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
Whitepunk [10]
3 years ago
7

How were colonial reactions to the Stamp Act, the Townshend Acts, and the Tea Act similar?

History
2 answers:
Vilka [71]3 years ago
6 0
B.) Colonists boycotted certain British goods.
Pani-rosa [81]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

B.) Colonists boycotted certain British goods.

Explanation:

In the years leading up to the Revolutionary War, the American colonists became unhappy with several laws passed by the British Parliament. Some of these included the Stamp Act, the Townshed Acts and the Tea Act. Boycotts were encouraged both to save money (due to the growing debt of the colonies) and to force Great Britain to repel the laws. Along with the boycotts, there was a growing non-importation movement among colonial merchants.

You might be interested in
Which of the following statements describes Italian Renaissance art? Select all the accurate descriptions. A. They rarely depict
Anestetic [448]
C:The figures have ideal beauty and physical perfection.<span>d:The art sometimes depicts classical topics or stories</span>
5 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Do you agree with President Harry Truman’s approach to Vyacheslav Molotov? Or would you have done things differently? Why or why
const2013 [10]

Answer:

Explanation: The Soviet Union had broken the Yalta agreement, and Truman was thoroughly upset with Stalin. Truman wanted to show the Soviet leaders that he would firmly oppose them if they tried to spread communism in Eastern Europe. Truman’s approach toward Molotov was justified. He wanted to convey the message to Stalin through Molotov that Stalin should keep his promises of holding a free election in Poland. Stalin had made this promise at the Yalta Conference.

7 0
3 years ago
Why had The traditional Roman religion lost its popularity
Gnesinka [82]

The continued vitality of paganism led Marcian, who became emperor of the east in 450 upon the death of Theodosius II, to repeat earlier prohibitions against pagan rites. Marcian decreed, in the year 451, that those who continued to perform the pagan rites would suffer the confiscation of their property and be condemned to death. Marcian also prohibited any attempt to re-open the temples and ordered that they were to remain closed. In addition to this, in order to encourage strict enforcement of the law a fine of fifty pounds of gold was imposed on any judge or governor, as well as the officials under him, who did not enforce this law.[94] However, not even this had the desired effect, as we find Leo I, who succeeded Marcian in 457, publishing a new law in 472 which imposed severe penalties for the owner of any property who was aware that Pagan rites were performed on his property. If the property owner was of high rank he was punished by the loss of his rank or office and by the confiscation of his property. If the property owner was of lower status he would be physically tortured and then condemned to labor in the mines for the rest of his life.[95]

Two more laws against paganism, which may be from this period, are preserved in the Justinian Code.[96] After the deposition of Avitus, who ruled as emperor of the West from 455 to 456, there seems to have been a conspiracy among the Roman nobles to place the pagan general Marcellinus on the throne to restore Paganism; but it came to nothing.[97]

In the year 457, Leo I became the first emperor to be crowned by the Patriarch of Constantinople. Anthemius (467-472), one of the last Western Roman emperors, seems to have planned a pagan revival at Rome.[98] He was a descendant of Procopius, the relative of Julian. Anthemius gave Messius Phoebus Severus, a pagan philosopher who was a close friend of his, the important offices of Praefectus urbi of Rome, Consul and Patrician. Anthemius placed the image of Hercules, in the act of vanquishing the Nemean lion, on his coins. The murder of Anthemius (by Ricimer) destroyed the hopes of those pagans who believed that the traditional rites would now be restored.[99] Shortly thereafter, in 476, the western emperor was deposed by Odoacer, who became the first barbarian king of Italy. In spite of this disaster, pagans made one last attempt to revive the pagan rites. In 484, the Magister militum per Orientem, Illus, revolted against Zeno and raised his own candidate, Leontius, to the throne. Leontius hoped to reopen the temples and restore the ancient ceremonies and because of this many pagans joined in his revolt against Zeno.[98] Illus and Leontius were compelled, however, to flee to a remote Isaurian fortress, where Zeno besieged them for four years. Zeno finally captured them in 488 and promptly had them executed.[100]

As a result of the revolt, Zeno instituted a harsh persecution of pagan intellectuals. With the failure of the revolt of Leontius, some pagans became disillusioned and many became Christian, or simply pretended to, in order to avoid persecution.[101] The Christianization of the Roman Empire became complete when the emperor Anastasius, who came to the throne in 491, was forced to sign a written declaration of orthodoxy before his coronation.


5 0
3 years ago
If the Brown vs. Board of Education decision had been different what do you think schools would look like today?
Ivenika [448]
Hello!

Brown v. Board of Education decided that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. It overturned the previous "separate but equal" doctrine which was originally decided in the Plessy v. Ferguson case. 

If the Brown v. Board of Education decision had been different, schools today could potentially still be racially segregated. This means that schools for colored students would be separate from schools for white students. 

I hope this helps answer your question! Have an awesome day!
7 0
3 years ago
Indira Gandhi became India’s first female prime minister because
MA_775_DIABLO [31]

Indira Gandhi became India’s first female prime minister because the people of India voted her in.

In the 1967 Lok sabha election, Indira Gandhi, the prime ministerial candidate of Indian National Congress won a landslide victory and thus became the first female Prime Minister of India. She remained PM of India from 1967 to 1977 and again from 1980 to 1984.

8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • The largest group of non-willing people brought to America were taken from ______.
    5·2 answers
  • Describe the whiskey rebellion. and the government's action in response to it
    12·1 answer
  • Compare the roman empire to the persian empire
    13·1 answer
  • In what way was the Haitian rebellion like the American Revolutionary War?
    12·1 answer
  • What was the name given to the series of laws that closed Boston harbor, required colonists to put up British soldiers in their
    12·1 answer
  • If a judge wanted to sentence someone to death for littering on the sidewalk, what amendment would prevent this from happening?
    13·2 answers
  • The ruler of which Muslim empire created an enormous legal code for his empire?
    7·2 answers
  • How did the Cajuns arrive in Louisiana?
    9·1 answer
  • How did parliament decide to repay the debt from the french and Indian War??
    6·1 answer
  • Kong Rong (153-September 26, 208), courtesy name Wenju. He was from the State of Lu (governing present-day Qufu, Shandong). A wr
    9·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!