Question

Which of the following describes a disadvantage secondary sources have compared to primary sources? A.They are created by people who have never experienced the historical period they describe. B.They are extremely rare and much harder for historians to locate. C.They do not rely on historical evidence to support their conclusions. D.They focus too closely on a single piece of evidence instead of providing summaries.

Answer 1

The answer is A they are created by people who have never experienced the historical period they describe.
I hoped this was helpful.
I got this info from Apexvs.

Answer 2

The correct alternative is the letter A

I'll leave a brief explanation about this:

A Secondary source is a document, image, or recording that discusses or relates information already presented elsewhere. Different from the primary source which is the original source of the information. The secondary source is the result of discussions in the primary source material, in other words, the authors of the secondary sources were not in the historical period they are describing.

Secondary sources involve analyzes, syntheses, discussions and interpretations of the original information.