How can Bolivar's Gran Colombia survive into the 20th Century and eventually come to encompass all of Spanish speaking South America right down to Argentina and Chile? I know southern South America is de San Martin's turf but it's not like their enemies or anything. So how could such a thing happen?
Survival of Gran Colombia
- Thread starter The Federalist
- Start date
Grey Wolf
Donor
I wonder if you could look at removing San Martin from the equation and having the Spanish reconquest of the South succeed, so that instead of 2 rival power-blocs emerging and meeting in Peru, you would have a victorious Northern power bloc pressing South against remaining Spanish forces ?
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Rockingham
Banned
Look, this is geographically almost impossible... exactly where would such a state have its capital? It would in no way have the defendability or ease in regards to transport across their territories that the US had and has....
Nowadays, it would be quite possible, seeing as the modern economic and political structures of organization aren't significantly impeded by it.... but back then, transport across land and sea was very difficult in the region....
Gran Columbia could perhaps survive, and extend somewhat further into Central America, Peru and Guyana, but said state extending to Argentina as anything more then a mere formality, or even if it somehow managed that retaining control of the region, is implausible.
If it somehow survived as a Holy Roman style formality, and was revived as an actual state in the 20th century, that would be a differet matter.
Nowadays, it would be quite possible, seeing as the modern economic and political structures of organization aren't significantly impeded by it.... but back then, transport across land and sea was very difficult in the region....
Gran Columbia could perhaps survive, and extend somewhat further into Central America, Peru and Guyana, but said state extending to Argentina as anything more then a mere formality, or even if it somehow managed that retaining control of the region, is implausible.
If it somehow survived as a Holy Roman style formality, and was revived as an actual state in the 20th century, that would be a differet matter.
What about two independent states? Bolivar's Gran Colombia to the North and a similar state in the South founded by San Martin?
What could make it survive? Other than a Spanish reconquest of the South and the Northern regions sticking together to counter Spanish influence like what Grey Wolf said, are there any other POD's that would enable Gran Colombia to avoid dissolution?
Grey Wolf
Donor
The problem with a single Southern state is the Andes which kind of slice it in half. Without them, I wonder whether San Martin would simply have attached his W coast conquests/liberations to those he had already achieved on the E coast ?
In my San Martin timeline I envisaged a Kingdom of Peru, San Martin style, which included Bolivia (OTL was a unification for a while) and also original Chile
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
In my San Martin timeline I envisaged a Kingdom of Peru, San Martin style, which included Bolivia (OTL was a unification for a while) and also original Chile
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
I could picture a Gran Colombia encompassing present day Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and maybe Ecuador in the XX century. But not all Spanish America, for the reasons others said.
The main problem is geography. IF your scenario were to happen, to go from, let's say, Caracas to Buenos Aires you would have to cross the Andes at least twice (and more likely four times), and travel thousands of kilometers through very rough roads. This would mean that, if the government is in the North, he would have had no cotrol of what happens in the South (IOTL Bolivar had problems controlling Colombia and Venezuela when he was in Peru)
Portuguese Brazil managed to stay united mainly because the royal family had come there. But grography madi its part: the fact that most of the population was on the Atlantic also helped.
That's a good point. Such a state would have territories mainly in the Pacific, with two branches extending towards the Atlantic: Venezuela in the North and the Río de la Plata in the South. The logical capital should be somewhere in Perú or Ecuador. And even in that case it would be extremely hard to keep the country united, as even TODAY it takes five days to travel from Lima to Buenos Aires by land, going through Chile (were roads are better than Bolivia).
The problem is Peru was the area were the Spanish were stronger. It was the richest area, and the one that benefited more from the Spanish system. It's no surprise the revolution started on the areas which were further away from it: Venezuela and Argentina. To have a revolution starting in the center and not in the periphery would have required very significant PODs.
The more likely was to have revolution spreading from the far North or the far South (or both, as IOTL). And, in both cases, it would be very hard for any of those to keep control of the lands further away.
Another thing: As soon as the revolution gets away from where it's started, it will lose strengh. IOTL Argentina's government was quite willing to support the liberation of Chile (cause the Spanish presence there was seen as a serious threat), but wasn't that concerned about freing Peru. If San Martin had chose to go norther, The Government of Buenos Aires probably wouldn't have backed him, nor that of Chile.
And the same would happen otherwise: Let's say revolution happen's only in Venezuela. I don't think many Venezuelans would back Bolivar's attempt to free Argentina. They would probably think that with Peru and Upper Peru its enough.
Peru centred instead
Well I don't know about Gran Colombia..
But what are the chances of a Greater Peru instead...
Argueably centering on Lima gives access to the entire Pacific coast...Colombia ( inclusive of Panama even) to Chile. Bolivia would be difficult but not impossible from Peru.
Well I don't know about Gran Colombia..
But what are the chances of a Greater Peru instead...
Argueably centering on Lima gives access to the entire Pacific coast...Colombia ( inclusive of Panama even) to Chile. Bolivia would be difficult but not impossible from Peru.
^^^I've wrote about this (I beat you for a couple of seconds)
I saw that but wasn't sure you were referring toencompassing the full Pacific coast..or just the historical Peru/Bolivia Confederation.
Mind you your more likely to get something like this if independence comes only to the Plate (Argentina) and gets confined in GC to Venezuela) with the Spanish somehow triumphing or at least managing their difficulties in the remaining regions.
Colombia, Ecuador and Chile and Charcas might then be logically grouped under the umbrella of a Spanish Peru, Just as Mexico City was enviaioned as the centre of a New Spain Kingdom in personal union with Spain itself. A Spanish Infante on its own throne eventually would have to be in the cards at some point.
The only way I see thei happening is if the Spanish Monarchs escape to Peru in 1807, and, when Charles returns, Ferdinand the VIIth stays and emulates the founder of Brazilian Monarchy...
Nevermind. It's an interesting idea. Difficult, but not impossible.
That would be what I would be thinking...Peru was one of the strongest bastions of Spanish control. Take away San Martin and Cochrane's intervention and they may have prevailed.
The thing is, OTL San Martin prefered to let the peoples he helped to liberatehe decide their own future, and didn't favour an union impossed by means of force. He didn't accept being head of the Chilenian state, and only accepted that post in Peru as there was no Peruvian who had enough consensus to be accepted by everybody (which would have endangered the succes of the war). While San Martin was in Peru, he had not direct control on the Argentinian government, and had no post in it. And he wasn't the head of the Chilenian state either.
But maybe an Alternate San Martin would think differently. After all, this is Alternate History
Sounds interesting. Is it on this site?
Interesting... If Peru has a Spanish monarch, who went there in 1807, what do you think would be the reaction in the Vicekingdom of Rio de la Plata? The British invasions would have already happened, and some independentist feeling could already have appeared...
Rockingham
Banned
Hmmm.... well, like you said, two independant states, one in the North and one in the South. However, the difficulty is having them survive...
As has been mentioned, the main difficulty in this is Peru, being both loyal to the Spaniards, and difficult to cross for any state in control of it...
The solution to the above problems, I feel, is having Peru remain in Spanish hands, thus Spain would remain a significant threat...enough to hold together geographically disadvantaged states perhaps.
So, its two states to the North and the South kept together by a still Spanish Peru in the middle. If that's the case, then what alternate path do Bolivar, Sucre, San Martin and the other rebel leaders take in order to avoid or at lest fail at taking Peru? And what would the Southern state be called, United Provinces of Río de la Plata? And would Bolivia still be called Bolivia?
Rockingham
Banned
I don't know about the Southern state, depends upon the territory it encompasses. We might even see something derived from San Martin's name.... after all, Bolivar had places and states named after him OTL(for example, Bolivia, IIRC, was derived from his name. If "Bolivia" remains under Spanish control, however, this would definitely not happen....
In any case, United States would probably be more likely, seeing as a state with that name already existed(assuming the TL isn't before the ARW).
As for the alternate path.... I honestly have no idea. My knowledge of South America at any point in history is very limited. Perhaps if the Spanish win some battle or other, or some general or other(perhaps Bolivar himself) is killed.... that might do it. Or not. Of course, Spanish control being anything more then de-jure is unlikely, but a hypothetical autonomous Peruvian colony would be a significant threat to independant Latin America.... as an independant state, it was one of the more powerful, and competing with Chile to project influence into the Pacific ocean, so with Spanish funds, advisors and military aid, it would be something of a behemoth relative to its poorer and unstable neighbours.
Last edited:
I don't get, if Peru becomes a monarchy during the time of Bolivar and San Martin, who becomes king?
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I was talking about two different things. I meant to say that I could think of two possible scenarios in order to create a huge Spanish speaking South American state: one with a Pod after 1810, which has San Martin and/or Bolivar as main characters (as in your original post), and another one with a Pod in 1806/7, which has the Spanish Kings as main actors (an alternate scenario). In the second case, the King would be a member of the spanish royal house who would have escaped to peru in order to flee from Napoleon.
In the first case, having a huge Gran Colombia, stretching from Venezuela to Argentina is extremly difficult, for the reasons posted above. On the one hand, geography conspires against such a state. On the other, this state would have had a core in the distant North (if Bolivar founds it) or in the far South (if San Martin founds it), and this would have made even harder to keep such an "unbalanced" state united.*
In the second scenario, Perú is the core of the new state, and its rulers, the Kings have a "traditional" letimacy that Bolivar and San Martin didn'thave (they have another type of legitimacy, of course). In this case, mantaining such a nation united is still difficult, but I think it's easier than in the previous case. This nation would probably lose territory in the North and in the South. And it wouldn't be exactly a Gran Colombia. But it's a scenario which gives you a huge Spanish speaking state in South America.