Answer:
In the Ottoman Empire, a millet (Turkish: [millet]) was an independent court of law pertaining to "personal law" under which a confessional community (a group abiding by the laws of Muslim Sharia, Christian Canon law, or Jewish Halakha) was allowed to rule itself under its own laws.
Despite frequently being referred to as a "system", before the nineteenth century the organization of what are now retrospectively called millets in the Ottoman Empire was not at all systematic. Rather, non-Muslims were simply given a significant degree of autonomy within their own community, without an overarching structure for the 'millet' as a whole. The notion of distinct millets corresponding to different religious communities within the empire would not emerge until the eighteenth century.[1] Subsequently, the existence of the millet system was justified through numerous foundation myths linking it back to the time of Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror (r. 1451–81),[2] although it is now understood that no such system existed in the fifteenth century.[3]
During the 19th century rise of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire, as result of the Tanzimat reforms (1839–76), the term was used for legally protected ethno-linguistic minority groups, similar to the way other countries use the word nation. The word millet comes from the Arabic word millah (ملة) and literally means "nation".[3] The millet system has been called an example of pre-modern religious pluralism.[4]
Johann Strauss, author of "A Constitution for a Multilingual Empire: Translations of the Kanun-ı Esasi and Other Official Texts into Minority Languages", wrote that the term "seems to be so essential for the understanding of the Ottoman system and especially the status of non-Muslims".
Please rate, and like, Give me Brainliest Thank you!
The correct chronology would be as follows:
The US government establishes the office of Indian trade. In 1806, Congress created the Office of Indian Trade, an office in charge of supervising the network of public Indian trading factories that the US had from 1795 to 1822. This office was closed in 1822 because of cases of corruption.
The Choctaw sign the treaty of dancing rabbit creek. The Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek was a treaty signed in 1830 between the Choctaw Nation and the United States. This was the first removal treaty put into effect under the Indian Removal Act passed by President Andrew Jackson that same year. As a consequence of this act, the Creek ceded control of large part of their territory in what today is Mississippi in exchange for land in Indian Territory, today Oklahoma.
The Supreme Court rules in Worcester v. Georgia. Worcester v. Georgia was a legal case in which Chief Justice John Marshall ruled, in 1832, that the relationship between the American Indian Nations and the United States was that of nations; consequently, only the federal government, and not the governments of the individual states, had the power to deal with the American Indians.
The US government forces Seminole tribe to relocate from Florida to Indian territory. Per the Indian Removal Act of 1830, the Seminole Nation was forced to relocate to Indian Territory. Some of the Seminoles were removed after signing the Treaty of Payne’s Landing in 1834. However, the majority of the nation declared the treaty illegitimate and refused to leave. This resulted in a struggle known as the Second Seminole War (1835–1842). As a consequence of this war, most of the Seminole Nation had to relocate from Florida to Indian Territory.
Answer:
Imperialism is the state policy, practice, or advocacy of extending power and dominion, especially by direct territorial acquisition or by earning or gaining political and economic control of other territories and peoples.
Explanation:
<em>D. Joint stock colony.</em>
<u>Here I will explain the different colonies and the answer to your question:</u>
<h3>Proprietary Colony</h3>
A proprietary colony is a colony that was given to a certain person or sometimes a group of people under the British crown. These people were called proprietors and they held power over the land in which they owned under the King.
<h3>Charter Colony</h3>
A charter colony is very similar to a proprietary colony, except it was governed by and used a royal charter. This made it so little to no interference from the British crown was present in the colony. Charter colonies were usually run by one person who would be the governor and the individuals of the colony could have a bit more freedom compared to other colonies.
<h3>Royal Colony</h3>
A royal colony is brought directly from the King himself. The King would make the rules overseas and send British government officials to go and run the colony for him. This made it so these colonies were usually used as profit for the British crown and many of the goods found under the Royal colony were sent to England.
<h3>
<em><u>Joint Stock Colony</u></em></h3>
A joint stock colony, which your question is referencing to, was a colony brought directly from investors that were from England. Many companies would sponsor these adventures to current day America, in hopes of getting profit. Individuals would then travel and set up colonies in the New World, where they would then sell items and goods exclusive to that region to the investors who would then make profit.
