Answer:
Considering these questions:
1. What if Napoleon had never been born? (In what ways would history have been different? Do you think someone else would have done what Napoleon did? Why?)
<em />
<em>a. If Napoleon was never born, someone else would have been born to undertake his roles but not in exact ways because nature abhors vacuum.</em>
<em>b. History would have been different because no two persons are the same and are created to perform exactly the same roles in nature. They might undertake similar ventures but not exactly the same at the given time.</em>
<em>
c. Yes someone else would have done what Napoleon did but in his own way. As earlier said no two persons are the same with the same mission. </em>
2. The French Revolution began as a struggle for the rights of the people against a single ruler with all the power. It ended by giving all power to another single ruler. Why do you think that happened?
Answer: It happened because the Public cannot be King, it is only a person that shall be given the people's mandate to lead the others. The only thing the people abhor or do not tolerate is high-handedness of a ruler not a leader. No leader is an absolute, that was why we should not allow too much power to be concentrated in an individual because of abuse. L<em>ord Acton said " Power corrupts but absolute Power corrupts absolutely."</em>
I believe it is B. Pls give brainlist
Answer:
The limits that artifacts on American civilizations pre-1600 have as historical sources are that the artifacts found in different locations cannot definitely establish a conclusion about the location of the Native American tribes or the type of society they lived in.
hope this helps!
Explanation:
I would love to help but I don't think I have studied this
