0
A historian would expect a source written at the time of the Civil War rather than today to?
A historian would expect a source written at the time of the Civil War to offer contemporary perspectives and insights reflective of the social, political, and cultural context of that era. Such a source might reveal the motivations, beliefs, and experiences of individuals directly involved in or affected by the conflict, providing valuable primary evidence. Additionally, it would likely contain biases and viewpoints shaped by the prevailing attitudes of the time, which can help historians understand the complexities of historical narratives.
What else can I help you with?
Which statement best describes how a historian would use a transcript of this speech?
As a primary source on Roosevelt's political views.
Which primary source document could help historian understand why the US Civil war started?
a Charleston Mercury editorial published in 1860
Which primary source document could help a historian understand why the US Civil War started?
a Charleston Mercury editorial published in 1860
How might the use of an artifact as a primary source compare with the use of a written primary source?
The use of an artifact as a primary source is different than the use of a written primary source because when you exacavate for an artifact, you may have to make guesses. However, with a written primary source, you don't need to guess as the writing inside will have the answers to your questions or guesses.
What items could serve as a primary source for a historian studying the American civial war?
Primary sources for a historian studying the American Civil War include letters and diaries written by soldiers and civilians, official government documents such as the Emancipation Proclamation, and photographs from the era. Other valuable sources include newspapers published during the war, battle maps, and personal artifacts like uniforms or weapons. These items provide firsthand accounts and direct evidence of the experiences and events of the time.
Would a story about Persian wars still be a primary source if it were written by a historian?
No, a primary source is a contemporary account. To write it now creates a secondary source.
What is an example of a primary source?
Primary sources (in history) are things such as documents produced at the time. A secondary source is something written later by a historian. Good examples of primary source documents are legal notices, letters, diaries, newspapers, maps, flags, important documents, clothes, and even furniture.
What items could serve as a secondary source for a historian studying early Chinese history?
An essay about China's first emperor written by a university professor
Which item could serve as a secondary source for a historian studying early Chinese history?
(Apex) An essay about China's first emperor written by a university professor.
What is a great example primary source?
Primary sources (in history) are things such as documents produced at the time. A secondary source is something written later by a historian. Good examples of primary source documents are legal notices, letters, diaries, newspapers, maps, flags, important documents, clothes, and even furniture.
What does a historian ask himself to decide if a primary source is usable or not for his research?
A historian may ask themselves the following questions to determine if a primary source is usable: Is the source contemporary to the events being studied? Is the author credible and knowledgeable about the subject matter? Is there bias or perspective that needs to be considered when interpreting the source?
What would a historian use to get a firsthand account of a past event?
Primary source
Would a historian use to get a firsthand account of a past event?
Primary source
Does a source becomes evidence only when a historian uses it to prove something?
yes
What item could serve as a primary source for a historian studying the end of apartheid in South Africa?
A journal written by a black south African describing his experiences with apartheid polices -Apex
Would an account for the Persian wars written by a modern historian also be considered a primary source?
No, primary source a evidence originating from the actual time of the events. Primary sources are not necessarily correct, but they are current accounts rather than later speculation. An example is a poem about how Pericles' girlfriend Aspasia had one of her prostitutes abducted by some drunks from Megara, and attributes the Peloponnesian War to Pericles' retribution. Not necessarily completely true, but at least it is a composition by someone who was there, rather than someone speculating hundreds of years later.
What process has the historian followed when he tests the accuracy of the source against facts and outside?
external critisism
