Which of the following is NOT a source of History on the basis of availability?

The social scientist uses a number of sources to dig the past objectively. All these exercises come under a major approach i.e. historical approach to investigate the past. Thus, all social scientists adopt a historical approach to understand the past. Different sources of history

• On the basis of availability:
  • Archaeological Sources: Monumental findings, Numismatic evidence (study of coins),  Epigraphic (stone slabs, pillars, rocks, copper plates)
  • Literary sources: Sacred or religious literature,  Secular literature (private literature like  dramas, novels, poems and official literature like official orders, dispatches, decisions of the law courts), Foreign testimony (Accounts written by foreigners like F-Hein, Megasthenes)
  • Oral Traditions are very helpful in imparting information about local history. Tod’s annals, Dipvamsa and Mahavamsa come under this source.
• On the basis of evidence:
  • Primary Sources: These sources are the accounts prepared by persons who were either directly connected with an event or were eye-witnesses to it. Minutes of parliamentary and judicial proceedings, laws, treaties, official papers of states, autobiographies come under this source.
  • Secondary Sources: These are the sources which were prepared by persons who were far away from the scene of actual happenings but who took help of the eye-witness accounts in preparing them.

Hence, witness accounts do not come under History on the basis of availability.