True or false a biography of king charles is a secondary source

A biography of King Charles would be a secondary source, since it gathers and presents information that was originally presented somewhere else. Primary sources present information in a relatively unfiltered state; they are less removed from the facts on the ground. Secondary sources, on the other hand, involve some level of generalisation or analysis, or some sort of interpretation of those facts. A biography would entail the study of primary sources (letters, chronicles, testimonies and other documents from the era) which, after being analized, would yield the information that is presented in the biography.

the answer is true hope you have a nice day and hope this helps

i dont no the claim so it's hard to answer but i think he would go to the people to decide. : ) ; )