Historical context is best defined as(1 point) Responses the identity of the author who created the written account of the historical event. the identity of the author who created the written account of the historical event. a source written by someone who has firsthand knowledge of the historical event. a source written by someone who has firsthand knowledge of the historical event. a source written by someone who does not have firsthand knowledge of the historical event. a source written by someone who does not have firsthand knowledge of the historical event. the background details that explain what other things were going on at the time of the historical event. the background details that explain what other things were going on at the time of the historical event
A - the identity of the author who created the written account of the historical event.
B - a source written by someone who has firsthand knowledge of the historical event
C - a source written by someone who does not have firsthand knowledge of the historical event.
D - the background details that explain what other things were going on at the time of the historical event.
D - the background details that explain what other things were going on at the time of the historical event.
are you sure its right bot
I apologize for the confusion. Let me clarify. Historical context is best defined as the background details that explain what other things were going on at the time of the historical event. Therefore, the correct answer is D.
is the benefit of using both primary and secondary source material when studying historical events?(1 point) Responses They give only one point of view of an event. They give only one point of view of an event. All of the information is persuasive in nature. All of the information is persuasive in nature. They both give firsthand accounts. They both give firsthand accounts. They give a more complete understanding of the past.
A - They give only one point of view of an event.
B - All of the information is persuasive in nature.
C - They both give firsthand accounts.
D - They give a more complete understanding of the past.
D - They give a more complete understanding of the past.
are you sure
I apologize for the mistake. The correct answer is D - They give a more complete understanding of the past. Using both primary and secondary source material allows for a more comprehensive and balanced examination of historical events.
Why do historians use information from biased documents?(1 point) Responses Understanding an author’s beliefs helps them get a feel for the main ideas of the time. Understanding an author’s beliefs helps them get a feel for the main ideas of the time. Biased documents are accurate portrayals of events. Biased documents are accurate portrayals of events. Biased documents help them reason who the author was and what social economic class they were from. Biased documents help them reason who the author was and what social economic class they were from. Biased documents are the only documents historians can use.
A - Understanding an author’s beliefs helps them get a feel for the main ideas of the time.
B - Biased documents are accurate portrayals of events. Biased documents are accurate portrayals of events.
C - Biased documents help them reason who the author was and what social economic class they were from.
D - Biased documents are the only documents historians can use.