Some choices would be nice for a "which" question, but in terms of political theories, most European Kings in the 1600s were absolutist and believed in the divine right of the monarchy, so ABSOLUTE MONARCHY or any derivative of that would be most supported. England, however, was already a constitutional monarchy by this point and the Kings of England knew that they would never be able to assert absolute power again, which meant that those kings would want something slightly different than absolute monarchy, but not terribly different.
Yes. If evolution was not widely supported by evidence, then it would be regarded as a hypothesis rather than a theory.
Building a new road in the wilderness would most likely be supported by a Southern plantation owner in the early 1800s.
It would become a theory. Then different predictions would need to be made to test other parts of it.
Assuming it passed all the tests it would move into a theory.
William Seward
A 17th century European king would most likely support the divine right theory.
The theory that the moon was formed when a large asteroid collided with the Earth, causing debris to coalesce into the moon, would be most supported. This is known as the Giant Impact Hypothesis, which suggests that the moon's irregular shape would be a result of its violent formation process.
Building a new road in the wilderness would most likely be supported by a Southern plantation owner in the early 1800s.
A factory owner
A 17th century European king would most likely support the divine right theory.
The divine right theory
the devine right theory