Use the passages to answer all parts of the question that follows.a) Explain ONE difference in the arguments expressed in the two sources regarding the effectof revolutions on the global political order.b) Explain ONE development from the period of the Atlantic Revolutions that grounded "socialrelations for the first time on the principle of formal equality" as claimed in the secondparagraph of Source 1.c) Identify ONE way in which empires in the nineteenth century (other than those mentioned inthe passage) successfully resisted revolutionary change, as suggested in Source 2. Source 1"More than in any other era, politics in the [late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries] wasrevolutionary politics. It did not defend 'age-old rights' but, looking ahead to the future,elevated particular interests such as those of a class or a class coalition into the interests ofa nation or even of humanity as a whole. ... New political orders came into being, with newbases of legitimacy. Any return to the world as it had been previously was barred; nowherewere prerevolutionary conditions restored. ...Whereas previous violent overthrows had merely led to external modifications of the statusquo, the American and French revolutionaries expanded the whole horizon of the age, openinga path of linear progress, grounding social relations for the first time on the principle of formalequality, lifting the weight of tradition and royal charisma, and instituting a system of rulesthat made those in political authority accountable to a community of citizens. These tworevolutions.., however different from each other in their aims, signaled the onset of politicalmodernity. From then on, defenders of the existing order bore the mark of the old andobsolete."Jürgen Osterhammel, German historian, The Transformation of the World: A Global History ofthe Nineteenth Century, 2014Source 2"The French revolution and those in North and South America have been transformed intofounding myths in their respective countries and are thought to mark the emergence ofcitizenship, of national economies, of the very idea of the nation. But in their own time, therevolutions' lessons were inconclusive.... The revolutions of the Americas began by drawingon ideas of [liberty and citizenship] ... to redefine sovereignty and power within imperialpolities but ended up producing new states that shared world space with reconfiguredempires. The secession of states from the British, French, and Spanish empires did notproduce nations of equivalent citizens any more than it produced a world of equivalentnations.... Popular sovereignty was far from the accepted norm in western Europe andwithin empires' spaces overseas it was unclear whether the idea of [individual rights] wouldbe a contagious proposition or one [restricted to] a select few. ... The nation had become animaginable possibility in world politics. But the leaders of [empires] did not want to limit theirpolitical compass to national boundaries."Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper, historians, Empires in World History, 2010

Question

Use the passages to answer all parts of the question that follows.a) Explain ONE difference in the arguments expressed in the two sources regarding the effectof revolutions on the global political order.b) Explain ONE development from the period of the Atlantic Revolutions that grounded &#34;socialrelations for the first time on the principle of formal equality&#34; as claimed in the secondparagraph of Source 1.c) Identify ONE way in which empires in the nineteenth century (other than those mentioned inthe passage) successfully resisted revolutionary change, as suggested in Source 2. Source 1&#34;More than in any other era, politics in the [late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries] wasrevolutionary politics. It did not defend 'age-old rights' but, looking ahead to the future,elevated particular interests such as those of a class or a class coalition into the interests ofa nation or even of humanity as a whole. ... New political orders came into being, with newbases of legitimacy. Any return to the world as it had been previously was barred; nowherewere prerevolutionary conditions restored. ...Whereas previous violent overthrows had merely led to external modifications of the statusquo, the American and French revolutionaries expanded the whole horizon of the age, openinga path of linear progress, grounding social relations for the first time on the principle of formalequality, lifting the weight of tradition and royal charisma, and instituting a system of rulesthat made those in political authority accountable to a community of citizens. These tworevolutions.., however different from each other in their aims, signaled the onset of politicalmodernity. From then on, defenders of the existing order bore the mark of the old andobsolete.&#34;Jürgen Osterhammel, German historian, The Transformation of the World: A Global History ofthe Nineteenth Century, 2014Source 2&#34;The French revolution and those in North and South America have been transformed intofounding myths in their respective countries and are thought to mark the emergence ofcitizenship, of national economies, of the very idea of the nation. But in their own time, therevolutions' lessons were inconclusive.... The revolutions of the Americas began by drawingon ideas of [liberty and citizenship] ... to redefine sovereignty and power within imperialpolities but ended up producing new states that shared world space with reconfiguredempires. The secession of states from the British, French, and Spanish empires did notproduce nations of equivalent citizens any more than it produced a world of equivalentnations.... Popular sovereignty was far from the accepted norm in western Europe andwithin empires' spaces overseas it was unclear whether the idea of [individual rights] wouldbe a contagious proposition or one [restricted to] a select few. ... The nation had become animaginable possibility in world politics. But the leaders of [empires] did not want to limit theirpolitical compass to national boundaries.&#34;Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper, historians, Empires in World History, 2010

Accepted Answer

Revolutions in history has brought relatively sudden changes and are the turning points. These are…