Answer: The comparison of Nicholas II and Vladimir Lenin
Explanation Both the leaders were hungry for power and came onto to become leaders by promising good for the people but the similarity didn't catch one's eye but how different to each historical figure was has been highlighted many a time.
- Nicholas II was czar and hence being born into a royal family made him an obvious leader whereas Lenin gained prominence in the party and came into power thus.
- Lenin had the willingness to lead Russia used the Bolshevik party to do so, however the Tsar was happy to be with his family and pets and not a bit interested in leadership.
- Nicholas II and his entire family were assassinated whereas Lenin died of natural causes way later.
- Lenin was the more brutal of the two and used his power to get what he wanted even if it meant torturing or murdering. here Nicholas made some concessions.
- The military responsibility was on Nicholas II during his regime but when Lenin took over he would delegate it.
Finally, none of them actually cared for the poor, the oppressed were further in distress when these two came to power.
Answer:
the right answer is B. Small states are easier to manage politically, while large states are more likely to be corrupt.
Explanation:
I got 100% on my test = )
Steam engines
factories
new technology/machines
C. History is and should be recorded as it happens, as factual and fixed information.
Answer:
C.) a new interest in classical literature began to influence the way people thought about themselves and their place in the world
.
E.) the convergence of artists like Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci, which changed the way people understood art and the stories of life.
Explanation:
The fifteenth century revolution in art and architecture which ended up known as the Renaissance started in Florence. Its change from a community during the 1100s to the business and monetary centre it had moved toward becoming before the end of the fourteenth century depended on the gainful wool exchange.
