Napoleon Bonaparte had a contradictory character. He had an unusual personality. The writer Germaine de Staël described him as being ‘neither good nor violent, neither gentle nor cruel’, which denotes that he was <em>neutral</em>, a<em> calm </em>and <em>calculated/prudent </em>person. he was considered<em> unique </em>and <em>very special </em>for the actions he took and the thinking he put into taking decisions. By the French writer Stendhal, he was seen as <em>very </em><span><em>ambitious</em> (''endowed with amazing abilities and a dangerous ambition’'). He was very <em>firm</em> when it was about facing his <span>opponents. Even more, he could get even mad when his passions had to face disputes. He was a very difficult person, but that made him more <em>powerful </em>than the others. Also, it is said that ''his diversity (<em>diverse</em>) made him <em>fascinating''</em>. He was hostile to his older brother. He had a military, legislative and <span>diplomatic talent. |He was<em> popular</em>, but his more of defects were: picky (<span>squeamish), selfish, egocentric.</span></span></span></span>
Answer:
What humans perceive with their senses is not always true.
Explanation:
The Han dynasty tried to fix the problems other dynasties had fallen to, such as government that was too centralized or fragmented. Instead, Han Gaozu allocated power to his family. This didn't work too well either, but the dynasty was still successful.
The Qin dynasty was very short, yet of great importance. The founder, Qin Shihuangdi, established centralized rule and divided China into provinces. He relied on his own loyal servants to rule the provinces rather than established nobility and disarmed regional military forces.
<span>
</span>The Zhou dynasty established the Mandate of Heaven, a belief that a ruler's authority came from a higher power and could also be taken away if he acted unjustly. In addition to losing office, a ruler could sometimes have further consequences, like the destruction of his ancestral temple.
Answer:
The relationship between Massasoit and New England colonists
Explanation:
So thinking about the one that doesn't have any association with trickery and war, you automatically can rule out the walking purchase, because the native Americans and English colonies were going up against each other for land. Then you have the Pequots and Connecticut colonists, if you remember, they do have not have good relations with each other and have had a war before, so that leaves you with the last option which is
The relationship between Massasoit and New England colonists.
Hope this will help :)
