Throughout history, some rulers have been given the title "Great." For example,

1 answer:

7 0

Because they are the ruler of their people, and many were thought to be descendants or friends with a higher power or god. since this person was obviously much higher in the social hierarchy because of this, they are “greater” than everyone else. sometimes they may have done a heroic act, too, that makes everyone believe in their bravery and courageousness.

You might be interested in

What major city can be found in the area outlined by the black square?

Katyanochek1 [597]

Answer:

Houston

##############################

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

__________ may be daunting and perhaps risky, but the challenge of it grabs people in the gut and gets their juices flowing and

Molodets [167]

C. Business efficiency goals

3 0

3 years ago

Government defines what constitutes a crime and issues formal charges against a defendant in criminal cases

Lubov Fominskaja [6]

The answer us arraignment. This is a reading that is formal and directed to a criminal charging in which the defendant involved will likely be informed of what charge is being brought against him or her or what accusation has been given to the defendant. The defendant is also likely to enter a plea.

3 0

2 years ago

1. Courts generally assume the existence of contractual capacity. a. True b. False 2. Adults who enter into contracts with minor

Alik [6]

Answer:

First one is true

second one is false

3 0

3 years ago

Why did the Supreme Court overturn the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in 1966? Explain the important change to the police arrest

sashaice [31]

The Supreme Court overturn the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in 1966 because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.

<h3>What was the conviction of Ernesto Miranda?</h3>

The case was related to Miranda who was found guilty of kidnapping and ra-pe and was sentenced to 20-30 years imprisonment on each count.

After the appeal of the case, the Supreme Court of Arizona held that Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated in obtaining the confession, hence, it overturn the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in 1966 because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.