Which conclusion do u. s. attitudes toward the panama canal during the 20th
century support?
o
a. historical context can only be determined long after an event has
passed.
o
b. biases prevent most people from participating in a changing
historical context.
c. people's points of view can change to suit changes in historical
context.
o
d. contextualization of a historical event should not be changed once
it has been made.

“the iliad” (gr: “iliás”) is an epic poem by the ancient greek poet homer, which recounts some of the significant events of the final weeks of the trojan war and the greek siege of the city of troy (which was also known as ilion, ilios or ilium in ancient times).

i would say your answer is a)

sorry if im wrong

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.