John Julius Norwich makes a point of saying in the introduction to his history of the popes that he is “no scholar” and that he is “an agnostic Protestant.” The first point means that while he will be scrupulous with his copious research, he feels no obligation to unearth new revelations or concoct revisionist theories. The second means that he has “no ax to grind.” In short, his only agenda is to tell us the story. Norwich declares that he is an agnostic Protestant with no axe to grind: his aim is to tell the story of the popes, from the Roman period to the present, covering them neither with whitewash nor with ridicule. Even more disarmingly, he insists that he has no pretensions to scholarship and writes only for “the average intelligent reader”. But he adds: “I have tried to maintain a certain lightness of touch.” And that, it seems, is the opening through which a fair amount of outrageous anecdote and Gibbonian dry wit is allowed to enter the narrative.
The 5th Amendment is all about due process, self incrimination...
idk tbh i just learned this not so long ago but i hope this helped
The conflict was over the fact that American settlers continued to go explore more lands despite the Native Americans' protests, leading to dispute with the Native Americans and American settlers.
