In each case naturally the intention for the first action existed, or it would not have been carried out. It is doubtful in the extreme that the initiators of those actions foresaw the full consequences of those actions, especially as the full scale of the consequences did not become apparent for hundreds of years.
<span>So in all three cases the answer must be that the consequences were not intentional.</span>
Answer:
informal rules such as traditions that are accepted and followed implicitly by political actors
Answer:
A) feudal arrangements.
Explanation:
After the fall of the Roman Empire, many groups of Germanic peoples would establish in the Roman territory. Their contact with the roman promoted many changes in the economy and society of the germanic peoples. With these changes, an aristocratic begins to develop, and an emergent monarchy that maintains itself through the work of peasants.<u> The arrangement between the Lord and the peasant was mutual and based on the favor exchange: the peasant would work on the Lord fields and will give a piece to him.</u>
<span>B.Civil Disobedience
short explanation: civil disobedience is a form of nonviolent protest which Gandhi is known for
hope I helped :)
</span>
Answer:
Human habitation.
Explanation:
The Bering land bridge is a postulated route of human migration to the Americas from Asia about 20,000 years ago.
