Who was abott suger? a. a well-known french artisan of gothic style windows b. a german statesman and historian who was the first patron of gothic architecture c. a french statesman and historian who was the first patron of gothic architecturethe answer is (c)  d. an apprentice of pseudo-dionysius

C. a French statesman and historian who was the first patron of Gothic architecture

Abott Suger (1081-1151) was a French statesman who during his adulthood served as an adviser of the French Kings Louis VI and VII. During his role as one of the advisers of Louis VII, he planned and supervised the rebuilding of the abbey church of Saint-Denis, which had fallen into decay. With this work, he changed the traditional architecture style with a new art style where he made pointed arches instead of round arches, used stained-glass windows, etc. This was later known as the beginning of the Gothic style.

He is also considered one of the foremost historians of that time, as he wrote about Louis VI and Louis VII and about the rebuilding of the Saint-Denis church.

to answer this question you need to explain more

b) a state law could be declared illegal if it contradicted the constitution.

explanation:

the conflict of this case originated when james w. mcculloch, a cashier of the baltimore branch of the second bank of the united states that the congress had chartered in 1816, refused to pay a tax imposed by the maryland state.

in the case, the state of maryland appealed that the establishment of a second bank was unconstitutional since the constitution didn't say anything about granting that power to congress. however, the case determined that even if such right wasn't specifically stated in the constitution, it was part of the "implied powers" of the government enunciated in article i, section 8.

the case also eliminated maryland's legislation to impose taxes to a national bank, asserting that even though the states retained the power of taxation, the constitution's laws are supreme and can not be controlled by the states, therefore, if a state law contradicts the constitution, it should be declared illegal.

explanation: