B. They can summarize a huge amount of data that a historian could not sort through alone.
C. They can compare and contrast conclusions other historians have made about a time period.
D. They can reveal how individuals experiencing historical events actually reacted.
The advantage for a historian in using primary sources over secondary sources is that they offer direct insight into how individuals experienced historical events. Primary sources provide a level of detail that secondary sources often cannot achieve.
The advantage that primary sources have over secondary sources for a historian is letter D: They can reveal how individuals experiencing historical events actually reacted. Primary sources are firsthand accounts or original records created during the time being studied, such as diary entries, letters, official reports, photographs, and artifacts. This contrasts with secondary sources, which interpret, analyze or draw conclusions from primary sources.
By examining primary sources, historians gain direct insight into the perspectives and experiences of people from the past. This nuanced, first-hand information is a key advantage primary sources have, providing a level of detail that secondary sources often lack.
#SPJ2
According to line 9, persistence means A) silliness. B) rowdiness. Eliminate C) reservation. D) determination.
Answer:
D) determination
Explanation:
Lindsey’s inventions are much safer than Edward’s.
Lindsey’s inventions are much safer than Edward.
Lindsey’s inventions are much safer than with Edward.
Answer: Lindsey’s inventions are much safer than Edward’s.
In this sentence, the items that are being compared are Lindsey's inventions and Edward's inventions. However, as the second part is repetitive and it is easy to imply its purpose, the word "inventions" can be omitted. However, for the sentence to be clear, the possessive has to be maintained. Therefore, the correct way of writing the second party of the sentence would be "Edward's."