1) The experience of empire for conquered peoples was broadly similar whoever their rulers were, Does the material in this chapter support or challenge this idea? It supports and challenges the idea to a certain extent.
2) In thinking about the similarities and differences among the empires of the early modern era, what categories of comparison might be most useful to consider?
3) Have a look at the maps in this chapter with an eye to the areas of the world that were not incorporated in a major empire. Pick one or more of them and do a little research as to what was happening there in the modern era. I chose the region of Borneo which is besides the Philippines. I believe the territory must have been led by an empire who did not want to be over thrown by the bigger empires such as Portuguese, French and English, so they would rather not be involved with their trade and other activities.
4) Looking back: compared to the world of the fifteenth century, what new patterns of development are visible in the empire-building centuries that followed?
1) To what extent did Europeans transform earlier patterns of commerce, and in what ways did they assimilate into those older patterns? Europeans for the first operated on a global scale, forging new trade networks across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans They also facilitated the full integration of fur-supplying regions into wider trade networks. But in other ways the Europeans assimilated older patterns, as in the Indian Ocean, where they sought to dominate previously established trade routes, and they continued to trade many of the same products
2) How should we distribute the moral responsibility for the Atlantic Slave trade? Is this an appropriate task for historians? Yes, this is an appropriate task for historians, but perhaps the responsibility should be disbursed by what region a historian is most familiar.
3) What lasting legacies of early modern globalization are evident in the twenty-first century? Pay particular attention to the legacies of the slave trade.
4) Looking back: Asians, Africans, and Native Americans experienced early modern European expansion in quite different ways. Based on Chapters 13 and 14, how might you describe and explain those difference? In what respects were they active agents in the historical process rather than simply victims of European actions? Asians, Africans, and Native Americas were all victims of European actions, but in all in different forms. Africans were used as slaves and to their own convenience. Whereas, Natives were victims in the form that they were pushed out of their territories.
Asians were threatened by the dominance of Europeans for two centuries. The English wanted to improvise on Christianity, but the Asians fought back. Although, these cultures were highly discriminated their customs helped form America today. For example the Asians taught English men’s daughters to make profit of their earnings. In addition, Native Americans taught the English about how to harvest and crops. Finally the African Americans brought their customs of foods and certain labors.
Courtney from Study Moose
Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/3TYhaX