Why should historians avoid oversimplifications when analyzing sources? a- oversimplifications often ignore complex or condradictory evidence. b- oversimplification rely on claims of value rather than claims of facts. c- oversimplifications do not make any kind of historical argument. d- oversimplifications are usually too similar to exsisting historical argument.

The correct option is "A- Oversimplifications often ignore complex or condradictory evidence."

Historical sources constitute the raw material of History. They include all the documents, testimonies or objects that transmit us significant information regarding the events that have taken place, especially in the past. Within them, and considering the value that others also have, the written sources are the basic support to build history.

The historian works historical sources ("interrogates and contrasts") to obtain as much information from them as possible. It must also attend to its variety, making an adequate selection of them. In a general sense, historical sources are of two types: primary and secondary.

it is loom ps i took the test

the first two-party system consisted of the federalist party, who supported the ratification of the constitution, and the democratic-republican party or the anti-administration party (anti-federalists), who opposed the powerful central government, among others, that the constitution established when it took effect in