Answer;
<span>European nations would have gotten more of a foothold in China.
</span>
If the imperial dynasty had continued to rule China, it is most likely that European nations would have gotten more of a foothold in China.
<span>Chinese civilization is one of the world’s oldest continuous civilizations. The three major Dynasties that stood above the rest were;
</span>-The Han Dynasty that ruled from 206 B.C.E. to 220 C.E.
<span>It was able to maintain its bureaucracy and military through a more efficient and thorough system of taxation than many contemporary empires.
-The Tan Dynasty ruled China from 618 to 907 C.E.
- The Qing Dynasty, it was China's last and one of its greatest dynasties, ruling from 1644 to 1911.</span>
He was the governor of new York
The correct matching of the given sentences are:
a. China only wanted silver, giving China more trade power until Europeans flooded China with opium, giving Europe more power. Chinese tried to fight back, but the British would take over the trade by force.
Opium War in China
b. Europeans wanted to extend their control due to industrialization; to do this, they focused on the continent of Africa, where almost ALL of Africa became a European colony.
Scramble for Africa.
<h3>What is Colonization?</h3>
This refers to the use of military or economic might to be able to rule over a country usually through proxy.
Hence, we can see that the other answers are:
c. Guns, especially the machine gun, created a huge advantage for Europeans in battles, making it nearly meaningless for other people/countries of Africa to fight back.
Why are guns such an important part of colonization in Africa?
d. Weapon technology and use of existing power sources, like princes who would receive special benefits, worked to European advantage.
Why was the indirect rule able to work?
Read more about colonization here:
brainly.com/question/510352
#SPJ1
Answer: I would choose A.
Explanation:
Looking at a question, it's more of an opinion than a right or wrong answer?
Nevertheless, personally I agree with the quote. Instead of a sole ruler who wants to do everything himself and makes it known to people below his status, a good leader would be somewhat "among us". He does his job, and lets us do ours (not disturbing us), or in most cases, leading us instead of controlling us. This would be more productive and meaningful, and peoples' morale and teamwork is boosted.
