Answer:Between 800 and 1000, three groups—the Magyars, the Vikings, and Muslims—invaded Europe. The Magyars, fierce warriors from the east, crossed over land and attacked Europe from Asia. Perhaps the most frightening invaders of all, the Vikings, came from Scandinavia in the north.
Explanation:
Answer:
A. It was used by the Catholic Church and in academic settings.
Explanation:
Latin was for 20 centuries the official language of the Church. Academic writing and research was published in Latin. Masses were said in Latin, despite the fact that only the clergy and the best educated people (very few people during the Middle Ages) were the only ones who could speak and understand it. It was only in the second half of the 20th century that the Roman Catholic Church authorized masses in the local and national languages of each country.
The Britishers had the bigger advantage of becoming rich than the French people which will allow them to provide better products to the native Americans whereas the French tried to understand the lifestyle of the native Americans and respected them.
<h3>Why did the Britishers want Ohio River Valley?</h3>
Great Britain and France each claimed the Ohio River Valley. British settlers desired to farm the wealthy soil there, and the French desired to entice beavers and change the furs.
But French understood the lifestyle of the native Americans and wanted to give service to them according to their needs.
Hence, The Britishers had the bigger advantage of becoming rich in the Ohio valley over the french, and because of this reason they wanted the Ohio valley.
learn more about Ohio River Valley:
brainly.com/question/897465
#SPJ1
Answer:
1. Nathanael Greene divided his troops to tire the British. (1776)
2. The British captured Savannah and Charleston. (1778)
3. Patriot and French forces blockaded and besieged Yorktown. (1781)
4. Officials from Britain and the United States signed the Treaty of Paris. (1783)
Answer:
he proceeded to narrate some of the facts in his own history as a slave, and in the course of his speech gave utterance to many noble thoughts and thrilling reflections. As soon as he had taken his seat, filled with hope and admiration, I rose, and declared that PATRICK HENRY, of revolutionary fame, never made a speech more eloquent in the cause of liberty, than the one we had just listened to from the lips of that hunted fugitive. So I believed at that time,--such is my belief now. I reminded the audience of the peril which surrounded this self-emancipated young man at the North, --even in Massachusetts, on the soil of the Pilgrim Fathers, among the descendants of revolutionary sires; and I appealed to them, whether they would ever allow him to be carried back into slavery,--law or no law, constitution or no constitution. The response was unanimous and in thunder-tones--"NO!" "Will you succor and protect him as a brother-man--a resident of the old Bay State?" "YES!" shouted the whole mass, with an energy so startling, that the ruthless tyrants south of Mason and Dixon's line might almost have heard the mighty burst of feeling, and recognized it as the pledge of an invincible determination, on the part of those who gave it, never to betray him that wanders, but to hide the outcast, and firmly to abide the consequences.
Explanation:
