Samuel de Champlain was born at Brouage around 1570. There is no known portrait of the Father of
New France and little is known about his family. His father and uncle were sea captains and he informed
the French court that the art of navigation had attracted him from his “tender youth.” We do not know
where he learned the many skills (navigation; cartography; drawing; geography) that prepared him for
his North American experience. In all likelihood Champlain learned about sailing at Brouage, a port on
the French Atlantic coast, a key stopover for ships of all nations who needed to take on cargoes of salt
before sailing for the fishing grounds off Newfoundland and the coast of New England. Concerning his
military skills, we know that he served as a soldier in the French province of Brittany where Catholic
forces allied with Spain opposed Henry IV as the rightful king of France. From 1595 to 1598, he served
in the army of Henry IV with the title of sergeant quartermaster. His uncle was also involved in this final
chapter of the war of religions and, at the conclusion of hostilities, we find them reunited at the port
of Blavet where the two sailed for Spain in 1598. From Spain Champlain joined a fleet bound for the
Spanish West Indies, a voyage that took him two years and a half. While he never published an account
of this voyage, several manuscript versions exist of the Brief discours des choses plus remarquables
que Samuel Champlain de Brouage a reconnues aux Indes Occidentals [Narrative of a Voyage to the
West Indies and Mexico in the years 1599-1602]. The work includes many illustrations of the flora and
fauna of the sites visited, and several maps of islands and cities such as Porto Rico, the Virgin Islands,
Guadeloupe, Panama, Cartagena, and Havana.
Constantine was the last Roman emperor who was able to unite the Roman Empire. He moved the capital to Constantinople in the fourth century, which was located in Byzantine.
Religion
The Romans were quite content to swipe most of the religion of the Greeks. Many of the gods served the same function with different names in both religions. You could quote Adonis[agriculture,<em><u>resurrection</u></em>], Apollo(light, prophecy), Pluto(The underworld), even some minor ones like Iris [rainbow], Others had a name change but served the same function. Eros (Greek),Cupid(sexual love). The point is that you have to understand that religion for the Romans was more or less a social convention rather than some deep rooted theology that needed slavish obedience. Easy come, easy go. The Greeks on the other hand were much more spiritual if you will. Their playwrights and poets were very careful about how they interpreted what the Gods did and how they did it. The Greeks called it as they saw it. The gods were not perfect; they could exhibit a wide variety of human foibles which the ordinary Greek citizen had best beware of. Offending the Gods was a very serious crime, but the Jehovah doesn't take kindly to that either.
The Romans paid homage to the Gods (women more than men -- sound familiar?), but they were much more tolerant, until the offense became political. Then there was all sorts of H*ll to pay. The whole history of Christianity and Rome can be summed up in the Crucifixion. Rome really didn't want to do anything about Jesus: they considered him a harmless gadfly. But that is what the crowd wanted (mostly Pharisees), and so Pilot gave Christ to them.
Literature
Stylistically there was not much developed in Rome. The poetry was mostly written by men (what else is new?), in what I consider a man's style and background of interests. I don't know that anyone ever wrote a cookbook in either culture. I have a science background and my mother tried to teach me to cook (she was old world). We drove each other crazy. Her measuring devices below a cup was the palm of her hand. "Mom you could at least put that into tablespoons." The comment was lost on her. That was the same sort of "cookbook" used by the Romans and Greeks. There were comedies and tragedies (some like Oedipus Rex are performed today. The plot is a classic: Oedipus was doomed to kill his father and sleep with his mother.)
Lest you think all Greek Theater was kind of far out, there were comedies. One of the most famous (my favorite actually) is Lysistrata. The plot is very interesting maybe even tempting for the modern woman. The plot centers around the women of Athens (Sparta and Thebes), to organize themselves to withhold sexual favors from their men. Though a comedy, it has really serious comments to make about the battle of the sexes in humanity. It is very political while at the same time being funny.
Roman really did not add anything revolutionary to this situation. Well, I have to leave this now and look at your other one. I don't know how much time I have today. If you need me to go through the other two parts, I will later on. Just leave me a note.
Answer:
The Boston Massacre helped spark the colonists' desire for American independence,
Explanation:
let me know if i'm wrong but i think this is correct
Answer: The Puritans were members of a religious reform movement known as Puritanism that arose within the Church of England in the late 16th century. They believed the Church of England was too similar to the Roman Catholic Church and should eliminate ceremonies and practices not rooted in the Bible.
Explanation:
The roots of Puritanism are to be found in the beginnings of the English Reformation. The name “Puritans” (they were sometimes called “precisionists”) was a term of contempt assigned to the movement by its enemies. Although the epithet first emerged in the 1560s, the movement began in the 1530s, when King Henry VIII repudiated papal authority and transformed the Church of Rome into a state Church of England. To Puritans, the Church of England retained too much of the liturgy and ritual of Roman Catholicism.
