Holocaust Primary Sources

Words: 520
Pages: 3

Primary sources can be hard to determine when it comes to holocaust denial. This is because primary sources are different when it comes to true history and pseudohistory. Interviews with deniers, denial journalism, and denier conferences would all be considered primary sources of the Holocaust to a denier. To a historian those works would be considered a secondary source. What would be considered a primary source of the holocaust would be pictures taken by an eyewitness or military, photos that the authors took of an actual camp that once existed and eyewitness testimony. An example of a primary source would be the Nuremberg Trials. The trials give a raw description of Nazi Leaders’ shock and horror at the scope and scale of the Holocaust gives us some indication of just how far beyond belief the mass murder was ever to perpetrator. Eyewitness testimony needs to be carefully handled and studied. A person's testimony is not always reliable due to what they can and cannot remember during that specific historical event. Primary sources are the biggest pieces of evidence that historians …show more content…
They would have agreed with John Tosh was the most accurate history possible is a social necessity to remember the past. Pseudohistory, which is history not based on evidence but on political motivation, may be pushed onto society and it may come across as a true claim. Historians need to refute these claims with historical research and evidence that show what truly happened in past events. Everyone has a bias, and only you can recognize it. Historians have to be careful when presenting information against Holocaust deniers because it can be twisted and turned around into something it was not meant to be. If evidence is not presented about historical events then these events could be erased from time and seen as if they never happened, or another story could twist the truth into something that did not