1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Debora [2.8K]
3 years ago
15

How did the geography of Africa make trade and communication difficult for ancient people?

Social Studies
1 answer:
aliina [53]3 years ago
8 0

Answer:

because the desert in africa was hot and dry and the had to travel over long distances which made it hard

Explanation:

You might be interested in
What describes the effect of economic alliances on member nations ?
Westkost [7]

Answer: Increased exchange of ideas and goods

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Please helpppppppppp meeeew
elixir [45]
Public safety i believe
6 0
3 years ago
WHAT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT RUNS THE ELECTION PROCESS
Nonamiya [84]

Answer:

In most states of the U.S., the chief election officer is the secretary of state. In some states, local officials like a county registrar of voters or supervisor of elections manages the conduct of elections under the supervision of (or in coordination with) the chief election officer of the state.

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
There are ________ courts of appeals in texas, with ________ justices serving those courts..
Ipatiy [6.2K]
The answer is <span>14; 80
A court of appeals is used by either parties who are not satisfied with the rulings from the district courts (The decision made in this court will overuled those from lower courts)
And the justices in this context are the people who are responsible in Managing all </span><span>preliminaries that happen in the court.</span>
7 0
3 years ago
At the beginning of the twentieth century, there were approximately 270,000 Native Americans left in the
Stels [109]

Answer:

In 2000 more than 600 indigenous bands or tribes were officially recognized by Canada’s dominion government, and some 560 additional bands or tribes were officially recognized by the government of the United States.

Census data from 2006 indicated that people claiming aboriginal American ancestry numbered some 1.17 million in Canada or approximately 4 percent of the population; of these, some 975,000 individuals were officially recognized by the dominion as of First Nation, Métis, or Inuit heritage.

U.S. census figures from 2000 indicated that some 4.3 million people claimed Native American descent or 1–2 percent of the population; fewer than one million of these self-identified individuals were officially recognized as of native heritage, however.

Marrying outside the Native American community has also been a factor: in some places and times, those who out-married were required by law to be removed from tribal rolls; children of these unions have sometimes been closer to one side of the family than the other, thus retaining only one parent’s ethnic identity; and in some cases, the children of ethnically mixed marriages have been unable to document the degree of genetic relation necessary for official enrollment in a particular tribe.

Although life has changed drastically for many tribal members, several indicators, such as the proportion of students who complete secondary school, the level of unemployment, and the median household income, show that native people in the United States and Canada have had more difficulty in achieving economic success than non-Indians.

Questions of who or what have the ultimate authority over native nations and individuals, and under what circumstances, remain among the most important, albeit contentious and misunderstood, aspects of contemporary Native American life.

With nearly 1,200 officially recognized tribal governments and more than 60 regional governments extant in the United States and Canada at the turn of the 21st century, and with issues such as taxation and regulatory authority at stake, it is unsurprising that these various entities have been involved in a myriad of jurisdictional battles.

The Oliphant decision might lead one to presume that, as non-Indians may not be tried in tribal courts, Indians in the United States would not be subject to prosecution in state or federal courts.

In this case, the Supreme Court favored tribal sovereignty, finding that the judicial proceedings of an independent entity (in this case, the indigenous nation) stood separately from those of the states of the United States; a tribe was entitled to prosecute its members.

In so ruling, the court seems to have placed an extra burden on Native Americans: whereas the plaintiff in Oliphant gained immunity from tribal law, indigenous plaintiffs could indeed be tried for a single criminal act in both a tribal and a state or federal court.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • If your friend Sheila is a very animated communicator and active listener, when she listens to you give a recounting of your day
    14·1 answer
  • How did life change for many Native Americans in the 1920s
    12·1 answer
  • How did the shift in cotton production change the economy of Georgia
    14·1 answer
  • What is another name for the red scare
    10·1 answer
  • What did Egyptians collect to be able to build temples and pyramids
    7·1 answer
  • Assume that Joe (single) has a marginal tax rate of 37 percent and decides to make the election to include preferentially taxed
    15·1 answer
  • Assume that Congress passes a law establishing a new administrative agency to oversee cyberterrorism issues. The agency writes r
    8·1 answer
  • If the politics of glasnost in Russia were applied, in a similar manner and with similar results, to the communist dictatorship
    7·2 answers
  • Mention the needs of development:​
    10·1 answer
  • Why doesn't one case of influenza infection confer lifelong immunity on the host?
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!