The Dream of Iolo Morganwg: An alternate history of Welsh Patagonia

I go away for two days to a conference and not only does somebody post a map, but people talk about it:D

The only real point I'd make is that the northern border of New Wales is about in the right place but too straight and New Wales and Argentina don't really have a common border yet. To get an idea of how things stand - if you look at this map then the road running from San Antonio Oeste Via Valcheta, Sierra Colorado and Maquinchao to San Carlos Bariloche is pretty much the northern limit of Welsh settlement and the Rio Negro from Carmen de Patagonies to Choele Choel is pretty much the southern limit of Argentina. If you then draw a line from Choele Choel to where General Alvear is you roughly get the boundary between between Argentina and the free(ish) Mapuche lands. It's also worth bearing in mind that of the subdivisions of Chile shown on that map, most of the 2nd and 3rd from the top are also Mapuche at this point.
 
I think that there are implications, at this point, that will start to go even beyond the wildest claims of the Welsh settlements.

For example, not only are the Mapuche settlements in the way of both the Welsh and Chileans, but a Chile that is well aware of European presence encroaching to the south will switch their OTL priorities fast. In the late 1830s, Great Britain had an ally in Andrés de Santa Cruz, Supreme protector of the Peru-Bolivian Confederation, and the British Consul in Lima, Belford Hinton Wilson, even got to sway Lord Palmerston’s opinion onto supporting the Confederation and ordering the British consul in Santiago to help broker peace, with mention of the fact that Great Britain stood behind the Confederation. Unfortunately, the Consul in Santiago chose to ally with the local aristocracy, and “postpone” review of his orders until a more convenient time, when the Foreign Office could be faced with a fait accompli.

ITTL, the mere presence of a “British” settlement so close to home might lend greater credence to the Foreign Office’s orders, and stop Chilean aggression on its tracks.

I just want to say that this is a fascinating story that I hadn't heard before. I'd also say that IMHO and regardless of his motives but the consul in Santiago made absolutely the right call - the government at home may have decided to support the Confederation but there was sweet FA they could do about it on the grouns - if they'd given Chile an ultimatum and were ignored there was sweet FA they could realistically do about it. Even the Pax Britannica had its limits.
 
I go away for two days to a conference and not only does somebody post a map, but people talk about it:D

The only real point I'd make is that the northern border of New Wales is about in the right place but too straight and New Wales and Argentina don't really have a common border yet. To get an idea of how things stand - if you look at this map then the road running from San Antonio Oeste Via Valcheta, Sierra Colorado and Maquinchao to San Carlos Bariloche is pretty much the northern limit of Welsh settlement and the Rio Negro from Carmen de Patagonies to Choele Choel is pretty much the southern limit of Argentina. If you then draw a line from Choele Choel to where General Alvear is you roughly get the boundary between between Argentina and the free(ish) Mapuche lands. It's also worth bearing in mind that of the subdivisions of Chile shown on that map, most of the 2nd and 3rd from the top are also Mapuche at this point.

Right, I've made a few alterations.

Grey area= sparsely settled. final New Wales-Argentina border will lie somewhere in this grey area.

lighter shades of Argentina and Chile = Mapuche-inhabited areas.

This better?

It occurs to me that the presence of the British Empire to the south might make it easier for the Mapuche seek independence from Argentina and Chile.

Patagonia.png
 
I just want to say that this is a fascinating story that I hadn't heard before. I'd also say that IMHO and regardless of his motives but the consul in Santiago made absolutely the right call - the government at home may have decided to support the Confederation but there was sweet FA they could do about it on the grouns - if they'd given Chile an ultimatum and were ignored there was sweet FA they could realistically do about it. Even the Pax Britannica had its limits.

Again, it all depends. Not only was Britain amongst the first to recognize the Confederation, along with the US and France, but in June of 1837 there was a free trade agreement signed that, implicitly, benefited Britain more than it did the Confederation. All of this was common knowledge in Chile. Also, and I forgot to mention this during the last anecdote, the Foreign Office did officially reprimand the Consul in Santiago for not carrying out his orders, and getting the Chileans to accept the peace treaty drafted after the failure of the first Chilean expedition.

Moreover, the war in its early stages was highly unpopular in the southern country, and even during the second expedition against the Confederation, there were groups of men who were embarked by force, bound by ropes. On the other hand British naval forces in the south Pacific were not negligible; if the FO had committed to act, whether it was to protect preexisting trade agreements with the Confederation, or to protect British interests, (or settlements ITTL) which they do IOTL during the first Chilean expedition by deploying in Peruvian and Bolivian ports, we could see something akin to the French blockade of Buenos Aires that the French Navy carried out.

It all depends on the butterflies, one thing leading to another. The drafted southern Chileans might be more concerned about Mapuches armed with English weapons, and might bail out on the war altogether. Or Santa Cruz offers preferential trade agreements to the Welsh settlements, which forces Britain to act, to protect its interests, or have Welsh volunteers fight for the Confederation. Or a British blockade of Valparaiso prevents the second expedition from ever leaving Chile which allows Santa Cruz time to consolidate his project. Or all of the above. Or none.

I don’t want to derail the thread by any means: if any of the options mentioned sound appealing, or you just need any complementary information on the period, I’ll be sure to send you a PM. Just let me know.
 
Moreover, the war in its early stages was highly unpopular in the southern country, and even during the second expedition against the Confederation, there were groups of men who were embarked by force, bound by ropes.

Seeing as there are small Welsh colonies now in areas that Chile claims, I can imagine a zealous recruiter press-ganging some poor young Welshmen (or, more likely, Chilean men who live with the Welsh) leading to Britain being drawn into war to punish the "slave-raiding Chileans" who have stolen her majesty's subjects.

fasquardon
 
Top