"there was with general washington, during most of the summer, a seneca chief, called the great tree, who, on leaving the head-quarters of the commander-in-chief, professed the strongest friendship for the american cause, and his first object, after his return to his own people, was to inspire them with his own friendly sentiments. while passing through the oneida nation on his way home, he professed the strongest confidence in his ability to keep his own tribe bound in the chain of friendship, and pledged himself, in the event of his failure, to come down with his friends and adherents and join the oneidas. early in october [1778], mr. dean, the indian interpreter and agent in the oneida territory, . .had despatched messengers to the seneca country, who had returned with unfavorable intelligence. it was stated, that on his arrival in his own country, the great tree found his tribe all in arms. the warriors had been collected from the remotest of their lodges, and were then thronging the two principal towns, kanadaseago and jennesee. having heard that the americans were preparing an expedition against their country, they had flown to arms; and the great tree was himself determined to chastise the enemy who should dare to penetrate his country. the oneida messengers were farther told that all the indians west of their own tribe, including, of course, the onondagas, together with the indian settlements on the susquehanna and its branches, were to join them. they were to rendezvous somewhere on the tioga, and make a descent either upon the pennsylvania or new jersey frontier."

the above excerpt most directly reflects which dominant goal of native americans during the colonial war for independence?
(a) to remain neutral in the conflict(b) forge advantageous alliances in hopes of protecting their own interests(c) protect fur trade networks with the french(d) avoid alliances with other tribes

Which of the following passages from “the californian’s tale” to advance the theme that pride can lead to regret? a.california has living dead men walking around b. tramping all day long with pick and pan and horn c. thirty-five years ago i was out prospecting on the stanislaus

In just over one hundred years, between 1701 and 1810, 252,500 enslaved africans were brought to barbados—an island that occupies only 166 square miles (making it, today, one of the smallest countries in the world). the english then set out to conquer more sugar islands, starting with jamaica, which they took from spain in 1655. in the same period that the 252,500 africans were brought to barbados, 662,400 africans were taken to jamaica. thus, sugar drove more than 900,000 people into slavery, across the atlantic, to barbados and jamaica—and these were just two of the sugar islands. the english were eagerly filling antigua, nevis, saint kitts, and montserrat with slaves and sugar mills. they took over much of dutch guiana for the same reason. seeing the fortunes being made in sugar, the french started their own scramble to turn the half of the island of hispaniola that they controlled (which is now haiti), as well as martinique, guadeloupe, and french guiana (along the south american coast near dutch guiana), into their own sugar colonies, which were filled with hundreds of thousands more african slaves. by 1753, british ships were taking average of 34,250 slaves from africa every year, and by 1768, that number had reached 53,100. –sugar changed the world, marc aronson and marina budhos how do the authors use historical evidence to support their claim? x(a) they use secondary sources to show how french and english monarchs were indifferent to enslaved people. x(b)they use secondary sources to show that enslaved people often fought for their freedom after arriving in the caribbean. the answer is: (c)they use facts from primary sources to show how countries increased the number of enslaved people to produce more sugar. x(d)they use primary source interviews to show that countries could make more money in trading sugar without using enslaved people.

Read the passage. excerpt from "why equal pay is worth fighting for" by senator elizabeth warren, april 17, 2014 i honestly can't believe that we're still arguing over equal pay in 2014. when i started teaching elementary school after college, the public school district didn't hide the fact that it had two pay scales: one for men and one for women. women have made incredible strides since then. but 40 years later, we're still debating equal pay for equal work. women today still earn only 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, and they're taking a hit in nearly every occupation. bloomberg analyzed census data and found that median earnings for women were lower than those for men in 264 of 265 major occupation categories. in 99.6 percent of occupations, men get paid more than women. that's not an accident; that's discrimination. the effects of this discrimination are real, and they are long lasting. today, more young women go to college than men, but unequal pay makes it harder for them to pay back student loans. pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women. . for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by, and many families depend as much on mom's salary as they do on dad's, if not more. women are the main breadwinners, or joint breadwinners, in two-thirds of the families across the country, and pay discrimination makes it that much harder for these families to stay afloat. women are ready to fight back against pay discrimination, but it's not easy. today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes. here in the senate, sen. barbara mikulski (d-md.) introduced the paycheck fairness act to give women the tools to combat wage discrimination. it would ensure that salary differences have something to do with the actual job that they are doing, and not just because they are women. senator warren states that the effects of pay discrimination are long-lasting. is this a valid argument supported by accurate evidence? no; warren weakens her point by claiming that the paycheck fairness act would "give women the tools to combat wage discrimination." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "for middle-class families today, it usually takes two incomes to get by." yes; warren supports her point by noting, "pay inequality also means a tougher retirement for women." no; warren weakens her point by noting, "today, a woman can get fired for asking the guy across the hall how much money he makes."