Which best describes the way photographs are considered by historians?
A)primary source documents that are useful in the study of history.
B)reliable sources for the study of history only if from a named source.
C)secondary source documents that are useful in the study of history.
D)unreliable sources for the study of history because they are too subjective.
E)useful sources for the study of personal histories, but not for general history.

And could I tag you in any other questions I might have?

Question

Which best describes the way photographs are considered by historians?
A)primary source documents that are useful in the study of history.
B)reliable sources for the study of history only if from a named source.
C)secondary source documents that are useful in the study of history.
D)unreliable sources for the study of history because they are too subjective.
E)useful sources for the study of personal histories, but not for general history.

And could I tag you in any other questions I might have?

anonymous · Answer

@wwhitlock

wwhitlock · Answer

The best answer is A. But realistically, photographs can be primary or secondary like any other document. Also, photoshop and earlier photography tricks need to taken into consideration. But, yeah, A

Tag whenever you like.