1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
mamaluj [8]
3 years ago
9

Why do people save artifacts like these even if the objects don’t have much monetary value ?

English
2 answers:
masha68 [24]3 years ago
7 0

I think because they were a great value in past history

Hatshy [7]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Sentimental value.

Explanation:

example. My mother had a teapot, she used this teapot every day. My mother passed away and I was left with it. The teapot is worth close to nothing in monetary value, but it means so much to me. Every time I see this teapot I think of my mother. This teapot has value. Sentimental value.

I hope this helps!

You might be interested in
Help make the tasks (1-20). Thank you very much!
spin [16.1K]

Answer:

3. Neither can I

9. Neither on I

5. So have I

6. Neither did I

7. So did I

8. Neither do I

9. So am I

10. So do I have I.

11. Neither do I.

12. So did I

13. So was I

44. Neither have I

15. So do I

16. Neither do I

17. So am I

10. So do I

29. So will I

20. So have I.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Can you count your hair?
Dmitry [639]
Yes we can but if U want correct no of hairs it very difficult .So we can estimate the no of hairs are there on our head
3 0
3 years ago
“you've got to take your medicine when it comes to you.”<br> is this an idiom?
soldi70 [24.7K]

Answer:yes

Explanation:

hi

4 0
3 years ago
20) Look at the underlined section marked (18). Choose the answer that best
denpristay [2]

Answer:

B)

Proper nursing is especially important, so cubs and

kittens are never given milk while they are lying on

their back

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Was napoleon good or bad for france?why.
Alja [10]
 <span>Bonaparte was regarded by all of Europe except France as a megalomaniac cruel tyrant - until about 1812. By the end of that year, there was a powerful anti-Bonaparte opposition developing in France also. The carnage that accompanied his reign/rule/administration came to be feared and hated by the French themselves once the glorious days of repeated victory were passed. Unfortunately, the French and the Allies through the Congress of Vienna were unable to provide a viable and credible alternative head of state, so that Napoleon-nostaglia returned within 10 years of his death. 

However, Bonaparte did introduce innovations not only in France but throughout Europe and the western world, and they are noteworthy. First, he provided a rational basis for weights and measures instead of the thousands of alternative measures that had been in use for centuries. We call it the Metric System and it works well in all of science and technology, and in commerce except in USA and a few other places. 

Second, he introduced an integrated system of civil and criminal laws which we call the Napoleonic Code. Some parts of it have been problematical (notably the inheritance laws) and need reforming, but it has stood the test of 200 years, and is well understood. Even the later monarchies and republics in France continued to use the Code; so well was it thought out. 

Third, he introduced the Continental System of agriculture and free trade between (occupied) nations. It remains as a model for the European Union and worked well in its own day. Even the Confederation of the Rhine, which led to the creation of the Zolverein and then to a unified Germany, was based on Bonapartist principles. I don't think the Germans or anyone else is willing to recognise this intellectual debt today. 

Fourth, he promoted French science and learning which had been damaged so badly by the Revolution. Medicine, chemistry, physics, astonomy and economics were all encouraged so that French higher education became a model for the century - to be emulated by any modern country with pretentions to culture. 

Despite all these, Bonaparte was a mass murderer; of the French as well as other peoples in Europe. He engaged in military campaigns, backed by an elitist philosophy, to extend French hegemony and can be recognised today in all that was wrong with Nazi domination of Europe and now in USA plans for the domination of the rest of the world. 

For a short time, he was a military and administrative success but his legacy was one of poverty, defeat and a distrust of the French. He seemed to offer a glorious change to French history, in which the French became winners of wars. In reality, he was just another winner of battles but, ultimately, he confirmed the French experience of losing every war in which they have engaged. Such a pity for a man of potential and flair, but his early success simply went to his head and he seemed to believe that he was invincible and omnipotent. That's a good definition of a megalomaniac, don't you think?</span>
8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Present progressive tense of swim
    8·2 answers
  • What was the significance of the Battle of Stalingrad?
    8·2 answers
  • Fallacies:_____.Select all that apply.
    12·1 answer
  • How might a student benefit from writing clerihews?
    11·1 answer
  • Read the excerpt from "The Storyteller." A dissentient opinion came from the aunt. "A most improper story to tell to young child
    12·1 answer
  • Please summarize this. i will mark brainliest!
    12·2 answers
  • Refer to lines 13-17: nothing which we.... In me understand'.
    11·1 answer
  • What negative and positive actions did the Puritans take?
    8·2 answers
  • This passage is mostly about: a. the use of candles to provide heat b. the modern usage of candles c. the ways ancient people ma
    7·1 answer
  • Which best explains why a poet might organize a poem into a sequence?
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!