List the statement that's why I can answer them
Answer:
Suppose I was king or queen:
Explanation:
You might have said no because the voyage was a big risk. The ships might all disappear at sea, and you would never get your money back. Or you might have said yes, because if Columbus found a better route to Asia, you could get rich from the trade with China and the Indies.
John Julius Norwich makes a point of saying in the introduction to his history of the popes that he is “no scholar” and that he is “an agnostic Protestant.” The first point means that while he will be scrupulous with his copious research, he feels no obligation to unearth new revelations or concoct revisionist theories. The second means that he has “no ax to grind.” In short, his only agenda is to tell us the story. Norwich declares that he is an agnostic Protestant with no axe to grind: his aim is to tell the story of the popes, from the Roman period to the present, covering them neither with whitewash nor with ridicule. Even more disarmingly, he insists that he has no pretensions to scholarship and writes only for “the average intelligent reader”. But he adds: “I have tried to maintain a certain lightness of touch.” And that, it seems, is the opening through which a fair amount of outrageous anecdote and Gibbonian dry wit is allowed to enter the narrative.
Answer:
D. The Abbasid state was headed by a caliph who was theoretically the state's supreme religious and political leader.
Explanation:
Caliphs concentrated in their hands religious and political power. The Abbasid caliphs, who reproached their Umayyad predecessors for behaving like secular rulers, tried to outline their own approach to government in Islamic terms and, accordingly, to the extent that they managed, they tried to adhere to a religious orientation in politics.
