The industrial revolution indeed was a great factor in the growth of population in industrialized countries. The population in industrialized countries had a sudden rise or increase due to the bigger and greater opportunities provided by the country thus, alluring more people to migrate.
The holy roman emperor (Henry IV) wanted to make the church independent from secular rulers so he banned the practice of Lay Investiture. The pope (Gregory VII) excommunicated him and went to find a new emperor when Henry IV confessed to him he was a sinner and Gregory forgave him. But Henry was so butt hurt about it that he sent to roman military to kill the pope.
:)
<span>The decline of feudalism was brought about by its own success. The system allowed for a new era of wealth and prosperity within Europe. However, this progress allowed people held back by the system to achieve a better standard of living. </span>During the feudalism era, serfs were at the mercy and will of their feudal lords. However in western Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries, many serfs were able to start growing their own personal wealth by engaging in trade. At the same time, many lords were beginning to have money issues and, therefore, needed to rent out their lands to tenant farmers. Serfs who had raised enough personal capital began to rent the land and, in effect, buy their freedom from serfdom.
As monarchical power in England and France increased, the power of the nobility decreased, which further led to the erosion of feudalism. In 1660, feudalism was outlawed in England. By the start of the French Revolution in 1789, feudalism ceased to exist in France. The lords in these countries who once ruled over serfs became the aristocracy. In Germany, the feudal system was replaced by small royal states until the 19th century and the unification of Prussia.
B I think I'm
Not very sure tho lol hope dis helps
Answer:
Irrespective of its genuine strategic objectives or its complex historical consequences, the campaign in Palestine during the first world war was seen by the British government as an invaluable exercise in propaganda. Keen to capitalize on the romantic appeal of victory in the Holy Land, British propagandists repeatedly alluded to Richard Coeur de Lion's failure to win Jerusalem, thus generating the widely disseminated image of the 1917-18 Palestine campaign as the 'Last' or the 'New' Crusade. This representation, in turn, with its anti-Moslem overtones, introduced complicated problems for the British propaganda apparatus, to the point (demonstrated here through an array of official documentation, press accounts and popular works) of becoming enmeshed in a hopeless web of contradictory directives. This article argues that the ambiguity underlying the representation of the Palestine campaign in British wartime propaganda was not a coincidence, but rather an inevitable result of the complex, often incompatible, historical and religious images associated with this particular front. By exploring the cultural currency of the Crusading motif and its multiple significations, the article suggests that the almost instinctive evocation of the Crusade in this context exposed inherent faultlines and tensions which normally remained obscured within the self-assured ethos of imperial order. This applied not only to the relationship between Britain and its Moslem subjects abroad, but also to rifts within metropolitan British society, where the resonance of the Crusading theme depended on class position, thus vitiating its projected propagandistic effects even among the British soldiers themselves.
Explanation:
