The fact that the disease that causes it exists today, but is just less common and we have the proper medical care to take care of it.
The plague known as the Black Death was a medieval disease and, as far as we know, was not in any way connected to ancient Rome. Ancient Rome did have outbreaks of plague from time to time, but there is not enough evidence to say weather it was the Black Death or not. To answer your question, the Black Death was AD.
The Black Death was spread by rats and the fleas they carried. There is a story that the religious fervor of the times, and especially a desire to suppress witchcraft, prompted medieval people to kill off cats, which allowed the rat population to increase out of control, making the plague worse than it otherwise would have been. Though it makes a good story, there is no historic evidence of it I have seen, and the history of witch hunts makes it seem unlikely, because the first witch hunts were more than a hundred years after the Black Death.
The primary evidence refers to original materials or firsthand accounts that provide direct proof of a phenomenon or event. This can include documents, photographs, recordings, eyewitness testimonies, and physical artifacts. Such evidence is crucial in research and legal contexts as it offers the most reliable basis for conclusions and interpretations. It contrasts with secondary evidence, which analyzes or interprets primary sources.
The black death started around 1437 in Europe.
The Black Death spread across Europe at 4km
there is statistics, dairy's and photos they are counted as primary evidence relay it is anything from the time of the event
Try the British Museum. I saw his death mask there and bet they have primary evidence from him.
The plague known as the Black Death was a medieval disease and, as far as we know, was not in any way connected to ancient Rome. Ancient Rome did have outbreaks of plague from time to time, but there is not enough evidence to say weather it was the Black Death or not. To answer your question, the Black Death was AD.
what evidence is given about death
it is the opposite of primary evidence
the difference is that Primary evidence is took from that moment and secondary is a piece of evidence found from the past.
No, primary evidence is not created after the time an event occurs. Primary evidence refers to original materials that provide direct evidence about a topic or event, such as eyewitness accounts, photographs, or official documents created at the time of the event. If evidence is created after the event, it is considered secondary or tertiary evidence, as it is based on interpretations or analyses of primary sources.
Primary evidence means original copy of evidence and secondary evidence is true copy of evidence. Chandrakant S.Sao,B.Sc.,LLB Advocate High court Bomay
Primary evidence consists of items that can be measured directly. If temperature readings are taken in the middle of a city for years and they keep increasing, that is primary evidence that the temperature is increasing in that city. If recent pictures taken of ice in Antarctica, Greenland, and the Himalayas are compared with those taken a century ago, they show the glaciers have decreased in size. That is primary evidence glaciers are shrinking. Any direct measurement is primary evidence.
secondary evidence for sure
I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.
The statue was created in the time Octavian Augustus was emperor. A primary source is direct evidence from people who lived in that time period. In this case the direct evidence is a statue and it is the history of a person. The statue is direct evidence so it is a primary source.