Hello Martincoretox9aum, an earl is a member of the nobility. The title is Anglo-Saxon in origin, akin to the Scandinavian form jarl, and meant "chieftain", particularly a chieftain set to rule a territory in a king's stead. In Scandinavia, it became obsolete in the Middle Ages and was replaced by duke (hertig/hertug/hertog). In later medieval Britain, it became the equivalent of the continental count (in England in the earlier period, it was more akin to a duke; in Scotland it assimilated the concept of mormaer). However, earlier in Scandinavia, jarl could also mean a sovereign prince.<span>[citation needed]</span> For example, the rulers of several of the petty kingdoms of Norway had the title of jarl
and in many cases they had no less power than their neighbours who had
the title of king. Alternative names for the rank equivalent to
"Earl/Count" in the nobility structure are used in other countries, such
as the hakushaku of the post-restoration Japanese Imperial era.In modern Britain, an earl is a member of the peerage, ranking below a marquess and above a viscount. A feminine form of earl never developed; instead, countess is used.
sacred text - Buddha's teachings passed down.
Explanation: Tripitaka. ... They contain teachings of the Buddha on how to reach enlightenment as well as teachings to help guide Buddhists in their everyday life.
The romans used D) aqueducts
Jamestown colony was actually an English settlement funded by a private endeavor in Virginia and the investors were asked to locate gold and a sea route to the Pacific Ocean.
The problems which they faced were the friendly ties with the natives which were not satisfactory, Food shortage and water contamination. This lead to the digging up of many wells and gradually brought famine and drought.
Africans were oppressed and were given meager opportunities by the natives. Slavery lingered and they started tobacco plantations for their survival.
Answer:
A. It would provide economic access to countries in East Asia.
Explanation:
What I found on the web, "The senator was an advocate of American imperialism. Among other goals, he supported the annexation of the Phillippines. He believed this to be justified because of the "white man's burden": the idea that Western, white people had the moral duty to educate other less civilized people."
I hope this helps, I always appreciate Brainliest!!! :)
