Answer:
Plato Answer
Explanation:
The narrative of “The Brown Chest” has a fragmented perception of time, as the story jumps years and even decades at a time. The fragmented timeframe is evident in how the narrator goes back and forth across his childhood and adulthood, and how he perceives things differently at each stage. When he’s older, he cherishes the old photos, clothes, and trinkets, even though he didn’t care for them when he was a child:
These books had fat pages edged in gold, thick enough to hold, on both sides, stiff brown pictures, often oval, of dead people. He didn't like looking into these albums, even when his mother was explaining them to him.
Updike possibly chose this unorthodox structure to contrast the reactions of the narrator from disdain to excitement and melancholy over old family memories.
And when he, or the grown-up with him, lifted the lid of the chest, an amazing smell rushed out—deeply sweet and musty, of mothballs and cedar, but that wasn't all of it. The smell seemed also to belong to the contents—lace tablecloths and wool blankets on top, but much more underneath . . . His parents' college diplomas seemed to be under the blankets . . .
The reason why people in early farming communities able to do various kinds of work is because there was a surplus of food--meaning that while certain people were responsible for farming and growing food to eat, other people could apply their attention elsewhere, to other skills that benefitted the community. <span />
Answer:
To be honest I think is B
Explanation:
B)
Because, if you read closely and carefully it says "all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free."
HOPE THIS HELPS ;3
--Koda
Which is supreme, the state governments or the federal government?
McCulloch v. Maryland addressed the issue of Maryland taxing the National Bank.
In this case, the state of Maryland attempted to tax the National Bank. The representative of the Bank refused to pay the taxes. The Court sided with the Bank stating the Federal government had the right to have a bank under the "necessary and proper clause". Additionally the ruling stated that the Federal government has supremacy over the state.
