Sarmiento and Patagonia

The historian Luciana Sabina analyzes the controversy that involved Domingo Sarmiento regarding the Patagonian lands and Chile’s claims over them.
Luciana Sabina || Memo




Map of the Southern Cone from 1849

Exiled in Chile, Sarmiento paid close attention to the colonizing expedition that the country sent to the Magellan region in 1843, founding Fuerte Bulnes. By 1848, that settlement moved a few kilometers, taking the name Punta Arenas. The occupation was based on the legal principle of res nullius (of no one), universally accepted at that time, according to which any nation could take possession of inhospitable spaces. Like it or not, the entire Patagonian territory was considered an empty space, lands in indigenous hands that had never been conquered by the Spanish, and because of this, they did not belong to the Río de la Plata or to Chile. They would belong to the first to settle there.

It was only five years later that Rosas, through the Foreign Ministry, presented Chile with a formal protest, claiming Argentine rights over the area. As a result, on March 11, 1849, Sarmiento published a first article on the matter in his newspaper La Crónica, titled “The Magellan Question.” There, he defended the Chilean position. Being fair and objective, he pointed out that since 1585 no one had established occupation in the area; that the act of sovereignty by Chile had been repeatedly mentioned in the press and in presidential messages; despite which the Restorer [Rosas] did not express himself. Rosas, remaining silent for years, had consented to the trans-Andean advance and was claiming something without showing titles or precedents of ownership. Furthermore, Sarmiento added, Rosas was concerned with claiming territories abroad while the heart of Argentina was a land of indigenous raids and uprisings. Consequently, he recommended the Restorer take care of populating the Chaco, Río Negro, and interprovincial borders. In other words, he reminded the government of Buenos Aires that it could not handle what it had and wanted more, only to leave it in complete neglect.



At the time, France and England—in the midst of imperialist expansion—saw Hispanic America as a set of young nations suffering the vicissitudes inherent to all infancy, and they attempted to establish themselves in the area. British, French, North American, and German maps of the time show Patagonia as res nullius, with which they could have easily occupied it. It was urgent to establish oneself in the area, and Chile was the only country with some political stability and in conditions to do so. The occupation of the mouth of the strait was surprising to the Europeans and had a deterrent effect. All of Patagonia could have met the same fate as the Falklands.

In response to Sarmiento’s publication, Rosas had a newspaper founded in Mendoza: La Ilustración Argentina. Under the direction of Bernardo de Irigoyen, he was the first to refer to Sarmiento as a “traitor.” Though for the Rosistas, anyone who thought differently was a “traitor to the homeland.”

The Restorer ended up submitting a request to extradite the man from San Juan, stating that Chile could not continue sheltering him because he disturbed the peace between the two nations, thereby violating the right of asylum. The trans-Andean authorities did not entertain the request, arguing that freedom of the press existed there.

Rosas was never able to demonstrate that the area belonged to us because, in fact, it does not belong to us. But the matter did not end there.

Three decades later, during Sarmiento’s presidency, the Chileans experienced a certain imperialist fever and claimed rights based on laughable grounds over Argentine Patagonia. To this end, they cited articles in the Chilean press from the past, in which Don Domingo had spilled his ink and ingenuity. The situation was complex for the man from San Juan: the Paraguayan War had not yet concluded, and the opposition—taking advantage of the moment—sought to tear him apart. The word “traitor” once again lashed at the colossus from Cuyo.

He then sought to demonstrate that he had never written in favor of Chilean sovereignty over our land. For this, he tasked Félix Frías—ambassador in Chile—with carefully reviewing the questioned articles. The seasoned diplomat concluded that, indeed, there was no comment referring to Patagonia. In all of them, Sarmiento referred to Chilean rights over the specific area of the Strait of Magellan. Despite this, many still consider him a traitor who wanted to give away the south.