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
maks197457 [2]
3 years ago
14

PLZ HELP ME ASAP. Upon arrival of European powers on American soil, a quick end came to many native populations. Numbers were de

vastated the longer Europeans were present. Many empires such as the Aztec and Inca were taken by force. The natives’ weapons of arrows and rocks were no match for gunpowder, steel swords, and horses. Yet even after hostile takeovers, the Native Americans continued to suffer in numerous ways. According to Las Casas, the harshness of the Encomienda system took many native lives. Examples of such harshness included beatings by colonists and exhaustion caused by never-ending labor. Natives were forced into slave labor in order to process colonists’ crops such as sugar cane and tobacco. These crops were referred to as “cash crops”. Cash crops are crops grown not for sustenance but because they are extremely profitable. The colonies would have natives tend to these crops and they would then be exported to other European nations for high prices in order to make manufactured or processed goods. Native slaves were worked for long hours in extremely hot temperatures with very little food, water, or breaks. They suffered savage beatings for working too slow and some were killed for refusal to work due to their exhaustion. Poor health is another struggle natives faced upon European colonization. Many natives died from hunger once colonists started to take their land. Colonists’ cattle trampled native crops such as corn and squash. But possibly the most devastating factor in declining native populations were the diseases brought by Europeans and against which the native people had no immunity. These included smallpox, typhus, chicken pox, mumps, and measles. Hundreds upon thousands of natives fell to such diseases. Entire villages were wiped out in mere days of the first symptom. Native cities throughout the Americas became desolate from the fast spread of disease. Native American empires such as the Aztec and the Inca fell to the Spanish and Portuguese in the 1500s. The Aztec alone had between sixteen and eighteen million people under their rule before Europeans landed on the continent. Why were these empires unable to fight the inevitable take over of European powers? Use evidence from the text to support your answer.
History
1 answer:
Digiron [165]3 years ago
7 0
In the terms that this story is presented, the native populations were unaware of people outside their world and were unaware that these people had an attitude that was explorative and exploitative. They were unable to prevent invasion at the level of weaponry, tactics of mass production, oratory/diplomacy to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome and medicine to fight off infections that the invaders bodies had adapted to but which the locals bodies had not. In effect, they came together at a time where one was advanced in technological and scientific terms and they had an attitude that didn’t respect the equivalent value of human life. It is impossible to know whether the Europeans arrived looking to live in harmony but it seems likely that they came from a time where they expected hostility. The weapons they brought which is referenced in the text was able to penetrate the defences and armour that the local people had developed within their own stage of development. Rather than work in symbiosis and harmony, the invading European forces saw themselves as superior to the indigenous people as their weaponry supported. With an attitude that the local people were a problem inhibiting then from their beliefs that they had a right to take what they needed, it was inevitable that there was going to be conflict. Unfortunately this progressed to a point where the sustainability of the local populations was threatened and in many place the populations were wiped out or left in a pitiful state relative to their former beauty. This, by the way, is a parable for what humanity is doing even to this day to our natural world. And it is going to either kill it, and us with it, or at best damage it a lot more before we realise we must start conserving it right now.
You might be interested in
How should the rebellious Southern states be reintegrated, both politically and economically, into the union?
KatRina [158]

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Although there are no options attached, we can say the following.

The rebellious Southern states would be reintegrated, both politically and economically, into the union in the following way.

After the end of the American Civil War, in 1893, Lincoln created the "10 percent plan," which represented the beginning of the reunification process. It required that 10 percent of the southerners that voted in the election of 1890 to take an oath of allegiance to the Union. If that happened, then the southern states could create their own state constitutions. US President Abraham Lincoln also ordered Reconstruction for the Southern States and gave these former Confederated states leeway to do Reconstruction at their own pace.

3 0
4 years ago
Why did Republicans challenged Stephan Douglas's run for the Senate
Dmitry [639]

I a millanair up up up


4 0
3 years ago
Could you have legitimacy but not authority?
kotegsom [21]

Answer: yes

Explanation:

Power is an entity's or individual's ability to control or direct others, while authority is influence that is predicated on perceived legitimacy. Consequently, power is necessary for authority, but it is possible to have power without authority. In other words, power is necessary but not sufficient for authority.

4 0
3 years ago
2)
Nadusha1986 [10]
C is your answer to the question


6 0
3 years ago
How does the author describe the relationship between Abraham Lincoln and the people he encountered throughout his life cite evi
Finger [1]

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Unfortunately, you did not attach the text or the link to it. Without the text, we cannot cite evidence from it because we do not know it.

However, trying to help you, we can comment on the following general terms.

The relationship between Abraham Lincoln and the people he encountered throughout his life was always amicable. Abraham Lincoln was never arrogant, never showed rude behavior, and always tried to treat people with respect.

He was known to be a good storyteller, He was very entertaining to be with, and people also said that he had good humor. Historians say that people felt comfortable being in a room with him. He was never pretentious and liked to hear what other people said. Others say he was perseverant and that attitude was contagious because he set the example for others to follow.

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which battle was an attempt by a Loyalist militia to retake North Carolina?
    10·2 answers
  • In the 1920, did japan become more or less prosperous? More or less democratic?
    5·1 answer
  • How did the emancipation proclamation affect the structure of black family?
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following groups of people is an example of a corporation
    6·2 answers
  • What is the job of the house of representitives
    15·2 answers
  • Please help me with this!!!!!!
    15·2 answers
  • How are the Bell Telephone Company and<br> AT&amp;T related?
    11·1 answer
  • PLZ I NEED HELP
    13·2 answers
  • GIVING BRAINLIST IF YOU WRITE ONE PARAGRAPH ON Meriwether Lewis <br><br> plsss helppp
    11·1 answer
  • How does thomas jefferson prove his argument
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!