What were the effects of the collapse of the bronze age

History

2 answers:

Luden [163]3 years ago

8 0

The transitions were sudden and due of violence, and culturally disruptive

Anna71 [15]3 years ago

7 0

It caused a period of chaos in Canaan. The palace economies of the Aegean region and Anatolia collapsed. It caused a cultural collapse of the Kassite dynasty of Babylonia, of the Mycenaean kingdoms, of the Hittite Empire in Anatolia and the Levant, and of the Egyptian Empire. Ugarit and the Amorite states in the Levant were destroyed. The Luwian states of western Asia Minor were fragmented. Elam, Assyria, and Babylon all declined.

Hope this helped. The question is kinda broad though. Maybe ask something more specific?

You might be interested in

What direction would you travel to go from New York ,USA to Istanbul turkey

Shalnov [3]

Your directions are east and slightly south from New York.

8 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

what methods did the Nazis use to separate Jewish people and other targeted groups from the rest of the population?

Nesterboy [21]

The Nazis separated Jewish people into small, condensed communities called ghettos. They also gave the Jewish populace Yellow patches (or badges), so, they would be able to identify the Jews from the rest of the population.

7 0

3 years ago

What led the u.s and soviet union to go from allies in ww2 to foes in the cold war?

stich3 [128]

The US and the Soviet Union were only allies in WWII because they were both so worried about Nazi Germany. It was not as if the two countries had any natural reason to be allies. That means that we should not be surprised that they went back to being rivals after WWII.

6 0

3 years ago

Use the following excerpt taken from an abolition speech delivered by William Wilberforce to answer the question below:

Fynjy0 [20]

Answer:

No person should be submitted to the immense suffering that is perpetrated through slavery.

Explanation:

From the excerpt it seems as if he felt rather deeply about the issue of slavery

5 0

3 years ago

In a paragraph, explain why President Wilson encountered opposition in the U.S. Senate in his efforts to ratify the Treaty of Ve

sergey [27]

Answer:

On the side of Wilson, that is, for the adoption of the Treaty of Versailles and the ensuing entry into the League of Nations in order to continue direct intervention in European affairs, a significant part of both the ruling circles and the "public" spoke. Wilson's position was supported by prominent business leaders. The defense of the Treaty of Versailles focused on proving the United States’s worth of creating the League of Nations. With the help of the league and the Versailles Treaty, senators Hitchcock, Kellogg, Owen and others said that the United States will be able to rebuild Europe, sell its goods widely, which will improve the country's economic prospects for many years to come. The mandate system will open access to the colonies, to the Turkish Straits, to Middle East oil and other raw materials.

But the central argument of supporters of the Versailles system remained the argument that through the League of Nations the United States will be able to gain the position of the dominant power in the world. Senator Owen argued during the discussions that the League of Nations has a whole arsenal of means - diplomatic pressure, arbitration, and the International Court of Justice, boycott, blockade, the use of collective armed forces - and with their help the fate of any international dispute can be decided. Wilson’s supporters said the US’s joining the league will help “overcome social unrest in Europe,” stop the growth of socialist forces.

The opposition to the Wilsonists was called isolationist, although it itself did not recognize this name. The term "isolationism," despite all its conventions (in fact, it did not mean calling for the isolation of America), nevertheless had a constant content: the rejection of political and especially military alliances with Europe, 'bequeathed' by George Washington in 1796.

In the Senate, the first movement was a bloc of so-called “irreconcilable” (with a fluctuating number of 12 to 36 out of 96 senators), headed by William Bora, one of the most critical opposition leaders. Bora, Lafollett, Norris and other senators of this group 'attacked' the League of Nations as a tool for drawing the United States into alien wars, in defense of extraneous interests, and protested against anti-Soviet intervention.

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago