Ill give brainliest 5 stars and a you someone i'm being timed on this and need an answer. compare and contrast the response of the french people to the rule of louis xvii and the rule of charles x.

Louis XVII was only a child when he inhertired the title of king after his father, Louis XVI was executed on January 21, 1793. Although there was public annimadversion towards the executed king due to his poor economic policies which resulted on hardships for the people, there was certain neutrality over his ascendace to the throne. As it had been product of monarchist theory (he inherited the right due to being a son of the dead king).

On the other hand, Charles X faced fierce opposition from the French People as he was opposed to any sort of reduction in the social benefits that members of the royal family and Church received. This was seen as an offense to the French public. He even was considered by his relatives to be "more royalist than the king".

Louis XVII was the younger son of King Louis XVI of France and Queen Marie Antoinette. Louis XVII was the younger son of King Louis XVI of France and Queen Marie Antoinette. When his father was executed on 21 January 1793, in the middle of the French Revolution, he became "King of France" in the eyes of the royalists. However, since France was by then a republic, he never actually governed. Besides the fact that he had been imprisoned from August 1792 until his death from illness in 1795 at the age of 10.  

In contrast, the reign of Charles X, which lasted almost six years,  proved to be deeply unpopular from the moment of his coronation in 1825. During his reign he tried to revive the practice of the royal touch; he censored the press, restored the clergy's position in the schools and politics, tried to bring back feudalism. He also gave pensions to nobles who had lost lands and rights from the Revolution and dissolved the legislature. In addition, he increased the power of the Catholic Church and imposed again capital punishment for sacrilege, which lead to conflict with the liberal-majority Chamber of Deputies.

the language of nature was a manifestation from god as he said "let there be light" and there was light the world began to assume visible, comprehensible form.

what ever we know now think of the old vision of creation we can be sure that with out the speaking of word -without language- we would have no science today with its striking power to illuminate the world.

answer; participant observation method;