Answer:
Italy's landscape was more varied and had much more potential, while Greece's landscape was monotonous and had little potential.
Explanation:
The landscapes of ancient Italy and ancient Greece differed a lot. Even though both areas are part of the Mediterranean region, the differences were very big, with Italy being much better suited for big development and progress while Greece was very limited.
Italy's landscape had everything from fertile plains, to wave lowlands, hillsides, and high mountains. There were areas dominated by forests, grasses, and shrubs, and some more typically Mediterranean in their appearance. Italy's landscape was very well suited for large-scale production of agricultural goods but also there were numerous natural resources as well.
Greece's landscape was very monotonous, being dominated by hills and mountains covered with Mediterranean flora. The soil was not of good quality and there were only very few cultures that can be grown, which is why a big portion of the population engaged in herding animals such as goats and sheep. The area was also poor in natural resources and it had very little potential for the creation of an empire.
Explanation:
During the ending of the glaciation period , the latitudinal climatic belts had developed well and climate was getting warmer. But at the end, there was extreme hot and dry condition that was a threat to marine and land based life. But the best thing was that there evolved diversity in terrestrial life and Pangea had lots of variety of species on it.
But we can not consider it similar to the present day climate since the present day climate change is occurring more because of human activities and is not natural. The climate change in that period was due to internal and external natural factors on the earth since human had not evolved that time to disturb the nature.
