Why would a researcher use a secondary source instead of a primary source when analyzing a historical event?
A. To see the event through the eyes of someone who witnessed it
B. To understand how people felt during the period when the event
happened
C. To learn from the conclusions of many other experts on the event
D. To hear about the event from someone who was directly involved
SUBMIT
PREVIOUS

C. To learn from the conclusions of many other experts on the event.

Explanation:

When a person uses primary sources, they are finding out about an event around the period that it happened which means that subsequent related events are not accounted for.

When using secondary sources however, people have most likely had time to review the information and make certain conclusions of the event that gives it more meaning and context. This is therefore one of the main reasons people might use secondary information as opposed to primary.

it the big letter b heart my answer