La respuesta correcta para esta pregunta abierta es la siguiente.
A pesar de que no hay opciones, podemos comentar esto.
Una fuente histórica se analiza de diversas maneras. Una de ella es por medio del autor. Hay que revisar quién es el autor, cómo recolectó la información, cuáles fueron sus fuentes. Si él mismo atestiguó el acontecimiento al que se refiere.
Otra forma puede ser si él entrevistó a personas que estuvieron presentes y vieron el acontecimiento que describe.
También hay que analizar qué tipo de documentos aporta para comprobar lo que se dice. Pueden ser pergaminos, cartas, fotografías, o más recientemente, videos y audios.
Otra manera es validar lo que la fuente dice, comparándola con otras fuentes que digan algo similar para corroborar la información original.
Yes. Parts of the Confederacy did.
They seceded, 11 of 13 to be exact. They said they were no longer part of "The United States" and they continued with their way of life which included the keeping of slaves and slave labor.
They didn't think it was wrong when they were part of it and sure as heck didn't think it wrong when they had seceded.
At least until Lincoln came out with his Emancipation Proclamation. And even then some slave owners- most plantations were destroyed by the Civil War- did not follow it. A few did though
I’m not 100% sure but The Hispanics had more supplies the natives where still fighting with bows and arrows and other things that they made. The Spanish had guns and swords. So it wasent a equal balance between the two sides.
The Wall Street Crash of 1929, is the stock-market crash that started the period of The Great Depression in the US
it started a econamic crisis
Many deaths were soldiers and civilians from their colonies.
