Answer:
1. ghazis
2. Shi'a
3. Janissaries
4. Byzantine
5. protection or religious freedom
6. Sufism
7. Ismail
8. Akbar
9. All three empires were ruled by Muslims, but they contained large populations of non-Muslims. Trade was the backbone of the economies in all three empires. All three empires were conquered by force by ambitious young men. At some point in all three places, religious tolerance was practiced. A mix of good and bad leaders ruled in all three empires, and all declined eventually.
10. There were many differences as well: the Mughals mostly ruled over Hindus, whereas the populations in the Safavid and Ottoman empires were mostly Muslim. In the Safavid Empire, Shi'ism was the official religion. The Mughals had a more difficult time maintaining control, as local lords had less loyalty and established their own kingdoms. The Safavids largely declined due to internal strife, and the Ottomans declined largely due to outside threats.
11. There are many reasons why rulers may have been motivated to adopt a policy of religious tolerance. First, all three empires were very large and contained people from many different religious backgrounds. Therefore, in order to maintain peace and rule over a diverse population, tolerance was a wise policy. Second, they all relied on trade to create wealth. They controlled important trading routes that connected people of various religious beliefs, and it was better to have a diverse citizenry to encourage trade with other peoples. Third, the practice of religious tolerance has roots in the Quran. It was an established practice among Muslim leaders.
Explanation:
<span>when the Confederates attacked Fort Sumter.</span>
Hint: Google Search
An internal conflict is when a character struggles in his mind and heart over a decision. Examples abound. ... An example would be Hamlet's inaction as caused by internal conflict or mental struggle arising from opposing demands or impulses from his family, his beloved, and from himself.
An internal conflict is the struggle occurring within a character's mind. Things such as the character views for, but can't quite reach. As opposed to external conflict, in which a character is grappling some force outside of him or herself, such as wars or a chain breaking off a bike, or not being able to get past a road block. The dilemma posed by an internal conflict is usually some ethical or emotional question. Indicators of internal conflict would be a character's hesitation or self-posing questions like "what was it I did wrong?".[1] An internal conflict can also be a decision-making issue.
The term "internal conflict" is also widely used to describe a military conflict within a nation, such as a civil war.[2] An internal conflict is a non-international conflict. It can be because of political, economic or religious causes.