Answer:
this is an agreement among the member of a society for social benefits.
Explanation:
The attitudes of the Spaniards toward the Aztec rebellion, according to the criteria of Lopez de Gómara were of consternation, and disdain, as he opposed the Mexican rebellion.
<h3>Why Spaniards had these sentiments against Aztecs?</h3>
In his text, Gómara referred to the Indians in Tenochtitlán as a "beast" just because they were very different from the Spaniards.
Native Indians did not wear the clothes Spaniards wore. Indians did not have horses for daily chores.
Gómora said that Aztecs were ignorant people. They had no education and did not have currency, so necessary for economic transactions.
He also said Indians were sinners because they did not believe in the one and only god. Indians worshiped many gods.
He was comparing a different society with the European society of the time. It means that Indians lived a totally different life in contact with and respect for mother nature. Something the Spaniards and Europeans would never understand in North America or South America.
We conclude that López de Gómara opposed the Mexican rebellion and described the Indians with consternation and disdain. Europeans never tried to understand the circumstances of the Native Indians.
Learn more about the Aztec rebellion here:
brainly.com/question/15221853
#SPJ1
Answer:
A. A religion was first practiced
A Patriot
Patriots were those colonists of the Thirteen Colonies who rejected British rule during the American Revolution and declared the United States of America as an independent nation in July 1776.
Hello. You forgot to put the text to which this question refers. The text is:
The great idea in Article V is that change requires two elements: consensus and necessity. There must be substantive national agreement, as well as agreement in most of the states, that an urgent problem exists that cannot be remedied by the courts, legislatures or Congress, and which can be solved only if the Constitution is changed.
—Mary Frances Berry, The New York Times, September 13, 1987
Answer:
Amending the Constitution
Explanation:
The above text reflects on how the constitution changes through amendments should be. the author of the text shows that the amendments should only be approved when there is a mutual agreement between several factors that prove and justify that there is a problem in society that is impossible to be solved by courts, legislatures or Congress. Furthermore, this problem needs to be solved with such urgency that only an amendment to the constitution, that is, a modification of the constitution can solve it. If this condition were not proposed, the constitution would run the risk of being a set of temporary laws with little or no real influence.
