Answer:
The history of the peoples of the American continent before their meeting with Europeans in the 16th century developed independently and almost without interaction with the history of the peoples of other continents. Written monuments of ancient America are very scarce, and the available ones have not yet been read in full. Therefore, the history of the American peoples has to be restored mainly according to archaeological and ethnographic data, as well as according to the oral tradition recorded during the period of European colonization.
By the time Europeans invaded America, the level of development of its peoples was uneven in different parts of the continent. The tribes of most of North and South America were at different levels of the primitive communal system, while the peoples of Mexico, Central America, and western South America developed class relations at that time; they created high civilizations. It was these peoples who were conquered at first.
Explanation:
Answer:
A secondary source summarizes large amounts of evidence.
Explanation:
Primary sources correspond to “primary literature” and are those that present themselves and are disseminated exactly as they are produced by their authors. Primary sources are original materials on which other research is based. This type of source presents the information in its original form, without interpretation, summarization or evaluation by other writers.
On the other hand, secondary sources are interpretations and evaluations of primary sources for this reason present a series of evidences that support their interpretations. In this sense, secondary sources may be more useful than a primary source.
Congress was split, as the French had helped the young United States during the Revolutionary War, however, many where confused what direction the revolution was going (spoiler alert, the French Revolution traded a monarchy for a dictatorship with Napoleon at the helm - so it didin't accomplish a whole lot).
Although both parties(the Democratic-Republicans and Federalists) had different hopes for the french revolution, they both agreed that war would be economically not possible and would possibly open the U.S up to attack, so the U.S remained neutral.
