1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ANTONII [103]
3 years ago
5

Why are primary sources important when studying historical events?

History
2 answers:
frutty [35]3 years ago
6 0
Primary sources are important for studying historical events because they come from the time you are studying and are not views from modern historians but from people who were there
Strike441 [17]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:  The correct answer is : Primary sources are important because they help people to relate in a very personal way to the events that occurred in the past. Primary sources are fragments of history that encourage students to seek information and additional evidence through research.

You might be interested in
Was the Korean War a US war or a UN war? Explain your answer.
dezoksy [38]

Answer:

It was part of the UN war since the UN was in a war and needed help , had asked korean and other countries to help them.

possibly.

5 0
3 years ago
Help help ASAP help math
OLEGan [10]

Answer:

He used his Veto 66 times

Thanks!

Answered by: FieryAnswererGT

#learnwithbrainly

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What is a stock and what is a bond?
Anon25 [30]
Stockan ownership share or shares of ownership in a corporation
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Opinion Question: Are the Progressive movements calls for government regulation of business justified?
pashok25 [27]

This is one of those questions that you should always qualify by stating that it is a fact specific inquiry.

Depending on the facts presented, a progressive movement's calls for government regulation may be justified if the facts presented show that the call is justified.

If business is routinely defrauding citizens and ignoring tax law, then a progressive movement is right to call for regulation.

If the regulation is poorly written, then the progressive movement should be calling for better regulation and not new regulation.

8 0
4 years ago
I SWEAR IF YOU CAN HELP I WILL GIVE YOU BRANLIEST 20 One viewpoint was suggested by _______________ and was called the _________
VladimirAG [237]

Answer: breanna here

July 16, 1987, began with a light breeze, a cloudless sky, and a spirit of celebration. On that day, 200 senators and representatives boarded a special train for a journey to Philadelphia to celebrate a singular congressional anniversary.

Exactly 200 years earlier, the framers of the U.S. Constitution, meeting at Independence Hall, had reached a supremely important agreement. Their so-called Great Compromise (or Connecticut Compromise in honor of its architects, Connecticut delegates Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth) provided a dual system of congressional representation. In the House of Representatives each state would be assigned a number of seats in proportion to its population. In the Senate, all states would have the same number of seats. Today, we take this arrangement for granted; in the wilting-hot summer of 1787, it was a new idea.

In the weeks before July 16, 1787, the framers had made several important decisions about the Senate’s structure. They turned aside a proposal to have the House of Representatives elect senators from lists submitted by the individual state legislatures and agreed that those legislatures should elect their own senators.

By July 16, the convention had already set the minimum age for senators at 30 and the term length at six years, as opposed to 25 for House members, with two-year terms. James Madison explained that these distinctions, based on “the nature of the senatorial trust, which requires greater extent of information and stability of character,” would allow the Senate “to proceed with more coolness, with more system, and with more wisdom than the popular[ly elected] branch.”

The issue of representation, however, threatened to destroy the seven-week-old convention. Delegates from the large states believed that because their states contributed proportionally more to the nation’s financial and defensive resources, they should enjoy proportionally greater representation in the Senate as well as in the House. Small-state delegates demanded, with comparable intensity, that all states be equally represented in both houses. When Sherman proposed the compromise, Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have an equal vote in the Senate in all matters—except those involving money.

Over the Fourth of July holiday, delegates worked out a compromise plan that sidetracked Franklin’s proposal. On July 16, the convention adopted the Great Compromise by a heart-stopping margin of one vote. As the 1987 celebrants duly noted, without that vote, there would likely have been no Constitution.

Explanation:

4 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • With which political affiliation was Thomas Jefferson tied to? Federalists Whigs Democratic-Republicans Antifederalists
    15·2 answers
  • What was significant about the Olmec civilization?
    7·2 answers
  • What word best describes the bureaucracy of the U.S Federal Gov't.
    5·1 answer
  • Genetic drift in a population affects the gene pool in which of the following ways?
    8·2 answers
  • When Congress doesn't approve a president's choice for a federal court, this is an example of _______
    12·1 answer
  • Match the character with the correct qualities.<br>​
    6·1 answer
  • Why did the pilgrims think they would be successful in Massachusetts
    7·1 answer
  • This photo was taken during the Great Depression.
    8·2 answers
  • 3 Points
    11·1 answer
  • What important developments in sumer and mesopotamia laid the foundation for later civilizations?
    14·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!