Answer:
Alexander was “great” because he easily conquered a lot of land and established prominent societies, like Alexandria.
Alexander wasn’t “great” because he was egotistical in naming a city after him and conquering land just for greed.
Alexander was “great” because he was smart enough to cross the river and use Porus’ own elephants against him.
Alexander was not “great” because he tricked a ruler and killed many men in war only because he was greedy and wanted more land.
Alexander was most likely very religious, and it seems that in Ancient Greek anyone seeking refuge in a temple should be shown mercy. Also, if Alexander had killed everyone in the city than there would have been no point in conquering the city except for land.
Answer:
sent formal requests.
Explanation:
I think. sorry. that's 7th grade
Answer:
food, clothing, religion, lenguage, arquitecture
The buffalo soldiers were expected to be the weaker lot - not as good as the white soldiers, most people who were in the army did not have much hope for them.They did not get as good quality guns,they had old uniform given out to them and got second priority after the white soldiers-I.e if there wasn't enough tents for both lots the white soldiers would come first so they would get the tents while the buffalo soldiers would have to sleep on the ground.Racial Abuse was experienced continuously, at the start of the buffalo soldiers time , slavery had just been abolished so it was difficult for black soldiers to be seen equal and free to the white soldiers who were used to treating them horribly, and saw the black soldiers as unable and useless.The black and white soldiers were also segregated into separate lots.
Now that is not the case, racism is not tolerated even though unfortunately it still happens in some cases.
