Which statement best defines a primary source?

• A. Written by someone with direct knowledge of the event or topic
• B. Based on secondary literature but written by someone without direct knowledge
• C. Literature twice removed from the original source
• D. A summary written by a journalist

Answer: (A)

Primary sources are original, firsthand records created by someone with direct experience of the event or topic. They capture observations, data, or evidence as it happened, without later interpretation or filtering. That direct, firsthand quality is why describing a primary source as written by someone with direct knowledge best captures what it is.

Other options describe works that are indirect or interpretive. A piece that relies on secondary literature and is written by someone without direct knowledge isn’t a firsthand account. Literature that’s twice removed from the original source is even more filtered through others, losing immediacy. A journalist’s summary, while informative, is a synthesis rather than an original, firsthand document.