How might different historians develop different interpretations of the same evidence?

There are many reasons why different historians might develop different interpretations of the same evidence. One of the most common ones is due to bias. Some historians might have a biased view of history due to their own preconceptions and prejudices. This will influence their view of the evidence. Moreover, a historian can be influenced by his own time period, or his cultural background.

a more perfect union: the creation of the u.s. constitution. the vote was unanimous. saddled with this weak government, the states were on the brink of not to lend a hand to any proceeding that seemed to pose a threat to that protection. delegates from virginia and other large states demanded that voting in

answer: the answer is b

explanation: i just took this quiz last week