1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Sidana [21]
3 years ago
10

Which statement best explains the Silk Road's

History
2 answers:
s344n2d4d5 [400]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

The answer is C: It gave Rome access to materials and goods from Central and East Asia.

Explanation:

vovikov84 [41]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

the answer is C

Explanation:

it gave rome access to materials from central and east asia

You might be interested in
Any facts about egyptian pharaohs?
marissa [1.9K]
They only married family members
Buried in a pyramid. 
Children and wives were buried in the same pyramid but different spot.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which person is most closely associated with the principle of nonviolent resistance?
larisa [96]
The person most closely associated with the principle of nonviolent resistance would be D) Martin Luther King, Jr.
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Fighting in the European Theater during World War II ended as a result of?
IrinaK [193]

Answer:

for the European Theater, it ended when the Russians reached Berlin

for the Asian theater, it ended after the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki

Explanation:

Hope this helps :)

5 0
4 years ago
Why did the japanese not succeed ate midway
Illusion [34]

Japan lost Midway the way they did based on a lack of coherent operational priorities, poor operational planning, poor operational security, and poor decision making in battle. Japan could not have won the Battle of Midway the way they wanted to, but they could have won a different battle. Of course, Japan could not have recovered from Pearl Harbor and won the war. That final outcome was never in doubt, regardless of the magnitude of that tactical victory.

3 0
3 years ago
How did Thomas Hobbes’s interpretation of the social contract differ from John Locke’s?
user100 [1]

Answer:

  • Hobbes' interpretation of the social contract believed human beings were inherently at odds with each other and therefore needed an authoritarian government to rule over them.
  • Lockes' interpretation of the social contract believed that human beings are morally neutral by nature, and can live side by side without a government -- but that creating a government makes society better.

Explanation:

Both English philosophers, Hobbes and Locke, believed there is a "social contract" -- that governments are formed by the will of the people.  But their theories on why people want to live under governments were very different.

Thomas Hobbes published his political theory in <em>Leviathan</em> in 1651, following the chaos and destruction of the English Civil War.  He saw human beings as naturally suspicious of one another, in competition with each other, and harmful toward one another as a result.  Forming a government meant giving up personal liberty, but gaining security against what would otherwise be a situation of every person at war with every other person.

John Locke published his <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government</em> in 1690, following the mostly peaceful transition of government power that was the Glorious Revolution in England.  Locke believed people are born as blank slates--with no preexisting knowledge or moral leanings.  Experience then guides them to the knowledge and the best form of life, and they choose to form governments to make life and society better.

In teaching about Hobbes and Locke, I've often described the difference between them in this way.  If society were playground basketball, Hobbes believed you must have a referee who sets and enforces rules, or else the players will eventually get into heated arguments and bloody fights with one another, because people get nasty in competition that way.   Locke believed you could have an enjoyable game of playground basketball without a referee, but a referee makes the game better because then any disputes that come up between players have a fair way of being resolved.    Of course, Hobbes and Locke never actually wrote about basketball -- a game not invented until 1891 in America by James Naismith.  But it's just an illustration I've used to try to show the difference of ideas between Hobbes and Locke.   :-)

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did Han Fei Tzu's beliefs differed from the beliefs of Confucius?
    15·1 answer
  • How did the corrupt bargain affect the US political party system in the 1820s
    13·1 answer
  • Which of the following is an example of the evils of totalitarian government in Nazi Germany?
    10·2 answers
  • Drag each tile to the correct box.
    5·1 answer
  • Crimes that started, but not completed- for whatever reason- are which of the following?
    12·1 answer
  • The Hundred Years' was fought by ____.
    5·2 answers
  • Comparing and Contrasting What are the similarities and differences of the
    7·1 answer
  • HELP ME PLZZ., ASAP!!
    6·1 answer
  • Quien para hablar? ando aburrido
    13·1 answer
  • What type of education did Washington endorse? Do you agree or disagree with his opinion?
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!