Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
Lars is completing a history project about World War I. On the British government's National Archives website, he finds letters from American soldiers as well as documents written by museum curators and historians that give background information about the war, supported by primary sources from their archives' collections.
Which descriptions best characterize this information? Select three options.
a. outdated facts, b. credible sources, c. primary sources, d. biased information
, e. reasoned judgment
Answer:
b. credible sources
c. primary sources
e. reasoned judgment
Explanation:
Primary sources are documents that were made and built at the time the historic event they document is taking place. In that case, they can claim that the letters that American soldiers wrote during the First World War are a primary source.
A credible source is one that is written by an expert on a given subject, in addition, these sources have evidence that supports all the statements they present. When Lars uses historical sources written by curators and historians who used primary sources as evidence, he is using credible feints.
After doing this research, Lars will be able to draw conclusions about the first world war using these sources as evidence, thus making an easoned judgment.
Answer:
But that all changed with Marbury v. Madison, an 1803 milestone case that established the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, by which it determines the constitutionality of executive and legislative acts. Judicial review is another key example of the checks and balances system in action.
Explanation:
John Smith is mostly associated with being the first colonial leader to settle the first permanent English settlement in America. He helped set up the colony of Jamestown in present day Virginia.
That they were called the border ruffians
