0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How would social class affect what someone would wear during the Renaissance?
social classes would affect what someone would wear or what color they want to wear during the renaissance because based on there classes the upper class; royalty class has the most power so if they need or want something they would go to the middle; working class or most likely the lower; slave or servant class. the lower class has no say in any decisions , therefore the social classes mostly have affect on the poor people because they must do what there told to do.
Was Jo Anderson a slave or a farmer?
he was a slave on the mccormick plantion
How did the Atlantic Slave Trade differ from other slave systems?
The Atlantic Slave trade was by far the largest slave trade in quantity of people transported. It was also the one with the longest sea voyage.
What was one result of the domestic slave trade?
Slave families were split up.
What word mean the same as slave?
Another word for slave is servant.
Who are the lower class people?
slave
Did American Slave society have class systems?
they did
What is kush social class?
it is emporer first and slave last
What does helot means in ancient Greek?
A helot is a member of a class of serfs in ancient Sparta. Or slave
What are the 3 social classes of Sumer?
Aristocracy, working class, and slave.
Who were the lowest social class of Spanish colonial society and were the slave and workers?
Peninsulares
In 1860 what percentage southern white families were in the slave owning class?
jhhj
What was the class structure during the medieval times?
The church, the nobility, and then the peasant. On the bottom was the serf/slave.
The slave based agricultural system in the south encouraged the development of?
a rigid social class system.
Who was protected under Hammurabi's code of laws?
It concerns all the Empire and all class of persons being rich or poor.
What is a domestic slave in Anglo saxon times?
The esne were Anglo Saxon lower class laborers and slaves.
Why were there different classes of slaves?
The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.
