t’s always going to be an asymmetrical comparison.
Do you compare the Roman empire as its peak with 12th century France or just Roman Gaul? Significant parts of Europe were never under Roman control to begin with and those would have been more advanced in the early middle ages than during Roman times. Besides that many regions of Europe such as Britannia, Gaul, Germania and the Danube region had a low population during Roman times whereas they had a higher one during the Middle Ages.
I believe prince should have the capability to become evil under right circumstances. Let me elaborate. When you're leading a kingdom, there might be some circumstances when another kingdom may try to harm yours. In this situation, your people do not need a 'nice guy. But they need someone that ruthlessly punish the people who tried to harm them.
Answer:
Hi! It is B, The people of Rome are easily swayed by Caesar's speeches.
Explanation:
I messed up the question myself and the system states that is correct.
Answer:
Option: C. Pliny the Younger
Explanation:
The cities Pompeii and Herculaneum were part of the Roman Empire until its destruction by the Volcano eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 AD. After volcano eruption, both the Roman cities remain as abandon for almost as many years until it was founded (Pompeii) after excavation by the architect Domenico Fontana in the 16th century (1748).
The destruction and volcano explosion comes from a report by Pliny the Younger, who was staying in the Bay of Naples when Mt. Vesuvius exploded. According to Pliny the Younger, the eruption lasted 18 hours which buried Pompeii and Herculaneum with ash, volcano rocks, and other volcanic materials and killing thousands of people.
Answer:
Tiger grrrr lol jsp it would be a <u>WOLF</u> , John Locke would be represented as a lone wolf an animal that acts independently or generally lives or spends time alone instead of with a group not being led by one single leader (Monarch) and having a more complex governing of himself (Democracy).
Explanation:
Represnting Locke, all humans have pre-political rights that afford them protection against the aggression of others. <em>But where does this leave animals? For Locke, animals do not have natural rights, and therefore human interactions with animals are property governed (Side By Side Comparison to The Governing of Rights with a single Monarch as a leader and then a Majority Ruled GOVT) </em>. <u>John would be an independent self governed animal such as a more complex democracy .</u>
