Question

Which part of the historian's argument does not rely on any historical evidence?

Answer 1

A historian is making a historical argument about the French Revolution. He notes that, following the Revolution, a rash of violence swept over France. He refers to the execution of French royalty and the European wars that revolutionaries launched following their victory to support his argument. In his opinion, it is morally wrong for any political movement to use violence to achieve its goals. Based on this information, he argues that the French Revolution produced far more negative outcomes than positive ones.

 

 

 

 

A. He refers to the execution of French royalty and the European wars that revolutionaries launched following their victory to support his argument.

 

B. He notes that, following the Revolution, a rash of violence swept over France

 

C. In his opinion, it is morally wrong for any political movement to use violence to achieve its goal.

 

D. Based on this information, he argues that the French Revolution produced far more negative outcomes than positive ones

Answer 2

Historian's argument does not rely on the negative part of the historical evidence due to following reasons :

- History compromises of various untold past chapters of an era stating and defining about the past incidents of an era so that there is a link between all the generations.

- Violence is also not used while executing any kind of arguments from the historical aspects as it will create a negative outcome on the future readers.

- Hence violence and negative impact is not focused by the historians to potray any kind of historical argument.