Question

A historian finds a copy of a document in the ruins of an ancient Indian city. When he translates it, he discovers that it is a code of laws used to govern the city. He publishes his translation and is happy to discover that other historians around the world have started analyzing it in their own work. Which of the following, if true, would suggest that the historian's document is a strong source of evidence for historical interpretation?

Answer 1

the historian's document is a strong source of evidence for historical interpretation, because it is the first translation for the document found in the ruins. (if he spends the time to do it correctly.)

usually, the first few translations are the best, later on, it wouldn't be the most closest to the document

hope this helps