Question

Which best describes the way photographs are considered by historians? A)primary source documents that are useful in the study of history B)reliable sources for the study of history only if from a named source C)secondary source documents that are useful in the study of history D)unreliable sources for the study of history because they are too subjective E)useful sources for the study of personal histories, but not for general history

Answer 1

a

Step-by-step explanation:

Answer 2

Well, the answer really depends on the  context, but I would say generally, option A  is the best. Photographs are still quite reliable even though they can be faked and while it's easier to find photographs to illustrate personal stories, they are still  quite use for for the study of general history.