The Crusades were initiated by the Catholic Church in order to gain control of Jerusalem again, as it has fallen into the hands of the Muslims. While the Catholic Church had its goals in conquering Jerusalem, including wealth and power, it didn't foresee that the organizing of the Crusades its going to actually backfire on it and make the biggest blow to it.
The Crusades themselves had mixed outcome, sometimes winning, sometimes losing. What had much greater effect was that the Crusaders managed to bring in Europe lot of things from Asia which turned out to change the course of the history.
Because the Crusaders were in constant contact with the Muslims, they brought in numerous technological advancement in Europe. Also, through them, some of the ancient literature from Greece and Rome came back to Europe.
This prompted a huge interest among the people, especially the ones higher in the hierarchy, as they saw the potential of the new technology, but also the potential for the future based on the ancient literature. The end result was technological boom in Europe, loss of power by the Catholic Church, the Age of Discoveries, or all put in one, the Renaissance.
Answer:
To begin with, Colonel John Bradstreet starts his statement off by calling the American Indians "savages", the "less useful, and "greatest villains". You can infer that Bradstreet does not like or want a relationship with the American Indians at all. In his statement he emphasizes how the Indians are defenseless, and that they are raising jealousy. I can tell that Bradstreet does not like the encounters with the Indians, nor think they are helpful people. Williams Johnson starts his statement off with saying that the colonist had the wrong idea about the Indians and that they " greatly dispised them" without even knowing their power or knowledge of these lands. He wanted a bond with the Indians that were beneficial; he also believed that the Indians had their own way of living and that they were useful.
The two perceptions are completely different. Bradstreet has a negative perception of the Indians the whole throughout the whole statement. He believes that the Indians are not a ally, but more of an enemy. Johnson on the other hand believes that the colonist hasn't gave the Indians a chance to show them their knowledge. He also believes that the Indians could be allies, and not enemy's.
Explanation:
On Edge 2020.
The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. They argued that the document would give the country an entirely new and untested form of government. They saw no sense in throwing out the existing government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as an elitist group under a veil of secrecy and had violated the provisions of the Articles of Confederation in the means selected for ratification of the Constitution.<span>
<span /></span>
Hi there!
The Judiciary Act of 1789...
C. Allowed John Marshall to become the Chief Justice
The office of Chief Justice did not exist prior to the Judiciary Act of 1789 and established the office. This in turn allowed John Marshall to become the chief justice. The other options, while true in history, are not related to the Judiciary Act of 1789.
"All of the above" would be the right way to describe why <span>so many people in Somalia are dependent on foreign aid. The correct option among all the options given in the question is the fourth option.
7. "A decrease in population" is the one among the following that is the </span><span>definition of scarcity. The correct option among the two options given is the first option.</span>
