“Brother, listen to what we say. There was a time when our forefathers owned this great [land]. . . . Your forefathers crossed the great water and landed upon this [land]. Their numbers were small. They found friends, not enemies. They told us they had fled from their own country for fear of wicked men, and had come here to enjoy their religion. They asked for a small seat. We took pity on them, we granted their request, and they sat down amongst us. We gave them corn and meat; they gave us poison in return.

“. . . Our seats were once large and yours were small. You have now become a great people, and we have scarcely a place left to spread our blankets. You have got our country, but are not satisfied; you want to force your religion upon us. . . .

“. . . The Great Spirit has made us all, but he has made a great difference between his white and red children. . . . Since he has made so great a difference between us in other things, why may we not conclude that he has given us a different religion according to our understanding? The Great Spirit does right. He knows what is best for his children; we are satisfied.”

Red Jacket, Iroquois American Indian chief in New York, speech to a missionary from Massachusetts and a United States diplomat, 1805

Which of the following best explains how the purpose of the speech in the excerpt was interpreted by federal officials?

Red Jacket sought to protect Iroquois independence from the United States.

“Brother, listen to what we say. There was a time when our forefathers owned this great [land]. . . . Your forefathers crossed the great water and landed upon this [land]. Their numbers were small. They found friends, not enemies. They told us they had fled from their own country for fear of wicked men, and had come here to enjoy their religion. They asked for a small seat. We took pity on them, we granted their request, and they sat down amongst us. We gave them corn and meat; they gave us poison in return.

“. . . Our seats were once large and yours were small. You have now become a great people, and we have scarcely a place left to spread our blankets. You have got our country, but are not satisfied; you want to force your religion upon us. . . .

“. . . The Great Spirit has made us all, but he has made a great difference between his white and red children. . . . Since he has made so great a difference between us in other things, why may we not conclude that he has given us a different religion according to our understanding? The Great Spirit does right. He knows what is best for his children; we are satisfied.”

Red Jacket, Iroquois American Indian chief in New York, speech to a missionary from Massachusetts and a United States diplomat, 1805

The excerpt could best be used by historians studying the

resistance against the expansion of United States influence

“Jackson truly believed that, compared to his predecessors’ combination of high-minded rhetoric, treachery, and abandonment, his Indian policy was ‘just and humane.’ . . .

“. . . Jackson’s paternalism was predicated on his assumption, then widely but not universally shared by white Americans, that all Indians . . . were [irrational] and inferior to all whites. His promises about voluntary and compensated relocation . . . were constantly undermined by delays and by sharp dealing by War Department negotiators—actions Jackson condoned. . . . Jackson tried to head off outright fraud, but the removal bill’s allotment scheme invited an influx of outside speculators, who wound up buying between 80 and 90 percent of the land owned by Indians who wished to stay at a fraction of its actual worth. At no point did Jackson consider allowing even a small number of Georgia Cherokees who preferred to stay to do so in select enclaves, an option permitted to small numbers of Iroquois in upstate New York and Cherokees in western North Carolina. . . . Bereft of long-term planning and a full-scale federal commitment, the realities of Indian removal belied Jackson’s rhetoric. Although the worst suffering was inflicted after he left office, Jackson cannot escape responsibility for setting in motion an insidious policy that uprooted tens of thousands of Choctaws and Creeks [from the Southeast] during his presidency.”

Sean Wilentz, historian, The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, published in 2005

Which of the following describes a context that most influenced the implementation of the government policy discussed in the excerpt?

Many Americans desired the United States to expand its western land claims.

“Jackson truly believed that, compared to his predecessors’ combination of high-minded rhetoric, treachery, and abandonment, his Indian policy was ‘just and humane.’ . . .

“. . . Jackson’s paternalism was predicated on his assumption, then widely but not universally shared by white Americans, that all Indians . . . were [irrational] and inferior to all whites. His promises about voluntary and compensated relocation . . . were constantly undermined by delays and by sharp dealing by War Department negotiators—actions Jackson condoned. . . . Jackson tried to head off outright fraud, but the removal bill’s allotment scheme invited an influx of outside speculators, who wound up buying between 80 and 90 percent of the land owned by Indians who wished to stay at a fraction of its actual worth. At no point did Jackson consider allowing even a small number of Georgia Cherokees who preferred to stay to do so in select enclaves, an option permitted to small numbers of Iroquois in upstate New York and Cherokees in western North Carolina. . . . Bereft of long-term planning and a full-scale federal commitment, the realities of Indian removal belied Jackson’s rhetoric. Although the worst suffering was inflicted after he left office, Jackson cannot escape responsibility for setting in motion an insidious policy that uprooted tens of thousands of Choctaws and Creeks [from the Southeast] during his presidency.”

Sean Wilentz, historian, The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, published in 2005

Which of the following claims is supported by the author’s main argument in the excerpt?

Andrew Jackson can be blamed for the unintended effects of Indian removal.

“Jackson truly believed that, compared to his predecessors’ combination of high-minded rhetoric, treachery, and abandonment, his Indian policy was ‘just and humane.’ . . .

“. . . Jackson’s paternalism was predicated on his assumption, then widely but not universally shared by white Americans, that all Indians . . . were [irrational] and inferior to all whites. His promises about voluntary and compensated relocation . . . were constantly undermined by delays and by sharp dealing by War Department negotiators—actions Jackson condoned. . . . Jackson tried to head off outright fraud, but the removal bill’s allotment scheme invited an influx of outside speculators, who wound up buying between 80 and 90 percent of the land owned by Indians who wished to stay at a fraction of its actual worth. At no point did Jackson consider allowing even a small number of Georgia Cherokees who preferred to stay to do so in select enclaves, an option permitted to small numbers of Iroquois in upstate New York and Cherokees in western North Carolina. . . . Bereft of long-term planning and a full-scale federal commitment, the realities of Indian removal belied Jackson’s rhetoric. Although the worst suffering was inflicted after he left office, Jackson cannot escape responsibility for setting in motion an insidious policy that uprooted tens of thousands of Choctaws and Creeks [from the Southeast] during his presidency.”

Sean Wilentz, historian, The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, published in 2005

Which of the following pieces of evidence would best refute Jackson’s claim about his predecessors’ policies toward American Indians, as described in the first paragraph of the excerpt?

President George Washington enforced treaties guaranteeing American Indians in New York rights to their land.

“Jackson truly believed that, compared to his predecessors’ combination of high-minded rhetoric, treachery, and abandonment, his Indian policy was ‘just and humane.’ . . .

“. . . Jackson’s paternalism was predicated on his assumption, then widely but not universally shared by white Americans, that all Indians . . . were [irrational] and inferior to all whites. His promises about voluntary and compensated relocation . . . were constantly undermined by delays and by sharp dealing by War Department negotiators—actions Jackson condoned. . . . Jackson tried to head off outright fraud, but the removal bill’s allotment scheme invited an influx of outside speculators, who wound up buying between 80 and 90 percent of the land owned by Indians who wished to stay at a fraction of its actual worth. At no point did Jackson consider allowing even a small number of Georgia Cherokees who preferred to stay to do so in select enclaves, an option permitted to small numbers of Iroquois in upstate New York and Cherokees in western North Carolina. . . . Bereft of long-term planning and a full-scale federal commitment, the realities of Indian removal belied Jackson’s rhetoric. Although the worst suffering was inflicted after he left office, Jackson cannot escape responsibility for setting in motion an insidious policy that uprooted tens of thousands of Choctaws and Creeks [from the Southeast] during his presidency.”

Sean Wilentz, historian, The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln, published in 2005

Which of the following pieces of evidence would help modify an argument in the excerpt about President Jackson’s intentions toward American Indians?

Jackson had led United States armies that conquered American Indian peoples in the Southeast and forced land cessions.

“National gratitude—national pride—every high and generous feeling that attaches us to the land of our birth, or that [elevates] our characters as individuals, ask[s] of us that we should foster the . . . literature of our country. . . . On the other hand, it is not necessary for these purposes—it is even detrimental to bestow on mediocrity the praise due to excellence, and still more so is the attempt to persuade ourselves and others into an admiration of the faults of [our writers]. . . .

“It must however be allowed, that the poetry of the United States, though it has not reached that perfection to which some other countries have carried theirs, is yet even better than it could have been expected to produce, considering that our nation has scarcely seen two centuries since its founders erected their cabins on its soil. . . .

“The fondness for literature is fast increasing in our country—and if this were not the case, the patrons of literature have multiplied, of course, and will continue to multiply with the mere growth of our population. The popular English works of the day are often reprinted in our country—they are dispersed all over the union. . . . What should hinder our native works, if equal in merit, from meeting an equally favorable reception?”

William Cullen Bryant, book review in the North American Review, 1818

The excerpt best serves as evidence of which of the following developments?

The creation of a unique American culture

“National gratitude—national pride—every high and generous feeling that attaches us to the land of our birth, or that [elevates] our characters as individuals, ask[s] of us that we should foster the . . . literature of our country. . . . On the other hand, it is not necessary for these purposes—it is even detrimental to bestow on mediocrity the praise due to excellence, and still more so is the attempt to persuade ourselves and others into an admiration of the faults of [our writers]. . . .

“It must however be allowed, that the poetry of the United States, though it has not reached that perfection to which some other countries have carried theirs, is yet even better than it could have been expected to produce, considering that our nation has scarcely seen two centuries since its founders erected their cabins on its soil. . . .

“The fondness for literature is fast increasing in our country—and if this were not the case, the patrons of literature have multiplied, of course, and will continue to multiply with the mere growth of our population. The popular English works of the day are often reprinted in our country—they are dispersed all over the union. . . . What should hinder our native works, if equal in merit, from meeting an equally favorable reception?”

William Cullen Bryant, book review in the North American Review, 1818

Which of the following can be concluded about the relationship between the United States and Europe based on the situation described in the excerpt?

European styles continued to influence American society.

“National gratitude—national pride—every high and generous feeling that attaches us to the land of our birth, or that [elevates] our characters as individuals, ask[s] of us that we should foster the . . . literature of our country. . . . On the other hand, it is not necessary for these purposes—it is even detrimental to bestow on mediocrity the praise due to excellence, and still more so is the attempt to persuade ourselves and others into an admiration of the faults of [our writers]. . . .

“It must however be allowed, that the poetry of the United States, though it has not reached that perfection to which some other countries have carried theirs, is yet even better than it could have been expected to produce, considering that our nation has scarcely seen two centuries since its founders erected their cabins on its soil. . . .

“The fondness for literature is fast increasing in our country—and if this were not the case, the patrons of literature have multiplied, of course, and will continue to multiply with the mere growth of our population. The popular English works of the day are often reprinted in our country—they are dispersed all over the union. . . . What should hinder our native works, if equal in merit, from meeting an equally favorable reception?”

William Cullen Bryant, book review in the North American Review, 1818

Which of the following can be concluded about the United States based on the author’s descriptions in the excerpt?

A common national culture was developing.

“The laity [church members] . . . saw to it that the Second Great Awakening exerted much of its influence through purposeful voluntary associations, typically headed by boards of directors on which laypersons appeared prominently. . . .

“Contemporaries called the interlocking, interdenominational directorates of these organizations “the Evangelical United Front” or “the Benevolent Empire.” . . .

“The social reforms embraced by the Evangelical United Front characteristically involved creating some form of personal discipline serving a goal or redemption. Prison reform serves as an example: No longer would the prison be intended only as a place to hold persons awaiting trial, coerce debt payment, or inflict retributive justice. Reformers reconceived the prison as corrective function, as a ‘penitentiary’ or ‘reformatory,’ in the vocabulary they invented. Besides prisoners, other people who did not function as free moral agents might become objects of the reformers’ concern: alcoholics, children, slaves, the insane. The goal of the reformers in each case was to substitute for external constraints the inner discipline of morality. Some historians have interpreted the religious reformers as motivated simply by an impulse to impose ‘social control,’ but it seems more accurate to describe their concern as redemptive, and more specifically the creation of responsible personal autonomy. Liberation and control represented two sides of the redemptive process as they conceived it. Christians who had achieved self-liberation and self-control through conversion not surprisingly often turned to a concern with the liberation and discipline of others. . . .

“The religious awakenings of the early nineteenth century marshaled powerful energies in an age when few other social agencies in the United States had the capacity to do so. [The] Evangelical United Front organized its voluntary associations on a national, indeed international, level, at a time when little else in American society was organized, when there existed no nationwide business corporation save the Second Bank of the United States and no nationwide government bureaucracy save the Post Office. Indeed, the four major evangelical denominations together employed twice as many people, occupied twice as many premises, and raised at least three times as much money as the Post Office.”

Daniel Walker Howe, historian, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, published in 2007

A piece of evidence used by Howe in the second paragraph of the excerpt to support his argument about the goals of prison reform was that prison reformers

intended to use prisons to rehabilitate criminals

“The laity [church members] . . . saw to it that the Second Great Awakening exerted much of its influence through purposeful voluntary associations, typically headed by boards of directors on which laypersons appeared prominently. . . .

“Contemporaries called the interlocking, interdenominational directorates of these organizations “the Evangelical United Front” or “the Benevolent Empire.” . . .

“The social reforms embraced by the Evangelical United Front characteristically involved creating some form of personal discipline serving a goal or redemption. Prison reform serves as an example: No longer would the prison be intended only as a place to hold persons awaiting trial, coerce debt payment, or inflict retributive justice. Reformers reconceived the prison as corrective function, as a ‘penitentiary’ or ‘reformatory,’ in the vocabulary they invented. Besides prisoners, other people who did not function as free moral agents might become objects of the reformers’ concern: alcoholics, children, slaves, the insane. The goal of the reformers in each case was to substitute for external constraints the inner discipline of morality. Some historians have interpreted the religious reformers as motivated simply by an impulse to impose ‘social control,’ but it seems more accurate to describe their concern as redemptive, and more specifically the creation of responsible personal autonomy. Liberation and control represented two sides of the redemptive process as they conceived it. Christians who had achieved self-liberation and self-control through conversion not surprisingly often turned to a concern with the liberation and discipline of others. . . .

“The religious awakenings of the early nineteenth century marshaled powerful energies in an age when few other social agencies in the United States had the capacity to do so. [The] Evangelical United Front organized its voluntary associations on a national, indeed international, level, at a time when little else in American society was organized, when there existed no nationwide business corporation save the Second Bank of the United States and no nationwide government bureaucracy save the Post Office. Indeed, the four major evangelical denominations together employed twice as many people, occupied twice as many premises, and raised at least three times as much money as the Post Office.”

Daniel Walker Howe, historian, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, published in 2007

Which of the following is a piece of evidence used by Howe to support his claim in the third paragraph of the excerpt about religious organizations in the early nineteenth century?

Members of the Evangelical United Front employed more people than the Post Office did.

“The laity [church members] . . . saw to it that the Second Great Awakening exerted much of its influence through purposeful voluntary associations, typically headed by boards of directors on which laypersons appeared prominently. . . .

“Contemporaries called the interlocking, interdenominational directorates of these organizations “the Evangelical United Front” or “the Benevolent Empire.” . . .

“The social reforms embraced by the Evangelical United Front characteristically involved creating some form of personal discipline serving a goal or redemption. Prison reform serves as an example: No longer would the prison be intended only as a place to hold persons awaiting trial, coerce debt payment, or inflict retributive justice. Reformers reconceived the prison as corrective function, as a ‘penitentiary’ or ‘reformatory,’ in the vocabulary they invented. Besides prisoners, other people who did not function as free moral agents might become objects of the reformers’ concern: alcoholics, children, slaves, the insane. The goal of the reformers in each case was to substitute for external constraints the inner discipline of morality. Some historians have interpreted the religious reformers as motivated simply by an impulse to impose ‘social control,’ but it seems more accurate to describe their concern as redemptive, and more specifically the creation of responsible personal autonomy. Liberation and control represented two sides of the redemptive process as they conceived it. Christians who had achieved self-liberation and self-control through conversion not surprisingly often turned to a concern with the liberation and discipline of others. . . .

“The religious awakenings of the early nineteenth century marshaled powerful energies in an age when few other social agencies in the United States had the capacity to do so. [The] Evangelical United Front organized its voluntary associations on a national, indeed international, level, at a time when little else in American society was organized, when there existed no nationwide business corporation save the Second Bank of the United States and no nationwide government bureaucracy save the Post Office. Indeed, the four major evangelical denominations together employed twice as many people, occupied twice as many premises, and raised at least three times as much money as the Post Office.”

Daniel Walker Howe, historian, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, published in 2007

Which of the following describes a piece of evidence used by Howe to support his overall argument about the motivations of religious reformers?

They desired to teach people personal autonomy.

“Antebellum planters . . . were very interested in the control of black movement. They were also keen to master their slaves’ senses of pleasure. Seeking to contain [African Americans] even further than laws, curfews, bells, horns, and patrols already did, some planters used plantation [parties] as a paternalist mechanism of social control. Plantation parties, which carefully doled out joy on Saturday nights and holidays, were intended to seem benevolent and to inspire respect, gratitude, deference, and importantly, obedience. . . . The most important component of paternalistic plantation parties was the legitimating presence of the master.

“. . . [Yet] again and again, slaves sought out illicit, secular gatherings of their own creation. They disregarded curfews and pass laws to escape to secret parties where . . . pleasures such as drinking, eating, dancing, and dressing up were the main amusements. . . .

“. . . In the context of enslavement, such exhilarating pleasure . . . must be understood as important and meaningful enjoyment, as personal expression, and as oppositional.”

Stephanie M. H. Camp, historian, Closer to Freedom: Enslaved Women and Everyday Resistance in the Plantation South, 2004

Which of the following does the author use as evidence to support her argument that slaveholders were “keen to master their slaves’ senses of pleasure”?

Slaveholders held parties to encourage the loyalty of the enslaved.

“Antebellum planters . . . were very interested in the control of black movement. They were also keen to master their slaves’ senses of pleasure. Seeking to contain [African Americans] even further than laws, curfews, bells, horns, and patrols already did, some planters used plantation [parties] as a paternalist mechanism of social control. Plantation parties, which carefully doled out joy on Saturday nights and holidays, were intended to seem benevolent and to inspire respect, gratitude, deference, and importantly, obedience. . . . The most important component of paternalistic plantation parties was the legitimating presence of the master.

“. . . [Yet] again and again, slaves sought out illicit, secular gatherings of their own creation. They disregarded curfews and pass laws to escape to secret parties where . . . pleasures such as drinking, eating, dancing, and dressing up were the main amusements. . . .

“. . . In the context of enslavement, such exhilarating pleasure . . . must be understood as important and meaningful enjoyment, as personal expression, and as oppositional.”

Stephanie M. H. Camp, historian, Closer to Freedom: Enslaved Women and Everyday Resistance in the Plantation South, 2004

Which of the following could best be used as evidence to support the argument in the third paragraph of the excerpt that enslaved people engaged in oppositional activities?

Enslaved African Americans routinely caused tools to break or worked more slowly as means of resistance.

“Antebellum planters . . . were very interested in the control of black movement. They were also keen to master their slaves’ senses of pleasure. Seeking to contain [African Americans] even further than laws, curfews, bells, horns, and patrols already did, some planters used plantation [parties] as a paternalist mechanism of social control. Plantation parties, which carefully doled out joy on Saturday nights and holidays, were intended to seem benevolent and to inspire respect, gratitude, deference, and importantly, obedience. . . . The most important component of paternalistic plantation parties was the legitimating presence of the master.

“. . . [Yet] again and again, slaves sought out illicit, secular gatherings of their own creation. They disregarded curfews and pass laws to escape to secret parties where . . . pleasures such as drinking, eating, dancing, and dressing up were the main amusements. . . .

“. . . In the context of enslavement, such exhilarating pleasure . . . must be understood as important and meaningful enjoyment, as personal expression, and as oppositional.”

Stephanie M. H. Camp, historian, Closer to Freedom: Enslaved Women and Everyday Resistance in the Plantation South, 2004

Which of the following pieces of evidence could best be used to modify the argument in the excerpt that many enslaved people engaged in oppositional activities?

Large-scale rebellions by enslaved African Americans in the first half of the 1800s were largely unsuccessful.

“Antebellum planters . . . were very interested in the control of black movement. They were also keen to master their slaves’ senses of pleasure. Seeking to contain [African Americans] even further than laws, curfews, bells, horns, and patrols already did, some planters used plantation [parties] as a paternalist mechanism of social control. Plantation parties, which carefully doled out joy on Saturday nights and holidays, were intended to seem benevolent and to inspire respect, gratitude, deference, and importantly, obedience. . . . The most important component of paternalistic plantation parties was the legitimating presence of the master.

“. . . [Yet] again and again, slaves sought out illicit, secular gatherings of their own creation. They disregarded curfews and pass laws to escape to secret parties where . . . pleasures such as drinking, eating, dancing, and dressing up were the main amusements. . . .

“. . . In the context of enslavement, such exhilarating pleasure . . . must be understood as important and meaningful enjoyment, as personal expression, and as oppositional.”

Stephanie M. H. Camp, historian, Closer to Freedom: Enslaved Women and Everyday Resistance in the Plantation South, 2004

Which of the following best describes a context in the first half of the 1800s that influenced the development of slavery as described in the excerpt?

Southern planters used enslaved people to produce cotton for international markets.

“Mississippi planter and agricultural reformer M. W. Phillips, a regular contributor to the American Cotton Planter, wrote about soil exhaustion and crop rotation, and extolled the virtues of manuring and self-provisioning. In one of his most widely reproduced articles, Phillips condemned planters before whom ‘everything has to bend [and] give way to large crops of cotton.’ . . .

“Phillips imagined the cotton economy in terms of flows of energy, nutrients, and fertility, all of which he was convinced were being expended at an unsustainable rate. He used images of human, animal, and mineral depletion to represent an onrushing ecological catastrophe. But he did so within the incised [limited] terms allowed him by his culture—the culture of cotton. Phillips was arguing that the slaveholding South needed to slow the rate at which it was converting human beings into cotton plants.”

Walter Johnson, historian, River of Dark Dreams: Slavery and Empire in the Cotton Kingdom, 2013

In the first half of the 1800s, which of the following resulted from the debates about the cotton economy described in the excerpt?

A distinct Southern economic and cultural identity emerged.

“Mississippi planter and agricultural reformer M. W. Phillips, a regular contributor to the American Cotton Planter, wrote about soil exhaustion and crop rotation, and extolled the virtues of manuring and self-provisioning. In one of his most widely reproduced articles, Phillips condemned planters before whom ‘everything has to bend [and] give way to large crops of cotton.’ . . .

“Phillips imagined the cotton economy in terms of flows of energy, nutrients, and fertility, all of which he was convinced were being expended at an unsustainable rate. He used images of human, animal, and mineral depletion to represent an onrushing ecological catastrophe. But he did so within the incised [limited] terms allowed him by his culture—the culture of cotton. Phillips was arguing that the slaveholding South needed to slow the rate at which it was converting human beings into cotton plants.”

Walter Johnson, historian, River of Dark Dreams: Slavery and Empire in the Cotton Kingdom, 2013

Which of the following most directly contributed to the development described in the excerpt?

A belief by southern businessmen that the southern economy should focus on the export of select agricultural products

“Mississippi planter and agricultural reformer M. W. Phillips, a regular contributor to the American Cotton Planter, wrote about soil exhaustion and crop rotation, and extolled the virtues of manuring and self-provisioning. In one of his most widely reproduced articles, Phillips condemned planters before whom ‘everything has to bend [and] give way to large crops of cotton.’ . . .

“Phillips imagined the cotton economy in terms of flows of energy, nutrients, and fertility, all of which he was convinced were being expended at an unsustainable rate. He used images of human, animal, and mineral depletion to represent an onrushing ecological catastrophe. But he did so within the incised [limited] terms allowed him by his culture—the culture of cotton. Phillips was arguing that the slaveholding South needed to slow the rate at which it was converting human beings into cotton plants.”

Walter Johnson, historian, River of Dark Dreams: Slavery and Empire in the Cotton Kingdom, 2013

Which of the following resulted from the mass production of cotton described in the excerpt?

Some southerners relocated their plantations to the west of the Appalachian Mountains.

Innovations in shipping and the growth of commercial networks were most directly related to which of the following other developments of the first half of the nineteenth century?

An increase in the number of Americans moving west of the Appalachian Mountains

Changes in ideas about men’s and women’s gender roles in the family, resulting from the market revolution, most directly contributed to which of the following shifts in American social practices during the same period?

A new emphasis on the separation between the public and private spheres

The growth of manufacturing in the United States from 1800 to 1850 was most directly connected to which of the following broader historical processes?

Large numbers of international migrants moving to northern cities

The expansion of suffrage to most adult White men in the early nineteenth century most directly resulted in which of the following?

The growth of new political parties

Which of the following most directly led to the expansion of participatory democracy in the first half of the nineteenth century?

Reduction of property ownership requirements for voting

The expansion of suffrage to most adult White men by the 1820s and 1830s most directly contributed to the

emergence of political rallies and events to encourage people to vote for particular parties

Which of the following best explains a major reason for the emergence of the Second Great Awakening in the United States?

The rise of individualistic and evangelical spiritual beliefs inspired religious conversion.