One
Your first instinct is probably to choose the free response essay. If you did, you would not be correct. A free response starts out with you making an opinion statement, but you have to be able to back it up, and your reasons ought to be logical.
DBQ you be your next guess, because the letters aren't well known and maybe it doesn't require any back up. Unfortunately it does. DBQ stands for Document Based Questions. That means you have to check things very carefully.
Globally Thinking Essay requires that you pick a global issue that you could apply to something local.
A process essay is what its name suggests. You are writing a procedure to do something. I don't think you need any backup material for this. You just have to give the right steps to do something. A document won't help you.
In my day this would not depend on any background notations if you were good enough. Simply writing an interpretation would be good enough. I don't think that's true now.
These terms are all knew to me but I would go with the process essay. It is cut and dried and I don't think it requires documentation, not at the level I'm thinking of. A scholarly paper might require great care in the directions for the procedure.
I'd pick D.
Two
A thesis statement should start out to be very general and then it should be confined in some way. Statements E (especially), D, C and B are too specific to start with. The true statement and general one is likely A.
Three
The definition of Histiography is the study of the way history is written. The first thing you say about any study should be what and not how. What is histiography? is the first thing you have to deal with. Top Down and Bottom up are methods of looking at history. Both are valid depending on what you are writing about. As usual I don't think any of them are really a choice or they all are. A is your best choice in my mind, but that's a poor choice of a bad lot.
The problem with the answers is that they suggest change. That's not what Histiography is is about. It is just the study of how history is written. For example Top Down is about the leaders who have created history and bottom up is how people have lived under that rule. There is no mention of one being superior to another or that we need to revise anything.
<span>The Austro-Hungarian empire was endangered by feelings of nationalism because there were multiple national groups within the empire. So fulfilling nationalist goals would mean a dividing of the empire. The mere fact that the question refers to the empire as "Austro-Hungarian" is already a strong hint of the issue. Prior to 1867, it had been known as simply the Austrian Empire, but a compromise in 1867 meant that a dual monarchy was recognized (an Austrian ruler and a Hungarian ruler). The Hungarians were given self-governing authority over their own internal affairs in their portion of the empire. Other people groups within the empire would seek their own recognition as well -- Czechs, Serbs, Croats, etc. So where nationalism was a uniting factor in regions like the Italian peninsula and the German territories north of Austria, for the Austrian empire, nationalism was a dividing force.</span>
Answer:
A People could not create a fair system with three separate powers is the correct answer.
Explanation:
Centinel was the alias that was used for writing articles to Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer and Philadelphia Freeman's Journal from October 1787 till April 1788. Historians consider that the articles were written by Samuel Bryan. Some of the articles were also written by George Bryan and Eleazer Oswald. Samuel Bryan was an anti-federalist who was against the proposed Constitution of the United States. He was a resident of Pennsylvania and wrote during the Confederation period.
The answer to 10-(-12)/4 x 3 = 19
