Absolutism was a very common form of government in Europe between the 16th and 19th centuries and defended the theory of the king's absolute power over the entire nation. The power of kings during the <u>Middle Ages </u>was considered limited compared to the absolutist period, as there was a lot of political fragmentation and the king's influence depended on a relationship of vassalage, in which the exchange of favors between kings and nobles guaranteed real power.
As modern nations were being structured, mainly England, France and Spain, and as trade resurfaced in Europe, a new social class emerged with great economic power: the bourgeoisie. For the bourgeoisie, the political and economic fragmentation that existed since the Middle Ages was not interesting, as it affected their business, mainly because of the differences in currency and taxes existing from one province to another (even in provinces of the same kingdom, there were these differences in currency and taxes).
The nobility, in turn, welcomed the concentration of power in the figure of the monarch as a way to guarantee control of the lands he owned. Thus, the concentration of power in the hands of the king was a demand from the rising bourgeoisie and also from the nobility.
<span>B. categorize concentration camp prisoners</span>
Joseph Stalin was the dictator of Soviet Union.
B. Soviet Union.
What we can say with certainty is that Clinton served as president during the last eight years of a decade-long economic expansion that stands as the longest boom in U.S. history. Clinton saw a gain of nearly 21 million jobs during his tenure .Certainly Clinton deserves some credit for that remarkable economic growth, but just as certainly he can’t claim all the credit. How much he deserves is a matter of opinion that will probably be debated for years to come. By the time he left office, the economy was slowing rapidly, and it slipped into recession<span> in March 2001, just weeks after George W. Bush was sworn in.</span>
Answer:
It is not true that historians have the freedom to omit parts of evidence that they do not agree with.
Explanation:
Historians are academic professionals whose job is to collect events that occurred in the past, interpret them, and explain their development and consequences, including making connections between those events in the past and events in the present.
For this reason, historians cannot suppress content or events with which they do not agree, because if they did, they would be modifying the course of events and, therefore, reproducing an account of the events that would not coincide with reality.
