Can someone please help me out with the question I just uploaded please?! Go to my profile and look at my most recent question !

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 excerpt from the time traveler's guide to elizabethan england.simon forman, who does attend plague sufferers, is a rare exception: this is because he has himself survived the disease and believes he cannot catch it again. however, his remedy amounts to little more than avoiding eating onions and keeping warm. he has a recipe for getting rid of the plague sores that will afflict you afterward if you survive the disease; but that is a very big "if.” it seems the best advice is provided by nicholas bownd in his book medicines for the plague: "in these dangerous times god must be our only defense.”which lines best summarize the excerpt?

After thea elvsted leaves the room, crushed by lovborg’s statement that he had destroyed the manuscript, he says to hedda, “to you i can tell the truth, hedda.” why does he think he can tell hedda the truth? do you think he’s right in this statement? why or why not? your answer should be at least one hundred words.