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
valentinak56 [21]
3 years ago
7

Does James I make a good case for divine right? Why or why not?

History
1 answer:
DIA [1.3K]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

Yes

Explanation:

Every human should have the right to liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Divine rights are something that cant be taken away.

You might be interested in
What was the purpose of herodotus'history?
Debora [2.8K]
Herodotus is famously known by the dual moniker, “Father of History, Father of Lies”. Whether or not he deserves the latter epithet is perhaps up for debate. He is sometimes criticized as unserious for his many cultural digressions and travelog sidebars. It would, however, take a truly obtuse and narrow-minded critic to deny him the former title. History as a thing separate from record-keeping and chronicling begins with Herodotus. In and among his entertaining and diverting rabbit trails is some of the best and most important history ever written. He shows those who would do history after him what they were to strive for. It is in the opening lines of the Histories where Herodotus establishes the scope and purpose of history, and in doing so establishes its role in man’s attempt to understand his world.

The lines which begin the Histories are a model of clarity and simplicity. There is no excess rhetoric, no flowery overstatement. Herodotus states succinctly in the above passage the purpose for his account. His “enquiries” (ἱστορία) were made to serve memory and understanding—memory in preserving the deeds of men, understanding in examining how the circumstances of those actions came about.

Herodotus’ treatment of memory in this passage is more than just a simple remembrance. He is doing more than just recording a how, where, and when. The preservation of memory here is active, even aggressive, as if time were attempting to destroy the things of man, and history is a brandished weapon holding it at bay.

Almost as an afterthought, Herodotus appends onto his paean to memory a secondary goal. Among the matters covered will be “…the cause of the conflict between the Greeks and non-Greeks.” This is just casually thrown in as if to remind you to look for it along the way. Here Herodotus is understating his purpose, and by playing down this item, he shows its importance. The discovery of the causes of action, and why men have acted as they have, is the heart of the study of history.

So what is the cause of the conflict between the Greeks and the non-Greeks? What was the spark that began the fire that led the largest army in antiquity to cross from Asia to Europe in order to subdue the cities of Attica and the Peloponnese? Herodotus’ examination of this is more subtle than some will give him credit for, and is composed of one part scholarly guile, and one part showmanship. He will look at the opinions of the Asians and the Greeks, and then settle on the pattern that will lead him through his entire enquiry.

“According to learned Persians, it was the Phoenicians who caused the conflict....”1 So begins Herodotus’ examination of the causes of the great conflict. Right away, he is already showing historians their business - he is sourcing his work. He is telling you whose opinion he is working with. As he proceeds, he relates the Persians’ story of Phoenicians going to Argos and abducting Io. In a turnabout, some Greeks go to Tyre and abduct Europa, while some others go to Colchis and abduct Princess Medea (there is some confusion amongst the Persians as to whether the former group were properly Greek, or Cretan). All of the second round of abductors justify their actions by pointing to Io’s earlier capture.

Finally, the son of the Trojan king, Alexander (Paris), abducts Helen from her home in Sparta. At this point, according to the Persians, the Greeks gain culpability, for “…so far it had only been a matter of abducting women from one another, but the Greeks…took the initiative and launched a military strike against Persia.”2

While it is true that the Persians viewed this kind of rapacious activity to be illegal, they found the Greek reaction to Helen’s abduction odd because, “…it is stupid to get worked up about it....“ They viewed the Greek reaction to be unjust and “…date the origin of their hostility towards the Greece from the fall of Illium.” 3

After sourcing these opinions, and running through them, Herodotus gives his own opinion: forget the abductions; they are not the issue.


3 0
3 years ago
Lee’s vision for invading pennsylvania
Mkey [24]

Answer:

The implication in Lee’s reports that his goals in the Gettysburg campaign were limited, and largely achieved, is at least partly consistent with some modern studies of the campaign. They challenge the traditional view that Gettysburg was a disastrous Confederate defeat that shattered Lee’s hopes for a war-winning victory on Northern soil. They also reject the notion that Gettysburg was a crucial turning point toward ultimate Union victory in the war. According to historians who question these traditional interpretations, Lee’s incursion into Pennsylvania was a raid, not an invasion. A smashing victory over the Army of the Potomac would have been a nice bonus, but it was not the main goal of the raid. The Union victory at Gettysburg was merely defensive, and the Army of Northern Virginia got away with its spoils and lived to fight another day— indeed, many other days, as the war continued for almost two more years. It was only in retrospect and in memory that Gettysburg became the climactic battle and turning point of the war.

Explanation:

Some of these arguments are self-evidently correct. The war did go on for almost two more years, and the Confederacy still had a chance to win it as late as August 1864 by wearing out the Northern will to continue fighting. Rebel foraging parties did scour hundreds of square miles of south-central Pennsylvania for whatever they could find and take—including many African Americans carried back to Virginia into slavery.

Hope this helps : )

7 0
3 years ago
I like to go on long wlaks
prohojiy [21]
That’s nice :) have a good day or night
3 0
2 years ago
1.) a summary about the battle of bunker hill
AlladinOne [14]

Answer: Bunker Hill May 17, 1755, Battle of Long Island August 27, 1776, Battle of Trenton 26.12.1776, Battle of Saratoga autumn 1777.

Explanation:

The attack on Bunker Hill was carried out by members of British troops led by William Howe. He led an army of about 2,500 soldiers, and on the other hand, there were about 1,500 Americans in defense. The battle took place on the Bunker above Hill in Charlestown near Boston. The attack for the British was disastrous because over 1000 soldiers lost their lives. On the other hand, about 400 Americans were killed. The battle also represented a moral victory for the Americans.

The Battle of Long Island took place in what is now Brooklyn, New York. The Barritans sought to conquer territories to control the port. The British were led by William Howe and defeated the American defense in several attacks with the army. Howe had over 30,000 troops. With quality military maneuvers, Howe brought the British army behind the back and the side of the Americans, which led to total disintegration among American troops.

The army of General George Washington defeated the garrison of Hessian mercenaries on December 26, 1776, and January 3, 1777, on two occasions. Victories are considered one of the key details of the war for independence. The battles gave the Americans a huge psychological advantage. The victory established control over New Jersey and led to the unification of American troops. The Battle of Saratoga brought an advantage in the war in favor of the Americans and decided the war's winner for independence. British General John Burgoyne led a large army. The U.S. military surrounded his troops. A British general with two military maneuvers tried unsuccessfully to break out of the ring. In a hopeless situation, he withdrew with the troops in Saratoga and soon had to surrender.

8 0
2 years ago
How do liberals and conservatives view government
slega [8]
Conservatives want smaller government and less government spending(In general). Liberals like a bigger government and more government spending to put it simply
3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • How did the transportation revolution reshape the United States ?
    15·1 answer
  • What did Prince henry from Portugal sponser and why?
    11·1 answer
  • What regions were added to the United States from 1803 to 1819
    5·2 answers
  • URGENT
    5·1 answer
  • Do you believe Truman’s directive was followed? Explain
    8·1 answer
  • Why was trade important to the economics of the Italian city states​
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following statements about Brendt line is false<br>​
    5·1 answer
  • Which part of the Declaration of Independence mostly show how the founding fathers were influenced by John Locke's theory of nat
    9·1 answer
  • What did mr. Rutledge mean by it will increase the commodities of which they will become carriers?
    12·1 answer
  • How did World War One end?(full story/all sides)
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!