I NEED HELP PLEASE Was the Brooks-Sumner incident a direct result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Bleeding Kansas or did it more accurately reflect the sectionalist and cultural division between the northern and southern United States? Provide examples to support your claim.

Was the Brooks-Sumner incident a direct result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Bleeding Kansas or did it more accurately reflect the sectionalist and cultural division between the northern and southern United States In his speech, Sumner used graphic depictions of violence, calling the situation in Kansas the r.a.p.e of a virgin territory and slavery in Kansas the hideous offspring of the crime. However, Sumner did not limit himself to attacking the South or slavery, he made his attack personal. First, he went after Stephen Douglas of Illinois, calling him a ''squat and nameless animal'' for his role in leading the Senate's Democrats.

Explanation:

- "the past is made of multitudinous items ranging from anything that can be collected, recollected or assessed to originate in the past. as such, the past is a gallimaufry of particulars that may not have been related in any way. however, the human mind seeks organization to understand concepts and other things. the human mind therefore seeks relationships in explaining and studying the past. history being a humanity, dictates that historians have to serve this human trait by bringing structure to details of the past. historians do this by creating interpretive frameworks that capture as many details as possible."

< 3