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a. outdated facts, b. credible sources, c. primary sources, d. biased information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.
Britain didn't have enough settlements to enforce the claim.
I think it’s c because congress has probably the power to do that atleast my mom said that and my teacher and it was on my test
<span>Conditions when Tsar Nick was in power were not good. The average working day was 11 hours, six days a week. This was also for very little pay. This is one of the main events in the early days of Russia which contributed to the 1905 Revolution. Overall, the working conditions were terrible. Hope this answers your question. : )</span>
