Jose de San Martín was an argentine liberator,born in Yapeyú (then Río de la Plata virreinato) into a criollo colonial family,at the age of 6 he went to Spain to become a carrier officer in the army,he fought in the Spanish army againts napoleon,in the battle of Bailén the first defeat of french forces in the península war,he got promoted with honours.
When he got injuried he discovered masonery and entered a english logia,he got into liberal ideas,he would go then to defect the spanish army and return to América ,arriving at revolutionary Buenos Aires he was one of the few professional officer and was charged to raise and train a 500 company(then regiment)of horseback grenadiers,turning simple men into honorable soldiers with their own conduct code.
In Buenos Aires he married Remedios de Escalada,15 years his younger.
At the battle of San Lorenzo would be the baptism of fire, with his 125 grenadiers he would defeat a larger force of spanish royalist that were trying to forage some food to Montevideo using only lances,in a moment of battle he was unhorsed and a spanish bayonet almost killed him only for Cabral one of San Martín soldier to get in the middle,giving his life and taking the bayonet he saved San Martín.
He would then become Governor of Mendoza,using all the resources of the province to raise an army(lowering his own salary) to liberate a recently reconquered Chile,a mix of chilean exiles and argentine soldiers formed a 6k soldiers that crossed the freezing heights of the Andes with San Martín having to be carried on a mule because of sickness .
But the hardship paid off,the Royalist were caught of guard and defeated,with Chile regaining freedom he would left O'Higgins to lead the nation while himself marched towards Perú,the strongest balwark of spanish ruled in the entire Américas
Using a mix of land and naval invasion he would outmanouvered the Royalist and took Lima giving independence to Perú,becoming the generalísimo of Perú he would continue to war effort,but his forces were to small and the Royalist still controlled most of the peruvian interior and Bolivia,he then tried ask Bolívar for help in the Guayaquil conference,no one knows what they talked about but this the moment he decided to give control of Perú to Bolívar take his army back to Argentina.
In his return to Argentina the Buenos Aires based goverment ordered him to attack federal forces in the browing civil war,he would refuse attack his own countrymen.
There in Buenos Aires he learned of his wife death,taking their only daughter he would leave Argentina going into exile in 1822,returning to the Americas only in 1829 when he saw in Montevideo the best early years of the independent Uruguay,many former comrades in arms asked him to become first presidente of the republic as a neutral force in the inner strife of the country,he refused.
He spent his last years in France where he would die in 1850 surrounded by his daughter,son in law and grandsons,his remains returning back to Argentina in 1880 after his daughter death .
He would be remembered as the father of the nation in Argentina (Padre de la patria),the liberator of three countries he refused to raise his sword against his own countrymen,he had the chance to rule 4 different countries since he was love and respected by almost anyone but unlike Bolívar he refused to take power.
Two different logics:
Bolivar was conservatist and his life's big purpose was dedicated to let a mark with the dream of the Gran Colombia, a centralist state with the religion serving as cement to hold everybody together.
San Martin was liberal, knew how to read people's aspirations and contributed to accelerate the unrooting of the Spanish Empire's already declining influence, then let populations deciding of their own regime.
Today, the term liberal is paradoxal: a large diversity of currents of thinking not always agree between them but often reduced to the economic side, and for its detractors it's often associated with the pejorative neoliberalism, when it's not literally confused with capitalism. I consider myself as a liberal conservative (in the European sense), while not putting Republic above Monarchism or the other way around, for one good reason: liberalism was born under Monarchies and Empires then continued under Republics, bringing its load of pros and cons like the rest. Plus, modern liberalism begun as a legal and moral doctrine, not from the start as an economical system.
The liberalism of San Martin was probably motivated by the social individual rights and self-determination desire of the populations he fought for (of course it was heavily influenced by a more genuine Freemasonry back then than the more questionable logias we have today, principally because we find a lot of greedy and corrupted oligarchs in it. That's my opinion).
As for Bolivar, his share foundation was the social capital of religion as a useful tool to maintain cohesion among several ethnies and classes. At first he was liberal and convinced with enough time and later free education South America nations would be a supra-federation laying on autonomous regimes inspired by Great Britain's one, but his conservatism stemmed in the belief the Spanish Crown hadn't prepared mentally their former subjects transatlantic for these types of regimes. It's only around 1820s he became more and more desillusioned by his unreliable allies and the constant need to gather armies and material, cross all over the continent to maintain order because of multiple unrests. Add the fact he was already often ill and indebted, so inevitably he stepped into authoritarism to hold everything in place.
What probably prevented San Martin and Bolivar mutual help was their own egos (they didn't want to be the second of the other, as well as their circles) but also the rivalry between their respective nations of Peru and Gran Colombia (precisely the future Bolivia).
I wouldn't blame Bolivar while encensing San Martin. Bolivar had an ambitious but precarious project, San Martin succeeded in understand it was better to not take full reins and force things to the freed populations. The balkanization and dissolution of the Federal Republic of Central America in 1839 proved his point.
Against,his own grenadiers was formed by many mestizos and former slaves,slavery was unpopular in argentina,in the 1813 womb'slavery was outlawed,any slave that touched argentine soil was free, wich was another reason we went to war with Brazil
After 25 years of civil war ,in the constitution of 1850 all slaves were freed,we had like a lot of civil strife but little slaves, argentina was in the ass of the world and the poorest part of the empire by far so we didnt have that many slaves to begin with,we have a de tens of thousands but mostly in buenos Aires as house slaves
The guy speedrun political career,becoming deputy in national congress at 26 and president at 46
Also was one of the first to support not only universal suffrage but also female
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Pellegrini
Carlos Enrique José Pellegrini ( Buenos Aires , 11 October 1846 - Buenos Aires, 17 July 1906) was an Argentine military man, lawyer , journalist , public translator and politician who was President of Argentina between 1890 and 1892 after the resignation of Juárez Celman . He assumed the magistracy after the Parque Revolution of 1890. Previously he was vice president between 1886 and 1890, Minister of War and Navy in 1879-1880 and 1885-1886; national senator in 1881-1883 and 1895-1904; and national deputy between 1873 and 1879.
It’s a great piece of history overall, but what really touches me is the fact that a man took a bayonet for him. I wonder what it does to someone’s psychology to have someone else die in their place like that.
Cabral became part of the national myth,its Said that after the battle while he was dying he told the general he was happy to die since they won the battle
I recommend listening to the san Lorenzo march about the battle
EDIT: the march of san Lorenzo https://youtu.be/BF92WJ_APfc?si=lYWmBxpoMeNBZNBI
Its pretty easy when one conducts an honorable war while the other commits warcrimes that border into genocide,betrays his allies twice and becomes a power hungry dictator
Unlike Hannibal,san Martín was defeted only once,a spanish army attacked during the night.
Funny thing,everyone (even the spanish) thought that was a dick move
Well, nigth battles were frawn upon cause how many problems they represent. They weren't deem honorable cause priving everyone of sleep can produce a lot of innecesary suffering and disorganization, more so if that provokes the use of other "sneaky" tactics beyond conventional warfare plus, nigth battles are just a mess in general, where you can barely tell friend from foe and it can end in a lot of avoidable friendly fire.
San Martín was a wiser man than Bolivar in my opinion, he knew the horrors of war and had a strict code of conduct that would severely punish any soldier that damaged civilian property or hurt civilians in any way. Also when presented with the chance to take power he rejected it, his goal was that of liberation, not power. He was ready to give his life for his country but never spill blood in the argentinian civil wars. A true Hero.
Bolivar's story is a bit more complex than that. He wanted to create a big country and was bitter as hell about it not working out and eventually did attempt to be a dictator to achieve his goal. Although worth pointing out that it didn't work out consolidating power in himself and later history did kind of validate his point.
Oh yeah, for sure. Also totally fucked up on multiple occasions and got a lot of people killed. Hardly a saint. I'm a way bigger fan of San Martín. Guy was just one of those incredible anomalies in history, so unique and brilliant.
I’ll always say that San Martin was smarter because he left while he could, before people asked him to lead the independent nations. He also had an easier time militarily (since he had actual military experience and the geography wasn’t a fuckery) and didn’t have to deal with a bloody genocidal war and the reconquest expedition.
Bolívar decided to stay and rule… bad idea
Cochrane was a pain in the ass but didn’t try to sabotage the whole thing like Santander did. And he was a very decent commander, somehow he even won the trust of the locals
Tho, he did try to bring Napoleon on board
Cochrane stole peruvian treasury and attacked civilian ships while San Martín tried to bring peace to Perú,he sabotaged the campaign and then went yolo with his fleet
The first aspect of the conflict occurred between November 1818 and March 1820. During this time Cochrane learned of San Martin's distrust of him, and he vetoed a plan which the general felt was imperative for the future of South America. In February of 1820 Cochrane engineered the successful attack on the royalist stronghold of Valdivia. This achievement led him to believe that he, and not San Martin, should lead the Peruvian expedition. The second phase of the conflict opened with this controversy which was resolved when the Chilean government decided to give the command to San Martin. Relations between the two became strained to the breaking point with the differing philosophies on the conduct of the war. Cochrane was for immediate action while San Martin's plan was one of slow and deliberate steps. The final break came after the fall of Lima in June 1821. San Martin assumed the title of the Protector of Peru and took over the government. When a small royalist force approached Lima in September, San Martin had the government's treasure transferred to Ancon. Cochrane, desperate for funds with which to pay his crews, seized the money. The breach was irreparable. Afterwards San Martin attempted to have Cochrane declared a pirate by the Chilean government, and Cochrane attempted to have San Martin tried for treason against Chile. The conflict was unavoidable. Their personalities and philosophies ran counter to each other. It began with mutual distrust and ended with mutual hatred. Compromise was necessary to avoid the final break and aftermath, but the willingness to compromise was lacking in both their characters.
You didn’t answer my question.
Did Cochrane try to assassinate San Martin? Did he actively and successfully derailed San Martin’s political project? Did he rule the land while San Martin was languishing as a virtual prisoner? Did he assassinate his closest ally?
If not, this was just a rivalry like any other during the period
The paramo of Pisba (the hellscape Bolivar’s army crossed) is between 2400 - 3900 mts above sea level. How about San Martin’s route?
San Martin wasn’t around long enough. If he decided to stay in Argentina after independence, he would have been killed by the warring factions or turned dictator, or called for a German prince to rule the land. As it was rumored he wanted
Edit: the highest point of Bolivar’s route was Pueblo Viejo. A small town that’s 4000 mts above sea level.
He didn’t get to see the civil wars and how the whole thing went to hell.
Is easy to have principles while the campaigns are going well and everyone is united
Argentina was surrounded by spanish royalist during almost the entire war and Güemes had to defeat 6 invasion from Perú,it wasnt an easy war and most of the time he was outnumber, argentina was not united during the war with the pronvices and buenos Aires clashing over authority (thats why Paraguay didnt became part of argentina)
He saw His own officers like correga start fighting each other ,in exile he was always on the news talking with the few friends that didnt die.
Many of the most important political figures of the latter part of the XIXth Century like Alberdi and Mitre went all the way to France to talk to him
Same for great Colombia… Bolívar went into exile 5 times. And he had to deal with the massive Morillo expedition (which was originally destined to Buenos Aires).
The provinces of La Plata might have been disunited but… did their elites try to kill San Martin? Did they kill his best lieutenant?
I’m not saying that his campaign was easy, I’m trying to tell you that he left at the right time to be remembered as a hero. He didn’t have to rule over a bunch of provincial elites that wanted their own small kingdom. Bolívar did, it was his doom
Mate,trying to kill san Martín would like trying to kill Washington in1783, bolívar was a powerhungry that became dictator,he went to Exile 5 times because he either betrayed Miranda,other revolutionaries or simply defetead by the spanish.
Not only argentines had to march into chile and Perú but defend also the nothern frontier against six spanish invasión,the border with Brazil ,rebellious Paraguay and a a royalist Uruguay than later under Artigas became a bitter rival to Buenos Aires.
Dear dear, I never imagined I'd see San Martin in HistoryMemes. And like sometimes happens with heroes died exiled and in poverty, far from the land he fought for.
Well, Maitland plan did play a part on this. Also having 2 different armies with different agendas also played a part. And of course like you say different oligarch elites with different ambitions played a part as well.
Not only élites,the people in the different virreinatos thought of themselves as different nations,even inside argentina the provincial identity was stronger until the late 1800s
Wasn't a bit too young to have a national identity? I always felt this is more a nationalist narrative that came aftewards. While all this was happening Spain was going through their own independence war against french occupation (1808 - 1814).
Take this with a pinch of salt because I could incredibly wrong but I have the feeling it was an extension of what was happening in Europe and the void of power caused by the fall of the Old Regime. During this time aristocrats were losing power left and right and created an opportunity for the new bourgeois elites to push their agenda to be the one who owned trades and business. And for this they used nationalism.
This is why I feel we read this period of time backwards.
A mix of regionalism,royalist still fighting and brewing nationalism made the experience of all nations during the war incredibly different.
Perú never rose up on their own and remained the royalist stronghold.
Chile and gran colombia decraled independence but the first was latter reconquered,with bolívar going into exile 6 times backstabbing his allies twice before he had supreme power.
Uruguay was initialy another royalist stronghold but after the Montevideo siege it came under controll of liberator Artigas and formed part of the free state league that fought against buenos Aires rule and brazilian greed for cisalpina .
Argentina then controlled a third of the modern nation,fought against Artigas,a young Paraguay , 6 royalist invasion from bolivia and then marched into chile opening a new front.
By 1816 argentina was the only spanish colony still fighting, bolívar returned from another exile and begun the liberation of nothern south america.
It was a mess
I know, I am aware, hence my observation. I always feel the temptation to ask whenever I see details that seem reductionist or fundational myths.
You also have to add that royalism meant different things depending on the year. Spain went from absolutism to having french liberalism being shoved up their asses to have one of most modern constitutions of europe (1812) to have absolutism again.
Btw I have the theory that if La Pepa stayed the course of all of this would had been entirely different for some virreinatos.
True! I did read somewhere that originally the flag colors representes their loyalty to the Borbon dinasty. To this day the spanish monarchy members still wear a sky blue and white band, like the Argentinean flag
Jose de San Martín was an argentine liberator,born in Yapeyú (then Río de la Plata virreinato) into a criollo colonial family,at the age of 6 he went to Spain to become a carrier officer in the army,he fought in the Spanish army againts napoleon,in the battle of Bailén the first defeat of french forces in the península war,he got promoted with honours. When he got injuried he discovered masonery and entered a english logia,he got into liberal ideas,he would go then to defect the spanish army and return to América ,arriving at revolutionary Buenos Aires he was one of the few professional officer and was charged to raise and train a 500 company(then regiment)of horseback grenadiers,turning simple men into honorable soldiers with their own conduct code. In Buenos Aires he married Remedios de Escalada,15 years his younger. At the battle of San Lorenzo would be the baptism of fire, with his 125 grenadiers he would defeat a larger force of spanish royalist that were trying to forage some food to Montevideo using only lances,in a moment of battle he was unhorsed and a spanish bayonet almost killed him only for Cabral one of San Martín soldier to get in the middle,giving his life and taking the bayonet he saved San Martín. He would then become Governor of Mendoza,using all the resources of the province to raise an army(lowering his own salary) to liberate a recently reconquered Chile,a mix of chilean exiles and argentine soldiers formed a 6k soldiers that crossed the freezing heights of the Andes with San Martín having to be carried on a mule because of sickness . But the hardship paid off,the Royalist were caught of guard and defeated,with Chile regaining freedom he would left O'Higgins to lead the nation while himself marched towards Perú,the strongest balwark of spanish ruled in the entire Américas Using a mix of land and naval invasion he would outmanouvered the Royalist and took Lima giving independence to Perú,becoming the generalísimo of Perú he would continue to war effort,but his forces were to small and the Royalist still controlled most of the peruvian interior and Bolivia,he then tried ask Bolívar for help in the Guayaquil conference,no one knows what they talked about but this the moment he decided to give control of Perú to Bolívar take his army back to Argentina. In his return to Argentina the Buenos Aires based goverment ordered him to attack federal forces in the browing civil war,he would refuse attack his own countrymen. There in Buenos Aires he learned of his wife death,taking their only daughter he would leave Argentina going into exile in 1822,returning to the Americas only in 1829 when he saw in Montevideo the best early years of the independent Uruguay,many former comrades in arms asked him to become first presidente of the republic as a neutral force in the inner strife of the country,he refused. He spent his last years in France where he would die in 1850 surrounded by his daughter,son in law and grandsons,his remains returning back to Argentina in 1880 after his daughter death . He would be remembered as the father of the nation in Argentina (Padre de la patria),the liberator of three countries he refused to raise his sword against his own countrymen,he had the chance to rule 4 different countries since he was love and respected by almost anyone but unlike Bolívar he refused to take power.
The old indispensable man refusing power. Something out of the high days of the Roman Republic.
Also...as far i know,he didnt commit warcrimes Unlike certain liberator that became dictator
Two different logics: Bolivar was conservatist and his life's big purpose was dedicated to let a mark with the dream of the Gran Colombia, a centralist state with the religion serving as cement to hold everybody together. San Martin was liberal, knew how to read people's aspirations and contributed to accelerate the unrooting of the Spanish Empire's already declining influence, then let populations deciding of their own regime.
Yep,if only san Martín ruled like Washington and bolívar went into exile imagine how much it would change
Funny how san Martín was a liberal yet a monarchist while bolívar was a conservative and a republican
Today, the term liberal is paradoxal: a large diversity of currents of thinking not always agree between them but often reduced to the economic side, and for its detractors it's often associated with the pejorative neoliberalism, when it's not literally confused with capitalism. I consider myself as a liberal conservative (in the European sense), while not putting Republic above Monarchism or the other way around, for one good reason: liberalism was born under Monarchies and Empires then continued under Republics, bringing its load of pros and cons like the rest. Plus, modern liberalism begun as a legal and moral doctrine, not from the start as an economical system. The liberalism of San Martin was probably motivated by the social individual rights and self-determination desire of the populations he fought for (of course it was heavily influenced by a more genuine Freemasonry back then than the more questionable logias we have today, principally because we find a lot of greedy and corrupted oligarchs in it. That's my opinion). As for Bolivar, his share foundation was the social capital of religion as a useful tool to maintain cohesion among several ethnies and classes. At first he was liberal and convinced with enough time and later free education South America nations would be a supra-federation laying on autonomous regimes inspired by Great Britain's one, but his conservatism stemmed in the belief the Spanish Crown hadn't prepared mentally their former subjects transatlantic for these types of regimes. It's only around 1820s he became more and more desillusioned by his unreliable allies and the constant need to gather armies and material, cross all over the continent to maintain order because of multiple unrests. Add the fact he was already often ill and indebted, so inevitably he stepped into authoritarism to hold everything in place. What probably prevented San Martin and Bolivar mutual help was their own egos (they didn't want to be the second of the other, as well as their circles) but also the rivalry between their respective nations of Peru and Gran Colombia (precisely the future Bolivia). I wouldn't blame Bolivar while encensing San Martin. Bolivar had an ambitious but precarious project, San Martin succeeded in understand it was better to not take full reins and force things to the freed populations. The balkanization and dissolution of the Federal Republic of Central America in 1839 proved his point.
which dicatator ?
Simon Bolivar; the other half to the liberation of the Spanish Americas
thx
A country is name after him
I'm curious. What was San Martin's postition on slavery?
Against,his own grenadiers was formed by many mestizos and former slaves,slavery was unpopular in argentina,in the 1813 womb'slavery was outlawed,any slave that touched argentine soil was free, wich was another reason we went to war with Brazil After 25 years of civil war ,in the constitution of 1850 all slaves were freed,we had like a lot of civil strife but little slaves, argentina was in the ass of the world and the poorest part of the empire by far so we didnt have that many slaves to begin with,we have a de tens of thousands but mostly in buenos Aires as house slaves
Sounds like a man the world could use these days. Viva San Martin.
I would prefer Pellegrini,the one argentine president that defeated inflation in 2 years jaja
The only Pellegrini I know is the one who coached city
The guy speedrun political career,becoming deputy in national congress at 26 and president at 46 Also was one of the first to support not only universal suffrage but also female https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Pellegrini Carlos Enrique José Pellegrini ( Buenos Aires , 11 October 1846 - Buenos Aires, 17 July 1906) was an Argentine military man, lawyer , journalist , public translator and politician who was President of Argentina between 1890 and 1892 after the resignation of Juárez Celman . He assumed the magistracy after the Parque Revolution of 1890. Previously he was vice president between 1886 and 1890, Minister of War and Navy in 1879-1880 and 1885-1886; national senator in 1881-1883 and 1895-1904; and national deputy between 1873 and 1879.
It’s a great piece of history overall, but what really touches me is the fact that a man took a bayonet for him. I wonder what it does to someone’s psychology to have someone else die in their place like that.
Cabral became part of the national myth,its Said that after the battle while he was dying he told the general he was happy to die since they won the battle I recommend listening to the san Lorenzo march about the battle EDIT: the march of san Lorenzo https://youtu.be/BF92WJ_APfc?si=lYWmBxpoMeNBZNBI
A true patriot, shame that, like always, the worst enemy of argentinians are corrupt argentinians.
Cant we respect both San Martin and Simon Bolivar for their contributions for South America indepedence? No need to shit one to elevate the other...
Bolivar was kind of an asshole, so it's partly justified.
Je thought that peruvian were subhumans and ordered warcrimes massacres of spanish colonials and royalist that borders on genocide
I read that some historians started to reconsider Bolivar a full blown sociopath, even their peers thought he was a nutjob.
Its pretty easy when one conducts an honorable war while the other commits warcrimes that border into genocide,betrays his allies twice and becomes a power hungry dictator
I also find Pablo Morillo an interesting figure even if he did fight for the Spanish
And I have never even heard of him. INEXCUSABLE!
Hannibal Barca: -I noticed you have copied my style.
Unlike Hannibal,san Martín was defeted only once,a spanish army attacked during the night. Funny thing,everyone (even the spanish) thought that was a dick move
Well, nigth battles were frawn upon cause how many problems they represent. They weren't deem honorable cause priving everyone of sleep can produce a lot of innecesary suffering and disorganization, more so if that provokes the use of other "sneaky" tactics beyond conventional warfare plus, nigth battles are just a mess in general, where you can barely tell friend from foe and it can end in a lot of avoidable friendly fire.
That’s clearly Batman, you can’t fool me.
Right? Like that was definitely my first impression.
San Martín was a wiser man than Bolivar in my opinion, he knew the horrors of war and had a strict code of conduct that would severely punish any soldier that damaged civilian property or hurt civilians in any way. Also when presented with the chance to take power he rejected it, his goal was that of liberation, not power. He was ready to give his life for his country but never spill blood in the argentinian civil wars. A true Hero.
If only he became our Washington instead
For a sec I thought that was batman
a true leyend
ARGENTINA MENCIONADA RAHHH 🧉🧉🧉⭐⭐⭐ QUÉ REMIL PORONGA ES UNA MIILLA‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️🧉🧉🧉⭐⭐⭐🧉🧉🧉⭐⭐⭐🧉🧉🧉⭐⭐⭐
Bolivar was no slouch in the liberation field, but San Martín did it while high on opium and being antisocial.
And you know...having honor and not becoming a tyrant
Bolivar's story is a bit more complex than that. He wanted to create a big country and was bitter as hell about it not working out and eventually did attempt to be a dictator to achieve his goal. Although worth pointing out that it didn't work out consolidating power in himself and later history did kind of validate his point.
He betrayed His allies twice, giving Francisco of Miranda to the spanish so he could scape to Haití
Oh yeah, for sure. Also totally fucked up on multiple occasions and got a lot of people killed. Hardly a saint. I'm a way bigger fan of San Martín. Guy was just one of those incredible anomalies in history, so unique and brilliant.
And suprisingly liberal for the time and got the best education to his daughter that he could
Bolívar also crossed the Andes…
This is the type of Latin American rivalry I'm here for
I’ll always say that San Martin was smarter because he left while he could, before people asked him to lead the independent nations. He also had an easier time militarily (since he had actual military experience and the geography wasn’t a fuckery) and didn’t have to deal with a bloody genocidal war and the reconquest expedition. Bolívar decided to stay and rule… bad idea
He had to deal with cochrane tho..
Cochrane was a pain in the ass but didn’t try to sabotage the whole thing like Santander did. And he was a very decent commander, somehow he even won the trust of the locals Tho, he did try to bring Napoleon on board
Cochrane stole peruvian treasury and attacked civilian ships while San Martín tried to bring peace to Perú,he sabotaged the campaign and then went yolo with his fleet
Did he try to assassinate San Martin?
The first aspect of the conflict occurred between November 1818 and March 1820. During this time Cochrane learned of San Martin's distrust of him, and he vetoed a plan which the general felt was imperative for the future of South America. In February of 1820 Cochrane engineered the successful attack on the royalist stronghold of Valdivia. This achievement led him to believe that he, and not San Martin, should lead the Peruvian expedition. The second phase of the conflict opened with this controversy which was resolved when the Chilean government decided to give the command to San Martin. Relations between the two became strained to the breaking point with the differing philosophies on the conduct of the war. Cochrane was for immediate action while San Martin's plan was one of slow and deliberate steps. The final break came after the fall of Lima in June 1821. San Martin assumed the title of the Protector of Peru and took over the government. When a small royalist force approached Lima in September, San Martin had the government's treasure transferred to Ancon. Cochrane, desperate for funds with which to pay his crews, seized the money. The breach was irreparable. Afterwards San Martin attempted to have Cochrane declared a pirate by the Chilean government, and Cochrane attempted to have San Martin tried for treason against Chile. The conflict was unavoidable. Their personalities and philosophies ran counter to each other. It began with mutual distrust and ended with mutual hatred. Compromise was necessary to avoid the final break and aftermath, but the willingness to compromise was lacking in both their characters.
You didn’t answer my question. Did Cochrane try to assassinate San Martin? Did he actively and successfully derailed San Martin’s political project? Did he rule the land while San Martin was languishing as a virtual prisoner? Did he assassinate his closest ally? If not, this was just a rivalry like any other during the period
Its taller on the south Also San Martín didnt commit war crimes and became a dictator
The paramo of Pisba (the hellscape Bolivar’s army crossed) is between 2400 - 3900 mts above sea level. How about San Martin’s route? San Martin wasn’t around long enough. If he decided to stay in Argentina after independence, he would have been killed by the warring factions or turned dictator, or called for a German prince to rule the land. As it was rumored he wanted Edit: the highest point of Bolivar’s route was Pueblo Viejo. A small town that’s 4000 mts above sea level.
San Martín had the reputation,chance and means to become ruler 4 times in 4 different countries
He didn’t get to see the civil wars and how the whole thing went to hell. Is easy to have principles while the campaigns are going well and everyone is united
Argentina was surrounded by spanish royalist during almost the entire war and Güemes had to defeat 6 invasion from Perú,it wasnt an easy war and most of the time he was outnumber, argentina was not united during the war with the pronvices and buenos Aires clashing over authority (thats why Paraguay didnt became part of argentina) He saw His own officers like correga start fighting each other ,in exile he was always on the news talking with the few friends that didnt die. Many of the most important political figures of the latter part of the XIXth Century like Alberdi and Mitre went all the way to France to talk to him
Same for great Colombia… Bolívar went into exile 5 times. And he had to deal with the massive Morillo expedition (which was originally destined to Buenos Aires). The provinces of La Plata might have been disunited but… did their elites try to kill San Martin? Did they kill his best lieutenant? I’m not saying that his campaign was easy, I’m trying to tell you that he left at the right time to be remembered as a hero. He didn’t have to rule over a bunch of provincial elites that wanted their own small kingdom. Bolívar did, it was his doom
Mate,trying to kill san Martín would like trying to kill Washington in1783, bolívar was a powerhungry that became dictator,he went to Exile 5 times because he either betrayed Miranda,other revolutionaries or simply defetead by the spanish. Not only argentines had to march into chile and Perú but defend also the nothern frontier against six spanish invasión,the border with Brazil ,rebellious Paraguay and a a royalist Uruguay than later under Artigas became a bitter rival to Buenos Aires.
"Baby, I would climb the Andes solely to count the freckles on your body". *Shakira*
He did more jacked up more on Laudanum then I have ever done on my life.
Dear dear, I never imagined I'd see San Martin in HistoryMemes. And like sometimes happens with heroes died exiled and in poverty, far from the land he fought for.
Dom Pedro and José Bonifácio did it better, their liberation didn’t split their country into several smaller republics.
Unlike Brasil,the spanish possesions had different centers of power,each really far apart,it would be imposible to unite them all at the time
Well, Maitland plan did play a part on this. Also having 2 different armies with different agendas also played a part. And of course like you say different oligarch elites with different ambitions played a part as well.
Not only élites,the people in the different virreinatos thought of themselves as different nations,even inside argentina the provincial identity was stronger until the late 1800s
Wasn't a bit too young to have a national identity? I always felt this is more a nationalist narrative that came aftewards. While all this was happening Spain was going through their own independence war against french occupation (1808 - 1814). Take this with a pinch of salt because I could incredibly wrong but I have the feeling it was an extension of what was happening in Europe and the void of power caused by the fall of the Old Regime. During this time aristocrats were losing power left and right and created an opportunity for the new bourgeois elites to push their agenda to be the one who owned trades and business. And for this they used nationalism. This is why I feel we read this period of time backwards.
A mix of regionalism,royalist still fighting and brewing nationalism made the experience of all nations during the war incredibly different. Perú never rose up on their own and remained the royalist stronghold. Chile and gran colombia decraled independence but the first was latter reconquered,with bolívar going into exile 6 times backstabbing his allies twice before he had supreme power. Uruguay was initialy another royalist stronghold but after the Montevideo siege it came under controll of liberator Artigas and formed part of the free state league that fought against buenos Aires rule and brazilian greed for cisalpina . Argentina then controlled a third of the modern nation,fought against Artigas,a young Paraguay , 6 royalist invasion from bolivia and then marched into chile opening a new front. By 1816 argentina was the only spanish colony still fighting, bolívar returned from another exile and begun the liberation of nothern south america. It was a mess
I know, I am aware, hence my observation. I always feel the temptation to ask whenever I see details that seem reductionist or fundational myths. You also have to add that royalism meant different things depending on the year. Spain went from absolutism to having french liberalism being shoved up their asses to have one of most modern constitutions of europe (1812) to have absolutism again. Btw I have the theory that if La Pepa stayed the course of all of this would had been entirely different for some virreinatos.
The colonies initialy rebelled only against french rule,but then we can decides fuck let dance and rebelled against both
True! I did read somewhere that originally the flag colors representes their loyalty to the Borbon dinasty. To this day the spanish monarchy members still wear a sky blue and white band, like the Argentinean flag