Question

How would a secondary source be beneficial to a historian studying a particular event?

A. It would eliminate the need for her to evaluate primary sources that have already been analyzed by other historians.
B. It would allow her to determine whether sources are reliable or unreliable without needing to actually read them.
C. It would eliminate the need for her to use any primary sources to support the historical argument she hopes to make.
D. It would help her organize her primary sources without having to rely on techniques like historiography or chronological thinking.
@True_Alpha_Wolf

Answer 1

idk @dan815

Answer 2

D probably

Answer 3

i hope so this is my last chance :(

Answer 4

@bigballz999

Answer 5

I'm pretty confident on it actually. The others suggest she wouldn't have to use first-hand sources.

Answer 6

it was wrong :(

Answer 7

Well shoot. What was right?

Answer 8

it doeesnt giv me the answers it just says if its correct or not i have one more try i guess

Answer 9

Then MAYBE B. Maybe. I don't rightly know.

Answer 10

i think c