Answer:
High chance of conflict.
Explanation:
The city-states in Ancient Greece were ruled by different Kings. Each kings have the authority to fully create legislations for their own region without having to be directly ordered by the central government.
Often time, the interests between one city-state contradicted the interest of another city states.
This often led to conflicts between the kings. Several wars arose because of this and caused Ancient Greece to lose high amount of people and resources during because of the war.
The reason why historians use the term “Middle Ages" is because this timer period took place between the fall of the western Roman Empire and the Renaissance--which were two major, innovative periods of history, whereas not much happened in the Middle Ages relative to them. <span><span>
</span></span>
Answer:
The emergence of yellow journalism
Explanation:
I know this answer is correct because I a 2/2 (100%) on this section of the test. There is further proof that this answer is correct in the file attached. :)
Answer: In the aftermath of the war, internationally the world was changing, Europe was slicing up Africa, many countries started fighting for their independence, and the fight for influence and money ensued between the most powerful nations. During the time periods of 1865-1900, the US sought to keep up with Europe and expand its sphere of influence in the world under the leadership of Roosevelt, McKinley and other presidents.
Answer:
The end of the Peloponnesian War did not bring the promised “…beginning of freedom for all of Greece.”[1] Instead, Sparta provoked a series of wars which rearranged the system of alliances which had helped them win the long war against Athens. A peace conference between Sparta and Thebes in 371 ended badly and the Spartans promptly marched upon Thebes with an army of nine thousand hoplites and one thousand cavalry. Opposing them were six thousand Theban and allied hoplites and one thousand cavalry.[2]
Over generations, the Thebans had been increasing the depth of their phalanx, generally given pride of place on the right wing of coalition armies, from the traditional eight men, to sixteen, then twenty-five and even thirty-five ranks. As the Spartan and Theban armies maneuvered toward the plain of Leuctra, the brilliant Theban general Epaminondas devised a new tactic which would use the deep phalanx to destroy the myth of Spartan superiority.
Over the generations, the citizens of Thebes had developed a reputation as tough, unyielding fighters. Epaminondas had witnessed the power of the deep Theban phalanx at previous battles, and increased the depth of the phalanx to fifty ranks, but only eighty files wide. But Epaminondas’ true innovation was to position the deep Theban column not on the right, where it would have clashed with the Spartan’s weaker allies, but on the left, where it would attack the main phalanx of the Spartan “Peers” led by King Cleombrotus, arranged only twelve ranks deep. In other words, Epaminondas was concentrating his fighting power at the critical point in the evenly-spaced, less concentrated Spartan phalanx. Finally, he arranged the Theban’s allies on his right would advance “in echelon”, each poleis’ phalanx staying slightly to the rear of that to its left, so that the allied right would protect the Theban’s flank, but not initially engage with the enemy (see Leuctra map – ‘Initial Situation’). When asked why he positioned the Theban phalanx opposite the Spartan king, Epaminondas stated he would “crush…the head of the serpent”.[3]
