Ask Question
23 February, 18:44

Why must historians always be skeptical when they read primary sources documents?

+5
Answers (1)
  1. 23 February, 20:03
    0
    Because they could be biased and strongly opinionated and also the primary source does not have the benefit of hindsight and is therefore not a valid interpretation and less credible
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Find an answer to your question ✅ “Why must historians always be skeptical when they read primary sources documents? ...” 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