Answer:
see explanation and i got an a btw.
Explanation:
b. The development of diseases in the sixteenth century would support the arguments of the “new generation of historians in the second paragraph because the “new generation of historians” would look at this in relation to european imperialism and see the impact of the european diseases like smallpox that would plague places like modern day united states because of the european immunity, but lack of native immunity.
c. The “biological competition” contributed to the European imperialism in the Americas by creating a survival of the fittest environment where the europeans brought in diseases like smallpox that had plagued europe generations ago, but infected the native populations and weaken them in both their numbers and their strength, which enabled the Europeans to take control of the new world and develop a dominance while the natives were fighting a disease. This was “biological competition” because the Europeans' immunity was assisting them in fighting the natives' lack thereof.
<span>This is true. The British army was much larger and much more developed, but the colonial army managed to win by winning the support of the people and of foreigners. They were helped by British enemies such as France who was willing to give not only weapons and money, but also its navy and its generals with their war expertise. </span>
By Jesus I think I'm not sure
