1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ryzh [129]
3 years ago
12

Money was definitely a factor in European exploration. Why was money so important to

History
1 answer:
Readme [11.4K]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

money, more than any scientific zeal for discovery was the reason for exploration as<u> whoever reached a new place first could simply loot its resources for profit</u>.

Explanation:

the age of European exploration saw explorers charting maps and reaching the very zenith of the world. <u>these expeditions were well funded by various European kingdoms that understood that the resources that can be discovered</u> in distant lands can reap profits for their kingdom.

hence, they urged explorers to discover more places which were either taken over or colonized and then used for their resources..

You might be interested in
Which aspect of the agricultural revolution most contributed to the formation of social hierarchies? (1 point) increased mobilit
Anettt [7]

Taking the test RN, I think it is

Need to stockpile and protect crops

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why did so many people move to California in the 1840's
crimeas [40]
The gold rush.

it's when people heard there was good in the California hills.
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Place the items in chronological order
Leya [2.2K]

1. Mayflower Compact

2. Proclamation of 1763

3. 1st Continental Congress

4. Revolutionary War

5. French and Indian War

mark brainlist plz

7 0
3 years ago
Help me pleaseeeeeeeeeeee
defon
The use of foreign ships where prohibited also exporting of specific products to countries and colonies other than the British. And all imports would be from Britain only
5 0
3 years ago
Which claim is not defensible?
Lostsunrise [7]
<span>"The world would be better off if political boundaries didn't exist" is an indefensible claim. The others can be proven or at least debated over because at some point in time all of them have true and false. For instance, the majority of congress and the President have been from the same political party. Also, the majority of congress and the President have NOT been from the same political party. Therefore, you can compare the difference between true and false. Political boundaries have always existed. As a result, you cannot comfortably compare it to anything else.</span>
6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What happened early in lenin's life that turned him against the czar?
    5·1 answer
  • Will mark brainliest
    13·1 answer
  • Can somebody tell me about New deal?
    9·1 answer
  • Which of the following makes a true statement about u.s. foreign policy?
    6·2 answers
  • When something is a limited supply is considered to be
    14·2 answers
  • Describe the components of the Emancipation Proclamation. Specify the slaves to whom this document applied. Why did Lincoln issu
    7·1 answer
  • All socialists agree that a major obstacle to freedom is
    7·1 answer
  • In the 1820s-1830s, the united state began transporting more goods on river steamboats. canals were also built to connect water
    13·2 answers
  • What were Spain's goals for exploration and colonization in the New World? Check all of the boxes that
    6·2 answers
  • Please help!!!!!! I'll give 5 stars and a like!​
    7·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!