To prove a hypothesis.

To support an argument.

To provide information about the past.

To entertain the reader.

Primary sources.

Secondary sources.

Oral histories.

Archaeological evidence.

All of the above.

A primary source is a document that was created at the time of the events being studied, while a secondary source is a document that was created after the events being studied.

A primary source is a document that is written by an eyewitness to the events being studied, while a secondary source is a document that is written by someone who did not witness the events being studied.

A primary source is a document that is written by a person who is involved in the events being studied, while a secondary source is a document that is written by someone who is not involved in the events being studied.

A primary source is a document that is written by a person who is biased towards the events being studied, while a secondary source is a document that is written by someone who is unbiased towards the events being studied.

Strengths: Primary sources are more likely to be accurate and reliable than secondary sources. Weaknesses: Primary sources can be difficult to find and interpret.

Strengths: Primary sources provide a unique perspective on the past. Weaknesses: Primary sources can be biased or incomplete.

Strengths: Primary sources can help historians to understand the context of historical events. Weaknesses: Primary sources can be difficult to generalize.

All of the above.

Strengths: Secondary sources are easier to find and interpret than primary sources. Weaknesses: Secondary sources can be biased or inaccurate.

Strengths: Secondary sources provide a broader perspective on the past than primary sources. Weaknesses: Secondary sources can be difficult to generalize.

Strengths: Secondary sources can help historians to understand the historiography of a topic. Weaknesses: Secondary sources can be outdated.

All of the above.

They consider the source of the evidence.

They consider the context of the evidence.

They consider the bias of the evidence.

They consider all of the above.

A fact is something that is known to be true, while an interpretation is a subjective opinion.

A fact is something that is supported by evidence, while an interpretation is something that is not supported by evidence.

A fact is something that is agreed upon by all historians, while an interpretation is something that is disagreed upon by historians.

A fact is something that is objective, while an interpretation is something that is subjective.

They select evidence that supports their thesis.

They organize evidence in a logical and coherent way.

They interpret evidence in a way that is consistent with their overall argument.

All of the above.

Evidence is used to support one side of the debate.

Evidence is used to refute the other side of the debate.

Evidence is used to find a compromise between the two sides of the debate.

All of the above.

In historical research, evidence is used to prove a hypothesis.

In historical research, evidence is used to support an argument.

In historical research, evidence is used to provide information about the past.

In historical research, evidence is used to entertain the reader.