Ask Question
8 April, 00:08

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

+3
Answers (1)
  1. 8 April, 00:28
    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 the answers seem to be not correct or there’s no answer. Try a smart search to find answers to similar questions.
Search for Other Answers