Over and above the Falklands issue, which can be debated ad nauseum, the British invasions of 1806 and 1807 have always fascinated me. Beresford was ill equipped and badly prepared and in 1807, Whitelocke was the wrong man in the right place and was a yellow coward.
The real man on the spot was Robert Crawfurd who had fought with Wellington in the Peninsula Wars and could quite easily have taken Buenos Aires if not for the cowardice of Whitelocke who refused Crawfurds strategic demands, resulting in one of the most embarrassing defeats in British military history.
This is not well known, but has been written about in several journals. Whitelocke was subsequently court marshalled as a result.
This led me to write a novel, loosely based on these facts, not least wondering in the reign of Queen Cristina, what would it be like if I, a Brit, were to be president of Argentina. Twenty years of BA living does that to you!
This was born The Last British President, my novel set in Buenos Aires where I finally become king.
Sorry for the unabashed promo and I hope you take it in good heart. I'm not president yet, but the current one is at least providing an opening, as it were.
Either in print in Spanish or eBook in English because I only have one English print version left due to shipping costs to Argentina. The Spanish version was POD locally.
Let me know if you would like me to leave a link. I don't want to be presumptuous, as it were.
Your description of the history of the Falklands in the early 19th century is fairly slanted, to the point of being Argentine propaganda. The recently settled Argentinians on the islands in 1833 were around 40 in number, and about 24 voluntarily remained after the British occupation. The islands had been disputed between France, Spain and Britain for decades with permanent continuous settlement only from the 1830's. "Islas Malvinas" is actually a Spanish translation of the French name.
There’s a couple fascinating articles on that for both arguments; still the historical claim on the islands is stronger in Argentina’s case. The current situation is very different after close to 200 years.
Well the Dutch claim to New York State, or New Netherlands, is strong too; from the perspective of 1664. At some point irredentism becomes unreasonable. And what happens if Argentinians annex the Falklands? Do they remove the population, or just repress them? Is this "re-unification" or imperial conquest? Is this about historical claims or the surrounding maritime resources? It seems exactly like renewed Venezuelan claims to western Guyana, which was "legitimized" by a plebiscite conducted amongst Venezuelans and not the inhabitants of the region to be "liberated".
Of course, the longer things drag on, the harder it is. The Dutch actually traded NY for Suriname at the time (even though it was semi-forced, they did agree to it). Regarding the Falklands it is just very unfortunate that Galtieri decided to start a war and send young kids to die, because before that, the situation was much more comparable to Hong Kong/China in terms of trade and travel. After that, zero.
Over and above the Falklands issue, which can be debated ad nauseum, the British invasions of 1806 and 1807 have always fascinated me. Beresford was ill equipped and badly prepared and in 1807, Whitelocke was the wrong man in the right place and was a yellow coward.
The real man on the spot was Robert Crawfurd who had fought with Wellington in the Peninsula Wars and could quite easily have taken Buenos Aires if not for the cowardice of Whitelocke who refused Crawfurds strategic demands, resulting in one of the most embarrassing defeats in British military history.
This is not well known, but has been written about in several journals. Whitelocke was subsequently court marshalled as a result.
This led me to write a novel, loosely based on these facts, not least wondering in the reign of Queen Cristina, what would it be like if I, a Brit, were to be president of Argentina. Twenty years of BA living does that to you!
This was born The Last British President, my novel set in Buenos Aires where I finally become king.
Sorry for the unabashed promo and I hope you take it in good heart. I'm not president yet, but the current one is at least providing an opening, as it were.
Cheers!
Oh wow that story about the court marshall is wild! Haha can I get the novel somewhere? Would love to read it!
Yes, you can!
Either in print in Spanish or eBook in English because I only have one English print version left due to shipping costs to Argentina. The Spanish version was POD locally.
Let me know if you would like me to leave a link. I don't want to be presumptuous, as it were.
Here you go:
https://eng.elultimopresidenteingles.com
I spelt his name incorrectly. He was in fact Major General Robert Craufurd and hailed from Newark, Ayrshire, Scotland.
Thank you for this - most informative.
Christ; I hadn't realised we were responsible for the central bank!
Thank you Katy! Haha I didn’t know that either before doing the research
Thanks @bowtiedmara. Always learning something new about Argentina from you. Great stuff as usual.
Thanks man!
Good piece of history. Enjoyed that one
Thanks man!
Wasn't the Falklands conflict the one where they learned building ships out of aluminum was bad because they would catch fire and burn?
Not sure about that, most ships were steel and only one was sunk by a British submarine
I meant the British losses: Sheffield, Ardent, Antelope, and Coventry
You’re right, super interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/1982/07/10/world/falkland-aftermath-a-naval-debate.html
Your description of the history of the Falklands in the early 19th century is fairly slanted, to the point of being Argentine propaganda. The recently settled Argentinians on the islands in 1833 were around 40 in number, and about 24 voluntarily remained after the British occupation. The islands had been disputed between France, Spain and Britain for decades with permanent continuous settlement only from the 1830's. "Islas Malvinas" is actually a Spanish translation of the French name.
There’s a couple fascinating articles on that for both arguments; still the historical claim on the islands is stronger in Argentina’s case. The current situation is very different after close to 200 years.
Well the Dutch claim to New York State, or New Netherlands, is strong too; from the perspective of 1664. At some point irredentism becomes unreasonable. And what happens if Argentinians annex the Falklands? Do they remove the population, or just repress them? Is this "re-unification" or imperial conquest? Is this about historical claims or the surrounding maritime resources? It seems exactly like renewed Venezuelan claims to western Guyana, which was "legitimized" by a plebiscite conducted amongst Venezuelans and not the inhabitants of the region to be "liberated".
Of course, the longer things drag on, the harder it is. The Dutch actually traded NY for Suriname at the time (even though it was semi-forced, they did agree to it). Regarding the Falklands it is just very unfortunate that Galtieri decided to start a war and send young kids to die, because before that, the situation was much more comparable to Hong Kong/China in terms of trade and travel. After that, zero.