Answer:
What do peasant farmers do when they lost their crops?
Peasant farmers often depended on <em>subsistence agriculture</em> - this means that the farmers primarily grew crops to feed themselves and their families, rather than selling their crops for economic gain.
So, if the peasant farmers lose their crops, they will have nothing to eat. The peasants will probably go hungry and perhaps starve.
And what common pattern do we see when the masses are starving? They <em>revolt </em>! I suppose that's a bit of a stretch, but in general, the peasant class would definitely be upset at having no crops to feed themselves and their children. Such tensions will be directed at their leader or "King" who is supposed to be prepared for any disaster.
Wouldn't people think, "The leader has everything he wants and can get anything he does not have, can't he share with us?"
Anyways, that's how I would interpret this question.
Hope this helps!
:D
The Hebrew civilization was the first civilization to develop a sense of history.
It important for local communities to work to protect the environment because the natural resources available to a community are limited
- Because the natural resources available to a community are limited
<u>Explanation:</u>
Ecological preservation is significant for some, reasons, including securing the ozone layer, keeping up the creature and human evolved ways of life, saving consumable water and utilizing non-sustainable assets. It is to a greater extent an ethical commitment for people to shield nature from contamination and different exercises that lead to ecological corruption.
Giving local communities control over natural resources could help protect the world's wildlife, according to a study of how animal extinctions affect people and society. Nature is a significant issue in any event when society is looked at with monetary emergencies, wars, and ceaseless social issues. It is important on the grounds that Earth is the main home that people have, and it gives air, nourishment, and different needs.
The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, were against the purchase of this territory because they wanted the states united by a strong central government, which would be difficult with state so far away.
