Primary sources from the Neolithic period include tools and weapons made from stone, pottery, cave paintings or rock art, and burial sites with artifacts and human remains. Additionally, some written sources such as the Vinča symbols and the Çatalhöyük tablets provide insights into Neolithic societies and their symbols and written communication.
i think that it is a secondary source because it dosen't look like that person who drew it was there
A historian using the thinking skill of primary source analysis would carefully examine and evaluate original sources from a particular time period or event, such as letters, diaries, photographs, or official documents. They would look for biases, perspectives, context, and credibility within these sources to better understand the past and draw informed conclusions about historical events.
Neolithic people obtained water from natural sources such as rivers, lakes, springs, and wells. They would also collect rainwater or melt snow for drinking and cooking. In some cases, they dug underground channels called qanats to bring water to their settlements from distant sources.
Neolithic traders would face challenges such as harsh weather, rough terrains, and potential encounters with hostile groups. They may also experience cultural and language barriers with the people they meet along their trading routes. Despite these difficulties, traders would benefit from exchanging goods and ideas, contributing to the spread of technology and cultural exchange during the Neolithic period.
Neolithic people decorated pottery for aesthetic purposes, symbolizing their cultural identity and belief systems. Polishing stones would have made tools more efficient, durable, and easier to use for various tasks, indicating advancements in craftsmanship and tool-making technology during the Neolithic period.
A primary source would be something like a diary, or a photograph. Primary sources are sources that came directly from the time period they are describing.
Why would an organic chemist prefer to read primary sources about experiments In her field rather than secondary sources
Metal knives: apex
Primary sources include letters, pamphlets, and other documents from the time period. Secondary sources include textbooks, encyclopedias, and other items from the present that paraphrase information from primary sources.
An engraved rock pillar from Asoka's time would be considered a primary source. This is because it is an original artifact from the period in question, providing direct evidence of Asoka's reign, including his policies and beliefs. In contrast, secondary sources would analyze or interpret such artifacts, offering context or commentary based on primary sources.
No, it would be a secondary source. A primary source is written by someone who was there when it happened. If the author happened to participate or witness a Spanish mission, then it would be a primary source. Secondary sources are based off things that people learn from a primary source or a different secondary source.
The best sources of primary source information on Revolutionary War propaganda would include collections of pamphlets, newspapers, and printed speeches from the time period, as well as personal correspondence, diaries, and other writings of individuals involved in promoting or responding to propaganda efforts during the war. Archives, libraries, and historical societies that specialize in American history would be valuable resources for locating these primary sources.
While primary sources are valuable for firsthand accounts, they can still be biased or incomplete. Secondary sources provide analysis and interpretation of primary sources, offering a broader perspective. It's essential to consider multiple sources to gain a comprehensive understanding of a topic.
They are usually secondary sources, but can be a primary source depending on the topic of the dissertation. If you are looking for primary sources you might be able to find many primary sources within the bibliography of a dissertation, since most of these scholars would have most likely referred to primary documents while drafting their dissertation.
There are two main sources: primary and secondary. A primary source would be "the document itself" or the testimony of an observer who was present at so-and-so. A secondary source would be eclectic documentation or testimony based on that of primary sources. For instance, a documentary of WWII would be a secondary source, which cites many primary sources such as interviews with veterans, clips of video or photos from the era, etc.
i think that it is a secondary source because it dosen't look like that person who drew it was there
A historian using the thinking skill of primary source analysis would carefully examine and evaluate original sources from a particular time period or event, such as letters, diaries, photographs, or official documents. They would look for biases, perspectives, context, and credibility within these sources to better understand the past and draw informed conclusions about historical events.