Generally speaking, objective historians behave in all of the following ways except that "<span>D. they interpret the evidence according to their personal beliefs and values" since this is not being objective.
Hope i helped! </span>
if you are referring yo a Iambic foot then it has 2
if not let me know
Answer:
Many Greek and Macedonian merchants, artisans, and officials settled in the lands that he conquered and the colonies that he established
Explanation:
Alexander respected the local cultures he conquered, and allowed their customs to continue
In August 1855, antislavery residents met to formally reject the pro-slavery laws. ... However, in a message to Congress on January 24, 1856, President Pierce declared the Free-State Topeka government insurrectionist in its stand against pro-slavery Territorial officials.
The difference between the interpretations is that Turner believes that western expansion is a good thing, while Limerick believes that this expansion is not positive, but represents something bad.
Based on this, we can list the answers to the other questions as follows:
- The closing of the frontier can be used as evidence to support Turner's interpretation.
- Population growth in the Rocky Mountains can be used as evidence to support Limerick's argument.
<h3>What are the bases for Limerick and Turner's arguments?</h3>
Turner believed that with western expansion, the country would have a greater number of economic activities for its citizens. This would decrease the need for foreign labor, allowing for the closing of the border and the internal growth of the country.
Limerick believed that this expansion would create an overload and an undesirable expenditure of money, as the country already had areas that would be economically promising, mainly due to population growth and the possibility of industrialization that these areas had.
More information about the western expansion is at the link
brainly.com/question/3123730
