WI: San Martín dies in 1813

[Taunay]

During the Battle of San Lorenzo, José de San Martín - which would later be known for liberating Argentina, Peru and Chile from Spanish control during the Hispanic independence wars - was wounded. According to some historians and urban legends, a former slave by the name of Juan Bautista Cabral sacrificed his life for San Martín during the battle, preventing the general from being killed.
But what if, on that February 3rd of 1813, San Martín dies in battle against the Spanish? Without him, is Spain able to keep control of Chile, Peru, and the Andean region proper? Without his assistance, would Simon Bolívar be able to get past Quito in his attempt to liberate the northern part of South America? How radically different is Platine history without San Martín as the "Liberator of Argentina, Chile and Peru"?

 

[ghappy1000]

It would be likely that Bolivar might be able to liberate Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador, but not further north as the early death of San Martin might prevent the liberation of northern South America and the Andes region of South America.

 

[Taunay]

It would be likely that Bolivar might be able to liberate Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador, but not further north as the early death of San Martin might prevent the liberation of northern South America and the Andes region of South America.

Good point, I wonder tho if Portugal would take advantage of Argentine independence being a more complicated process, maybe they can fully control Uruguay ITTL

 

[jacob ningen]

During the Battle of San Lorenzo, José de San Martín - which would later be known for liberating Argentina, Peru and Chile from Spanish control during the Hispanic independence wars - was wounded. According to some historians and urban legends, a former slave by the name of Juan Bautista Cabral sacrificed his life for San Martín during the battle, preventing the general from being killed.
But what if, on that February 3rd of 1813, San Martín dies in battle against the Spanish? Without him, is Spain able to keep control of Chile, Peru, and the Andean region proper? Without his assistance, would Simon Bolívar be able to get past Quito in his attempt to liberate the northern part of South America? How radically different is Platine history without San Martín as the "Liberator of Argentina, Chile and Peru"?s

O'Higgins and Suarez and Juarez might pick up the slack in Argentina and Chile. And Bolivar spent a lot of time marching on his Northern allies according to Marx in OTL IIRC. One change is Guayaquil conference going differently or Bolivars grand american republic surviving as Argentinian anti-Spanish monarchists lack any liberator supporting them.

 

[Taunay]

O'Higgins and Suarez and Juarez might pick up the slack in Argentina and Chile. And Bolivar spent a lot of time marching on his Northern allies according to Marx in OTL IIRC. One change is Guayaquil conference going differently or Bolivars grand american republic surviving as Argentinian anti-Spanish monarchists lack any liberator supporting them.

Would O'Higgins, Suarez and Juarez be as effective as San Martín was in Argentina IOTL?

 

[Atrahasis]

During the Battle of San Lorenzo, José de San Martín - which would later be known for liberating Argentina, Peru and Chile from Spanish control during the Hispanic independence wars - was wounded. According to some historians and urban legends, a former slave by the name of Juan Bautista Cabral sacrificed his life for San Martín during the battle, preventing the general from being killed.
But what if, on that February 3rd of 1813, San Martín dies in battle against the Spanish? Without him, is Spain able to keep control of Chile, Peru, and the Andean region proper? Without his assistance, would Simon Bolívar be able to get past Quito in his attempt to liberate the northern part of South America? How radically different is Platine history without San Martín as the "Liberator of Argentina, Chile and Peru"?

It depends a lot on who would take the position of San Martín. He wasn't the only one to realise that since Alto Peru front was an stalemate, then, they should take the offensive from Chile; if they proceed, then they could very well be defeated after the, since a different leader could use a different strategy; if successful, then this different general could support Carrera over O'Higgins, which could potentially completely change the history of Chile. There's also the possibility that the expedition wouldn't even happen, since it was thought that the existence of Chile as an independent state was necessary for this mission, and it had ceased to exist after Rancagua.

I mean, there are a lot of different possibilities that this could result on, and it could completely change the future of all of South America.

Since you seem more interested in the case of Chile not being liberated, then imagine that after the crossing of the Andes the army of the Andes is completely defeated. Then, there's an stalemate up to 1820 where the loyalist control basically all of Chile, Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador, while the independentists are unable to advance. 1820 and 1821 are the decisive years, the disunity of the loyalist caused by Riego's coup gives Chile and Bolívar another opportunity; but seeing how well the loyalist performed in Ecuador under worse circumstances, then I think the stalemate would just continue. There's also the possibility of them making some kind of agreement, similar to that of Iturbide, which ends like the viceroy of Peru declaring himself king of all that territory. Even if they stay loyal, the ability of Spain to actually project power there is null; the wise decision would be to give it to a cadet branch of thr Bourbons, but Ferdinand is not known for being wise; this strange superstate will probably be extremely unstable, and it doesn't seem to have a bright future.

 

[jacob ningen]

Another thing since San Martin was one of the more vocal supporters of European monarchs ruling from America after independence a la Maximillian or Pedro I, does his death prevent Pedro's revolution against Lisbon? and later the Hapsburgs in Mexico?

 

[unprincipled peter]

Another thing since San Martin was one of the more vocal supporters of European monarchs ruling from America after independence a la Maximillian or Pedro I, does his death prevent Pedro's revolution against Lisbon? and later the Hapsburgs in Mexico?

I doubt Pedro changes his actions based on Argentinian attitude on monarchy.

Mexico's first monarchy was that of Iturbide. Gotta get through that one before worrying about Habsburgs several decades later.

pro monarchy sentiment was driven partially by the recognized distrust of republican style gov't, and with good reason. It wasn't a case of SM creating a desire for monarchy.

Things that might change: IF SM's death makes for less pro monarchy sentiment in Argentina, you might see butterflies affecting Carlotta, Queen of Portugal, residing in Brazil. OTL, she angled for control of a monarchy in Argentina, and had a little bit of backing...until they figured out she wanted Absolute control. If she gets less traction, it could make for less tension spinning out of control between her and King Joao.

 

[Taunay]

I doubt Pedro changes his actions based on Argentinian attitude on monarchy.

Mexico's first monarchy was that of Iturbide. Gotta get through that one before worrying about Habsburgs several decades later.

pro monarchy sentiment was driven partially by the recognized distrust of republican style gov't, and with good reason. It wasn't a case of SM creating a desire for monarchy.

Things that might change: IF SM's death makes for less pro monarchy sentiment in Argentina, you might see butterflies affecting Carlotta, Queen of Portugal, residing in Brazil. OTL, she angled for control of a monarchy in Argentina, and had a little bit of backing...until they figured out she wanted Absolute control. If she gets less traction, it could make for less tension spinning out of control between her and King Joao.

Do you think Argentine independence would be a hard-fought war, even more than IOTL without San Martin's military genius?

 

[juanml82]

Argentina lacked well trained (or trained at all) officers, so the death of San Martin will cause significant problems to the independentist cause. There were European mercenaries serving within the patriot armies, but they wouldn't be trusted as leaders. And the local officers simply lacked the knowledge and skills to successfully conduct the war.

The Army of the Andes either isn't formed, or they end up sitting in Mendoza and San Juan rather than crossing the Andes as they'll lack the training, logistics and possibly political support to do so. Maybe the Spanish pull a crossing of the Andes from Chile.
Overall, Argentina ends up in the defensive and either Bolivar liberates everything or Peru and possibly Chile remain part of Spain, at least until this ATL's version of the Carlist Wars spread across the remains of the Spanish Empire.

 

[unprincipled peter]

Do you think Argentine independence would be a hard-fought war, even more than IOTL without San Martin's military genius?

Do you think Argentine independence would be a hard-fought war, even more than IOTL without San Martin's military genius?

San Martin's masterpiece was the crossing of the Andes. He was a factor in Argentine independence, but Argentina likely gains independence with or without him, and pretty much similarly either way with the OP POD.