Colonial subjects who choose to cooperate are often given a reward or status not otherwise given under the old rule. This was a common tactic of the British--pull underclasses into the military and/or government rule. By doing this, you get support, it is cost effective as the colony will govern itself, and you lessen the power of the old elite.
The old elite are more likely to react with violence or rejection of the colonial system. They are typically more equipped to fight against the colonial power. Additionally, members of the military, if replaced, may also rebel against the colonial power. Another factor contributing to rebellion, may be the removal of important traditions or religious rites.
<span>C. Early historians often used information from unverifiable sources.</span>
What are your thoughts on why the modernization of Quebec was called "The Quiet Revolution"?
The name is a paradoxical one due to this period was a tumultuous one that shaped Quebec's traditional Catholic administration into a modern city held by the government. These attempts were achieved in a <em>tranquil</em> way, hence the term in French <u><em>"Révolution tranquille".</em></u> The name, coined by a journalist from Toronto, illustrates the notion that it wasn't a revolution per se. It wasn't formed through military conflict, manifestations or violence, but through beliefs and reforms that eagerly attempted to change and revolutionize Quebec.
At the peak of the Roman Empire's reach, around A.D. 117, the Empire stretched as far north as modern Scotland, stretched down through Europe east into Asia as far as the border between modern day Iraq and Iran, with its southern reaches extending into northern Africa.
