True , family values in Ancient Rome included obedience to elders and devotion to the gods
Answer:
Sitting Bull (c. 1831-1890) was a Teton Dakota Native American chief who united the Sioux tribes of the American Great Plains against the white settlers taking their tribal land. The 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty granted the sacred Black Hills of South Dakota to the Sioux, but when gold was discovered there in 1874, the U.S. government ignored the treaty and began to remove native tribes from their land by force.
The ensuing Great Sioux Wars culminated in the 1876 Battle of Little Bighorn, when Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse led united tribes to victory against General George Armstrong Custer. Sitting Bull was shot and killed by Indian police officers on Standing RocPlz k Indian Reservation in 1890, but is remembered for his courage in defending native lands.
plz make me brilliant
They both learned american indian customs . Hope this helps !:)
In 1887, the government made a new policy under the Dawes Act. It was designed to force assimilation by separating Native Americans from their tribal affiliations. They were then turned into farmers, and American citizens.
We can say that a person is biased when their opinion or recollection of something favors one <u>person, idea, or group</u> more so than the other. It is the inability to remain impartial.
Though it cannot be denied that the statement that was given by Lum May as to the events of November 3rd, 1885 may be biased, I do not believe his account of the occurrence is overly biased. He describes the violent nature of the altercation, the burning down of Chinese homes, and the trauma that overtook the sanity of his wife.
All of these statements made by Lum May are backed by evidence such as:
- The piles of ashes where Chinese homes once stood
- A similar recollection of the events from hundreds of Chinese citizens who were present
- The unstable nature of his wife's mental health.
All of this leads us to believe that Lum May is a credible source for the events of <em>November 3rd, 1885 </em>in Tacoma.
Unlike the credible testimony of Lum May, we can infer that the letter from James Wickersham is not only extremely biased in nature, but also an overwhelmingly unreliable source of information. Many of the participants of that day were indicted for their actions, giving Mr. Wickersham much to lose were he to provide accurate information.
The evidence supporting the statements of Lum May allows us to infer that her recollection of the events is credible and not overly swayed by bias. However, the contradictory statements declared by James Wickersham and the repercussions he may face should he tell the truth, point towards his letter being an unreliable and overly biased source.
To learn more visit:
brainly.com/question/25061293?referrer=searchResults
