it for my class us history
2007-09-08 07:08:54 · 7 answers · asked by john a 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
they were conquistadors, not good at all...
2007-09-12 02:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
WERE THEY GOOD?
Just successful conquistadors, that's all.
Cortez had a bit more vision than Pizarro.
But neither of them returned to Spain for long.
They lived out their lives - civil war and violent death, in Pizarros case - in the countries they had conquered.
2007-09-08 07:15:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
well they set up cities for spain in mexico and south america. they also had great military skills and were able to defeat native american groups and make alliances easily. cortez was named governor of new spain.
2007-09-10 13:51:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
i don't think the natives thought they were soo good. but i'm sure spain thought they were good because they brought back some good gold (at least pizarro did. i think cortez got his ship bombed before he could get back or something)
2007-09-08 07:14:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
While neither of these were good people and cannot be considered good in any way (in my opinion), they did succeed in nearly eradicating human sacrifice in that area of the world. In this way they did succeed in a good deed, whether that makes them good, well.....
2007-09-08 14:55:49 · answer #5 · answered by sferguson1529 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
In whose opinion? They killed natives, introduced disease, stole gold and land, then returned to Spain with their spoils.
2007-09-08 07:17:43 · answer #6 · answered by St N 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
THEY WERE RUTHLESS, MERCILESS MEN WHO WERE LOOKING FOR RICHES. THEY COULD HAVE CARED LESS ABOUT THE NATIVE POPULATION.
2007-09-12 04:44:21 · answer #7 · answered by Loren S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋