Answer: I GOT YOU!
They introduced Italian scholars to academic fields that promoted individual growth and thinking.
The rise of humanism in Italy is associated with the period in history, from the 14th to 16th centuries, that we call "The Renaissance." Renaissance means a rebirth -- and a big part of what was being reborn in the Italian Renaissance was the classical culture and scholarship of Greece and Rome. Scholars were unearthing many of the old writings of Greek and Roman philosophers, historians, and statesmen. These writings -- from pagan societies -- showed the deep thinking and great acts human beings were capable of prior to the rise of Christian society in Europe. This prompted humanist scholars in Italy (and elsewhere) to give focus to the full range of human capabilities -- in art, architecture, scholarship and writing, etc. Renaissance humanists remained within the Catholic Church and Christian culture, which dominated Europe in those centuries. But whereas church-dominated culture prior to the Renaissance focused mostly on the sinfulness and lowness of human beings in contrast to the greatness of God, the humanism of the Renaissance emphasized the greatness of human beings as God's creation. Individuals were encouraged to be all they could be, learn all they could learn, do all they could do as "Renaissance men."
It is E sorry i did not put it in there before sorry but there you go :)
Explanation:
Hope this helps If it dues let me know by saying thank you :)
<span> the traditional </span>role for women<span> began to </span>change<span> as the </span>Industrial Revolution<span> unfolded. ... As a result, </span>women and children<span> often worked </span>in<span> the factories and mines </span>in<span> order to help pay </span>for<span> the families cost of living. </span>Women were<span> not valued the same as men </span>in<span> the workplace, and </span>were<span> often paid much less than men.</span>
The political, economic, and military strength of the Union was much greater than that of the Confederacy. However, the war did last four years. The Confederacy proved itself resilient on many occasions. Throughout the war the tide constantly shifted, and with that so did the political, economic, and military strength of either side. Although each side had its share of military successes, in the end, the superior Northern economy, centralized government and overwhelming manpower would eventually lead to victory. In mid 1863, both the Union and the Confederacy could have won the war although; the Confederacy lacked the industry, or manpower to wage a long war with the Union.
The Union was far more industrialized than the South. The North possessed 80% of total U.S. industry. In addition, most Confederate industry was located in the Upper South-particularly in Virginia. The Confederacy lost a great deal of potential industry and manpower when West Virginia, Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland joined the Union instead of the Confederacy. The loss of these states to the Union was as much a testament to shrewd northern politics (Maryland) as it was to opposition within the states (West Virginia). Confederate industry, especially with the loss of these states, was unable to compete with the Union.
In addition to the South's lack of industry, most capital was invested in slaves and land-both of these are non-liquid. The South's lack of a large supply of liquid capital made it difficult for Southerners to buy munitions for the war effort. As a result of the South's lack of liquid capital the North enjoyed a decided advantage..
Glad to help :)
-liyah❤
