What is one way that France and the American colonies
differed at the onset of their revolutions?

the answer is b: burial places

Answer:The German colonial empire (German: Deutsches Kolonialreich) constituted the overseas colonies, dependencies and territories of Imperial Germany. Unified in the early 1870s, the chancellor of this time period was Otto von Bismarck. Short-lived attempts of colonization by individual German states had occurred in preceding centuries, but crucial colonial efforts only began in 1884 with the Scramble for Africa. Claiming much of the left-over uncolonized areas of Africa, Germany built the third-largest colonial empire at the time, after the British and French.[2] The German Colonial Empire encompassed parts of several African countries, including parts of present-day Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Namibia, Cameroon, Gabon, Congo, Central African Republic, Chad, Nigeria, Togo, Ghana, New Guinea, and numerous other West Pacific / Micronesian islands.

Germany lost control of its colonial empire when the First World War began in 1914, in which all of its colonies were invaded by the Allies during the first weeks of the war. However, a few colonial military units held out in remote areas for a while longer: German South West Africa surrendered in 1915, Kamerun in 1916 and German East Africa in 1918.

Germany's colonial empire was officially confiscated with the Treaty of Versailles after Germany's defeat in the war and each colony became a League of Nations mandate under the supervision (but not ownership) of one of the victorious powers. The German colonial empire ceased to exist in 1919.[3] Plans to regain their lost colonial possessions persisted through the Second World War, with many at the time suspecting that this was a goal of the Third Reich all along.

Explanation:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stepped back from there royal duties because they wanted to work towards financial independence, while still continuing there royal duties for the queen.

yes i agree very much

Answer:

individual rights

Explanation:

this is the only one that sounds even remotely correct

Answer:

FIRST ONE IS WRONG AND THE LAST TWO ARE CORRECT

Explanation:

A+B=90 IS WRONG ITS 180

90+B=180 IS RIGHT BECAUSE ITS 90 + A 90 DEGREE ANGLE

180-B=A IS CORRECT BECAUSE B IS 90 SO 180 - 90 = A. A=90

Answer:

That all men are created equal. That they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I think

Answer:

i disagree

Explanation:

it just cant

plz mark brainliest

Answer:

lands near the coast

Explanation:

The areas in Japan that have the lowest elevations is "lands near the coast."

This is evident in the fact that the lowest elevation in Japan is the "surface of Hachirōgata" which is 4 meters below the sea level from a natural point.

Even that Hachirōgata is a lake in Akita Prefecture in northern Japan which is a body of land near the coast.

Answer:

Gerrymandering is the strategical separation of district boundaries to benefit one particular political group over the other(mostly in elections)

Explanation: hope that’s good

Answer:

tuba I love you

Explanation:

please come to me

Answer: the answer is B. viet cong

Explanation: The Viet Cong also known as the National Liberation Front of Southern Vietnam or NLF was an armed communist political revolutionary organization in South Vietnam and Cambodia.

The simple version is that both Union and Confederacy cared about British neutrality for the same reason - both sides of the same coin so to speak.

The Confederacy was an agrarian society. Their two major crops were cotton and tobacco, much of which they exported to England. Their manufacturing capabilities were minor and they relied on the income they got from their trade with England to purchase many manufactured goods, especially weapons.

The Union had considerable manufacturing capability of their own, and wanted England to stay neutral for exactly that reason, so that they (the English) would not respond militarily to the Union blockade of Confederate ports, which effectively cut off the supply of arms, equipment and cash the Confederacy needed to survive.

___________________________

Hope this helps!

- Lexi

Me das mas información?

Answer: d] romanticism

Explanation: This is because a lot of art in this period has loose brushwork and strong color contrasts.

Answer:

b

Explanation:

Answer:

Depending on if they need it.

Explanation: The U.S. should spend money on weapons and military care only for necessary needs like health.

Answer:

C

Explanation:

Answer:

C .. the attacks on the world trade center and pentagon

hope it is helpful to you

Answer:

probably things like cigarettes and alcohol, gambling

Explanation:

Answer:

The Titanic was a giant British cruise ship. It sank after hitting an iceberg. Around 1500 people died from the sinking. It was a really fancy ship with many swimming pools and places to play.

Explanation:

Answer:

The following is the explanation according to the given scenario.

Explanation:

Thus the above is the correct answer.

Answer:

She has a (thing) for traveling the world.

Explanation:

Answer:

Court of last Resort

Explanation:

Here's link to the answer:

tinyurl.com/wpazsebu

Explanation:

"The law, as we understand the word in the West, meaning the rules that regulate relations among people, is an integral part of Sharia. Rules of law are rules of Sharia, but not all the rules of Sharia are rules of law.  However, the words “Sharia” and “law” are often used interchangeably.

After the death of the Prophet Mohammed, Muslim jurists known as fuqaha’ (singular faqih) began studying the Sharia to discern its legal rules, leading to the formation of schools of Islamic legal thought known as mazahib (singular mazhab).  The work of these schools initiated a new discipline of Islamic study known as ilm al-fiqh or the science of knowledge.[2]

The Islamic legal theory espoused by these schools compared the law to a tree with few roots and many branches and divided ilm al-fiqh into ilm al-usul, or science of the roots, and ilm al-fourou’, or science of the branches.

Ilm al-usul dealt with the philosophical underpinning of Sharia law and the methodology used to elucidate the legal rules applicable in the various fields of the law, while ilm al-fourou’ dealt with the actual elucidation of these rules.  The elucidation process is called ijtihad, or exertion of the utmost efforts in seeking to translate God’s commands and exhortations into specific legal rules.

Ilm al-fourou’ is divided into two major components, ibadat and muamalat. Ibadat means “worship” and consists of the rules applicable to religious rituals such as prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage.  These rules are mandatory, but their implementation is left to the personal decisions of the believers.  Muamalat, on the other hand, means “transactional dealings” and consists of the rules applicable to commercial and other types of relations, such as trade, marriage, and partnerships.  The rules of muamalat constitute a comprehensive legal system whose legal rules can be identified by consulting the writings of the jurists of the relevant school of Islamic legal thought.

Sharia law may vary from one school to another on certain issues. For example, according to the Shiite Jaafari school, the law of inheritance gives the daughters of the deceased parents the right to inherit all non-reserved parts of the estate in the absence of male siblings, while the Sunni schools (Hanafi, Shafii, Maliki, and Hanbali) do not.[3]"

For many scholars, the simple answer lies in the negative legacies of British colonialism. It was the British that “constructed” modern Hindu and Muslim identities through mechanisms like the first scientific census of 1871. And it was the British that used a “divide-and-rule” policy to drive apart religious communities, thereby promoting violence between them. In this post, however, I will argue that this seemingly straightforward argument connecting British rule and modern communal riots is problematic for three reasons.  

First, what do we know about Hindu-Muslim conflict before the British? While many scholars in the humanities have looked into precolonial religious identity and conflict, most social scientists are content to focus solely on “modern” India. But India’s history did not start with the British. Consider, for instance, the argument that Hindu and Muslim identities were constructed by British administrators. The work of scholars of Indian religions like David Lorenzen and Andrew Nicholson shows that there was a clear sense of difference between Hindu and Muslim communities long before British rule. Similarly, Hindu-Muslim riots in India date back to hundreds of years before any British official set foot on the subcontinent. In the fourteenth century, the famed Moroccan scholar Ibn Battuta wrote about the state of Hindu-Muslim relations in the south Indian town of Mangalore: :

Explanation:

Answer:

Hunger for Community

Explanation:

Assuming you meant hunger, it is hunger for community.