subject
History, 28.05.2020 22:04 gnoelle98

One historian writes that the Code of Hammurabi was the most important source of modern law. Another historian argues that modern law is based on the legal system of the Roman Republic. What could be the reason for the difference of opinion between these experts?

one historian did not examine primary sources

one of the historians' research has serious flaws

they used different secondary sources for research

their interpretations of historical facts vary

ansver
Answers: 1

Another question on History

question
History, 21.06.2019 15:30
Which is more important in determining the format in which recordings are offered by the music industry, new technology or consumer sovereignty? explain.
Answers: 2
question
History, 21.06.2019 22:30
Which best describes how president kennedy apples to the audiences at the beginning of his speech?
Answers: 1
question
History, 21.06.2019 23:00
The chart shows data on the construction of dreadnoughts, or armed battleships, by 1914. (look at chart provided) a logical conclusion that can be drawn from this chart is that britain and germany were a.)engaged in an arms race. b.)looking for ways to cooperate. c.)hoping not to fight on land. d.)the strongest nations on the earth.
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 01:40
How do developments in the us space program during the ford administration reflect the foreign policy of president ford
Answers: 1
You know the right answer?
One historian writes that the Code of Hammurabi was the most important source of modern law. Another...
Questions
Questions on the website: 13722361