All categories

3 years ago

Who did some Christians blame for the spread of the Black Death?

History

2 answers:

masha68 [24]3 years ago

8 0

Answer:

The Jews

Explanation:

The Black Death spread around Europe in 1348. During that period millions died and many Christians believed that those deaths were due to an international conspiracy led by the Jews to poison Christendom.

They believed that the leaders of the Jewish Community in Toledo initiated the plot and the main chief of the conspiracy was Rabbi Peyret.

Because of this Conspiracy, many Jews were arrested and tortured and forced to confess something that did not exist, this rumor led to the destruction of the Jewish community in Strasburg.

Pepsi [2]3 years ago

3 0

I believe the answer is Jews

You might be interested in

Which leadership crisis occurred in the USSR that allowed a totalitarian government to take control?

cupoosta [38]

Answer:

B: Lenin died and Stalin rose to power

edge 2020

Explanation:

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Atatürkün irade-i milliye gazetesini açmasındaki temel amaç nedir?

BaLLatris [955]

Answer:

gence of the newspapers Minbar, İrade-i Milliye and Hakimiyet-i Milliye. He also ... The purpose of this article is to reveal this little-known characteristics of. Mustafa ... Where ever those Christian armies would go, books in major libraries were ... newspaper, Atatürk's speech at the opening of the Sivas Congress took place. In.

Explanation:

i think am not sure

6 0

2 years ago

How are Shinto, Buddhist, and Confucian ideas reflected in Japanese government, literature and gardening?

andre [41]

Buddhist,Shinto and Confucian increased in Japan because of war so a lot of people went there to stay.

4 0

2 years ago

Who assisted James Monroe in the writing of the Monroe doctrine?

netineya [11]

Two things had been uppermost in the minds of Adams and Monroe. In 1821 the Russian czar had proclaimed that all the area north of the fifty-first parallel and extending one hundred miles into the Pacific would be off-limits to non-Russians. Adams had refused to accept this claim, and he told the Russian minister that the United States would defend the principle that the ‘American continents are no longer subjects of any new European colonial establishments.’

More worrisome, however, was the situation in Central and South America. Revolutions against Spanish rule had been under way for some time, but it seemed possible that Spain and France might seek to reassert European rule in those regions. The British, meanwhile, were interested in ensuring the demise of Spanish colonialism, with all the trade restrictions that Spanish rule involved. British foreign secretary George Canning formally proposed, therefore, that London and Washington unite on a joint warning against intervention in Latin America. When the Monroe cabinet debated the idea, Adams opposed it, arguing that British interests dictated such a policy in any event, and that Canning’s proposal also called upon the two powers to renounce any intention of annexing such areas as Cuba and Texas. Why should the United States, he asked, appear as a cockboat trailing in the wake of a British man-of-war?

In the decades following Monroe’s announcement, American policymakers did not invoke the doctrine against European powers despite their occasional military ‘interventions’ in Latin America. Monroe’s principal concern had been to make sure that European mercantilism not be reimposed on an area of increasing importance economically and ideologically to the United States. When, however, President John Tyler used the doctrine in 1842 to justify seizing Texas, a Venezuelan newspaper responded with what would become an increasingly bitter theme throughout Latin America: ‘Beware, brothers, the wolf approaches the lambs.’

Secretary of State William H. Seward attempted a bizarre use of the doctrine in 1861 in hopes of avoiding the Civil War. The United States, said Seward, in order to divert attention from the impending crisis, should challenge supposed European interventions in the Western Hemisphere by launching a drive to liberate Cuba and end the last vestiges of colonialism in the Americas. President Lincoln turned down the idea.

In the 1890s, the United States, once again by unilateral action, extended the doctrine to include the right to decide how a dispute between Venezuela and Great Britain over the boundaries of British Guiana should be settled. Secretary of State Richard Olney told the British, ‘Today the United States is practically sovereign on this continent and its fiat is law upon the subjects to which it confines its interposition…. its infinite resources combined with its isolated position render it master of the situation and practically invulnerable as against any or all other powers.’ The British, troubled by the rise of Germany and Japan, could only acquiesce in American pretensions. But Latin American nations protested the way in which Washington had chosen to ‘defend’ Venezuelan interests.

4 0

2 years ago

100 pts What was the name given to the disagreements between the United States and the Soviet Union at the end of World War II?

sattari [20]

Wartime relations between the United States and the Soviet Union can be considered one of the highpoints in the longstanding interaction between these two great powers. Although not without tensions--such as differing ideological and strategic goals, and lingering suspicions--the collaborative relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union nonetheless was maintained. Moreover, it was instrumental in defeating Nazi Germany in 1945.

The United States greeted the democratic Russian Revolution of February 1917 with great enthusiasm, which cooled considerably with the advent of the Bolsheviks in October 1917. The United States, along with many other countries, refused to recognize the new regime, arguing that it was not a democratically elected or representative government. The policy of non-recognition ended in November 1933, when the United States, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, established full diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, the last major power to do so.

Despite outwardly cordial relations between the two countries, American misgivings regarding Soviet international behavior grew in the late 1930s. The August 1939 Nazi-Soviet Pact, which paved the way for Hitler’s invasion of Poland in September, followed by the Soviet invasion of Poland’s eastern provinces of Western Ukraine and Western Byelorussia, caused alarm in Washington. The Soviet attack on Finland in November 1939, followed by Stalin’s absorption of the Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1940, further exacerbated relations.

The Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, however, led to changes in American attitudes. The United States began to see the Soviet Union as an embattled country being overrun by fascist forces, and this attitude was further reinforced in the aftermath of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Under the Lend-Lease Act, the United States sent enormous quantities of war materiel to the Soviet Union, which was critical in helping the Soviets withstand the Nazi onslaught. By the end of 1942, the Nazi advance into the Soviet Union had stalled; it was finally reversed at the epic battle of Stalingrad in 1943. Soviet forces then began a massive counteroffensive, which eventually expelled the Nazis from Soviet territory and beyond. This Soviet effort was aided by the cross-channel Allied landings at Normandy in June 1944.

These coordinated military actions came about as the result of intensive and prolonged diplomatic negotiations between the Allied leaders, Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin, who became known as the “Big Three.” These wartime conferences, which also sought to address issues related to the postwar world, included the November 1943 Tehran Conference. At Tehran, Stalin secured confirmation from Roosevelt and Churchill of the launching of the cross-channel invasion. In turn, Stalin promised his allies that the Soviet Union would eventually enter the war against Japan. In February 1945, the "Big Three" met at Yalta in the Crimea. The Yalta Conference was the most important--and by far the most controversial--of the wartime meetings.

Recognizing the strong position that the Soviet Army held on the ground, Churchill--and an ailing Roosevelt--agreed to a number of things with Stalin. At Yalta, they granted territorial concessions to the Soviet Union, and outlined punitive measures against Germany, including Allied occupation and the principle of reparations. Stalin guaranteed that the Soviet Union would declare war on Japan within 6 months after the end of hostilities in Europe.

While the diplomats and politicians engaged in trying to shape the postwar world, Soviet forces from the east and Allied forces from the west continued to advance on Germany. After a fierce and costly battle, Berlin fell to Soviet forces on May 8, 1945, after Allied and Soviet troops had met on the Elbe River to shake hands and congratulate each other on a hard won impending victory. Although the war in Europe was over, it would take several more months of hard fighting and substantial losses for Allied forces to defeat the Japanese in September 1945, including the first use of the atomic bomb. In accordance with the Yalta agreements, the Soviet Union declared war on Japan in early August 1945, just prior to Japan’s surrender in September.

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers