Hello,
If someone uses a primary source, should the context be quoted directly? If it is not, would that constitute original research? Another words, if someone takes the primary source and interprets it to his or her own need, it does seem like a re-creation of a primary source. It's like original research in an attempt to make the primary source a secondary source.
I've seen this kind of discussion before. The result was that all scholarly work is always based on secondary scholastic sources. That does not give an answer to the primary sources as above, but it does shed some insight into non-scholarly source creep.
Feedback is appreciated.
Jonathan