Respuesta :
So, here are the options:
primary source documents that are useful in the study of history - this is the best answer!
reliable sources for the study of history only if from a named source - I would say it's best if you know the author but it can be very useful also without it
secondary source documents that are useful in the study of history - no, they are primary (=from the time) documents
unreliable sources for the study of history because they are too subjective- they can present a subjective side of an event, but they can't easily fake a whole event - they are still reliable
useful sources for the study of personal histories, but not for general history - theymight be more useful for personal histories, but are also very usefuf for general histories
primary source documents that are useful in the study of history - this is the best answer!
reliable sources for the study of history only if from a named source - I would say it's best if you know the author but it can be very useful also without it
secondary source documents that are useful in the study of history - no, they are primary (=from the time) documents
unreliable sources for the study of history because they are too subjective- they can present a subjective side of an event, but they can't easily fake a whole event - they are still reliable
useful sources for the study of personal histories, but not for general history - theymight be more useful for personal histories, but are also very usefuf for general histories
Primary source documents that are useful in the study of history , so the answer is A on plato.
