0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What kind of evidence do historians use to study the past?
they use the evidence from the past that will tell them what exactly happened, or they ask people who were at that certain place and time.
How do historians sort through evidence?
poo poo wee wee testicle balls boobs
Do historians always agree about the past why?
No they don't because some historians believe that the universe was created by the big bang and others by god. Or the dinosaurs some historians think they were killed by a meteor. They don't agree about everything because there isn't enough evidence to prove something. And it is OK.
What problems do gaps in evidence cause historians?
Historians rely on primary sources to reach conclusions. Gaps in history, where there is no written documentation of events may leave historians in a quandary. They must then rely on archaeological evidence, and secondary sources, if available. Historians must ask the following: Is the information reliable? What was the reputation of the writer at the time? Does the archaeological record, primary, or secondary sources disagree with previously published historiography concerning the person or event? How accurate is prior published historiography concerning the subject matter? New evidence can displace old theories regarding history, so historians must be ready to adjust their thesis to reflect this information. Historians must also recognize that myth may shroud the truth about history. "Lost Cause" mythology concerning the American Civil War is a good example of lies perpetuated as history that has been disproved by primary sources.
Archaeologists and historians have determined that ancient Nubia had a rich trade relationship with ancient Egypt. What provides the best evidence of this?
You aint always gonna get an answer my name is siri
How do historians analyze evidence?
Historians analyze evidence by examining its reliability, relevance, and context. They assess the source of the evidence, its bias, and corroborating or contradictory evidence to form a well-supported interpretation of the past. Additionally, historians use critical thinking skills to evaluate the perspectives and motives of the sources providing the evidence.
Why do historians look for evidence?
Historians look for evidence to support their understanding and interpretation of the past. Evidence helps validate their arguments, provide context, and support conclusions about historical events and figures. By examining various forms of evidence, historians can construct a more accurate and nuanced understanding of history.
What evidence shows that Phoenicia existed?
The writings of contemporary historians.
What Kinds of evidence will historians of the future study to learn about your culture?
i think, they will study what we did in life
What step must a historian take to evaluate historical evidence?
The steps historians take include studying the lives of ppl in different times and places is the work of the historians. The most basic tool for this work is historical evidence. Historians collect the evidence, then use it to interpret events. Historians look first at a primary source, first hand information about ppl or events or a secondary source that is stated after the fact.
What are techniques historians use when synthesizing evidence?
Comparing and contrasting historical sources
Why do historians look for evidence about the distant past in myths and legend?
Historians look for evidence about the distant past in myths and legends because myths and legends tell what people believed and understood. Historians study by looking at journals, data, diaries etc., to learn information.
What do historians have to do with the evidence they find?
Historians use the evidence they find to analyze and interpret the past, draw conclusions, and form historical narratives. They evaluate the reliability and significance of the evidence to construct well-grounded arguments about historical events and trends. Critical thinking and interpretation are essential skills historians utilize to make sense of the past based on the information available.
How can historians determine whether a claim is valid?
evaluate the evidence used to support it
What can historians learn from archeological evidence?
Historians can learn about past societies' daily life, cultural practices, and technological advancements from archaeological evidence. By studying artifacts, structures, and landscapes, historians can gain insights into ancient economies, social structures, and religious beliefs. Additionally, archaeological evidence can provide information about trade networks, migration patterns, and interactions between different societies.
How did historians find out about events that happended without writing books and etc?
When exploring the periods for which there are no written records at all, historians have to reply on archaeological evidence.
How can personal biases and points of view influence historians when they are studying evidence?
Answer this question… They can lead historians to arrive at very different interpretations of an event.
