1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
11Alexandr11 [23.1K]
3 years ago
15

Do you agree or disagree w/ Cortes decision to burn the ships? Explain

History
2 answers:
Kaylis [27]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

I agree and disagree with his choice. I agree because it proved to be an incredibly effective manner of ensuring that his men would be motivated to conquer the territory, mainly because they did not have an alternative choice. They had to become rulers there or be lost in the middle of unknown lands. In the end, his choice justified his goal and means. I also disagree because it can also be argued on how unethical it was that he prevented his men from deciding if they wanted to participate or not on the mission. He eliminated their choice and rights, which is exactly why the renaissance happened, so people can be knowledgeable and make their own decisions rather than it being imposed on them.

I hope it helps :)

Nataliya [291]3 years ago
3 0

Hernan Cortes (1485-1547) was a Spanish colonizer and conqueror, who leaded the conquest of the Mexican territories, that started in 1519 with the occupation of Veracruz. The tales about the sacking of the Mexican capital, Tenochtitlan, are still legendary nowadays.

After the takeover of Veracruz, Cortes gave the order of sinking his own ships (it was thought they were burnt, but nowadays that hypothesis is being questioned). Anyway, he destroyed his ships on purpouse to force his men to go forward and conquer the New World, both in the militar and spiritual (goal of spreading the Christian religion) dimensions.

  • Agreement with his decision: of course it is an incredibly effective manner of ensuring that his men would be motivated to conquer the territory, mainly because they did not have an alternative choice. They had to become rulers there or be lost in the middle of unknown lands. It can be claimed how the ultimate goal justifies the means.
  • Disagreement with the decision: it can be argued how unethical is that he prevented his men from deciding if they wanted to participate or not on the mission. He eliminated the choice.
You might be interested in
Cold war why did the other allied powers not trust stalin after world war 2 came to an end
cricket20 [7]

Answer:

Stalin failed to keep some of his promises.  Churchill and other allied leaders were afraid Stalin /Russians would not leave cities they liberated from the Nazis.  Truman took over from Roosevelt and was tougher with Stalin.  The West did not share information on nuclear/atomic developments, another sign of distrust.  They felt he was another dictator, when they just fought dictators.  The Communist ideology saw Capitalism as an enemy to be conquered rather than a different ideology to co-exist with.

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Describe the booking process in Florida
tangare [24]
Booking like in plane ticket?
3 0
2 years ago
According to the declaration of independence what should people do when the government abuses it's power
Leona [35]
The people ought to change it or topple it.
4 0
3 years ago
At the recent convention of first continental in philadelphia voted to establish the
Dafna11 [192]

At the recent convention of first continental in Philadelphia voted to establish the organized colonial resistance to Parliament's Coercive Acts. It was a meeting between the 12 British representatives colonies (except Georgia) to become the United States.

The representatives of all the 12 British colonies met at Carpenter Hall in Philadelphia from 5th September to 26th October 1774. The congress also gave vote to come for the following year’s meeting if their problems were not solved of it they did not get satisfactory solution.

3 0
3 years ago
George washington supported proposal of which group?
Dennis_Churaev [7]

Answer;

-Federalists

Explanation;

-Federalists were the supporters of the proposed Constitution. They believed that the nation might not survive without the passage of the Constitution, and that a stronger national government was necessary after the failed Articles of Confederation.

-The Federalists wanted a strong government and strong executive branch, while the anti-Federalists wanted a weaker central government. The Federalists did not want a bill of rights; they thought the new constitution was sufficient.

6 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What was the primary purpose of the ten commandments​
    8·2 answers
  • How did romans empires expansion be described
    7·1 answer
  • ¿Por quien fue diseñada La plaza de San Pedro en Roma?
    10·1 answer
  • Several generations living in one household
    8·2 answers
  • Why was Senator Ross so important to the trial of President Johnson?
    10·1 answer
  • Charlemagne created a general policy that brought what to his people? A.) for taxation B.) legal system C.) religious order D.)
    8·1 answer
  • What is the name for a sudden and dramatic change in political power?
    13·2 answers
  • How did voodoo, practiced by African slaves, contribute to conflict in Louisiana?
    7·1 answer
  • What is Promote the general welfare and why was it important in creating a strong nation
    15·1 answer
  • Question 12 of 20:
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!