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
Svet_ta [14]
3 years ago
9

A historian is examining religions role in history. Which question might the historian ask if she were organizing her study by p

eriod?
History
2 answers:
Vika [28.1K]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

"How did the role of religion in Europe change between the postclassical and modern eras?"

Explanation:

The historian is studying the role of religions in history. Since it is necessary to ask if she is organizing the study by period, the question needs to be made clear. A good example of the question would be "How has the role of religion in Europe changed between post-classical and modern times?" This question is asked based on two periods which are the post-classical period and the modern period. By asking this question it is possible to know if the historian is organizing the study by period.

Colt1911 [192]3 years ago
5 0
A question they might ask is How did your religion form?
You might be interested in
I need help!!! In a response of approximately 50 words, describe the differences between the oath of office administered during
RoseWind [281]

Answer:

The Constitution requires all government office-holders to take an oath to support that document, but it ... No one felt anything more was needed—until the Civil War. In 1862, Congress adopted the "Ironclad Test Oath." Civil servants and military officers had to swear loyalty to the Union and affirm no previous disloyalty.

8 0
3 years ago
Help!!! ILL MARK YOU BRAINLY! And don’t ignore pleasee
luda_lava [24]
Number 1 is What was the result of the military campaigns Napoleon led in Italy? France received control of Italy. ... He created the seven law code or the Napoleonic Code.
4 0
3 years ago
How much fault or guilt should the United States have about the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Vesnalui [34]

Answer:

On Aug. 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, killing tens of thousands of people – many instantly, others from the effects of radiation. Death estimates range from 66,000 to 150,000.

Declining Support in Both the U.S. and Japan for America's Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

This first use of a nuclear weapon by any nation has long divided Americans and Japanese. Americans have consistently approved of this attack and have said it was justified. The Japanese have not. But opinions are changing: Americans are less and less supportive of their use of atomic weapons, and the Japanese are more and more opposed.

In 1945, a Gallup poll immediately after the bombing found that 85% of Americans approved of using the new atomic weapon on Japanese cities. In 1991, according to a Detroit Free Press survey conducted in both Japan and the U.S., 63% of Americans said the atomic bomb attacks on Japan were a justified means of ending the war, while only 29% thought the action was unjustified. At the same time, only 29% of Japanese said the bombing was justified, while 64% thought it was unwarranted.

But a 2015 Pew Research Center survey finds that the share of Americans who believe the use of nuclear weapons was justified is now 56%, with 34% saying it was not. In Japan, only 14% say the bombing was justified, versus 79% who say it was not.

Not surprisingly, there is a large generation gap among Americans in attitudes toward the bombings of Hiroshima. Seven-in-ten Americans ages 65 and older say the use of atomic weapons was justified, but only 47% of 18- to 29-year-olds agree. There is a similar partisan divide: 74% of Republicans but only 52% of Democrats see the use of nuclear weapons at the end of World War II as warranted.

In the years since WWII, two issues have fueled a debate over America’s use of nuclear weapons against Japan: Did Washington have an alternative to the course it pursued – the bombing of Hiroshima followed by dropping a second atomic weapon on Nagasaki on Aug. 9 – and should the U.S. now apologize for these actions?

70 Years Ago, Most Americans Said They Would Have Used Atomic Bomb

In September 1945, the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago asked Americans what they would have done if they had been the one to decide whether or not to use the atomic bomb against Japan. At the time, a plurality of Americans supported the course chosen by the Truman administration: 44% said they would have bombed one city at a time, and another 23% would have wiped out cities in general – in other words, two-thirds would have bombed some urban area. Just 26% would have dropped the bomb on locations that had no people. And only 4% would not have used the bomb.

By 1995, 50 years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, support for an alternative to the bombing had grown. Gallup asked Americans whether, had the decision been left up to them, they would have ordered the bombs to be dropped, or tried some other way to force the Japanese to surrender. Half the respondents said they would have tried some other way, while 44% still backed using nuclear weapons.

But this decline in American support for the use of atomic bombs against Japanese cities did not mean Americans thought they had to apologize for having done so. In that same Gallup survey, 73% said the U.S. should not formally apologize to Japan for the atom bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Only 20% supported an official apology.

8 0
3 years ago
The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 resulted in the deportation of half of the Chinese in the United States. was ruled unconstitut
trasher [3.6K]

Answer:

Banned Chinese in the United States from becoming naturalized citizens.

Explanation:

The  Chinese Exclusion Act was a law signed in 1882 by President Chester A. Arthur, and it was about suspending immigration from a specific country. In this case, the law prohibited Chinese labourers from entering the United States. This law was set as the first one that limited entrance to The U.S.A and it changed its image of a welcoming country to one of  gatekeeping one.    

 

3 0
3 years ago
Background information: This account of the fall of
ladessa [460]

Answer:

what was the question? I doesn't seem like there is one.

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Many Southerners, including white merchants and white small landowners,
    11·2 answers
  • Explain what is a poll tax is and describe one positive and one negative outcome of the poll tax establish in Texas in 1902.
    5·2 answers
  • About 90 percent of the population in Germany is composed of ethnic Germans.
    9·2 answers
  • Who decides how states will ratify the amendments? a. Congress c. Justices b. President d. States
    6·2 answers
  • Approximately how many amendments to the texas constitution?
    11·1 answer
  • SOME ONE PLEASE HELP MEEEE!!!
    15·2 answers
  • Why is mental health for Men just as important mental health for Woman
    13·2 answers
  • Writing as President Lincoln, compose a short memo that predicts which constitutional principles are most likely to change as a
    9·1 answer
  • Choose two groups of people that were described in the article. How was their experience of the event similar? How was it differ
    6·1 answer
  • • Leo III's influence on the "iconoclast" controversy
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!