Final answer:
Anthropological studies as historical sources face limitations like potential researcher biases, the disproportionate focus on elites in written records, and difficulties in grasping a society's full complexity, necessitating validation against other knowledge sources.
Step-by-step explanation:
Anthropological studies of modern societies have unique limitations when used as historical sources. While they provide valuable insights, they can be affected by the researcher's biases, the need for a broader cultural context, and the difficulties in capturing the full complexity of a society.
One significant limitation is that the field notes and observations may reflect the anthropologist's preconceived notions rather than the authentic traditions of a society. This issue has been raised particularly by tribal scholars concerning ethnographic studies of indigenous peoples.
Additionally, historical narratives traditionally rely on written records, which tend to emphasize the lives of the elite, leading to gaps in understanding the experiences of ordinary people. Anthropologists often strive to fill these gaps by examining a broad range of cultural elements, yet there is still a risk that important societal connections may be overlooked if the research is too narrowly focused.
Moreover, the potential for altered interpretations over time can lead to a distorted understanding of cultural practices, requiring careful validation against other sources such as elder knowledge or corroborating evidence.