The correct answer is answer C ("The article will be biased because the historian is using only one source about the ruler").
If a historian only took this one scroll to write a biography on its subject (the ruler), it would most likely be extremely misleading and inaccurate. There's no way of getting closer to the truth of any subject without contrasting a variety of opinions from different sources. What if people working for this ruler wrote it in a way that made him look good? What if it was written under pressure? What if it was a complete lie? These and many other questions should come to mind as possible ways in which relying on one source might compromise historical facts.
Hope this helps!
Answer:
Mrs. Whatsit.
Explanation:
One night, thirteen-year-old Meg Murry meets an eccentric new neighbor, Mrs. Whatsit, who refers to something called a tesseract. She later finds out it is a scientific concept her father was working on before his mysterious disappearance.
They lost faith because President Johnson hadn't delivered the victory he had repeatedly promised.
Explanation:
The calling of a Second Constitutional Convention of the United States is a proposal made by some scholars and activists from across the political spectrum for the purpose of making substantive reforms to the United States Federal government by rewriting its Constitution
Answer:
Rus?
Explanation:
I am pretty sure it's Rus, nothing else makes sense.
