments, add context, and compare perspectives.
  • Specific examples mentioned:
    • Monographs: a type of secondary source focused on a narrow topic. Example given: Great Crossings is a monograph.
    • Textbooks: not monographs; the transcript notes a textbook example (the American Yacht) as not a monograph and advises against citing it for certain scholarly assignments.
  • The peer-review process (for scholarly publishing):
    • A manuscript is submitted to a journal editor.
    • The editor sends the manuscript to peers (experts in the field) for evaluation.
    • Reviewers assess the argument, use of primary and secondary sources, and overall quality.
    • Feedback can request revisions, resubmission, or rejection.
  • The purpose of evaluating both primary and secondary sources:
    • Just as primary sources require critical questioning of bias and context, secondary sources require scrutiny of the author’s argument, evidence use, and methodology.
    • The author’s institutional affiliation and potential political or organizational ties can influence perspective and interpretation.
  • The practical workflow for historians and students:
    • When using secondary sources to interpret primary sources, evaluate the secondary source’s argument and its use of evidence.
    • When selecting sources for assignments or research, prefer reliable monographs and peer-reviewed articles over less rigorous or outdated textbooks when possible.

How to Evaluate Sources: Agenda, Affiliation, and Bias

  • Agenda: ask what the author is attempting to argue or prove. What is the stated or implied objective? How might that objective color interpretation or emphasis?
  • Affiliation: identify where the author works (university, historical society, think tank, political organization). Institutional context can shape framing and emphasis.
  • Bias and perspective: recognize that all sources have biases, whether explicit or implicit. The goal is to understand how bias might influence selection of facts, framing of arguments, and interpretation of evidence.
  • Practical guidance for students:
    • Use primary sources to ground your analysis in contemporaneous material.
    • Use secondary sources to gain interpretive frameworks and to see how historians have debated issues.
    • Cross-check claims across multiple sources to test robustness.
    • Be transparent about sources and acknowledge limitations and potential biases in your own analysis.

Practical Takeaways for Studying and Research Practice

  • When working with primary sources, begin with the five basic questions and tailor them to your thesis.
  • Employ primary sources like government documents and political cartoons to illustrate contemporaneous perspectives, but interrogate their biases.
  • Use secondary sources to inform interpretation, but critically assess the author’s agenda, affiliations, and methodological approach.
  • In historical debates (e.g., slavery, citizenship, civil rights), be mindful of the difference between caricatured representations and historical reality; always check assumptions against primary evidence.
  • In scholarly communication, understand the publication process: writing clearly, citing sources properly, and submitting for peer review to strengthen your argument.

Key Terms and Concepts (with Context from the Transcript)

  • Primary source: a document or artifact created during the period being studied or by someone with direct experience of the event.
  • Secondary source: analysis or interpretation of primary sources and other secondary materials produced after the period studied.
  • Monograph: a scholarly book focused on a narrow topic, used here as an example of a secondary source.
  • Abolitionist vs. free-soil: the transcript discusses a common mischaracterization of Lincoln, clarifying that Lincoln advocated restricting slavery’s expansion (free soil) rather than immediate abolition, countering the cartoon’s portrayal of him as an abolitionist.
  • Miscegenation: a historical term used in the cartoon to accuse Lincoln of supporting race mixing; the transcript notes this as a misrepresentation and argues Lincoln did not advocate such ideas.
  • Know Nothing Party: a nativist political movement of the 1840s aimed at limiting immigration, particularly from Ireland; the party’s imagery is connected to anti-Irish stereotypes in the cartoon.
  • The 1860 election candidates and parties: Lincoln (Republican), Bell (Constitutional Union), Douglas (Northern Democrat), Breckinridge (Southern Democrat).
  • The Missouri Compromise: referenced in the cartoon’s discussion as part of the broader debate about slavery in new territories and political settlements to preserve the Union.
  • Editorial and peer review: the process by which scholarly work is evaluated by experts in the field before publication.

Quick Summary Takeaways

  • Primary sources require critical interrogation of bias and context; secondary sources help frame and interpret but must be evaluated for agenda and affiliations.
  • The Dred Scott decision is a key event illustrating how legal rulings can reflect and reinforce racial hierarchies rather than universal civil rights.
  • The 1860 presidential election featured four major contenders with divergent positions on slavery and union preservation; political cartoons of the era used stereotypes to influence public opinion, while distorting some historical truths about candidates.
  • Understanding both primary and secondary sources—and the relationship between them—is essential for sound historical analysis and credible scholarly work.
  • The scholarly publishing process relies on careful argumentation, robust use of sources, and external validation through peer review, with attention to potential biases and institutional affiliations.