Was first proposed by Thomas Jefferson.
Answer: in relation to medieval society and psychology, renaissance constitutes counter-movement. So, if Middle Ages are introverted, Renaissance is extraverted. If Middle Ages are theocentric, Renaissance is anthropocentric. If Middle Ages are totally European (with an exception of Crusades), Renaissance transcends Europe and becames more cosmopolitan. The same is true in science. Renaissance science is extraverted ....it is looking for God not in heavens but in the nature ! It is able to experiment and think outside the box.
Explanation: Renaissance is a revolutionary time in all respects.
I assume your talking about the HUNS... When the empire split in two the east had more gold and more resources and the dying west had to suffer all the barbarian attacks like the huns... The East quite simply was more prepared and had more walls and guards to defend their border also the Eastern Empire had the river danube north of them which helped deflect the Hunnic invasions and other barbarian invasion more west...
Axis would have probably wiped out most of its West-European enemies. Canada would probably have tried to fight against America and failed, getting its armies crushed, or stayed on the defensive. Hitler would probably have had more troops and peace of mind tromping around around the Soviet grounds, and would have lost a lot less manpower than when the US actually went to war in the real WWII. Since I'm assuming that in this hypothetical scenario, the US was allied with Japan, Pearl Harbor never happened. Japan and America would both have undisputed hold of the Pacific, with America's (unsunken) battleships and aircraft carriers along with Japanese suprbattleships like the Yamato, and dual force garrisons on the pacific islands. America might have invaded the lower Americas as well, if it didn't stop at securing the border. Mexico might have joined in to help the Axis powers. Then Hitler would still turn on Stalin, still loose an ungodly portion of his army in Russia, get driven back, and start losing the war in the European theatre, at least until axis forces come to back him up, primarily in the form of American Axis soldiers. Then America would lose many men in the Russian front, until it finally invaded Russia somehow (probably after many years and the combined nuclear armaments research being conducted by the US and Nazi Germany.) After invading Russia, Hitler will grow pompous and attempt to invade America with his already weakened force. He would attempt to destroy the remaining American troops in the European/Asian Theatre. America and Japan would probably ally with each other to maintain their hold of the Pacific, and fight back, with a smaller scale D-Day happening (Only made up of Americans) being launched from the invaded and annexed New American Britain or New German Britain or whatever. America would invade Germany, while Germany cannot invade America (see other Quora posts for explanations on why it is virtually impossible to invade America). America ends up with territories and troops spread all across the Pacific, Africa, Russia, Europe, and Asia, with probably troops in Canada and Mexico as well. Consequently, the troops will be brought down through the freedom fighters and rebellions that will ultimately pop up. Hitler shoots himself in the bunker as well.
Lots of bloodshed. Thank god it didn't happen this way! A lot of countries would be utterly in ruins after this version of the World War, not just Poland and Germany and England and Russia and Korea and China (etc.), but who knows how many more countless places. Not to say that I am okay with WWII happening how it did anyway, since it was extremely bloody as well, but... the real WWII was a giant bloody clash of death. This hypothetical one wouldn't have been a clash. It would have been a giant cluster that resulted in possibly twice or three times as many deaths, mostly more civilian deaths in general.
b.) powers that allow the each branch to curb the others
