how do you think this map influence native born Americans who saw it in the 1860s

Answer:

The correct answer is A. The southern delegates of the Democratic Party affirmed that slavery should be based on popular sovereignty.

Explanation:

When Jackson left the Presidency, the Democratic Party became increasingly conservative; the party was very popular in the southern states of the country for its defense of the rights of the states against federal power, but this resulted in southern white politicians having an enormous weight within the organization and making it a defender of slavery.

The democrats of the South defended the institution of the slavery of the blacks, and the majority of the democrats of the North contemplated and did not dare to oppose their companions of the South.

Final answer:

The themes in 'Oedipus the King' are deeply influenced by the cultural and philosophical changes of the time, reflecting the shift from oral to literate culture, the rise of reflective thought on morality and tales, and changing perceptions of leadership and divinity.

Explanation:

The time period in which Oedipus the King was written greatly impacts its themes, reflecting a shift in societal beliefs and cultural practices. During this period, Greek culture was transitioning from an oral tradition to a literate one, allowing playwrights like Sophocles to pen dramas that encouraged audiences to reflect upon values and morality. Indeed, the play encourages audiences to question the tales and myths that had been passed down orally and to consider the actions of divine beings that were often morally questionable.

The rise of philosophical thought, with figures like Socrates and later Plato, also influenced the play. They were challenging the traditional bases of moral order and the relationship between gods and humans, prompting authors to depict human characters like Oedipus as complex figures capable of both greatness and tragic error. Oedipus' hamartia, or tragic flaw, his arrogance, and refusal to accept his fate, becomes a central theme that speaks to the audience's own experiences and emotions.

The Middle Kingdom in Egypt also saw the king being required to be more accessible to the public, illustrating a shift in how leadership and divinity were perceived across the broader Mediterranean region. Such cultural movements created an environment that allowed the unique themes in Oedipus the King to resonate with contemporary audiences, exploring human responsibility in the face of divine intervention, the role of fate, and the potential for human fallibility.

Answer:

They feared a growing Soviet influence in the region.

Explanation:

The Operation Nickel Grass is the operation which the US delivered aid - weapons and supplies - to Israel during the Yom Kippur War. The Yom Kippur War also known as the Arab-Israeli War 1973 was a war between the coalition of Arab states that was led by Egypt and Syria against Israel.

Answer:

A tolitarian Government seeks total control over its citizens.

Explanation:

 They take control over all citizens and take total control of News and media.

The answer is: dissidents

Dissidents refer to the group of people who actively challenge the policy made by  a certain instution (could be a government).

During world war I, amrican government felt that leaving the dissidents free to talk whatever they want could damage public's support toward the government regarding American involvement in world war I. So, the government decided to silent them.

Between 1660 and 1700, revolts in Colonial America were driven by disputes over land, Native American policies, and colonial governance, with significant rebellions being Bacon's Rebellion and King Philip's War. These were resolved through military action, often resulting in the suppression of the revolts with leaders being executed or dying, and leaving behind a legacy of tension and resistance.

The revolts and rebellions that occurred in the colonies of Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York between 1660 and 1700 were fueled by various grievances and underlying conflicts. In Virginia, the Bacon's Rebellion of 1676 was sparked by tensions between frontier settlers and Native American tribes, with settlers feeling unprotected by colonial authorities. Nathaniel Bacon led an uprising against the administration of Governor William Berkeley, campaigning for removal of the Native Americans and reform of the colonial government.

In Maryland, similar discontent over land and Native American policies led to Bacon's Rebellion inspiring local uprisings, though they did not escalate to the same extent. In Massachusetts, King Philip's War (1675-1676) was another significant conflict, where Native Americans, led by the Wampanoag chief Metacom (King Philip), fought against English settlers in an attempt to stop colonial expansion. Lastly, in New York, tensions between English and Dutch settlers, along with conflicts over trade and governance, resulted in uprisings such as Leisler's Rebellion (1689-1691).

The resolution of these rebellions typically involved military intervention. In Bacon's Rebellion, royal troops helped quell the uprising, leading to the execution of several leaders, although Bacon himself died of disease. King Philip's War ended with the death of Metacom and severe consequences for Native tribes in New England. Leisler's Rebellion ended with the capture and execution of Jacob Leisler, and a restored order by the English crown. These rebellions highlighted colonial unrest and set the stage for later resistance against British policies leading up to the American Revolution.

Final answer:

The Sumerians were the people who created the first Mesopotamian civilization. They were followed by the Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians, who continued to build upon their advancements.

Explanation:

The people who created the first Mesopotamian civilization were the Sumerians. So the word to complete the sentence provided will be  Sumerians. The Sumerians lived in southern Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, and were known for their advancements in technology and the development of a writing system that was sophisticated. They were followed by the Akkadians, Babylonians, and Assyrians, who built upon the Sumero-Akkadian heritage and further helped in the development of the civilization.

The statement that is true about a grassland ecosystem is Grasslands are dominated by herbaceous plants rather than large trees. The option (B) is correct.

Grasslands, including tropical grasslands (savannas) and temperate grasslands, cover regions with moderate rainfall that support the growth of grasses but not enough for dense tree cover. These ecosystems typically have few trees, except along rivers or streams, and are characterized by dense grass vegetation.

The dominant plant life in grasslands consists of grasses and the ecosystem's maintenance is due to factors such as low precipitation, periodic fires, and grazing.

This question is not complete, Here I am attaching the complete question:

Which statements are true about a grassland ecosystem?

A) Grasslands are typically characterized by dense tree cover.

B) Grasslands are dominated by herbaceous plants rather than large trees.

C) Grassland ecosystems receive heavy rainfall throughout the year.

D) Grasslands have abundant tree-dwelling animals like monkeys and sloths.

King Narmer is a legendary hero in Ancient Egyptian history because he is believed to have played a crucial role in unifying Upper and Lower Egypt into one powerful kingdom around 3150 BCE. The Narmer Palette, an ancient Egyptian artifact, suggests that Narmer was the pharaoh responsible for this unification. Thus, his significant contribution forms the basis of his heroic status.

King Narmer holds a legendary status in Ancient Egyptian history due to his major contribution in unifying Upper and Lower Egypt into a single powerful entity around 3150 BCE. This significant political and cultural shift marked the beginning of the first dynasty of Pharaonic rule in Egypt, setting the foundation of the impressive civilization that would then flourish for many centuries.

The Narmer Palette, a two-foot-tall Egyptian siltstone artifact, attributes this achievement to Narmer. It portrays Narmer wearing both the white crown of Upper Egypt and the red crown of Lower Egypt, symbolizing the unification of the two areas. Because of this, many historians now believe that Narmer and another king named Menes, also often credited with the unification, are likely the same person.

Therefore, King Narmer's significant contribution to Egyptian civilization – the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt – is why he is considered a legendary hero in ancient Egyptian history.

https://brainly.com/question/31596638

#SPJ12

"The correct answer is that Miller characterizes Parris as a man who feels a great deal of insecurity and fear regarding his position within the community, and he harbors a sense of resentment towards his parishioners.

In Arthur Miller's play ""The Crucible,"" Reverend Samuel Parris is portrayed as a deeply insecure and fearful man, particularly concerning his reputation and authority within the community of Salem. Parris is constantly worried about his standing and the respect he commands from his parishioners.

He is depicted as being more concerned with his salary and the size of his congregation than with the spiritual well-being of his flock. This insecurity is evident in his obsession with the behavior of the townspeople and his suspicion that they may be turning against him.

 Parris's feelings towards his parishioners are complex and largely negative. He views them with a degree of resentment and suspicion, believing that they are not supportive enough of him and his work. He is quick to interpret any dissent or questioning as a direct challenge to his authority.

Shah Jahan had over 20,000 workers build the Taj Mahal for his favorite wife when she died.

The following are ways of how the native people had transform North American environment before the European colonization began:

-          They were able to cultivate maize, the caves were used by natives for shelter and they made use of ignited fires when hunting.

Native Americans had the abundant population, a forceful bureaucratic state, productive agriculture, chiefdoms or paramount chiefdoms, paid payment and tax, and sometimes diminutive political organization that could secure and sustain their power. Whereas, European kings and princes had vast areas of land, compulsorily recruited men for military service, and occupied farmer with nobles had huge lands and handled hundreds of farmer families, meanwhile, African had lesser vassal kingdoms and depended on military for control.

EXPLANATION:

• Native American

The city size and the magnitude of its power imply that the city depended on some lesser chiefdoms under the power of a paramount leader. Social stratification was partially well-maintained through regular rivalry. War prisoners were imprisoned, and these prisoners shaped a crucial part of the North American Southeast economy.  

Slavery of Native American was not based on retaining people as property. In its place, Native Americans comprehended slaves as people who are deficient in kinship systems. Slavery was not often a perpetual condition. Regularly, an earlier slave could turn out to be a fully combined member of the community. Marriage or adoption could allow a slave to come in a kinship system and join the community. Slavery and prisoner trading turned out to be a crucial way that many Native communities regrew and maintained or gained power.

• European

European communities operated the feudal structure to establish power and labor in the Middle Ages. Europeans worked under a belief of private property rights, contrasted with shared Native American or African communities of the time. These communities were unified by the Christian Church, that functioned as the foundational establishing convention of many Europeans' daily lives.

• African

Africa was ruled by different empires with its own culture, government, religion, and so on for hundreds of years before this era. Each African kingdom was unbelievably unique, only one edge of an unparalleled diversity land—before foreign raiders occupied this land while concurrently slicing it up amid themselves and grouping it all jointly into a single location they used to know as "Africa."

LEARN MORE

If you’re interested in learning more about this topic, we recommend you to also take a look at the following questions:

• How did the rulers of native American, European, and African empires and kingdoms secure and sustain their power? https://brainly.com/question/4505187

KEYWORDS : Native American, European, Africa, ruler

Subject  : History

Class  : 10-12

Sub-Chapter : Civilization

Native American and African rulers often had complex, consensual leadership structures, unlike European assumptions. African empires typically had checks and balances, while European powers used various methods, including coercion, to control territories. Successful empires provided stability, safety, and prosperity to their populace.

Rulers of various empires and kingdoms throughout history have employed multiple strategies to secure and sustain their power. In Native American societies, leadership varied from egalitarian systems to more hierarchical ones. Chiefs or sachems were often selected for their roles, even if the European colonizers misinterpreted their authority as being equivalent to that of European kings. For example, the Haundenosaune (Iroquois) operated through long councils and had significant participation by women, leading to the confusion of European settlers. Similarly, in African empires, European assumptions about chiefs being cruel despots were often incorrect. Instead, many African chiefdoms had moralized political systems with checks and balances to limit chiefs' power.

On the other hand, European rulers often relied on various methods to control their realms, ranging from the Encomienda System used by Spain in the Americas to matrimonial and territorial imperialism, where marriage and annexation of land played a role in expanding influence. Coercion and military power were common among empires who sought to absorb neighboring territories or faced fierce local resistance.

Ultimately, the sustainability of these empires often depended on their ability to provide stability, safety, and prosperity to their populace. Those that succeeded in creating these conditions tended to maintain power longer than those that did not.

The Shire could still benefit from trading with Mordor due to the principle of comparative advantage, which allows regions to specialize in productions where they have the greatest advantage and trade for other goods, leading to higher consumption than in autarky.

If the Shire is better than Mordor at producing everything, it may still benefit from trading with Mordor due to the principle of comparative advantage. This economic theory suggests that even if one region is more efficient in producing all goods (absolute advantage), it can still gain by trading if it focuses on the goods for which it has the greatest efficiency difference, and trades for other goods where its efficiency advantage is smaller. For example, if the Shire is highly efficient at producing both food and clothing but has a larger efficiency margin in food production, it could focus on food and trade for clothing, allowing it to consume more than it could in autarky.

This concept is explained using the example of England and Poland. England, despite having superior land for producing corn, may benefit by specializing in manufactured goods and trading with Poland, if the amount of corn received from Poland exceeds the amount England would have produced. Essentially, trade allows each country to specialize in production where they hold the greatest comparative advantage, resulting in a higher level of consumption than would be possible without trade.

The theory of comparative advantage further implies that all parties can gain from trade. For instance, three farmers trading based on their relative efficiencies illustrate that each farmer ends up better off than without trade. The gains from trade can exist even when a party is not the best at producing any particular good, as long as they are not the worst in all aspects. Similarly, individuals within an economy will still find it beneficial to trade goods and services where each holds a comparative (not necessarily absolute) advantage.