Uhhhhhh i think the answer is 'c' :)
While both Greek and Romans were pretty ethnocentric by modern standards, the Romans assimilated far more people into their institutional lives.
Many non-Greeks adopted Gteek lifestyles, language and habits after the age of Alexander, but the cross-pollination was more frequently cultural than political. Cleopatra might have dressed like an Egyptian queen and patronized the Egyptian gods, but she wouldn't have had Egyptian generals or Egyptian judges. The Greeks tended to settle into the cultures they occupied like the British in India: remaining separate from and believing themselves superior to the people around them, even while encouraging the 'natives' to adopt their culture habits.
Romans did a much more thorough job assimilating the peoples they conquered. Non-Romans could and did become citizens, even from very early times. This started with neighboring groups like the Latins, but eventually extend to the rest of Italy and later to the whole empire. Eventually there would be "Roman" emperors of Syrian, British, Spanish, Gallic, Balkan, and North African descent Farther down the social scale the mixing was much more complete (enough to irritate many Roman traditionalists). This wasn’t just a practical accommodation, either — when emperor Claudius allowed Gauls into the Roman Senate he pointed out that by his time the Romans had been assimilating former enemies since the days of Aeneas.
Answer:
The answer would be A.)
Explanation:
I hope this helps, if it doesn't then just message me and ill be more than happy to help :)
<u><em>Answer:</em></u>
<u><em>The Haitian Revolution and the subsequent emancipation of Haiti as an independent state provoked mixed reactions in the United States. Among many white Americans this led to uneasiness, instilling fears of racial instability on its own soil and possible problems with foreign relations and trade between the two countries; among enslaved black Americans it fueled hope that the principles of the recent American Revolution might be realized in their own liberation.</em></u>
<u><em></em></u>
<u><em>One outcome of the Haitian Revolution for the US was the Louisiana Purchase. Having lost his control of the Caribbean landholding, Napoleon saw no further use for Louisiana. The US was only interested in the New Orleans area; however, the revolution enabled the sale of the entire territory west of the Mississippi River for around $15 million. This purchase more than doubled US territory.</em></u>
<u><em>Explanation:</em></u>
Answer:
D
Explanation:
The Mexican War wasn't a thing, related to Texas becoming a state/slavery/states rights
