Ask Question
27 July, 17:01

A historian studying the Roman Empire reads a letter written by a Roman soldier stationed in Great Britain in 70 CE. Which of the following best describes the letter? A. Biased source B. Primary source C. Secondary source D. Historiographical source

+4
Answers (1)
  1. 27 July, 18:55
    0
    The answer is B, Primary Source.

    Why? A letter written in the past is an actual historical artifact and is a personal account of something the person experienced. A account of something a person actually experienced is a primary source about whatever events are described.

    A biased source would be an account that is from a source that has an incentive to distort history.

    A secondary source would be a work that describes or analyzes a primary source. For example, an account written about the letter by me or you would be a secondary source.

    A Historigraphical source is a history text that is informed by both primary source and secondary sources.
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Find an answer to your question ✅ “A historian studying the Roman Empire reads a letter written by a Roman soldier stationed in Great Britain in 70 CE. Which of the following ...” in 📘 History if you're in doubt about the correctness of the answers or there's no answer, then try to use the smart search and find answers to the similar questions.
Search for Other Answers