All history, at least theoretically, is based on primary sources. Suppose you want a study of the daily lives of soldiers guarding the Black Hills Road. Someone is going to have to take a look at the military records of the soldiers themselves, their diaries, letters, and memoranda. These are the primary sources. Without some evidence from that time, you have only speculation.
Now, what happens when someone publishes this study? It becomes a secondary source, i.e., one that synthesizes and interprets a number of primary sources. Future studies, also secondary sources, will likely consult this book on the Black Hills Road to take advantage of the knowledge that it has built up from its study of the primary sources. But here’s the problem: unless you’ve seen the primary sources yourself, how can you trust the author of the secondary source? How can you be certain that the primary sources really do say what the author thinks they do? Well, to begin with, it’s a comfort if you know that the author had a good editor.
It’s a truism that the more pairs of eyes you have looking at something, the more likely you are to spot potential issues. And in many cases, that’s what an editor is: a second pair of eyes. Here at the South Dakota State Historical Society Press we pay particular attention to fact-checking, as do many other presses. We strive hard to go back to all the pertinent primary sources and vet the accuracy of the author’s references. In some instances, we even have to look over another editor’s shoulder, as it were, and check the primary sources cited by the secondary sources cited by the author of the manuscript that we’re working on. Dubious towers of inaccuracy have been constructed by one author citing another citing another citing another whose work wasn’t properly fact-checked in the first place. In some cases, an erroneous “fact” can become enthroned as historical truth if it is printed often enough by authors who are not sufficiently careful in checking their sources—and then good luck dethroning it!
So for the sake of accurate history, we certainly do our best to check, check, check!
RGH