This reminds of me of -tyrone

The difference between primary and secondary sources is the lack or the support of evidence at the time it mainly relies if the sources are correct and appropriate for that time. like say a letter from the explorers to the court of Britain explaining their findings and gains this would be a primary source and a great reference. while a secondary source could be a newspaper after the event or even a reference about the event if it wasn't truly from the time or event it is not a primary source.


this process reminds me of say compare a live interview of a accident or event to a later summary of the same event. which further pushes towards the requirements of the supporting event at the time and how it cant just be a later rerun or say a newspaper reporting it at a later time it lacks the sources to be a primary source. Without the support of the sources anything is either a secondary source or not even a source to begin with. If you attempted to write say a research paper and you only reference secondary sources or other people research on the same topic there is a high chance that they will slash your marks heavily. 

So all in all the differences are the support and relation to the time or event. the impact and dates also play a key role in the classification of these source types.