I think it is poaching, I'm pretty sure it is.
The answer is like the second choice, “Africa’s river systems made it easy for Europeans to reach the the African interior”. We can determine this is correct by cancelling out the other options.
1- yes, Africa WAS rich in natural resources, but the Europeans did not care much for that. They had come to Africa for trade and slaves.
3- similar to A, the Europeans weren’t there because they were running out of space, yes they did conquer and claim lands in Africa, but the purpose of them being there was goods.
4- a lot like C, but not very relevant at all, especially since at this time the Europeans who were traveling definitely did not farm, they wanted their goods already prepared.
Since the other options have been ruled out, I will explain 2 a little bit. Obviously, the Europeans had sailed to Africa. At first the remained on the edges of it, taking over ports and just sailing along picking up slaves and continuing west. A good example of an African river used by the Europeans is the Congo River. It branches out throughout all of Congo and it’s historical importance is that an explorer named Henry Morton Stanley used it to continue into Africa. Though he may not sound familiar, we’ve all heard the phrase “Doctor Livingstone, I presume”. It was Stanley who said this once meeting with him.
The appropriate response is self-fulfilling prophecy. A self-fulfilling prophecy is a forecast that straightforwardly or in a roundabout way makes itself turn out to be valid, by the very terms of the prediction itself, because of positive criticism amongst conviction and conduct.
Answer:
The creation of new industries. The bringing of unfamiliar diseases to American Indians.
Explanation:
A similarity between English colonies and the Spanish missions in North America during the 1500s and 1600s was. the creation of new industries. the bringing of unfamiliar diseases to American Indians.
does it allow two answers??
