What is one possible reason a constitutional monarchy developed in england while an absolute monarchy continued in russia

Constitutional monarchy developed in England because the Magna Carta placed limits on the Kings in 1215. Gradually the idea of a Parliament began to take shape, which, little by little, removed powers from the monarchs. In 1649, King Charles I rebelled, found that he had unlimited powers, raised taxes as much as he could, and as a result was judged as a traitor and executed. After a period of exception, the monarchy was reinstituted with its son, Charles II, in the power. The message was clear: the monarchy could not and could not aspire to be absolute, thus passing to constitutional monarchy.

This kind of monarchy did not develop in Russia because the monarchy was overthrown during the Russian revolution and was never restored. In its place the Bolshevik Party took over.

Newly industrialized and suffering from World War I, Russia had a large mass of workers and peasants working hard and earning little. In addition, Tsar Nicholas II's absolutist government disliked the people who wanted a less oppressive and more democratic leadership. The sum of the factors led to popular demonstrations that caused the monarch to resign and, at the end of the process, gave rise to the Soviet Union, the first socialist country in the world, which lasted until 1991.

in the 1800s, locomotives powered by steam made transportation faster and cheaper. the resulting rapid growth of railroads led to the connection of the atlantic and pacific railroad in oklahoma city in 1897.

in the last years of the century, the improvement of steam-based engines the expansion and growth of railroads. this growth increased when the companies started to build and expand, such as the atlantic and pacific railroad, which connected new mexico with california, and missouri with oklahoma. many of these new networks were built in oklahoma, and these changes transportation henceforward.

thurgood marshall

explanation: in 1954, thurgood marshall and a team of naacp attorneys won brown v. board of education of topeka, kansas. in this landmark decision, the supreme court held that segregation in public education violated the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment.