Answer:
(See explanation for further details)
Explanation:
As monarchy was seen as a form of government where people were subject to the rule of monarch and their families, in which people only have rights as privileges granted by the monarch. Whereas democracy represented a form where citizens of the same nation have the same rights and duties, and would make them active figures of the construction of nations.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Do you consider Bishop Eusebius’s account to be reliable?
No, really not.
The reason why because his account had created many controversies.
Eusebius has been known as the official historian of the church. He participated in the Council of Nice in 314, organized by Roman Emperor Constantine to revise the religious or historic documents that would end up being in the Bible.
So Eusebius based most of his comments on personal opinions and other historic document's interpretations. It is difficult to say that he did the proper research and had reliable sources. During the Nicea Council, a group of Bishops decided what documents had to be part of the Bible and which not, based on their own criteria. That is not a good indicator of the validity of the documents included, even less we can consider those as sacred.
Well really sending food (large scale) to the areas of Africa would really hurt it more (advise u look into it)
but south africa is an interesting topic
. South Africa is like a piece of easily shaped granite (with a few exceptions)
The answer is A. Right of life,liberty, and property
Market economy
Hope this helps!
