Answer: B) They experienced periods of conflict, invasion, and warfare. D) They were heavily influenced by Buddhism.
Explanation:
Answer:
Conflicts were regarding to the extraordinary power given to the president and the Senate which would have a tyrannical rule.
Conflict regarding the passage of the Bill of Rights.
Debates over ratification in the fall and winter of 1787 - 88.
Explanation:
According to the Philadelphia Convention - a new Constitution for United States provided for a strong government with an extraordinary amount of power given to the president and the senate. The Anti - Federalists charged that the new federal government resembled a monarchy in its concentration of power at the expense of liberty. The Federalists rejected the arguments of the Anti - Federalists by relocating it in the people. They on the other hand argued that since the constitution which represented the people had sought to instruct and control the institutions of government, thus all sovereignty rested with the people and that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights,
The Anti - Federalists held that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty.
Under the leadership of Madison, the first federal Congress attempted to fulfill this promise and proposed twelve amendments to the Constitution. In 1791, ten of them were ratified by the states, and these became the Bill of Rights.
Current implications:
In the United States,
1. There is a federal court system.
2. The lower house represented the people; it became the civic faith of the United States to which all Americans must unquestionably adhere. The emergence of this rambunctious middling democracy was the most significant consequence of the American Revolution.
Americans became angry with president jimmy carter
This is definitely a “History” or “Politics & Government”” question, not “Travel” and I agree with Sue, you’re avoiding doing your own homework. I’m not going to do it for you, but I’ll try and put you on the right track.
The “Roman” institutions (caro amico napoletano, il ragazzo sta parlando della Roma antica, anzi di Bisanzio, che aveva un principio legislatvo ben diverso dal nostro, uno che “funzionava” per essere chiari) definitely influenced the Founding fathers. Some aspects are obvious (The Senate, Governors of Roman Provinces/US States, Ethics) others are less obvious (Representation, civil Rights of citizens, Fiscal system).
The basic differences are of “anglo saxon” inspiration (Pursuit of happiness, Common law, Inviolability of office).
The end result is a very interesting combination of both, which should make US citizens proud of their constitution and system of Government.
Compare Obama’s political platform with the Gracchi brothers, and both Bushes with the Dictator Sulla. You should get quite an interesting result.
The Justinian Code came very late in Roman History, when “Rome” had ceased to exist, and it’s spirit continued to live in Byzantium, in a very watered “Greek” community. In terms of law making, it is certainly interesting, because it is an attempt to sum up all that was positive in the “inherited system”, but it should not be taken out of it’s Historical context, unless you believe the US has reached the same stage of “decline”, which I don’t.
Stricter laws in Roman times? I would say more Draconian, according to the times.
Look up a description of Gibbons’ “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” and you should have enough background data to write your paper.
It helped him come up with his famous theory of gravity and the laws of gravity.
