Minnesota History 1862 was my first graduate level experience with synthesizing primary and secondary sources.  Since my undergraduate use of sources was not as focused on synthesis, I was required to establish where each source was applicable.  While searching for sources, I noticed that secondary sources often provided a different perspective on primary sources.  This observation shifted my research by giving the primary sources a different significance.  

Through this observation I began to understand the relationship of primary and secondary sources.  Fortunately there has been a large amount of interest in the American Civil War and sources were easy to locate.  My initial research garnered some helpful primary sources and provided an introduction to my work.  After consulting secondary sources, observations from scholars about the primary sources changed their potential for my research.

These observations presented some helpful insights as to the depth of primary source generation.  It became apparent that primary sources contain valuable information beyond what is explicitly stated in them. Secondary sources affect synthesis by giving a historian different interpretations of primary sources.  Through these experiences, I began to understand the relationship between historical evidence in primary sources and current observations by scholars.

Encountering these relationships between the sources taught me how to adjust my research. Rather than changing my thesis entirely, I was able to augment my work with different perspectives.  Combining the use of primary sources in guiding my research with the observation of larger scholarly literature has greatly expanded my ability to synthesize information.  For a museum professional, it will be necessary to merge evidence from the past with contemporary observations.