Answer:
The voyage of Columbus
inaugurated a network of global trade that connected both hemispheres. Silver from the New World was minted into the peso de ocho, a widely accepted currency that connected major trade systems. In the Pacific, the Spanish colony of Manila connected the New World with Asia markets; much of the New World's silver ended up in China. Despite this new level of global connectivity, this era saw major disruptions and changes in trade networks. Attempts by Portugal and Spain to monopolize trade in the Indian Ocean led to the down fall of the Swahili cities and the fall of Malacca. In Africa, the incorporation of West Africa into the Atlantic system drew the focus of trade from Trans-Saharan to the west. The fall of Constantinople to the Muslim Ottomans and Vasco DaGama’s maritime route to the Indian Ocean lessened Europe’s dependence upon Silk Road trade. The Atlantic System would emerge as the premier trade system in this era.
Explanation:
translate to spanish
Answer:
she believe in other gods
<span>For Jefferson, the basic elements of the argument for separation lie in a lack of respect. Jefferson frames the argument that the violation of economic and political rights that the Colonists have had to suffer were the result of a lack of respect. Jefferson is emphatic in how the British government has refused to "assent" to the basic principles of dignity and decency that could enable a successful relationship and partnership to develop. For Jefferson, the critical argument that makes rebellion and dissolution absolute is that this lack of respect will not depart. As long as this imbalance exists, the Colonists will be treated in a secondary manner, denying them their full voice and activation of their rights. It is in this light where I think Jefferson's key arguments lie. In the second section regarding the "Grievances" that the Colonists have borne, Jefferson outlines all that has been done. In doing so, he solidifies his initial argument that separation from Great Britain is the only path that the Colonists can pursue. The relationship between both nations has been so degraded by a lack of respect that there is no other option.
rephrase this in your own words</span>
Many people reacted in a good way to the new constitution, while some thought it gave too much power to the government. The Federalists supported the new constitution in 1787, while the Anti-Federalists primarily did not agree with it.
The Federalists were in support of a new constitution. They believed that the Articles of Confederation, which was the United States' first constitution, was too weak and the government needed more power. Under the Articles, the government could not tax citizens, properly create and enforce laws, regulate trade, and draft soldiers. The Federalists felt like this was weakening the country and they needed to amend it. While the Articles ended up getting scrapped altogether, the Federalists were in support of this and wanted to create a new constitution that gave more power to the federal government.
On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists favored the Articles of Confederation and did not want to amend it or create a new constitution. They associated the government having power with British tyranny and thought the power should be in the hands of the states and citizens. They opposed having a new constitution and were scared for their rights, this is why they demanded to have a Bill of Rights.
