Cortés' decision to burn the ships can be seen as a bold but reckless move. By eliminating the option for retreat, he forced his men to fully commit to their expedition, which could have fostered unity and determination. However, this act also left them without a safe way back, increasing the risk of failure and potentially leading to dire consequences. Ultimately, while it demonstrated strong leadership, it also reflected a dangerous gamble.
Cortes's decision to burn the ships can be seen as both bold and reckless. On one hand, it eliminated the option of retreat, forcing his men to fully commit to their mission in the New World, which ultimately led to their success. On the other hand, it removed any chance of a safe escape in case of failure, which could be viewed as an unnecessary risk. Overall, the decision reflects a dramatic approach to leadership that emphasizes commitment over caution.
burn the ships!
because they need to go and destroy all the ships before the other people steel it
Hernan Cortes ordered his men to burn all but one of their ships. Cortes reasoned that by eliminating their only method of retreat, his men had no choice but to fight hard to win against the Aztecs, which they ultimately did (Global Business Today (2010)).
Since there was no easy way to get back to Spain, his troops would have to make the best of it under Cortez's orders. It took away any incentive to rebel or mutiny.
Yes, to prevent a mutiny.
Rape, pillage and burn. He conquered Mexico.
crude
burn it
Hernán Cortés burned his ships in 1519 shortly after arriving on the coast of Mexico. This decisive action was meant to prevent his men from retreating and to solidify their commitment to the conquest of the Aztec Empire. By eliminating the option of returning home, Cortés aimed to inspire his troops to push forward and succeed in their mission.
Exuro naues.
he died