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
aev [14]
3 years ago
5

1. TRUE or FALSE: The term polytheism means the belief in only one god. True or false

History
2 answers:
zmey [24]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

False.

Explanation:

Monotheism means belief in one God. Polytheism, like the Romans, Greeks, and Spartans believe in more than one god.

Eddi Din [679]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:false

Explanation:

Poly means many

You might be interested in
6. How did Caesar acquire his riches?
zaharov [31]

Answer:

Marcus Licinius Crassus is considered to be the wealthiest man in Roman history. Extremely adept at making money, he parlayed that success into leading positions in government and the military but was ultimately undone by a series of unwise decisions.

The son of a well-known senator who also served as consul and censor, Crassus began his public life by marrying the wife of his recently dead older brother and allying himself with Sulla, who later ruled Rome as dictator. Crassus led a group of soldiers who won a crucial battle that turned the tide of the civil war.

This alliance proved fruitful for Crassus's ambitions of wealth. As Sulla set about getting rid of his opponents, Crassus followed up by buying their properties at cut-rate prices and then selling them at large profits. He had amassed quite a fortune by this time and had hundreds of slaves at the ready.

Crassus made quite a name for himself by taking advantage of owners whose buildings were burning. Fires were quite common in Rome, yet the city did not have an organized firefighting force. According to several sources, Crassus would rush to a burning building, buy it from the owner, then order his slave-labor firefighters to put out the fire. Crassus would then spruce up the building, using his slave labor, and sell the building at a profit.

He also made quite a bit of money buying and selling slaves and getting the most out of a group of silver mines that his family owned. As a result, he amassed a huge fortune and became powerful and well-known on the strength of his wealth.

Crassus had political and military ambitions and used his wealth to pursue them. He befriended the young, brilliant general Julius Caesar, in part by offering to help finance Caesar's frequent military campaigns. Meanwhile, Crassus was moving up the political ladder. He held the rank of praetor when the Spartacus-led slave revolt broke out, in 73 B.C. After the brilliant slave leader led his men through a series of victories against better-equipped Roman legions, Crassus offered up his own wealth to finance an army to fight Spartacus. Crassus it was who finally defeated Spartacus, ensuring that he was dead and then crucifying 6,000 surviving slaves on the road from Rome to Capua, as a deterrent to future revolt leaders.

Crassus was not the only Roman gaining fame and fortune, however. The aforementioned Caesar was proving his worth in matters military and legal. The greatest general, in terms of field victories, was Pompey, who had secured the ongoing enmity between himself and Crassus by claiming credit for ending the slave revolt by capturing a few thousand slaves in a mop-up operation after Crassus had defeated Spartacus.

Despite this, Crassus and Pompey were named consuls in 70 B.C. Already jealous of each other, they grew even moreso as they shared power. Consulship was only for a year, and the two served in other posts after that. For the next few years, Crassus and Caesar cemented their alliance by doing political and monetary favors for each other.

Crassus and Pompey were still the two most powerful figures in Rome and still did not trust each other. Caesar, sensing an opportunity, convinced them both to take control of the government together, along with him, in what came to be known as the First Triumvirate, in 60 B.C.

As part of the arrangement, Crassus took control of Syria, a wealthy province that, he hoped, would give him even more wealth and an opportunity for more military triumphs. He hoped to lead forces through Syria to attack the Parthians, at the time harassing Rome's eastern flank.

Crassus and Pompey again served as consuls in 55. That same year, the Triumvirate nearly fell apart. Caesar called the other two together at the Lucca Conference, however, and smoothed things over enough for the arrangement to continue.

While Pompey was solidifying his hold on Spain and Caesar was invading Britain and subduing Gaul, Crassus launched his attack on Parthia. It was not at all a success. He was undone by treachery and impetuosity, being the victim of both a double-cross by a supposed neutral party and his own desire to rush into glory rather than fight on terms more favorable to his troops. Thus it was at Carrhae in 53 that a greater Roman infantry force was defeated by an inferior Parthian force of cavalry and archers and Crassus himself was killed in the fighting. Accounts of the details surrounding his death differ. All agree, however, that he did not return to Rome except to be buri

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why did Queen Victoria have to accept democratic and economic<br> reforms?
stira [4]
Queen Victoria restored the reputation of a monarchy tarnished by the extravagance of her royal uncles. She also shaped a new role for the Royal Family, reconnecting it with the public through civic duties.

At just 4ft 11in tall, Victoria was a towering presence as a symbol of her Empire. She and her husband Albert and their nine children came to symbolise a new, confident age.
24 May 1819
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The US should have become an imperial or not ?
Crank

Answer:

the US should NOT have become an imperial

Explanation:

4 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of these is true about pre colombian north and south america
nirvana33 [79]

Answer:

c) they had complex societies

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Which statement best describes a disadvantage of indirect democracy over direct democracy?
Xelga [282]
Indirect democracy means that people don't vote themselves, but that they choose representatives to vote for them. 

It's typically more efficient than direct democracy, because less people need to directly participate - only the representatives. 

however, the disadvantage is that some people's voices won't be heard - so the correct answer is B, for example when their representatives are not aware of them.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Why did richard nixon want to have better relations with china apex?
    14·2 answers
  • What is the white mans burden
    9·1 answer
  • In addition to the payoff of $1 million, what else did the Denver Post get?
    5·2 answers
  • Why did the north wanted to pass the wilmont proviso bill into law?
    14·1 answer
  • Why did the Aztecs engage in human sacrifice?
    6·1 answer
  • 20 POINTS. PLS HURRY.
    11·2 answers
  • What do historians think Machu Picchu was mostly likely used for?
    13·2 answers
  • Do you think Korea would be better off as one nation or divided into 2 nations?
    12·2 answers
  • Spanish assignment :For those who watched the movie Coco, please answer these questions. Will give brainliest
    10·1 answer
  • HELP ME PLZ I WILL GIVE BRAINLY PLUS 50 POINTS
    8·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!