Here is you're answer: *THIS INFORMATION IS FOUND BY GOOGLE NOT BY ME*
According to [Blank], Ramses II<span>, the third pharaoh of the 19th dynasty of ancient Egypt, is renowned for his success in battle (especially against the Hittites) and for his contributions as a builder and religious figure. He ruled from 1279 B.C. to 1213 B.C
</span>
THIS IS NOT BY ME I HAVE MADE SOME CHANGES FOR COPY RIGHT REASONS
Answer:
The United would be very different for many reasons.
Explanation:
The country would've been ran by the states alone and barely would have had a national or federal government. There would've only been the legislative, no judicial or executive branch. Each state would've probably had a different currency, no national bank, and no national army. Each state would've had a militia or volunteer military.
Answer:
Finding a permanent solution to ruined harvest and mass famines
Explanation:
What Egypt could have done differently to save itself from decline is "finding a permanent solution to ruined harvest and mass famines."
This is because the major reason that is attributed to the fall of the Egyptian Empire are the following:
1. Great disparity in wealth between the aristocrats and the lower class
2. Constant war from neigboring city states
3. Culture and religion from other states.
Hence, to solve these issues, is to have a stable economy that is sustainable. And to have a sustainable economy is to ensure the city state or nation can feed itself well all the times, regardless of the climate change.
However, ancient Egypt struggled to maintain their economic growth which rest mainly on agriculture due to change in climate that effect their agricultural produce.
Therefore, in this case, the correct answer is "finding a permanent solution to ruined harvest and mass famines."
Pros- You can share and get people interested.
Cons- Some people will critizie what you try to do.
