britsh missions were on the south and the spanish were on the west
britsh missions were on the south and the spanish were on the west
britsh missions were on the south and the spanish were on the west
french missions were put on the east coast and spanish on the west
The biggest differences is in how the three treated the Native Americans. The French treated Native Americans with more respect and many French lived with the natives. They traded with them and had good relationships. The British thought of the Native Americans as a problem from the start and felt that they should leave the land to the British. They did their best to kill them or drive them out of their native areas. The Spanish were even worse. They enslaved the Native Americans that they encountered. The missions they set up still have the mass graves of the Natives that worked on the missions grounds.
French were from France, and Spanish were from Spain.
French were from France, and Spanish were from Spain.
Beginning with Christopher Columbus, these patterns were referred to by the Spanish as Las Conquistas. The explorers who carried out these missions to colonize the New World were known as Conquistadors.
No it was never a British colony, it was French, Spanish and then purchased by the United States. No it was never a British colony, it was French, Spanish and then purchased by the United States.
they didnt french British dutch and the spanish all had there own
Never. Only British and French.
They were basically unsuccessful and the Spanish responded with building more missions.
Spanish and French explorers and missionaries were among the first to establish missions in the Americas in the early 16th century. Notable figures include Spanish missionaries like Junípero Serra in California and French missionaries like Jacques Marquette in the Midwest. These early missions played a critical role in the spread of Christianity and European colonization in the Americas.