<span>The Byzantine had major effect on early Rus culture. One of the first major effects is in their written language. Prior to this they used mainly runic script, but after contact they developed a modified Greek script, Cyrillic, to use in their writings. They would also add some items of culture, such as language to these peoples. The word Czar would be developed from Byzantine and Roman culture, from their word Caesar, who was the Emperor and originally derived from the Emperor Julius Caesar. This root word is found in many languages in the area, including Kaiser in Germany. The last impact would be the religion. Greek Orthodoxy, a break away from the church in Rome, gained a foothold here in Russia where it stays until today. The remainder of Western Europe and even some of the Slavic regions are still predominantly Roman Catholic, with exception to Russia and its surrounding regions.</span>
I believe the answer is: C. He was worried about his border with North Korea being in jeopardy.
Mao zedong feared that if he let the allied forces took control of north korea, the allied forces would be able to establish a navy base on that territory and exposed the chinese mainland from naval attack from north Korea. Because of this, he decided to help the north korean with both millitary soldiers and supplies.
It largely depends on what city state we are talking about. People at this time didn't identify as Greeks they were Thebans, Ionians, Athenians, Thracians and so on.
Syracuse and Corinth had well developed democratic systems and many of the other city states had democratic components. Even the militaristic duel monarchy of the Spartans had some democracy. The Spartan Ephors were elected and had enough power to exile kings if desired. Let's look at the most commonly cited city state though, Athens.
Athenians utilized a direct democracy compared to Roman republic and everything would be voted upon. Who would lead the armies, what kind of trade arrangements, who the diplomatic envoys would be; pretty much everything. Romans elected specific individuals to handle regional business like a representative of the people, the senators and provincial governors.
Athens was slightly more equal then the Roman system. Under the Athenian law all free citizens technically had equal rights in the government. In Rome the Patricians, Equestrians and Plebeians had strictly defined roles both legally and legislatively.
The reverse of the above point were the inclusiveness of the two systems. Athens had draconian regulations on who qualified as a free member of the city state. Rome comparatively welcomed a large swath of people and actively sought to latinize the frontiers.
Rome had two consistent political parties. Politics would be marked by conflict between the Conservatives and the Populares. Athens comparatively had many political blocks that were constantly evolving and changing beliefs.
The most distinct difference between the system is probably the adaptability of them though. The Roman system was extremely complex, but was constantly changing and adapting to meet the changing times. The Athenian system would become bogged down as time progressed and would essentially become little more then another oligarchy towards its end.
The King and parliament believed they had the right to tax the colonies. They decided to require several kinds of taxes from the colonists to help pay for the French and Indian War. ... Other laws, such as the Townsend Acts, passed in 1767, required the colonists to pay taxes on imported goods like tea.
<em>The sculpture portrays David, a biblical figure. Therefore, they viewed David as a perfect symbol of Florence, as he captured the unwavering courage, unexpected strength, and historic perseverance that they saw in themselves....</em>
