Answer:
In my opinion yes.
Explanation:
I think that it caused more tension sectionally because there was already tension between slave and non-slave states so it's growing economy just added more. Hope this helped!! Have a good day :)
Answer:
B. Suleyman the Magnificent led the Ottoman Turks to the height of power
Explanation:
Suleyman the Magnificent is one of the most, if not the most beloved historical figure among the Turkish people. There are numerous reasons for this. Unlike the typical Turkic ruler, Suleyman was very well educated, which led to him making multiple reforms and wise decisions. He prompted cultural development of the empire. Suleyman was a big admirer of the arts, so he lifted the significance of the arts in the society, as well as getting artists to make numerous beautiful things, especially around the capital. He was also a great military tactician, and managed to expand the empire further north in the Balkan Peninsula by defeating the Serbians and capturing Belgrade.
Since you provide no options,
The most significant result probably that Kiev was able to increase its wealth
After Kiev increased its trade around that region , they're able to buy more manpower and equipments that would help them in their cause
Answer:
<h2>Hi mate PLEASE MARK ME BRAINLIEST IF MY ANSWER IS CORRECT PLEASE </h2>
Explanation:
The three-fifths compromise was an agreement reached by the state delegates at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. Under the compromise, every enslaved American would be counted as three-fifths of a person for taxation and representation purposes.
Origins of the Three-Fifths Compromise
At the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, the founders of the United States were in the process of forming a union. Delegates agreed that the representation each state received in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College would be based on population, but the issue of slavery was a sticking point between the South and the North.
It benefitted Southern states to include enslaved people in their population counts, as that calculation would give them more seats in the House of Representatives and thus more political power. Delegates from Northern states, however, objected on the grounds that enslaved people could not vote, own property, or take advantage of the privileges that White men enjoyed. (None of the lawmakers called for the end of slavery, but some of the representatives did express their discomfort with it. George MAS on of VIRG inia called for anti-slave trade laws, and Gouverneur Morris of New York called slavery “a nefarious institution.”)
Ultimately, the delegates who objected to enslavement as an institution ignored their moral QUAL-ms in favor of unifying the states, thus leading to the creation of the three-fifths compromise.
