Blog

(04.01 MC)Question refers to the excerpt below.”SEC. 8. And…

(04.01 MC)Question refers to the excerpt below.”SEC. 8. And be it further enacted. That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the state, contemplated by this act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever prohibited: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same, from whom labour or service is lawfully claimed, in any state or territory of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labour or service as aforesaid.”Source: The Missouri Compromise, 1820The Missouri Compromise would appeal to abolitionists because of its goal to

(03.02, 03.03 HC)Using the excerpts, respond to parts a, b,…

(03.02, 03.03 HC)Using the excerpts, respond to parts a, b, and c.”During the years from 1763 to 1767 a new colonial system had been created. This was not so much the result of a definite fixed policy as the outgrowth of the spasmodic attempts on the part of the English…to make the colonies pay a part of the expenses incurred for their protection, with the general intent to strengthen British authority in America. Marked by an invasion of the rights which the colonists held most dear, this new colonial system must be considered most unwise. Possibly any attempt to reform the abuses of colonial administration would have ended as disastrously, but certainly care should have been taken to avoid antagonizing the colonies by selecting the least objectionable instead of the most offensive measures.”Source: Roscoe Lewis Ashley, historian, American History, 1908″A revolution, unexpected in the moment of its coming, but prepared by glorious forerunners, grew naturally and necessarily out of the series of past events by the formative principle of a living belief. And why should man organize resistance to the grand design of Providence [the guidance given by God]?…Britain was the mighty mother who bred men capable of laying the foundation of so noble an empire, and she alone could have trained them up…The condition which entitled them [colonists] to independence was now fulfilled. Their vigorous vitality refused conformity to foreign laws and external rule. They could take no other way to perfection than by the unconstrained development of that which was within them. They were not only able to govern themselves, they alone were able to do so; subordination visibly repressed their energies.”Source: George Bancroft, historian, History of the United States of America, 1889 Briefly describe ONE important difference between Ashley’s and Bancroft’s historical interpretations of the increasing conflict between Britain and the American colonies in the years leading up to the American Revolution. Briefly explain how ONE specific historical event or development from the period 1754 to 1800 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Ashley’s argument. Briefly explain how ONE specific historical event or development from the period 1754 to 1800 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Bancroft’s argument.

(03.02, 03.03 HC)Using the excerpts, respond to parts a, b,…

(03.02, 03.03 HC)Using the excerpts, respond to parts a, b, and c.”I believe American independence was inevitable, not necessarily in 1776 but within decades. The continental colonies were growing too fast and as Paine pointed out there was something ridiculous about an island ruling a continent.”Source: Gordon Wood, historian, interview by the Journal of the American Revolution, 2013″Almost nothing is inevitable in history. One can easily envision counterfactual scenarios in which the American colonists, like their northern neighbors, resolved to remain within the British Empire and then achieved peaceful separation from Great Britain during the nineteenth century.”Source: Benjamin L. Carp, historian, interview by the Journal of the American Revolution, 2013 Briefly describe ONE important difference between Wood’s and Carp’s historical interpretation on the question of whether an independent United States was inevitable. Briefly explain how ONE specific historical event or development from the period 1754 to 1800 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Wood’s argument. Briefly explain how ONE specific historical event or development from the period 1754 to 1800 that is not explicitly mentioned in the excerpts could be used to support Carp’s argument.

(05.01 MC)Question refers to the excerpt below.”We have not…

(05.01 MC)Question refers to the excerpt below.”We have not sought to extend our territorial possessions by conquest, or our republican institutions over a reluctant people. It was the deliberate homage of each people to the great principle of our federative union. If we consider the extent of territory involved in the annexation, its prospective influence on America, the means by which it has been accomplished, springing purely from the choice of the people themselves to share the blessings of our union, the history of the world may be challenged to furnish a parallel…We may rejoice that the tranquil and pervading influence of the American principle of self-government was sufficient to defeat the purposes of British and French interference…From this example European Governments may learn how vain diplomatic arts and intrigues must ever prove upon this continent against that system of self-government which seems natural to our soil, and which will ever resist foreign interference.”Source: James Polk, from the State of the Union Address, December 2, 1845The ideas expressed in Polk’s State of the Union Address most directly support the growing sense of