This should be from your own personal experiences and what you truly believe sets you apart from other candidates. Be honest and you'll do fine!
Hi, you've asked an incomplete question. The complete question read;
The object in Image 1 best illustrates which of the following continuities in world history?
(A) The power of traditional elites was continuously challenged by the emerging power of new elites.
(B) The power of states was based on the ability of rulers to monopolize the use of violence.
(C) Artists depended on royal patronage for their livelihoods.
(D) Rulers used religious imagery to legitimize their political authority.
Answer:
<u>(D) Rulers used religious imagery to legitimize their political authority.</u>
Explanation:
We can make this assertion because the image seems to portray a blend between religious authority and political authority; because the caption seems to show that this religious object (the female ancestor spirit) was now used "FOR A KING’S CEREMONIAL SCEPTER".
In other words, the rulers now used religious imagery to legitimize their political authority, as if to say, they are been approved by their ancestors.
where the heck are the options
The first and second questions should be answered by you according to your classes. You should think of: how was President Andrew Jackson elected (1828)? What was he famous for before his candidacy? And according to this, what could be expected from his speech? Jackson was famous for his military victories over Indian tribes and for working actively on the occupation of previous Indian land. Thus his defense of the Indian Removal and his feelings of superiority over Indians wasn’t surprising.
On his opinions about the United States being better in 1830, it is due to an authoritarian view according to which the ways of the Indian’s – who preferred their territories covered with forests – were inferior to the ways of the Americans’, supposedly full of cities, Art, happy people, liberty, civilization, and religion.
Since President Jackson wasn’t thinking from the point of view of the Indians, for whom the relationship with their territory was fundamental, he thought Indians would be happy being left in peace away from the whites and free to live their own way.
He also thought Indians would be glad about this policy for believing it was “kind and generous” as the Indian Removal Act compromised to pay for the Indian’s immigration and for their first year in new territory. That was an offer, he said, “our own people would gladly embrace… on such conditions”, referring to the whites occupying lands east of the Mississipi River.
In order to predict what Elias Boudinot said about Indian Removal you should remember that he was a member of the Cherokee Nation where he was part of a minority who believed their nation would have more chances of surviving if they integrated themselves into the American society. This explains why Boudinot was in favor of Indians making treaties with the United States and willingly giving up on their lands.
