subject
History, 27.05.2020 23:58 sammielucero

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: 2

Another question on History

question
History, 21.06.2019 18:30
How does the grapes of wrath identify the effects of americans' views on the dust bowl? the story is a depiction of oklahoma farmers and the difficulties they experienced migrating to california. the story accurately describes the impact the california vineyard industry had on migrant workers. the story covers the rise of corporate farming and the devaluation of the small family farms that dotted the great plains. the story is an allegory for the conflicts between american values and the rise of the communist party in the united states.
Answers: 3
question
History, 21.06.2019 19:00
What factors allowed philip ii of macedonia to conquer the greek city-states?
Answers: 3
question
History, 21.06.2019 23:00
Space is not completely empty. there are small particles in space. what happens when these particles come together?
Answers: 1
question
History, 22.06.2019 01:50
Why did president johnson decide not to run for reelection in 1968?
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
question
English, 13.12.2021 16:10
question
Mathematics, 13.12.2021 16:10
question
Social Studies, 13.12.2021 16:10
question
Mathematics, 13.12.2021 16:10
Questions on the website: 13722360