A Stronger South America by 1900

TFSmith121

Banned
Sorry, long day...

My eyes bleed from seeing this:mad::D

Anyway, I have to concede a lot of South America is not prime land for settlement. There is Patagonia, the Puna, Atacama, the Amazonas, the whole Andes.

But what with it. Argentina and Brazil have more than enough good land. It's a fact they won't contend the US, specially since the latter has a way bigger population. But both countries can easily become Nº2 and Nº3 in the whole Americas and holding a GDP per capita on par with the US.

Sorry, long day...:eek:

At least I didn't use River Plate.;)

Brazil or Canada at number 2 in the Western Hemisphere is an interesting question; Mexico or Argentina as number 3 is as well.

Best,
 
Last edited:
But without the 1850 Law of Lands, the capitalist planter class of Western São Paulo, the one that modernized Brazil (or at least, the Southeast) would never have existed.



I think you'd need a British POD in order to do that. Sadly, British imperialism had a lot to do with the Viscount of Mauá's bankruptcy.



I think a better option would have them colonize the arable areas in North and Midwest Brazil. Not sure if that's possible in the 19th century, though.



It's the contrary; the sooner slavery is abolished, the sooner immigrants will come.
In 1845 Brazil was producing already half of the coffe in the world. I think that the rise of the coffe producers could only be avoided with an earlier POV, like in the early 1800s.

Putting immigrants to work further north than São Paulo would be difficult. The weather is warmer, the plants that grow there are different from those that grow in Europe, they would need to stop planting things like wheat and grape to plant cassava and other plants adapted to the tropical climate.

I agree with you that the immigration was boosted by the end of slavery, still there is a lot of motivations to the wave o immigration that hit South America in the 19th century. Wars, economic and political instability and overpopulation in Europe played its part.

Since 1870 the immigration was growing, with a big jump in the years after the abolition. What I agree with you is that if the abolition had come earlier maybe we would see an earlier boost in immigration.
 
in the arable land department, South America has plenty. It isn't an issue. I see it constantly here that SA is mostly tropics. That's blatantly false. There is a huge part that is tropics, but it is also economically viable IF you adapt to it, instead of trying to force the tropics to adapt to European farming. The rubber alone ran a country for decades, until Europe figured out where to farm it properly (not in Europe, but elsewhere). Brazil was dumb with the exploit it where it is mentality instead of figuring out how to do it right. Same thing with Cinchona (quinine), cocoa, and a whole host of agricultural products. They used it, abused it, got rich quick, then whined and moaned when the modern world took it over, as with sugar.

South America is loaded with opportunity in every possibly way, except energy. That's huge, and the earlier the era, the harder it is to overcome. Otherwise, SA has just as much geographic chance to be a powerhouse as North America. OK, the distance thing is an issue, too, but if you're talking sheer minerals/arable land/economic viability, the only thing holding SA back is the way it was colonized and the ensuing populace/political situation.

South America has oodles and oodles of economically viable land. The biggest problem is NOT the tropics, but the semi arable land (savannah, caatinga, outright desert) which makes up just as big a part. People think of the US as a huge economic agricultural powerhouse, which it is, but a large part of that is on marginal land. There's more marginal 'waste' land west of the rockies then there is optimal land. Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, almost all of California, Western Colorado, Montana, Idaho, etc is all viable only with modern technology (and many say unsustainable). There really isn't much of the US that is as ideal as the popular mythology. Heck, in the time frame we're talking (mid 1800's), people passed right over what is considered the breadbasket of America because they thought it the great American desert.

Bottom line is that agriculturally, South America takes a hind seat to no one and never did, except for man's ability to recognize it.
 
Diego,
Brazil took a two part approach to Immigration. They wanted it, knew they had to have it, but also actively discouraged it. At one point, early in the Pedro I era, they passed laws making it illegal for the gov't to help immigrants. The planters, recognizing that immigration was a threat to continued slavery, held the day and thus made it more difficult to enact pro immigration legislation. And beyond this, society was still in the throes of exploitation, so the civilian populace so abused immigrants that some german countries prohibited emigration to Brazil.

With things as they were, it's difficult to start the immigration tidal wave, but with (admittedly LOTS of) things done differently, Brazil could have seen massive immigration a lot earlier.
 
Treaties can be made. Argentina recognizes the border of Rio Grande and the Misiones plus free navigation and Brazil recognizes that Argentina owns Uruguay.

Besides, its best for Brazil to have an Argentina where a powerful player like Montevideo can stand up to Buenos Aires than one where Buenos Aires makes the call. It would most likely mean free trade.

Brazil was hoping for small countries in the Castilian South America, not big powerfulls Argentinas owning the East Band and Paraguay. Argentina would them be in perfect position to try to destabilize the already unstable Rio Grande do Sul.

If Argentina annex Uruguay, then you can expect a lot of intervention of Brazil in the affairs of Buenos Aires and a lot of intervention of Argentina in the south of Brazil.

I think that only total defeat in Cisplatine War, like a big naval disaster, could have led Brasil to sign a treaty containing so bad conditions.
 
I don't think Brazil was keen on balkanization of Spanish America. Brazil was fractured itself and was having a hard time keeping itself intact. watching the neighbors split apart would only lead to encouragement for Grande do Sul and Catarina to split. It's why Brazil was afraid of Artigas and his brand of federalism.

And I don't understand why people keep referring to Argentina annexing Uruguay or Paraguay. Prior to the Napoleonic era, they were one principality. Paraguay split off on its own, but Uruguay was ripped free by Brazil, who then couldn't hang on to it. Granted, Brazil had pretensions on the area for a long time, but in reality they hadn't been in control for any significant period of time.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Look up the square miles of temperate land in North America

in the arable land department, South America has plenty. It isn't an issue....Bottom line is that agriculturally, South America takes a hind seat to no one and never did, except for man's ability to recognize it.

Look up the square miles of temperate land in North America; then look up the equivalent in South America. Consider the crop packages, both for sustenance and for exports, available to European emigrants in the Eighteenth Century.

Then consider the fatality rates due to tropical diseases to unacclimated Europeans in the Nineteenth Century.

Then consider the cost of transportation from NW Europe to the Saint Lawrence, Hudson, or Mississippi in the Nineteenth Century; then consider then same from NW Europe to the Rio de la Plata.

There are some pretty stark differences.

Best,
 
Well, I don't really want Brazil as powerful as the United States, I just want Argentina, Brazil, and Chile to be more stable and more industrialized. This of course is difficult. For Chile I think avoiding their Civil War in the 1890s. Then avoiding Civil Conflicts in Argentina in the 1850s and 1860s would attract more immigrants from Europe. I don't really know that much about Brazilian History I ask my neighbors who are Brazilian if they have any ideas. Again I don't really want great power South America. I think that's very unlikely. However I don't think it is too challenging to have them be much more prosperous and powerful. Also any ideas on Mexico for them (W/ Maximilian). Of Course simply avoiding Civil Wars isn't going to be enough. However would a prolonged Prussia/Italy-Austria war generate more immigrants to South America? (This was already part of the TL).
 

Deleted member 67076

Actually, just making the states wealthier on their own would increase immigration substantially. They could also look towards Arab and Orthodox Christians as potential migrants like Colombia did.
 
About Chile...

More europeans immigrants on century XIX-XX?
Civil War of 1891 not happening
Keep Tacna (small population plus)
Use the navy to expand over the Pacific (Eastern Island as a base)
More decentralized politics (Santiago is not Chile)
Keep the Mapuches happy (giving them a semi-autonomous province could work)
Attract immigrants from Asia
Encourage and keep a strong navy (actually Chile can produce its own ships, what if Chile produce her own ships late in c.XIX?)

It could not make Chile a great power, but yes a regional one and maybe influence on the Pacific economies.
 
Chile's hard primarily because(strictly speaking of politics and land gains) they did as best as can be imagined. They survived despite being faced with three hostile neighbors, took land from two of them, and managed to lay claim to a large chunk of land that was disputed between Chile and the third. The only thing you can really do to Chile(IMO) is to improve their economic and industrial situation early so that they can grab more Pacific islands. Maybe screw Argentina so Chile can grab more of the Tierra Del Fuego. I dunno, Chile is simply not a nation that can conceivably become more than a regional power. Brazil, Argentina, and a (united) Peru-Bolivia are all more likely to establish themselves as a world player to some degree.

Side question, but what in theory could a successful Peru-Bolivia demand from Chile and Argentina assuming they win their war?

On another tangent, is it plausible for a really successful Peru-Bolivia to incorporate Chile into their union? My guts tells me no, but that's because I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who's seen South America fight countless stupid little wars.
 
Side question, but what in theory could a successful Peru-Bolivia demand from Chile and Argentina assuming they win their war?

On another tangent, is it plausible for a really successful Peru-Bolivia to incorporate Chile into their union? My guts tells me no, but that's because I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who's seen South America fight countless stupid little wars.

1. Copiapo river would be the northern frontier between Chile and Peru-Bolivia... in the worst case it would be La Serena. Dunno about Argentina

2. I don't think. Chileans would oppose to anexation, for wathever reason.
 
Cisplatine

In order to avoid the civil wars in Argentina, initially the Federalist should have been included and not be pushed into civil war as the alternative for them only survival.

An early total victory of the Federalists would have prevented the separation and rebellion of the Orientales ( people of the Eastern band of the river Uruguay, it's the former demonym for the Uruguayan people), that later would lead to the Portuguese intervention and subsequent annexation to Brazil, by a tacit alliance with the government of Bs. As. and of course with the good pleasure of opponents of federalism.


The Cisplatina war or War of reunification of the United Provinces, came to an end by the British pressure.
England encouraged and supported existing autonomist tendencies among of the Orientales, the pressure on the Argentine and Brazilian Emperor asked after losing the Battle of Ituzaingo and eastern Misiones be conquered, leading to the negotiating table to belligerents.

Perhaps the prestige of a complete defeat of Brazil, have hastened the end of the Brazilian monarchy, making it modernized before.

If not for the pressure and British interference, the reunification of Argentina and Uruguay would have been possible.

This would be a more balanced and stable ally Argentina to Peru-Bolivia have prevented their defeat and dissolution.
 
Brazil was hoping for small countries in the Castilian South America, not big powerfulls Argentinas owning the East Band and Paraguay. Argentina would them be in perfect position to try to destabilize the already unstable Rio Grande do Sul.

Actually Brazil "created" buffer states in the Plate Basin to avoid the preponderance of Buenos Aires (aka Argentina) over the navigation of the rivers that connected/gave access to most - all? - of its Center-South provinces. The empire pretty much controlled the political and economic life of these countries in a US-ish style. They had little interest/power to spread their power elsewhere in South America.

Brazil took a two part approach to Immigration. They wanted it, knew they had to have it, but also actively discouraged it. At one point, early in the Pedro I era, they passed laws making it illegal for the gov't to help immigrants. The planters, recognizing that immigration was a threat to continued slavery, held the day and thus made it more difficult to enact pro immigration legislation. And beyond this, society was still in the throes of exploitation, so the civilian populace so abused immigrants that some german countries prohibited emigration to Brazil.

I'm not familiar with that law, can you give references please? As far as I know landowners were more worried about their land rights by that time and most of them knew that slavery would eventually end - as they have promised the British.

South America is loaded with opportunity in every possibly way, except energy. That's huge, and the earlier the era, the harder it is to overcome. Otherwise, SA has just as much geographic chance to be a powerhouse as North America. OK, the distance thing is an issue, too, but if you're talking sheer minerals/arable land/economic viability, the only thing holding SA back is the way it was colonized and the ensuing populace/political situation.

You're probably right if you only take into consideration Spanish-speaking countries. Brazilian politics/colonization is much closer to the American South than to Argentina, Chile or Peru. An independent CSA would be pretty much an English-speaking apartheid-esque Brazil.

South America has oodles and oodles of economically viable land. The biggest problem is NOT the tropics, but the semi arable land (savannah, caatinga, outright desert) which makes up just as big a part. People think of the US as a huge economic agricultural powerhouse, which it is, but a large part of that is on marginal land. There's more marginal 'waste' land west of the rockies then there is optimal land. Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, almost all of California, Western Colorado, Montana, Idaho, etc is all viable only with modern technology (and many say unsustainable). There really isn't much of the US that is as ideal as the popular mythology. Heck, in the time frame we're talking (mid 1800's), people passed right over what is considered the breadbasket of America because they thought it the great American desert.

Bottom line is that agriculturally, South America takes a hind seat to no one and never did, except for man's ability to recognize it.

You're absolutely right. Brazil is an agricultural country par excellence. It is not by chance that today Brazil is largest producer of most of the agricultural commodities that you can find in the tropics.

As for the marginal areas, firstly the Cerrado (Brazilian savanna) started to develop after the green revolution in the 60's and today is the most important region in the world if you're talking about cattle and grains. This late development is due to high acidity of its soil, thus today they use massive amounts of limestone to treat the soil's pH. C'mon, this ain't rocket science. They could have invented it in the 19th century.

Now, if we're talking about the Caatinga (dry savanna in Northeastern Brazil) it's important to know that it's a region densely populated with regular droughts. The Coffee plantation owners could have used this manpower to supply their lands after the end of slavery, but they prefered to "import" European labour, given their "civilizing mission". Instead, most of these starving Northeasterners went to the Amazon only to died extracting rubber in the rainforest. Celso Furtado talks about it in his Economic Growth of Brazil. An early development of the Cerrado could not only absorb the over population of the Northeast but also connect the regions, as Brasilia did.
 
In order to avoid the civil wars in Argentina, initially the Federalist should have been included and not be pushed into civil war as the alternative for them only survival.

An early total victory of the Federalists would have prevented the separation and rebellion of the Orientales ( people of the Eastern band of the river Uruguay, it's the former demonym for the Uruguayan people), that later would lead to the Portuguese intervention and subsequent annexation to Brazil, by a tacit alliance with the government of Bs. As. and of course with the good pleasure of opponents of federalism.


The Cisplatina war or War of reunification of the United Provinces, came to an end by the British pressure.
England encouraged and supported existing autonomist tendencies among of the Orientales, the pressure on the Argentine and Brazilian Emperor asked after losing the Battle of Ituzaingo and eastern Misiones be conquered, leading to the negotiating table to belligerents.

Perhaps the prestige of a complete defeat of Brazil, have hastened the end of the Brazilian monarchy, making it modernized before.

If not for the pressure and British interference, the reunification of Argentina and Uruguay would have been possible.

This would be a more balanced and stable ally Argentina to Peru-Bolivia have prevented their defeat and dissolution.

That is not what would have occurred. Argentina and Uruguay made a big deal of Ituzaingó (which was actually inconclusive) to have a moment of pride, just like the Cinco de Mayo for Mexicans that meant little in the overall context of the French invasion.

What few people know, mainly because we still do not have a book in English about the Cisplatine War, is that Brazil was heading to win the war.

By 1828 Brazil had completely destroyed the entire Argentine navy and was supreme in the seas.

Most of the Brazilian army and militia were located across the country, since the Emperor and the government feared rebellions in other areas. When they realized that that would not occur, they began the mobilization of the other troops to the south.

How many soldiers Brazil had across its territory? 27,000 in the army and 95,000 militiamen. How many men Brazil had in Cisplatina? Around 10,000 (most protecting towns). How many men Argentina and the rebel Uruguayans had in Cisplatina? 6,000.

What was the goal? To amass an army in Rio Grande do Sul, march to Cisplatina, crush the rebel army and then begin the invasion of Argentina conquering Misiones and Corrientes (yes, you read correctly, Brazil was going to annex those Argentine provinces).

By 1828 the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata had disintegrated, facing major rebellions inside its own territory. The economy was in shambles due to the Brazilian navy blockade. The rebel army still in Cisplatina as composed of starved and ill-equipped men.

Even if Brazil had not mobilized 115,000 men, but only 50,000, it would crush Argentina.

Britain did not force an end to the war because it feared that Argentina would annex Cisplatina. On the contrary: it feared that Brazil would annex large pieces of Argentina.

Seeing how able Pedro I proved as commander-in-chief in his war in Portugal in 1832-34, crushing the Portuguese and the Spanish carlistas, I hardly believe Brazil would have been defeated in 1829 (had the Cisplatine War continued).

Brazil with increased territory, no chaotic regency and a possibly pro-monarchy Pedro II raised by a warrior-like father? Butterfly that!
 
Causes.

The CISPLATIN War (1825-28)

Causes: The war of independence of Uruguay, supported by Argentina, eager to incorporate it as the united province, was the main cause of this war which met Brazil further weakened militarily for the following reasons:

Portugal had taken three divisions of Brazil, forced by our Independence.

Lack of military leadership with the return of Portuguese officers to Portugal in the colonial army that occupied the most important posts in Brazil

The Brazilian Army novel was driving the effort to consolidate its operational independence in Pará, Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará and Bahia, in addition to the commitment in the field of Republican Revolution in the Northeast - the Confederation of Ecuador in 1824.

Significant events: On April 19, 1825, Cisplatin Province rebelled against Brazil, which was incorporated by Portugal in 1821.

On that day, the Orientals, led by Colonel Don Juan Lavalleja and from Argentina, landed in Agraciada beach in Uruguay River and began the process of independence of the last country of Spanish origin in America.

On October 25, 1825, Lavalleja proclaimed the independence of Brazil and the current Uruguay declared confederate the United Provinces of the River Plate.
• It was approved by the Buenos Aires Congress.
• It was rejected by Brazil, which declared war on the United Provinces.



The troops of the Rio Grande, now under the command of Marshal José de Abreu, started operating in the strategic field, with a mission to raise troops of the captaincy and frown upon Montevideo, to assist the General Lecor to tackle the eastern revolt.



In September 4, 1825, Colonel Benedict militiaman Manoel Ribeiro defeated Rivera in Aquila. 23 Rivera in Rincón de Las Galinas, took the reserve of about 6000 horses Abreu Marshal and the next day, hit two militia regiments Guarani Mission.



On October 12, was fought the battle of Sarandi: the troops, the Bento Manoel Ribeiro command, were beaten by Lavalleja and Rivera. Therefore, the militia and gaucho troops failed to join the General Lecor.

Marshal José de Abreu
had to return to the Rio Grande and defend him with a faint and weak defensive cord.

The Oriental Rivera and Lavalleja, reinforced by the Argentines, dominated throughout Uruguay, except Colonia and Montevideo.

Caxias, then Captain, participated in the defense system of Montevideo.

The troops of Rio Grande do Province were reorganized. The predominant line 2nd Cavalry (Militia): valuable, but limited operation against the forces they would face - the Republican Army of Argentina, regular and veteran of the independence of Chile, Bolivia and Peru.

The command of War was in charge of a brave and experienced guerrilla, José de Abreu Marshal, who was replaced on 3 February 1826 by another military leader, until recently Infantry Colonel of the Legion of Volunteers Reais - Brigadier Francisco Paula Rosado Massena, without experience in the strategic field and the Rio Grande.



Now the government of Rio Grande was separated from the military command, which now depend on the President. This brought a series of unfortunate misunderstandings. The gaucho territory was helpless.



Massena Rosado demonstrated incompetence to command the Army of the South. He hurried, inexplicably, to gather all available forces in Santana (Imperial camp Carolina, one of the names of Princess Leopoldina), baring the rest of the border, easy prey for involvement by Aceguá. Ranked Jaguarão Colonel Bento Gonçalves, who has missed the order of concentration in unhealthy region and lousy pastures. While Massena discussed with the Viscount of São Leopoldo, president of the province, the army deteriorated in Santana.



The public outcry woke D. Pedro I, who decided to go personally to the theater of operations, taking important reinforcements and a new and prestigious commander, Lieutenant General Felisberto Caldeira Brandt Bridges and Barbacena Marquis, who, with very good advice, took command the South Army on January 1, 1827, in Santana, like this:



"I found a barefoot army without ammunition mouth (food) and war, without medicine, without horses and reduced after a year the most humiliating defensive."

The Barbacena decisions:
• displacement of Santana Army to Bagé in order to bring up on the enemy invader and the main centers of the Province (Porto Alegre, Rio Grande, Pelotas, etc.),
• Army organization still underway.
• meeting with the troops Marshal Henry Brown (about 1,600 men) sent from Rio de Janeiro



On the action of Barbacena, we can conclude:


1) Have been exceptional achievement of Barbacena and his Staff receive a troop in tatters and march toward Bagé and even put yourself in a favorable position on a hill, for his infantry and interposed between the Argentine-Oriental Army of Alvear and the main cities of Rio Grande, with free way to be supplied by them.


2) It was the the Rosary Pass Battle (Ituzaingo), undecided, resulting in a fight against whose Brazilian withdrawal made to pass São Lourenço
in the river Jacuí was forced, not by the enemy, but by the following factors:


Delay in the vanguard, consisting of former deserters and badly mounted, the Command of Marshal José de Abreu, to resume the march towards the passage of Rosary. It took the arrival in the region battle along with the rest of the Southern Army.

Placement of Alvear Artillery dominant and advanced location in relation to the Brazilian Artillery, who had to take disadvantage in a ravine in the
center of the Brazilian position, and so dominated.


Absence at the time of the battle, the Brigade Bento Manuel Ribeiro, who should occupy the left flank. Was replaced by Marshal forefront of Abreu, made up of civilians, former deserters, who gathered in the Sierra Up and evil mounted. It was there that led the Argentine main effort. And that's also what Abreu met his death, sandwiched by enemy cavalry against the
square of the Infantry Division of General Chrysostom Calado.


Adverse Actions of the battlefield fire, which was driven by the wind against the Brazilian position, enveloping her and making her do a withdrawal maneuver in order to not be a victim of that imponderable factor.

Reprehensible behavior of 2nd line units of Mission Indians, who have left the battlefield and plundered the South Army trains. In addition, caused the opening of the current flank Dragons of Brasilia, causing the heaviest
losses of fighting it.


And that was the decision of Barbacena, in a fight against and to prevent his army was destroyed. That he made it clear on your part to fight ...

After remaining in Los Currales - Uruguay, Alvear invaded once again, the Rio Grande by Bagé, which reoccupied. Next,he operate on the river Jaguarão region.


Until now discussing: 'indecisive Battle "" Brazilian strategic defeat? "And" tactic defeat of both contenders, who withdrew from the battlefield? "...?

At this time,the news reached the Brazilian Court of conquering the
Eastern Missions by the General Rivera, who combined with the preceding events allowed to be negotiated by the diplomacy a way out.

It was translated in the Preliminary Convention of Peace, between Brazil and Argentina, which recognized the independence of Uruguay after seven years of artificial incorporation to the Empire of Brazil.


South army went to the village to Piratini command, since January 21, 1828, Lieutenant-General Carlos Frederico Lecor, where he was
demobilized in December 18, 1828, after having wintered there.

And there was a dissatisfaction with the conduct of war, piling up-came motivate the Revolution Farroupilha (Ragamuffin) that in Piratini had its epicenter.

As the seat of a large municipality consists of the current Canguçu, Cerrito, Pinheiro Machado, Coal Black, and Candiota Bagé to the Pirai.
Location that served as the capital of the Republic Rio Grande, improperly confused with Republic of Piratini.
 
Missions and the Cisplatine war

The decision of the General Rivera to put into practice the plan to invade and conquer the Eastern Missions as a way to definitely defeat Brazil.

The Argentinean-Oriental army under the direct command of Rivera, began the invasion to take Santa Tecla, regarded as central to operations and from where he could work in either direction, and support his forces.

Them invaded and conquer the Missions and expelling the Brazilians of that territory in addition to cut off their retreat.

By controlling the territory from the 'mouths' Monte Grande (Boca do Monte (district of Santa Maria) or Sierra de los Tapes to the shores of Bacacay, isolated him inside Brazil and prevented them to use the Missions as a point of meeting with the rest of the Brazilian army forces to try an offensive against Argentine territory.

Once this first stage, only enough to leave detachments in San Martin, Batoví or Casiquí stream and in this way, with the rear of his army secured, it would overturn all the forces against the enemy in the interior of Brazil.

At this point, after this strategic victory operations were suspended by the political rivalry between the military and then by the Emperor armistice request to the danger of a total defeat.

From the point of view geographic-military territory of Rio Grande has two separated by a nearly straight line that follows the course of the Ibicuí river, a tributary of the Uruguay and Yacuí, a tributary of Lake Ducks well-characterized regions.

The northern part of this line, form an orographic system characterized by high accident with deep cuts, too-steep ravines and regions, South Ibicuí-Yacuí, part has different characteristics, its terrain is low and undulating and somewhat broken in the south-east.


From the military standpoint the region where development campaign shows that all direct invasion to the Rio Grande and Missions, following the line of the Great Blade easily be stopped in the region of Santa Tecla, or even when achieved forcing this passage and still defeat the enemy; this always has at East Great Blade formidable region, where can always protect an army, strengthened and constitute a serious danger to the rear of every enemy venturing north.


Recall that purpose invasion Alvear, who despite the victory of Ituzaingó, could not finish winning campaign, he could not attack the army remains Barbacena occupying the mountains.


Also the geographical-military study indicates the region as a line of invasion of Brazil, to the north, that is the area of the Missionswould be the most dangerous for Brazil.
 
Top