Answer:
the factors that tended to keep India from remaining united were the domination of the region, new customs cames, and new languages.
The argument has often been used to diminish the scale of slavery, reducing it to a crime committed by a few Southern planters, one that did not touch the rest of the United States. Slavery, the argument goes, was an inefficient system, and the labor of the enslaved was considered less productive than that of a free worker being paid a wage.
This sharp contrast between America’s lofty ideals, on the one hand, and the seemingly permanent second-class status of the Negroes, on the other, put the onus on the nation’s political elite to choose the nobility of their civic creed over the comfort of longstanding social arrangements. Ultimately they did so. Viewed from a historic and cross-national perspective, the legal and political transformation of American race relations since World War II represents a remarkable achievement, powerfully.
According to European colonial officials, the abundant land they had "discovered" in the Americas was useless without sufficient labor to exploit it. Slavery systems of labor exploitation were preferred, but neither European nor Native American sources proved adequate to the task.
Learn more about shaping America here:-brainly.com/question/19552107
#SPJ9
I'm pretty sure it would take way too long and they wouldn't have a pattern to grab information off of.
Answer:
Martin de Leon was a rancher and wealthy Mexican empresario in Texas who was descended from Spanish aristocracy. He was the patriarch of one of the prominent founding families of early Texas.
Explanation:
This is a very complex question, but they both collapsed due to:
decentralization and government corruption
plagues/ epidemics
high taxes
and invasions
Some differences are that the Chinese empires saw a revival while Rome didn't.