I thought a conference celebrating Terence Ranger’s life and work would be as good a venue as I might find to ask a question that had been nagging at me since I started working on Zimbabwe. What are we supposed to do about Ranger’s role in the history of the 1960s, and his role in the broader historiography of the country? How do we write history in which living people are subjects, informants, authors, archives, and actors? How do we understand our sources, and how do we demarcate between them—what’s primary, what’s secondary, what’s fact, what’s fiction?