Want this question answered?
primary sources and secondary sources.
primary and secondary sources.
They use primary and secondary sources
There are three categories for historians and their source material: Primary: ancient historians existed at the time of the event Secondary: ancient historians existed after the event and analysed/used primary sources modern: Modern historaians who use either of the above majority of the primary sources do not criticize Augustus and idolize him, in contrast some secondary sources like Tacitus hate Augustus Overall however it is agreed(by many modern historians) that Augustus was emperor because of his freinds Marcus vipsanius Agrippa and Gaius Maecanus. The primary sources(historians) were either sychophantic or terrified of persecution by Augustus, the Secondary sources are also biased because they were hired by patrons with vested interests in Augustus's depiction. In short thereare a range of views all with their own bias.
Cross-checking sources against other evidence. However, there's no 'patent recipe' for dealing with problems of bias in sources.
Because people who write memoirs, tend to adjust the facts to show themselves in a better light.
Primary sources, secondary sources, and oral history.
primary sources and secondary sources.
historians use primary soucres and secondary sources
They summarize conclusions about primary sources.
Primary sources are more valuable to modern historians because they are more reliable.
The two different sources are primary and secondary sources
historians use primary soucres and secondary sources
They summarize conclusions about primary sources.
skeptism
skeptism
You need sources to be able to unravel history.