Which of the following describes an advantage that secondary sources have over primary sources for historians

2 answers:

8 0

While you didn't really provide the "following" as the comment above me states, in general, the advantage of secondary sources of primary ones is that they perhaps provide a more objective or even just a broader view on a certain topic. While a primary source of the American civil war would be a letter written by a soldier, a secondary source would be a book that describes more letters taken together and discusses possible information regarding them.

Kipish [7]3 years ago

4 0

Answer:

they can reveal how individuals experiencing historical events actually reacted

You might be interested in

What is Marquis de Lafayette best known for?

Lana71 [14]

The second one. He was a critical link between military and French alliance

4 0

3 years ago

One significant consequence of the 1994 Rwandan genocide was that __________.

Alekssandra [29.7K]

Answer: B. over 1 million children were orphaned

Explanation:

7 0

3 years ago

Which political party did not want a strong national government because they feared it would be like having a king again?

lianna [129]

Answer:

Anti-Federalists？

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Dogs kept as companions pre-1800s were mainly seen as what?

lianna [129]

The dogs during the pre 1800’s were not mainly seen as a companion or a friend in which the society today claims. During this period, the dogs are mostly seen as an animal who serves as hunting, herding and protection to people.

6 0

4 years ago

Why is a representative government necessary in a large society?

jonny [76]

It would be like the government that is in the USA, it can't be a direct democracy as that would mean everyone votes on everything. Not only is it not efficient but also the general population often does not possess enough knowledge. That's why we have electoral college votes in USA because the people are not trusted.

8 0

3 years ago