Le recenti battaglie di mare nel Pacifico meridionale

di Augusto Vittorio Vecchj

ne La Rassegna Nazionale, II, 1880, vol. 2, pp. 256-265

War of the Pacific

South America (1879): Bolivia, Chile, and Peru held territorial disputes with their neighbors, except among each other. Bolivia and Chile resolved their territorial disputes in 1866. Peru and Chile did not hold a border. Chilean military operations.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date Location Result 14 February 1879 20 October 1883 (Chile-Peru Peace) Bolivia-Chile armistice in 1884; peace with Bolivia signed 20 October 1904 Peru and Bolivia in Pacific coast of South America Chilean victory, Bolivia became a landlocked country Litoral Department (Antofagasta) ceded by Bolivia to Chile in 1904. Tarapac Department ceded by Peru to Chile in 1884. Puna de Atacama ceded by Bolivia/Chile to Argentina in 1889/1899 Tarata occupied by Chile in 1885, return to Peru in 1925. Arica province occupied by Chile in 1884, ceded by Peru in 1929. Tacna (Sama River) occupied by Chile in 1884, return to Peru in 1929.

Territorial changes

Belligerents Peru Bolivia Chile

Commanders and leaders President of Peru Mariano Ignacio Prado (18761879) Nicols de Pirola (1879 1881) Francisco Garca Caldern (12.Mar.188128.Sep.1881) Lizardo Montero Flores (18811883) Miguel Iglesias (North Peru 18821885) President of Chile Anibal President of Bolivia Hilarin Daza (18761879) Narciso Campero (18791884) Pinto (18761881) Domingo Santa Maria (18811886) Commander in Chief of the Allied Army Juan Buenda Narciso Campero Pedro Silva Andrs A. Cceres Commander in Chief of the Peruvian Navy Miguel Grau Aurelio Garca y Garca Strength 1879 Bolivian Army: 2,300 soldiers Bolivian Navy: None 1879 Peruvian Army: 4,700 soldiers Remington and Minie rifles, Chilean Army: 4,000 soldiers Comblain rifle, Krupp Blakely cannon Peruvian Navy: 2 ironclad, 2 coastal monitors, 1 cannon Chilean Navy: 2 ironclads, 4 corvettes, 1 gunboat, 1

corvette, 1 gunboat

schooner

December 1880 Peruvian Army: 28,000 soldiers[1] Peruvian December 1880 Chilean Army: 41,000[2]:263 soldiers Navy: 2 coastal monitors, 1 corvette Chilean Navy: 3 ironclads, 4 corvettes, 2 gunboats, several armed steamers Casualties and losses 10,467 Killed/Wounded (9,103[3] POWs) 2,825[3] Killed in Action 7,347[3] Wounded No cities were Pisagua, Iquique, Mollendo, Supe, Chorrillos, Miraflores, affected Concepcin, San Pablo, bombed or burned The War of the Pacific (Spanish: Guerra del Pacfico) took place in western South America from 1879 through 1883. Chile fought against Bolivia and Peru. Despite cooperation among the three nations in the Chincha Islands War, disputes soon arose over the mineral-rich Peruvian provinces of Tarapaca, Tacna, and Arica, and the Bolivian province of Antofagasta. Chilean enterprises, which largely exploited the area, saw their interests at stake when Peru nationalized all nitrate mines in Tarapaca, and Bolivia imposed a 10 cent tax on the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company. The foundations of the conflict were laid in a dispute between Chile and Bolivia over part of the Atacama Desert. The war began on February 14, 1879 when Chilean armed forces occupied the port city of Antofagasta, after a Bolivian threat to confiscate Chilean Antofagasta Nitrate Company's property. Peru attempted to mediate, but when Bolivia announced that a state of war existed, the situation deteriorated. Bolivia called on Peru to activate their mutual defense pact, whereas Chile demanded that Peru immediately declare its neutrality. On April 5, after Peru resisted both demands, Chile declared war on both nations. The following day, Peru responded by acknowledging the casus foederis. This "Saltpeter War" took place over five years in a variety of terrain, including the Atacama Desert and Peru's deserts and mountainous regions. The war's first battle was the Battle of Topter. For most of the first year the focus was on the naval campaign, as Chile struggled to establish a seabased resupply corridor for its forces in the world's driest desert. The Peruvian Navy met initial success, but the Chilean Navy prevailed. Afterwards, Chile's land campaign bested the badly equipped Bolivian and Peruvian armies, leading to Bolivia's complete defeat and withdrawal in the Battle of Tacna on May 26, 1880, and the defeat of the Peruvian army after the Battle of Arica on June 7. The land campaign climaxed in 1881, with the Chilean occupation of Lima. The conflict then became a guerrilla war engaging Peruvian army remnants and irregulars. This Campaign of the Brea was fairly successful as a resistance movement, but did not change the war's outcome. After Peru's defeat in the Battle of Huamachuco, Chile and Peru signed the Treaty of Ancn on October 20, 1883. Bolivia signed a truce with Chile in 1884. Chile acquired the Peruvian territory of Tarapac, the disputed Bolivian department of Litoral (cutting Bolivia off from the sea), as well as temporary control over the Peruvian provinces of Tacna and Arica. In 1904, Chile and Bolivia signed the "Treaty of Peace and Friendship" establishing definite boundaries. The situation between Chile and Peru worsened when the 1893 plebiscite to determine the fate of the provinces of Arica and Tacna was not held. Colonization and violent Chileanization of the territories resulted in a break of relations in 1911. The 1929 TacnaArica compromise gave Arica to Chile and Tacna to Peru, but did not resolve the antipathy. Later political problems among these neighbors often referred back to this conflict. Etymology Due to the cause of the war, it is also known as the Saltpeter War (Guerra del Salitre), Guano War (Guerra del Guano), and the Guano and Saltpeter War (Guerra del Guano y el Salitre).[4] Other names include The Cents War, in reference to the controversial ten cent tax imposed by the Chilean-run council of Antofagasta and supported by the Bolivian Congress, and the Second War of the Pacific (as the Chincha Islands War is sometimes known as the First War of the Pacific). Background See also: Boundary Treaty of 1866 between Chile and Bolivia and Treaty of defensive alliance between Peru and Bolivia of 1873 The dry climate of the Peruvian and Bolivian coasts had permitted the accumulation and preservation of vast amounts of high-quality nitrate deposits such as guano (bird excrement) and saltpeter. In the 1840s, guano's newfound value as fertilizer and saltpeter's role in explosives made the Atacama desert strategically and economically important. Bolivia, Chile, and Peru sat on the largest reserves of a resource the world demanded. During the Chincha Islands War (18641866), Spain, under Queen Isabella II, attempted to exploit an incident involving Spanish citizens in Peru to re-establish Spanish influence over the guano-rich Chincha Islands, lost following the independence of Peru. Peru and Chile signed a treaty of alliance against Spain on December 5, 1865.[5] Together, with the minor aid of Bolivia and Ecuador (who had fought an inconclusive war with Peru from 1858 to 1860), they forced the Spanish to withdraw after clashes at Papudo, Abtao, and Callao. Atacama disputes During this time mutual interests sustained a Chile-Peru alliance, while Bolivia and Chile fell into a border dispute. Claiming territory according to the uti possidetis juris principle, the two disagreed on whether the territory of Charcas had access to the sea. Charcas had been part of the Viceroyalty of Peru and, later, part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata. Eventually, the two countries negotiated the Boundary Treaty of 1866 ("Treaty of Mutual Benefits"). The treaty established the 24th parallel south as their mutual boundary.[6] The two countries gained equal rights to tax revenue on mineral exports from the territory between the 23rd and 25th parallels, which covered a large part of the Atacama Desert. Starting from the Chilean silver rush in the 1830s Atacama became prospected and populated by Chileans backed by Chilean and European (mainly British) capital.[7] The natural barrier of the Andes mountains divided the Bolivian altiplano from Atacama, preventing the Bolivians from colonizing the area. Chilean and foreign enterprises in the region eventually extended their control all the way to the Peruvian saltpeter mines. During the 1870s, Peru capitalized on the guano exploitation and nationalized all industries in the region, leaving Peru with 58.8% of all saltpeter production, while Chile held 19% and Great Britain 13.5%.[8] Mutual Defense Treaty of 1873 In 1872, Peruvian foreign relations minister Jos de la Riva-Agero believed Chile would use their acquisition of new ironclads to take possession of the Bolivian coastline. He desired for Peru to use its maritime influence to put an end to the conflict before matters got out of hand.[9] Marshal Ramon Castilla had also warned Peru of a possible Chilean attack and recommended that when Chile bought a warship, Peru should buy two; lack of money prevented the Peruvian government from following Castilla's advice.[10] On February 6, 1873, Peru and Bolivia signed a treaty of alliance known as the "Treaty of Mutual Defense" which guaranteed their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. The last clause kept the treaty secret as long as both parties considered its publication unnecessary.[11] Nonetheless, Chile, through its Minister Plenipotenciary Carlos Walker Martnez, knew of the treaty since 1874. Walker even mentioned the treaty in his 1876 work, Pajinas De Un Viaje Al Traves De La

America Del Sur. Chile once again received notification of the treaty through another minister in 1877, when Argentina's senate discussed the invitation to join the Peru-Bolivia defensive alliance.[12][13][14][15] Boundary Treaty of 1874 In 1874, Chile and Bolivia replaced the 1866 boundary treaty with a treaty granting Bolivia the authority to collect all tax revenue between the 23rd and 24th parallels, fixing the tax rates on Chilean companies for 25 years and calling for Bolivia to open up.[6][16] Chilean companies executed most of the exploitation of the Atacama coastal region. On December 26, 1874, the recently built ironclad Cochrane arrived in Valparaiso; it remained in Chile until the completion of the Blanco Encalada threw the balance of south Pacific power towards Chile.[17] In 1875 Peru postponed the Argentine signing of the alliance treaty.[18] Economic depression See also: Long Depression and Guano Era Starting in 1873, Chile's economy deteriorated.[19] Chilean wheat exports were outcompeted by production in Canada, Russia, and Argentina. Chilean copper was largely replaced in international markets by copper from the United States and Spain.[20] Chile's silver mining income also dropped.[20] In the mid-1870s, Peru nationalized its nitrate industry, affecting both British and Chilean interests.[19] Contemporaries considered the crisis the worst ever of independent Chile.[19] Chilean newspaper El Ferrocarril predicted 1879 to be "a year of mass business liquidation".[19] In 1878, thenPresident Anibal Pinto expressed his concern through the following statement:[20][19] If a new mining discovery or some novelty of that sort does not come to improve the actual situation, the crisis that has long been felt will worsenAnibal Pinto, president of Chile, 1878 This "mining discovery" came, according to historians Gabriel Salazar and Julio Pinto, into existence trough the conquest of Bolivian and Peruvian lands.[20] It has been argued that the economic situation and the view of new wealth in nitrate was the true reason for the Chilean elite to go into war against Peru and Bolivia.[20] The 1870s was for Peru's economy "a decade of crisis and change".[21] Nitrate extraction rose while guano extraction declined and sugar cane dethroned cotton as the main cash crop.[21] Guano exports dropped from 575,000 tons in 1869 to less than 350,000 tons in 1873 and the Chincha Islands and other guano islands were depleted or close to be so.[21] Deposist elsewhere were of poor quality.[21] When in 1873 Peru imposed an estanco, a sales monopoly of nitrate, most larger nitrate firms opposed it.[21] As the economic situation deteriorated and Peru held large overseas debts, the estanco was later replaced by a full state monopoly on production and exports.[21] To uphold the monopoly, Peru bought in 1876 the nitrate concessions Henry Meiggs had in Bolivia.[21] Chile was not considered a serious competitor due to the high costs of its nitrate deposits, which were too far from ports.[21] However, Antofagasta Nitrate and Railway Company, controlled by Chilean Agustn Edwards and operating in Bolivia, was a serious competitor.[21] Course of the war Crisis The crisis began in 1878 when the National Congress of Bolivia and a National Constituent Assembly determined an 1873 contract authorizing the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company to extract saltpeter duty-free for 15 years to be moot because it had never been ratified by the Bolivian Congress, as required by the constitution. The Congress proposed to approve the contract if the company would pay a 10 cents per quintal tax,[22][23] but the company objected that the increased payments were illegal and demanded an intervention from the Chilean government.[24] In response, Chile said that the treaty[25] did not allow for such a tax hike. Bolivia suspended the tax in April 1878. In November Chile suggested the possibility of nullifying the treaty if Bolivia continued to insist on the taxes. Bolivia then said the tax was unrelated to the treaty and that the claim of the Nitrate Company should be addressed in Bolivian courts, and revived the tax.[24] When the company refused to pay the tax, Bolivia threatened to confiscate its property. In December 1878, Chile dispatched a warship to the area. Bolivia announced that the company was to be seized and auctioned on February 14, 1879. On the day of the auction, 500 Chilean soldiers arrived by ship and occupied the port city of Antofagasta without a fight and experienced widespread support.[26] Antofagasta's population was 9395% Chilean.[27] On February 18, while in Antofagasta, Chilean colonel Emilio Sotomayor intercepted a letter from Bolivian presidential Hilarin Daza to Bolivian prefectcolonel Severino Zapata. The letter allegedly mentioned Daza's worry of Chilean interference with Bolivia's nationalization of British saltpeter companies, and mentioned a previously secret treaty that Bolivia would, if necessary, demand that Peru honor should Chile declare war.[28] News of the invasion reached Hilarin Daza on February 20, but he postponed mention of it until the end of the carnival festivities. On February 27, Daza made a public manifesto informing Bolivians and calling for patriotic support. The same day the Bolivian legislature authorized a formal declaration of war upon Chile, although it was not immediately announced. On March 1, Daza issued instead a decree which prohibited all commerce and communications with Chile "while the state-of-war provoked upon Bolivia lasts," provided Chileans ten days to leave Bolivian territory unless gravely ill or handicapped, embargoed Chilean furniture, property, and mining produce, allowed Chilean mining companies to continue operating under a government-appointed administrator, and provided all embargoes as temporary "unless the hostilities exercised by Chilean forces requires an energetic retaliation from Bolivia." Then, on March 14, in a meeting with foreign powers in Lima, Bolivia announced that a state of war existed with Chile. Bolivia called on Peru to activate the alliance treaty, arguing that Chile's invasion constituted a casus foederis. On March 23, while on their way to occupy Calama, north of 23rd parallel, 554 Chilean troops and cavalry defeated 135 Bolivian soldiers and civilians dug in at two destroyed bridges next to the Topter river. This Battle of Topter was the first of the war. Peruvian mediation Peru sent a diplomatic team headed by Jos Antonio de Lavalle, a senior diplomat, to mediate with the Chilean government and request that Chile return Antofagasta to Bolivia. Under the impression that previous Peruvian demands had favored Bolivia, the Chilean government stalled. Chileans were further discomfited by Lavalle's claim that he did not know of a Peru-Bolivia Mutual Defense Treaty. Suspecting that Peru's attempt was not bona fide, Chile believed Peru was only trying to delay the situation until it completed its war preparations.[29][30] However, international law expert Edwin Montefiore Borchard argues that "much reading fails to substantiate the charge" Chile made against Peru. He further writes that Peru "was in such financial distress a fact which may also in lesser degree be asserted of Chile that she could make no real preparations."[31] Moreover, historian William Skuban notes that although in 1879 Chile, Bolivia, and Peru were "ill-prepared" for war, both Peru and Bolivia were less prepared than Chile.[32] On March 14, Alejandro Fierro, Chile's minister of foreign affairs, sent a telegram to the Chilean representative in Lima, Joaquin Godoy, requesting immediate neutrality from the Peruvian government.[33] On March 17, Godoy formally presented the Chilean proposal in a meeting with Peruvian President Mariano Ignacio Prado.[34] The following day, Godoy told the Chilean government about the Peru-Bolivia treaty, which had been revealed to him by President Prado while on a conference in Chorrillos.[29] On March 24, Peru responded to Chile and Bolivia by proposing that the Peruvian Congress debate both Chile's neutrality proposal and the Bolivian request for military action under the alliance on April 24.[35] On March 31, after receiving the treaty from Lima, Lavalle proceeded to read the whole text to Fierro and told him that it was not offensive to Chile.[29] Acknowledging the alliance,

Chile responded by breaking diplomatic ties and formally declaring war on both countries on April 5, 1879. Peru responded on April 6, when President Prado declared the casus foederis of the Mutual Defense Treaty with Bolivia.[36] Naval campaign Main article: Naval Campaign of the War of the Pacific See also: War of the Pacific#Military strength comparison Given the few roads and railroad lines, the nearly waterless and largely unpopulated Atacama Desert was difficult to occupy. From the beginning naval superiority was critical.[37] Bolivia had no navy,[38] so on March 26 of 1879 Hilarin Daza formally offered letters of marque to any ships willing to fight for Bolivia.[39] The Armada de Chile and Marina de Guerra del Per fought the naval battles. Chilean naval power was based on the twin central battery ironclads Cochrane and Blanco Encalada (commissioned in 1874 and 1875, respectively), the corvettes Chacabuco, O'Higgins, and Esmeralda, the gunboat Magallanes, and the schooner Covadonga. Peruvian naval power relied on the broadside ironclad Independencia and the monitor Huscar (both commissioned in 1868), the corvette Unin, the gunboat Pilcomayo, and the coastal monitors Atahualpa and Manco Cpac. Although both the Chilean and Peruvian ironclads seemed evenly matched, the Chilean ironclads had twice the armor and greater range and hitting power.[40] Early on Chile blockaded the Peruvian port of Iquique, on April 5.[41] This first naval encounter was the indecisive Battle of Chipana of April 12, 1879, in which the Chilean Magallanes escaped the Unin and Pilcomayo, but was unable to complete its reconnaissance mission. In the Battle of Iquique (May 21, 1879), Captain Miguel Grau commanding the Huscar engaged and sank the Esmeralda; during the battle, Chilean commander Arturo Prat was fatally shot while attempting to board the Huascar. In the aftermath, Grau ordered the rescue of the remaining Chilean sailors.[42] Meanwhile, the Independencia, led by Captain Juan Guillermo More, chased the schooner Covadonga, led by Lieutenant Commander Carlos Condell, until the heavier Independencia collided with a submerged rock and sank in the shallow waters near Punta Gruesa. This naval battle gave a tactical victory to Peru as it stopped the blockade of Iquique. Nevertheless, it was a Pyrrhic victory; the loss of the Independencia, one of Peru's most important ships, was a fatal blow.[43] In the subsequent months, Miguel Grau's success upheld Peruvian morale in the early stages of the conflict.[44][45] Despite being outnumbered, Grau's monitor Huscar held off the Chilean navy for six consecutive months.[46] During this time the Huscar participated in the Battle of Antofagasta (May 26, 1879) and the Second Battle Antofagasta (August 28, 1879).[47] The climax finally came with the capture of the steamship Rmac on July 23, 1879,[48] while carrying a cavalry regiment (the Carabineros de Yungay), the Chilean army's largest loss to that point.[49] The loss led Admiral Juan Williams Rebolledo to resign.[50][51] Commodore Galvarino Riveros Crdenas replaced Rebolledo,[50][52] and he devised a plan to catch the Huscar.[53] The Battle of Angamos, on October 8, 1879 proved decisive.[54] In this battle, the Chilean Navy managed to capture the Huscar after several hours of fierce battle, and despite her remaining crew attempted to scuttle her.[55] Miguel Grau died during the fighting, but his deeds made him a Peruvian national hero.[56] After the loss of the Huascar, the Peruvian navy still had some successful actions, particularly during the Naval Battle of Arica (February 27, 1880) and the Second Naval Battle of Arica (March 17, 1880),[57] but its remaining units were locked in its main port during the long Blockade of Callao. When the Peruvian capital of Lima fell after the battles of San Juan and Miraflores, the Peruvian naval officers scuttled the entire fleet to prevent its capture by the Chilean forces.[58] Land campaign Main article: Land Campaign of the War of the Pacific Once Chile achieved naval superiority, the Chilean army initiated a series of military maneuvers in the Peruvian provinces of Tarapac, Tacna, and Arica. The Campaign of Tarapaca began on November 2, 1879, when Chilean troops landed and attacked beach defenses in Pisagua, some 500 kilometres (310 mi) north of Antofagasta. That night, the Chilean army moved inland.[59] From Pisagua the Chileans marched south towards Iquique and on November 19, 1879, defeated the allied troops gathered in Agua Santa in the Battle of San Francisco and Dolores. Bolivian forces retreated to Oruro and the Peruvians fell back to Tiliviche, while the Chilean army captured Iquique. A detachment of Chilean soldiers, with cavalry and artillery, was sent to face the Peruvian forces in Tarapac. Peruvian forces marched towards Arica to reach Bolivian troops led by Daza coming from Arica, but in Camarones Daza decided to return towards Arica. The two sides clashed on November 27 in the Battle of Tarapac, where the Chilean forces were defeated,[60] but the Peruvian forces, unable to maintain the territory, retreated north to Arica.[61] Bruce W. Farcau comments that, "The province of Tarapac was lost along with a population of 200,000, nearly one tenth of the Peruvian total, and an annual gross income of 28 million in nitrate production, virtually all of the country's export earnings."[62] The victory afforded Santiago an economic boon and a potential diplomatic asset.[63] The Peruvian government was confronted with widespread rioting in Lima because of its failures.[64] On December 18, 1879, Peruvian president Prado went from Callao to Panama, allegedly with six million pesos in gold,[65] with the duty to oversee the purchase of new arms and warships for the nation. In a statement for the Peruvian newspaper El Comercio, he turned over the command of the country to vice president La Puerta, but a coup d'tat led by Nicols de Pirola overthrew the government and took power on December 23, 1879.[66] In Bolivia, after receiving a telegram on December 27, informing him that the army had overthrown him, Daza departed to Europe with $500,000. General Narciso Campero became Bolivia's new president.[67] Meanwhile, Chile continued its advances in the Campaign of Tacna and Arica. On November 28, Chile declared the formal blockade of Arica.[2]:214 A Chilean force of 600 men carried out an amphibious raid at Ilo as a reconnaissance in force, to the north of Tacna, on December 31, and withdrew the same day.[68] On February 24, 1880 approximately 11,000 men in nineteen ships (protected by Blanco Encalada, Toro, and Magallanes and two torpedo boats) sailed from Pisagua and arrived off Punta Coles, near Pacocha, Ilo on February 26. The landing took several days without resistance. The Peruvian commander, Lizardo Montero, refused to try to drive the Chileans from the beachhead, as the Chileans had expected.[2]:217 On March 22, 3,642 Chilean troops defeated 1,300 Peruvian troops in the Battle of Los ngeles,[2]:222 cutting any direct Peruvian supply from Lima to Arica or Tacna (Supply was possible only through the long way over Bolivia).[69] After the Battle of Los ngeles, only three allied positions remained in southern Peru: General Leyva's 2nd Army at Arequipa (including some survivors from Los ngeles), Bolognesi's 7th and 8th Divisions at Arica, and at Tacna the 1st Army. These forces were under Campero's direct command.[70] However, they were unable to concentrate troops or even to move from their garrisons.[71][72] After crossing 40 miles (64 km) of desert, on May 26 the Chilean army (14,147 men[2]:229) destroyed the allied army of 5,150 Bolivians and 8,500 Peruvians in the Battle of Tacna. The need for a port near the army to supply and reinforce the troops and evacuate the wounded compelled the Chilean command to concentrate on the remaining Peruvian stronghold of Arica. On June 7, after the Battle of Arica, the last Peruvian bastion in the Tacna Department fell. After the campaign of Tacna and Arica, the Peruvian and Bolivian regular armies ceased to exist,[2]:256 and Bolivia effectively left the war.[73] To show Peru the futility of further resistance, on September 4, 1880 the Chilean government dispatched an expedition of 2,200 men[74] to northern Peru under the command of Captain Patricio Lynch to collect war taxes from wealthy landowners.[75][76] Lynch's Expedition arrived on September 10 to Chimbote[2]:260and levied taxes of $100,000 in Chimbote, $10,000 in Paita, $20,000 in Chiclayo, and $4,000 in Lambayeque in local currencies; those who did not comply had their property impounded, destroyed or were

killed. On September 11, the Peruvian government decreed that payment was an act of treason, but most landowners still paid, given the many death threats.[77] Lackawanna Conference Before the United States became formally involved, France, England, and Italy jointly proposed that Chile receive Tarapac and withdrew their troops to the Camarones River; Chile accepted this solution.[78] On October 22, 1880, delegates of Peru, Chile, Bolivia, and the United States Minister Plenipotentiary in Chile held a 5-day conference aboard the USS Lackawanna in Arica.[79] Chile had refused previous peace mediations from Ecuador (in May).[80] The Lackawanna Conference, also called the Arica conference, attempted to develop a peace settlement. Chile demanded the Peruvian Tarapac province and the Bolivian Atacama, an indemnity of $20,000,000 gold pesos, restoration of property taken from Chilean citizens, the Rimac's return, abrogating the treaty between Peru and Bolivia and Peru's formal commitment not to mount artillery batteries in Arica's harbor. Arica was to be limited to commercial use only. Chile planned to retain the territories of Moquegua, Tacna, and Arica until all peace treaty conditions were satisfied. Although willing to accept the negotiated settlement, Peru and Bolivia insisted that Chile withdraw its forces from all occupied lands as a precondition for discussing peace. Having captured this territory at great expense, Chile declined the terms and the negotiations failed. Campaign of Lima Main article: Occupation of Lima After the campaign of Tacna and Arica, the southern departments of Peru were in Chilean hands, and the armies of Peru and Bolivia could no longer fight. Nonenetheless, Chilean public pressure and expansionist ambitions demanded an invasion of Lima to "exterminate the enemy."[81][82] The defeated allies not only failed to realize their situation but, despite the empty Bolivian treasury, on June 16, 1880, the National Assembly voted to continue the war. On June 11, 1880, a document was signed in Peru declaring the creation of the United States of Peru-Bolivia.[83] This situation forced both the Chilean government and its high command to plan a new campaign to obtain an unconditional surrender.[84] The Chilean forces confronted virtually the entire civilian population of Lima. The irregulars defended prepared positions, supported by a collection of old coastal guns located a few miles from the capital's arsenal and supply depots.[2]:258259 President Pierola ordered the construction of two parallel defense lines at Chorrillos and Miraflores a few kilometers south of Lima. The line of Chorrillos was 10 miles (16 km) long, lying from Marcavilca hill to La Chira, passing through the steep terrain of San Juan and Santa Teresa.[2]:276 The Peruvian forces were approximately 10,000 untrained civilians between Arequipa and Lima. A small Chilean force went ashore near Pisco, approximately 200 miles (320 km) south of Lima, while the mass of the army disembarked in Chilca only 45 kilometres (28 mi) from the city. On January 13, 1881, the 23,129[85] Chilean troops charged 18,000[86] Peruvian defenders in Chorrillos. During the Battle of Chorrillos, the Chileans inflicted a harsh defeat and eliminated Lima's first defensive line. Following a triumph in the Battle of Miraflores, the Chilean army entered Lima on January 17, 1881.[2]:296 The Peruvian dictator Nicols de Pirola retreated from the capital to try governing from the rear, and defied Chile's demand for territory and indemnity.[87] After the Battle of Miraflores, Chilean soldiers started fires and performed sackings, rapes, and even fighting among themselves over war spoils in the towns of Chorrillos and Barranco. Chile ransacked the contents of the National Library of Peru in Lima and transported thousands of books (including many centuries-old original Spanish, Peruvian, and Colonial volumes) to Santiago de Chile, along with much capital stock.[citation needed] 3,000 wagons carried the plunder that hadn't already left by sea.[88] In November 2007, Chile returned 3,778 stolen books to the National Library.[89] Without a Peruvian president who was willing to accept their terms, on February 22, 1881, the Chileans allowed a convention of Peruvian "notables" outside of Lima to elect Francisco Garca Caldern as president. Garcia Caldern was allowed to raise and arm two infantry battalions (400 men each) and two small cavalry squadrons to add credibility to the provisional government.[90] Campaign of the Brea or Sierra The occupation commander, Vice-admiral Patricio Lynch, sited his military headquarters in the Government Palace of Peru in Lima. After the confrontations in San Juan and Miraflores, Peruvian Colonel Andrs Avelino Cceres escaped to the central Andes to organize resistance. This would come to be known as the Campaign of the Brea or Sierra, which organized a rebellion in Lima and eventually organized a widespread resistance.[91][92] Despite the Bolivian tax crisis of 1879, Chile voted in a new Congress on schedule. In 1881 Domingo Santa Maria was elected President, assuming office on September 18, 1881. A new Congress was elected on schedule in 1882.[93] The new administration pushed for an end to the costly war. In February 1881, Chilean forces under Lt. Col. Ambrosio Letelier started the first Expedition, with 700 men, to defeat the last guerrilla bands from Huanuco (April 30) to Junin. After many losses the expedition achieved very little and returned to Lima in early July,[2]:309 where Letelier and his officers were courts-martialed for diverting money into their own pockets.[94] To annihilate the guerrillas, in January 1882 Lynch started an offensive with 5,000 men[2]:315 first towards Tarma and then southeast towards Huancayo, reaching Izcuchaca. Lynch's army suffered enormous hardships including cold temperatures, snow, and mountain sickness. On July 9, 1882 they fought the emblematic Battle of La Concepcin. The Chileans had to pull back with a loss of 534 soldiers: 154 in combat, 277 of disease and 103 deserters. During the James A. Garfield administration (March 4September 19, 1881), the anglophobic Secretary of State James G. Blaine wanted to advance the US presence in Latin America. He believed that England had prodded Chile into war to secure England's mining interests. Blaine proposed that Chile accept a monetary indemnity and renounce claims to Antofagasta and Tarapac. These American attempts reinforced Garcia Calderon's refusal to discuss the matter of territorial cession. When it became known that Blaine's representative, Stephen Hurlburt, would personally profit from the settlement, it was clear that Hurlburt was complicating the peace process.[95] Frederick Theodore Frelinghuysen, Blaine's successor, publicly disavowed Blaine's policy, rejected any notion of intervening militarily in the dispute[2]:306 and accepted Chile's right to annex Tarapac.[2]:329 Because Garcia Calderon refused to relinquish Peruvian control over Tarapac, he was arrested. Before Garcia Calderon left Peru for Chile, he named Admiral Lizardo Montero as successor. At the same time President Pierola stepped back and supported Avelino Caceres for the Presidency. Caceres refused to serve and supported Lizardo Montero instead. Montero moved to Arequipa and in this way Garcia Calderon's arrest unified the forces of Pierola and Caceres.[59](p329) On April 1, 1882 Miguel Iglesias, Defence Minister under Pierola, became convinced that the war had to be brought to an end or Peru would be completely devastated. He issued a manifesto, "Grito de Montan", calling for peace and in December 1882 convened a convention of representatives of the seven northern departments, where he was elected "Regenerating President"[2]:329330[96] To support Iglesias against Montero, on April 6, 1883, Patricio Lynch started a new offensive to drive the Montoneros from central Peru and destroy Caceres' little army. The Chilean troops pursued Caceres northwest through narrow mountain passes until July 10, 1883, winning the definitive Battle of Huamachuco, the final Peruvian defeat.[2]:317338[97] After signing the peace treaty on October 20, 1883 with Iglesias' government, Lizardo Montero tried to resist in Arequipa with a force of 4,000 men, but when Chile's 3,000 fighters arrived, the troops in Arequipa revolted and allowed the Chileans to occupy the city. Montero opted for Bolivian asylum.[98] On October 29, 1883 the Chilean occupation of Lima ended.

Peace Peace treaty with Peru On October 20, 1883 hostilities between Chile and Peru formally came to an end under the Treaty of Ancn. Under the treaty's terms, Peru formally ceded the province of Tarapac to Chile. Chile was also to occupy the provinces of Tacna and Arica for 10 years, after which a plebiscite was to be held to determine nationality. For decades thereafter, the two countries failed to agree on the terms of the plebiscite. Finally, in 1929, through US mediation, under President Herbert Hoover, an accord was reached by which Chile kept Arica. Peru re-acquired Tacna on 1929, and received some concessions on Arica in 1999 . Peace treaty with Bolivia In 1884, Bolivia signed a truce that relinquished the entire Bolivian coast, the province of Antofagasta, and its nitrate, copper and other mineral deposits. A 1904 treaty made this arrangement permanent. In return, Chile agreed to build the Arica-La Paz railway, a railroad connecting the capital city of La Paz, Bolivia with the port of Arica, and Chile guaranteed freedom of transit for Bolivian commerce through Chilean ports and territory. Military analysis Military strength comparison Ships of Chile and Peru at the beginning of the War of the Pacific[99][100] tons Horse- Speed Armor Built Warship Main Artillery Year (L.ton) power (Knots) (Inch) Cochrane Esmeralda O'Higgins Chacabuco Covadonga Magallanes Abtao Huascar Independencia Manco Cpac Atahualpa Unin 3,560 854 1,101 1,101 412 772 1,051 1,130 2,004 1,034 1,034 1,150 3,000 912.8 up to 9 6x9 Inch 3,000 912.8 up to 9 6x9 Inch 200 300 300 140 260 300 8 12 11 7 11.5 8 wood wood wood wood wood wood 4 4 10 10 wood 16x322x12-pounders 1874 1874 1855 Blanco Encalada 3,560

3x1152x702x12pounders 1874 1x1152x702x12pounders 1874 2x703x40pounders 3x1153x30pounders 2x300pounders 2x150pounders 2x500pounders 2x500pounders 12x681x9pounders 1859 1870 1865 1865 1864 1864 1864 1x1151x642x20pounders 1874

1,200 1011 1,500 1213 320 320 320 6 6 13

600 180 10.5 wood 2x704x40pounders 1864 Pilcomayo As the war began, the Peruvian Army numbered 5,241 men of all ranks, organized in seven infantry battalions, three squadrons of cavalry and two regiments of artillery.[101] The most common rifles in the army were the French Chassepot and the Mini rifles. The artillery, with a total of twenty-eight pieces, was composed mostly of British-made Blakely cannon and counted four machine guns. Much of the artillery dated from 1866, and had been bought for the Chincha Islands War against Spain.[102] The mounts used by the cavalry were small and inferior to the Chileans'.[102] The Bolivian Army numbered no more than 2,175 soldiers, divided into three infantry regiments, two cavalry squadrons, and two sections of artillery.[103] The Colorados Battalion, President Daza's personal guard, was armed with Remington Rolling Block rifles, but the remainder carried odds and ends including flintlock muskets. The artillery had three rifled pounders and four machine guns, while the cavalry rode mules given a shortage of good horses.[102] The regular Chilean Army was well equipped,[104][105][106][107] with 2,694 soldiers. By April 5, when Chile formally declared war, the army had grown to 7,906 men. The regular infantry was armed with the modern Belgian Comblain rifle, of which Chile had a stock of some 13,000. Chile also had Grass, Minie, Remington and Beaumont rifles which mostly fired the same caliber cartridge (11 mm). The artillery had seventy-five artillery pieces, most of which were of Krupp and Limache manufacture, and six machine guns. The cavalry used French sabers and Spencer and Winchester carbines.[108] Strategy Control of the sea was Chile's key to an inevitably difficult desert war: supply by sea, including water, food, ammunition, horses, fodder and reinforcements, was quicker and easier than marching supplies through the desert or across the Bolivian high plateau. While the Chilean Navy started an economic and military blockade of the Allies' ports, Peru took the initiative and used its smaller navy as a raiding force. The raids delayed the ground invasion for six months, and forced Chile to shift its fleet from blockading to hunting and capturing the Huascar. After achieving naval supremacy, sea-mobile forces proved to be an advantage for desert warfare on the long coastline. Peruvian and Bolivian defenders found themselves hundreds of kilometers from home while Chilean forces were usually just a few kilometers from the sea. Chilean ground strategy focused on mobility. They landed ground forces in enemy territory to raid, landed in strength to split and drive out defenders and then garrisoned the territory as the fighting moved north. Peru and Bolivia fought a defensive war maneuvering through long overland distances and relying where possible on land or coastal fortifications with gun batteries and minefields. Coastal railways reached to central Peru and telegraph lines provided a direct line to the government in Lima. During the entire conflict the Chilean armed forces sought the systematic destruction of the Peruvian infrastructure,[109]. They also receive the support of the Chinese coolies immigrants, who joined the Chilean Army[110] during the campaign of Lima and in the raids to the north Peruvian cities. The occupation of Peru between 1881 and 1884 took a different form. The war theater was the Peruvian Sierra, where the remains of the Peruvian Army had easy access to population, resource and supply centers far from the sea; supporting an indefinite war of attrition. The occupying Chilean force was split into small garrisons across the theater and could devote only part of its strength to hunting down dispersed pockets of resistance and the last Peruvian forces in the Sierra. After a costly occupation and prolonged counterinsurgency campaign, Chile sought a diplomatic exit. Rifts within Peruvian society and Peruvian defeat in the Battle of Huamachuco resulted in the peace treaty that ended the occupation. The three nations claimed to adhere to the Geneva Red Cross Convention to protect the war wounded, prisoners, refugees, civilians, and other non-combatants.[111] However, during the war, the Chilean military commonly ordered a repaso (or repase), a method "to completely

kill the dead" by executing all soldiers, regardless of injuries, of the opposing army left in the battlefield.[112] After the Battle of Tacna, Chilean troops went as far as to enter field hospitals and execute all soldiers of the opposing Peruvian and Bolivian armies.[113][114] The repaso further incremented the number of Peruvian casualties in the battles of San Juan, Chorrillos, and Miraflores.[115] In the aftermath of the Battle of Huamachuco, Chilean Colonel Alejandro Gorostiaga ordered a repase under the pretext that they formed part of an irregular army and could therefore not be considered prisoners of war.[116][117] Peruvian Colonel Leoncio Prado was among the few soldiers who were not killed during the Huamachuco repase,[118] but was executed shortly thereafter. Technology Both sides employed late 19th-century military technology such as breech-loading rifles and cannons, remote-controlled land mines, armor-piercing shells, naval torpedoes, torpedo boats, and purpose-built landing craft. The second-generation of ironclads (i.e. designed after the Battle of Hampton Roads) were employed in battle for the first time. That was significant for a conflict where no major power was involved, and attracted British, French, and U.S. observers. During the war, Peru developed the Toro Submarino ("Submarine Bull"). Though completely operational, she never saw action, and was scuttled at the end to prevent her capture. The USS Wachusett (1861) commanded by Alfred Thayer Mahan, was stationed at Callao, Peru, to protect American interests during the war's final stages. Mahan formulated his concept of sea power while reading history in an English gentlemen's club in Lima, Peru. This concept became the foundation for his celebrated The Influence of Sea Power upon History.[119][120] Consequences See also: Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1904 between Chile and Bolivia The War of the Pacific had a profound impact on the societies of all three nations. Bolivia For Bolivians, the loss of the Litoral (the coast) remained a deeply emotional and practical issue, as was particularly evident during the 2003 natural gas riots. Popular belief attributed many of the country's problems to its landlocked condition; recovering the seacoast was seen as the solution to these difficulties. Numerous Bolivian Presidents pressured Chile for sovereign access to the sea. Diplomatic relations with Chile were severed on March 17, 1978, in spite of considerable commercial ties. The leading Bolivian newspaper El Diario featured at least a weekly editorial on the subject, and the Bolivian people annually celebrated a patriotic "Dia del Mar" (Day of the Sea) to remember the crippling loss. [121] Politically, Narciso Campero ushered in a new era of civilian constitutional government that would last under the 1880 Constitution until defeat in the Chaco War with Paraguay radicalized opponents of the ruling elite. Chile See also: Chilenization of Tacna, Arica and Tarapac and Patriotic Leagues (Southern Cone) As the victor and possessor of a new coastal territory, Chile benefited from the war by gaining a lucrative territory with significant mineral income. The national treasury grew by 900% between 1879 and 1902 due to taxes coming from the newly acquired lands.[122] British involvement and control of the nitrate industry rose significantly.[123] High nitrate profits lasted for several decades, but fell sharply once synthetic nitrates were developed during World War I. This led to a massive economic breakdown (known as the Nitrate Crisis). Many industrial factories had closed in the early 1880s to provide labor for the extraction industry. Loss of industry dramatically slowed the country's industrial development. When the saltpeter mines closed or became unprofitable, the British companies left the country, destroying many jobs. The former Bolivian region remained the world's richest source of copper and its ports moved trade between nearby countries and the Pacific Ocean. The former Peruvian region suffered because no new sources of wealth appeared after the Nitrate Crisis. On August 28, 1929, Chile returned Tacna to Peru, who later discovered copper deposits. During the war Chile waived most of its claim over the Patagonia in the 1881 Chile/Argentina treaty, to ensure Argentina's neutrality. After the war, the Puna de Atacama dispute grew until 1899, since both Chile and Argentina claimed former Bolivian territories. On August 28, 1929, Chile returned the province of Tacna to Peru. In 1999, Chile and Peru at last agreed to fully implement the Treaty of Lima (1929), providing Peru with a port in Arica.[124] Ericka Beckman argued that during and after the war there was a rise of racial and national superiority ideas among the Chilean ruling class.[125] Chilean historian Gonzalo Bulnes (son of president Manuel Bulnes) once wrote, "What defeated Peru was the superiority of a race and of a history".[126] During the occupation of Tacna and Arica (18841929) the Peruvian people and nation were treated in racist and denigrating terms by the Chilean press.[127] In 2007 the Chilean government returned almost 4,000 books to Peru's national library, more than a century after they were taken by Chilean soldiers in hopes that the return of the books may go some way to improving the two nations relations.[128] Peru According to Bruce W. Farcau, "in Peru, the wounds run less deep than in neighboring Bolivia".[citation needed] After the War of the Pacific, Peru was left without saltpeter production, the Chilean production decreased to 15%, and Great Britain's production rose to 55%.[8] According to military historian Robert L. Scheina, the Chilean plunder of Peruvian national literary and art treasures contributed to "demands of revenge among Peruvians for decades."[129] Scholar Brooke Larson pointed out that the War of the Pacific was the "first time since independence wars" that "Peru was invaded, occupied and pillaged by a foreign army" and that "no other Andean republic experienced such a costly and humiliating defeat as Peru did in the hands of Chile".[130] Miguel Grau became an important figure in Peru due to his alleged gallantry during the conflict, especially his treatment of Prat's family and rescue of Chilean sailors in Iquique,[131] which gained him recognition as the Caballero de los Mares ("Knight of the Seas").[132][133] The war and postwar period was one of profound political and social instability for Peru. The war shook the whole social order of Peru: armed indigenous peasants sacked and occupied haciendas of landed elite criollo "collaborationists" in the central Sierra, Chinese coolies revolted and even joined the Chilean Army, indigenous and mestizo Peruvians murdered Chinese shopkeepers in Lima, black slaves rose against their masters and fought equally the Chinese, Peruvian mobs sacked Chiclayo at the same time the criollo elite fought a civil war.[clarification needed][134][135] The fear of disorder, opposing factions and armed peasants was for many Peruvians larger than that of the Chilean invaders.[135] In some cases, the delegations of European countries and the United States provided safety during riots and persecutions.[135] The War of the Pacific also sparked an indigenous peasant guerrilla movement throughout the central Sierra against Chileans and collaborationist landlords. In 1884 Cceres turned against his former guerrilla allies in order to defend the old order. In 1886 and 1888 the Cceres sent troops to the central sierra to disarm the peasants. The lack of rule of law in central sierra was such that, in one particular case, a landowner was only able to recover his occupied estate in 1902 after a massive mobilization of military, police and gunmen.[134] In the aftermath of the war, the indigenous populations of Peru became scapegoats in the narratives of Peruvian criollo elites, exemplified in the writing of Ricardo Palma: The principal cause of the great defeat is that the majority of Peru is composed of that wretched and degraded race that we once attempted to dignify and ennoble. The Indian lacks patriotic sense; he is born enemy of the white and of the man of the coast. It makes no difference to him whether he is a Chilean or a Turk. To educate the Indian and to inspire him a feeling for patriotism will not be the task of our institutions, but of the ages.[136] Bibliography

Barros Arana, Diego (1881a) (in Spanish). Historia de la guerra del Pacfico (18791880) (History of the War of the Pacific (18791880)). 1. Santiago, Chile: Librera Central de Servat i Ca. http://www.archive.org/details/historiadelague00arangoog. Barros Arana, Diego (1881b) (in Spanish). Historia de la guerra del Pacfico (18791880) (History of the War of the Pacific (18791880)). 2. Santiago, Chile: Librera Central de Servat i Ca. http://www.archive.org/details/historiadelague01arangoog. Basadre, Jorge (1964). "Historia de la Republica del Peru, La guerra con Chile (History of Peru, The War on Chile)" (in Spanish). Lima, Peru: Peruamerica S.A.,. http://www.unjbg.edu.pe/basadre/. Bulnes, Gonzalo (1920). Chile and Peru: the causes of the war of 1879. Santiago, Chile: Imprenta Universitaria. http://www.archive.org/details/chileperucauseso00bulnuoft. Chilean government (18791881) (in Spanish). Boletin de la Guerra del Pacifico (Bulletin of the War of the Pacific). Santiago, Chile: Editorial Andres Bello. http://books.google.com/books?id=hH_BiSV-hYkC. De Varigny, Charles (1922) (in Spanish). La Guerra del Pacifico (The War of the Pacific). 1. Santiago de Chile: Imprenta Cervantes. http://www.archive.org/details/laguerradelpacif00vari.(published first time 18811882 in Revue des deux mondes) English, Adrian J. (1985). Armed forces of Latin America: their histories, development, present strength, and military potential. Jane's Information Group, Incorporated. ISBN 978-0-7106-0321-0. Farcau, Bruce W. (2000). The Ten Cents War, Chile, Peru and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 18791884. Westport, Connecticut, London: Praeger Publishers. ISBN 978-0-275-96925-7. http://books.google.com/?id=BsxISMTwsSUC. Retrieved January 17, 2010. Gutierrez, Hiplito (1956) (in Spanish). Crnica de un soldado de la Guerra del Pacfico (Chronicle of a soldier in the Pacific War). 1. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Editorial del Pacfico. http://www.memoriachilena.cl/archivos2/pdfs/MC0012291.pdf. Jefferson Dennis, William (1927). Documentary history of the Tacna-Arica dispute from University of Iowa studies in the social sciences. 8. Iowa: University Iowa City. http://books.google.de/books?id=kL0JAAAAIAAJ. Paz Soldan, Mariano Felipe (1884) (in Spanish). Narracion Historica de la Guerra de Chile contra Peru y Bolivia (Historical narration of the Chile's War against Peru and Bolivia). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Imprenta y Libreria de Mayo, calle Peru 115. http://www.archive.org/details/narracionhistri00soldgoog. Rosales, Justo Abel (1984) (in Spanish). Mi campaa al Per, 18791881 (My campaign to Peru, 18791881). 1. Concepcin, Chile: Editorial de la Universidad de Concepcin. http://americas.sas.ac.uk/publications/genero/genero_segunda3_Rosales.pdf. Sater, William F. (2007). Andean Tragedy: Fighting the War of the Pacific, 18791884. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 978-0-8032-4334-7. http://books.google.com/books?id=etT0iVZW73MC. Sater, William F. (1986). Chile and the War of the Pacific. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 978-08032-4155-8. Milla Batres, Carlos (1994). Enciclopedia biogrfica e histrica del Per: siglos XIX-XX. Michigan: Editorial Milla Batres. p. 71. ISBN 978-958-9413-00-5. http://books.google.com/?id=7sd-AAAAMAAJ. Retrieved July 22, 2009. Scheina, Robert L. (2003). Latin America's Wars: The age of the caudillo, 17911899. Potomac Books, Inc.. ISBN 978-157488-450-0. http://books.google.com.pe/books?id=oOVsN5SwPIC&pg=PA387&dq=battle+of+miraflores+scheina&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false. Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Martimos del Per (2004). Historia martima del Per, Volume 2; Volume 11. Lima, Peru: Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Martimos del Per. ISBN 978-9972-633-05-8. http://books.google.com/?id=43EKAQAAIAAJ. Retrieved January 17, 2009. Wikimedia Commons has media related to: War of the Pacific

See also

Anti-Chilean sentiment Atacama border dispute Battle of Tarapaca: Brief synopsis (in Spanish, from Website of Peruvian military central command) Chincha Islands War ChileanPeruvian maritime dispute Chile-Peru relations Puna de Atacama Lawsuit Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1904 between Chile and Bolivia War of the Confederation References 1. ^ 19,000 in San Juan, 4,000 in Lima, 1,000 in El Callao (Pierola letter to Julio Tenaud) 4,000 in Arequipa, Col. Jose de la Torre Basadre 1964 2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Sater 2007 3. ^ a b c sater, pp. 348349 tables 22 and 23. The figures consider neither Chilean POWs (from "Rimac" and "Esmeralda" survivors) nor deserters 4. ^ Sala Guerra del Guano y el Salitre , Peruvian Naval Museum 5. ^ Approving Treaty on offensive and defensive alliance concluded between the Republics of Peru and Chile. Lima: Congress of Peru. 1865 (Spanish) 6. ^ a b Boundary treaty between Bolivia and Chile. 1866 (Spanish) 7. ^ Bethell, Leslie. 1993. Chile Since Independence. Cambridge University Press. p. 13-14. 8. ^ a b British influence on the salt: the origin, nature and decline. Soto Crdenas, Alejandro. Santiago : Ed. University of Santiago de Chile, 1998. Page 50 9. ^ See Private note of Riva-Agero to Novoa, November 20, 1872. Godoy papers. Cited in Bulnes 1920, pp. 58,59

10.

11. 12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28.

29.

It is desirable that once for all, and as soon as possible, the relations between the two Republics should be defined, because it is necessary to arrive at an arrangement satisfactory to both parties. If Chile dealing with this boundary question seizes the most favorable opportunity to take possession of that coast-line, it is necessary that their plans develop before Chile is in possession of the ironclads under construction, in order that in the definite settlement of this question, the influence, which we are in a position to exert by means of our maritime preponderance may have due weight. ^ "Thomas Cleland Dawson, ''The South American Republics: Peru, Chile, Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Colombia, Panama'' (G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1904), 118". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=Il8zAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA118&dq=Chile+knew+of+the+secret+alliance&hl=en&ei=fiaTqKoB8r1sQKHiqnUBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDAQ6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=Chile %20knew%20of%20the%20secret%20alliance&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ (See full English version of the treaty in Bulnes 1920 ^ "Charles Edmond Akers, A History of South America, Page 439". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=QTwTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA439&dq=Jose+Antonio+Lavalle+santiago&hl=en&ei=oWt ATsyOGsKFsAKo5JDWBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=Jose %20Antonio%20Lavalle%20santiago&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ "Sir Clements Robert Markham, ''The war between Peru and Chile, 18791882'' (Sampson Low. Marston, Searle & Rivington, 1882), pp. 8687". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=YZotG2IXhUsC&pg=PA87&dq=Chile+knew+treaty+1874&hl=en&ei=aOKaTreeIcO1s QLpyuCmBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Chile%20knew%20tre aty%201874&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ "Dolores Luna-Guinot, ''Conspiracy in Mendoza'' (Trafford Publishing, 2009), 316". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=NF0stYFMyfoC&pg=PA316&dq=Chile+knew+of+the+secret+alliance&hl=en&ei=fiaTqKoB8r1sQKHiqnUBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=Chile %20knew%20of%20the%20secret%20alliance&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ "Columbia studies in the social sciences Columbia University. Faculty of Political Science, Herbert Millington Google Books". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=uhMOAQAAIAAJ&q=Chile+knew+treaty+1874&dq=Chile+knew+treaty+1874&hl=en &ei=EOWaTt-rLrLfsQLO0bzABA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAjge. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ "Sir Clements Robert Markham, ''The war between Peru and Chile, 18791882'' (Sampson Low. Marston, Searle & Rivington, 1882), 87". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=YZotG2IXhUsC&pg=PA87&dq=Chile+knew+treaty+1874&hl=en&ei=aOKaTreeIcO1s QLpyuCmBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Chile%20knew%20tre aty%201874&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ Basadre 1964, p. 2282 "The beginning of the Peruvian naval inferiority and lack of initiative for preventive war": Won by Chile's supremacy at sea that year of 1874 contributed to the endeavor to avoid any problem Peru ^ Basadre 1964, p. 2286, "Peru in 1874 and 1878 avoid the alliance with Argentina": In August, September and October 1875 ... Peru will hasten to take footdragging and even inhibitory for signing the treaty with that republic [Argentina] in order to retain their freedom of action. The existence of the Chilean ironclads perhaps explains the difference between this attitude and previous In 1878 [the Peruvian government] refused to deliver the items ship orders by the Argentine government and collaborate in the search for a peaceful solution... ^ a b c d e Palma, Gabriel.Trying to 'Tax and Spend' Oneself out of the 'Dutch Disease': The Chilean Economy from the War of the Pacific to the Great Depression. p. 217-240 ^ a b c d e Historia contempornea de Chile III. La economa: mercados empresarios y trabajadores. 2002. Gabriel Salazar and Julio Pinto. p. 25-29. ^ a b c d e f g h i Greenhill, Robert and Miller, Rory. (1973). The Peruvian Government and the Nitrate Trade, 1873 1879. Journal of Latin American Studies 5: pp 107-131. ^ Retrospective of landlocked sea. A critical view on how the conflict started. Jorge Gumucio. La Paz, Bolivia ^ Chile-Bolivia-Peru: The War of the Pacific. June 2004. Patricio Valdivieso. Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile ^ a b Employers, policy, and the Pacific War. Luis Ortega. Santiago de Chile. 1984. (Page 18. File Antony Gibbs & Sons AGA. Valparaiso to Londres. Private N 25. March 6, 1878) ^ (Spanish) Boundary Treaty of 1866 between Chile and Bolivia ^ Barros Arana 1881a, p. 59 ^ Bulnes 1920, pp. 42 ^ War of the Pacific Chilean historian Gonzalo Bulnes. Antofagasta and Tarapac. 1911. Tengo una buena noticia que darle. He fregado a los gringos (se refiere a Mr. Hicks) decretando la reivindicacion de las salitreras i no podran quitarnoslas por mas que se esfuerce el mundo entero. Espero que Chile no intervendra en este asunto... pero si nos declara la guerra podemos contar con el apoyo del Peru a quien exijiremos el cumplimiento del Tratado secreto. Con este objeto voi a mandar a Lima a Reyes 0rtiz. Ya ve Ud. como le doi buenas noticias que Ud. me ha de agradecer eternamente i como le dejo dicho los gringos estan completamente fregados i los chilenos tienen que morder i reclamar nada mas. ^ a b c War of the Pacific. Francisco A. Machuca. Valparaso "Mientras el seor Lavalle gozaba de relativa tregua, y estudiaba las causas de la poca prisa del Gobierno chileno para continuar las negociaciones, ste, en constante comunicacin con nuestro Ministro Godoy, quedaba impuesto el 18 de Marzo, por comunicacin del da anterior, 17, de la existencia del pacto secreto, y de una nota clara y terminante de nuestro Ministro al Gobierno de Lima...Por fin, el 31 de Marzo, el seor Lavalle se aperson al seor Ministro de Relaciones y le di conocimiento del tratado secreto, que acababa

30. 31. 32.

33. 34. 35. 36.

37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

43. 44.

45.

46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55.

56. 57.

de recibir de Lima, en circunstancia que haca das, el general Prado le haba confesado su existencia a nuestro Ministro Godoy, en una conferencia tenida en Chorrillos." ^ Current History (1922) (page 450) The New York Times ^ Edwin Montefiore Borchard, Opinion on the controversy between Peru and Chile (Washington, 1920), p. 13. ^ "The Peruvian government, fearful of being dragged into a war for which it was ill-prepared, attempted to mediate the dispute, and sent envoy Jose Antonio de Lavalle to Santiago to meet with Chilean president Anibal Pinto. [...] Briefly, though, the year 1879 found Chile almost as ill-prepare for war as Peru and Bolivia." See William Skuban, Lines in the Sand (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2007), p. 12. ^ Bulnes 1920, pp. 147 ^ Guerra del Pacfico, Tomo 1: De Antofagasta a Tarapac. Page 148. Bulnes Gonzalo. ^ Peruvian Congress March 24, 1879 ^ "William Jefferson Dennis, pp. 7980". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=kL0JAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA2-PA79&dq=Peru+casus+foederis&hl=en&ei=UHZTpnZAcqAsgKVpQG&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Peru%20casus%20foederis&f=f alse. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 65 As the earlier discussion of the geography of the Atacama region illustrates, control of the sea lanes along the coast would be absolutely vital to the success of a land campaign there ^ Vargas Valenzuela, Jos (1974). Tradicin naval del pueblo de Bolivia. Bolivia: Editorial Los Amigos del Libro. p. 61. http://books.google.com/?id=flgSAAAAYAAJ. Retrieved January 17, 2010. ^ Sater 2007, p. 102 and ff "... to anyone willing to sail under Bolivia's colors ..." ^ Farcau 2000, pp. 5556 ^ Lpez Urrutia, Carlos (2003). La Guerra del Pacfico, 18791884. Ristre Editorial. pp. 3742. http://books.google.com/?id=0osTAQAAIAAJ. Retrieved January 17, 2010. ^ Farcau, Bruce W. (2000). The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 18791884. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-275-96925-7. http://books.google.com/?id=BsxISMTwsSUC&pg=PA74&dq=farcau,+%22such+was+the+sense+of+chivalry+in+this+war %22#v=onepage&q&f=false. ^ Spila, Benedetto (1883). Chile en la guerra del Pacfico. Valparaso, Chile: Impr. del Neuvo Mercurio. p. 94. http://books.google.com/?id=Gy8_AAAAIAAJ. Retrieved January 17, 2010. ^ "Lawrence A. Clayton, Grace: W.R. Grace & Co., the formative years, 18501930, Page 108". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=EB5i7yoRk3UC&pg=PA108IA14&dq=Grau+peruvian+morale&hl=en&ei=wOKZToX7ENGpsAKBr7HwBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnu m=3&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Grau%20peruvian%20morale&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28.Direct Quote "Miguel Grau, Peruvian hero of the naval Battle of Iquique. His modern, heavily armed monitor Huascar battered the Chilean frigate Esmeralda into a sinking hulk, thereby breaking the Chilean naval blockade of Iquique and rallying the morale of the Peruvian nation during the early stages of the War of the Pacific." ^ "Latin America: a general history". Books.google.com. p. 663. http://books.google.com/books?ei=VBpxT4nHL6_1sQLBmv3QDg&id=bZoSAQAAIAAJ&dq=Grau+%22morale%22+Peru &q=Peruvian+spirits. Retrieved 2012-03-26.Direct Quote "Much as Admiral Grau and the heroic vessel Huascar did to lift Peruvian spirits, their deeds did not prevent the Chilean conquest of the nitrate-laden southern provinces, Tacna, Arica, and Tarapaca.." ^ Milla Batres 1994, p. 71 ^ Arosemena Garland, Geraldo (1962). El Almirante Miguel Grau. Lima, Peru: Ministerio de Educacin Pblica. p. 188. http://books.google.com/?id=UKPUAAAAMAAJ. Retrieved January 17, 2009. ^ Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Martimos del Per 2004, p. 188 ^ Farcau 2000, p. 214 ^ a b Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Martimos del Per 2004 ^ Mellafe Maturana, Rafael; Mauricio Pelayo Gonzlez (2007). La guerra del Pacfico: en imgenes, relatos, testimonios. Santiago, Chile: Ediciones Centro de Estudios Bicentenario. p. 435. ISBN 978-956-8147-33-4. http://books.google.com/?id=KYQTAQAAIAAJ. Retrieved January 18, 2009. ^ Lpez Urrutia, Carlos; Jorge Ortz Sotelo (2005). Monitor Huscar: una historia compartida (18652005). Lima, Peru: Asociacin de Historia Martima y Naval Iberoamericana. p. 192. http://books.google.com/?id=RmVjAAAAMAAJ. Retrieved January 18, 2009. ^ Historia del Ejrcito de Chile, Volume 6. Santiago, Chile: Estado Mayor General del Ejrcito. 1980. p. 54. http://books.google.com/?id=SPNjAAAAMAAJ. Retrieved January 18, 2009. ^ Luna Vegas, Emilio (1978). Cceres, genio militar. Peru: Librera Editorial Minerva-Miraflores. p. 19. http://books.google.com/?id=u4K1AAAAIAAJ. Retrieved July 22, 2009. ^ Valds Vergara, Francisco (1908). Historia de Chile para la enseanza primaria. California: Sociedad "Imprenta y litografa Universo". p. 319. http://books.google.com/?id=oFZJAAAAIAAJ&dq=Angamos+Hu%C3%A1scar+capturado+Chile+hundirlo+tripulaci%C3 %B3n.. Retrieved July 22, 2009. ^ Milla Batres 1994, p. 73 ^ Elas Murgua, Julio J. (1980). Marinos peruanos en Arica. Peru: Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Maritimos del Per. p. 38. http://books.google.com/?id=2KIKAQAAIAAJ. Retrieved July 22, 2009.

58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75.

76. 77.

78. 79. 80.

81. 82.

^ Paz Soldn, Juan Pedro (July 1919). "El hundimiento de la Escuadra Peruana - 16 de enero de 1881". El Mercurio Peruano Revista Mensual de Ciencias Sociales y Letras (Lima, Per) III (13): 4447. http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/El_hundimiento_de_la_Escuadra_Peruana. Retrieved 2011-09-24. ^ a b Sater 2007, p. 172^ Sater 2007, p. 204 "only the lack of allied cavalry prevented Buendia's [Peruvian] men from finishing off the few remaining survivors" ^ Sater 2007, p. 205 "The victorious troops had no choice, as Colonel Suarez ruefully admitted, but to abandon Tarapac to the Chileans". ^ Farcau 2000, p. 119 ^ Sater 2007, p. 181 "not only a economic bonanza but also a diplomatic asset that could barter in return for Peru ending the war". ^ Farcau 2000, p. 120 "He [Prado] was met with widespread rioting in the capital in protest over the administration's abysmal handling of the war to date" ^ Farcau 2000, p. 120 "...Prado suddenly gathered up his belongings ... and took a ship ..." ^ Farcau 2000, p. 121 "Pierola ... mounted an assault on the Palace but ... leaving more than three hundred corpses ..." ^ Sater 2007, p. 208 "Daza received a telegram from Camacho, informing him that the army no longer ..." ^ Farcau 2000, p. 130 "In the early morning hours of the 31. December 1879 ..." ^ Sater 2007, p. 222 "Baquedano could not simply bypass the Peruvian troops, whose presence threatened Moquegua as well as the communications network extending southeast across the Locumba Valley to Tacna and northwest to Arequipa and northeast to Bolivia" ^ Farcau 2000, p. 138 specifies 3,100 men in Arequipa, 2,000 men in Arica and 9,000 men in Tacna, but this figures contradict the total numbers given (below) by William F. Sater in page 229 ^ Farcau 2000, p. 138 "...it became evident that there was a total lack of the necessary transport for even the minimum amount of supplies and water" ^ Sater 2007, p. 227 "The allied force, he [Campero] concluded lacked sufficient transport to move into the field its artillery as well as its rations and, more significantly, its supplies of water" ^ Farcau 2000, p. 1147 ^ Farcau 2000, p. 152 "Lynch's force consisted f the 1 Line Regiment and the Regiments "Talca" and "Colchagua", a battery of mountain howitzers, and a small cavalry squadron for a total of twenty-two hundred man" ^ Barros Arana 1881b, p. 98 "[The Chilean government thought that it was possible to demonstrate to the enemy the futility of any defense of Peruvian territory not only against the whole [Chilean] army but also against small [Chilean] divisions. That was the purpose of the expedition, which the claims, insults, and affliction in the official documents of Peru and in the press had made famous" (Original: "[El gobierno chileno] Crea entonces que todava era posible demostrar prcticamente al enemigo la imposibilidad en que se hallaba para defender el territorio peruano no ya contra un ejrcito numeroso sino contra pequeas divisiones. Este fu el objeto de una espedicion que las quejas, los insultos i las lamentaciones de los documentos oficiales del Per, i de los escritos de su prensa, han hecho famosa.") ^ Basadre 1964, p. 2475 ^ Barros Arana 1881a quotes Johann Caspar Bluntschli: "Bluntschili (Derecho internacional codificado) dice espresamente lo que sigue: rt. 544. Cuando el enemigo ha tomado posesin efectiva de una parte del territorio, el gobierno del otro estado deja de ejercer alli el poder. Los habitantes del territorio ocupado estn eximidos de todos los deberes i obligaciones respecto del gobierno anterior, i estn obligados a obedecer a los jefes del ejrcito de ocupacin." ^ Valdes Arroyo, Flor de Maria (2004) (in Spanish). Las relaciones entre el Per e Italia (18212002). Lima, Peru: Fondo Editorial de la Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru. p. 97. ISBN 978-9972-42-626-1. http://books.google.com/?id=DGexys3TxhQC&pg=PA97. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 153 ^ "Imperial Skirmishes, page 132". Books.google.com. http://books.google.com/books?id=x8bWMRvlL54C&pg=PA129&dq=Peru+no+war+preparations+war+of+the+pacific&hl =en&ei=TQ5ZTqyyI8OusQKEzZ2vDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC4Q6AEwATgK#v=onepa ge&q=Peru%20no%20war%20preparations%20war%20of%20the%20pacific&f=false. Retrieved 2012-02-28. ^ John Lawrence Rector The history of Chile page 102 ^ Jason Zorbas The influence of domestic politics on America's Chilean policy during the War of the Pacific page 22: "The Chilean public demanded that Lima be taken. Bloodlust ran high, as some of the press demanded that the Moneda (the Chilean equivalent of the White House) ""exterminate the enemy the same as Great Britain and Argentina had annihilated the Zulus and the Indians."" The government struggled to satisfy the public demands for an invasion. During the last months of 1880, the Chilean armed forces prepared for a full invasion of Peru and as the new year arrived the Chilean forces were poised outside Lima and prepared to invade the capital"

^ Farcau 2000, pp. 149150 "Despite this expectations ..." 84. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 157 "... until all vestiges of organized military force in Peru had been destroyed and the capital occupied" 85. ^ La Guerra del Pacfico en imgenes, relatos, testimonios; p. 237 86. ^ Basadre, Jorge (2000). "La Verdadera Epopeya". http://www.unjbg.edu.pe/basadre/. Retrieved 2008. 87. ^ Sater 2007, p. 302 "which he [Nicols de Pirola] did not" 88. ^ Hugh Chisholm. "Encyclopdia Britannica: Lima". Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=OvYtAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA690&lpg=PA690&dq=Chile+destroyed+Lima&source=web& ots=NYWbeGRm5E&sig=fqU3QDhDg_ClzJ37DR5XIHV9uBI&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result. Retrieved 2008-12-04. 89. ^ Dan Collyns (November 7, 2007). "Chile returns looted Peru books". BBC. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7082436.stm. Retrieved 2007-11-10. 90. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 173 ^ John Edwin Fagg Latin America: a general history" page 860 91. 92. ^ Steve J. Stern Resistance, rebellion, and consciousness in the Andean peasant world page 241 93. ^ Sater 1986, p. 180 "Even in the midst of the Bolivian crisis, congressional elections occurred in schedule. In 1881, the nation selected a new president, Domingo Santa Maria, and the following year, elected a new congress" 94. ^ Sater 2007, p. 312 "Consequently, the court stripped Letelier of his rank, sentenced him to six years in jail, and demanded restitution" 95. ^ Sater 2007, pp. 304306 "The anglophobic secretary of state ..." 96. ^ Farcau 2000, pp. 181182 97. ^ Farcau 2000, pp. 183187 98. ^ Sater 1986, p. 220 "Since Montero was not a party to the Treaty of Ancon ..." ^ Sater 2007, pp. 113114 99. "There are numerous differences of opinion as to the ships' speed and armament. Some of these differences can be attributed to the fact that the various sources may have been evaluating the ships at different times." 100. ^ Cap. Jorge Ortiz Sotelo, Miguel Grau, page 7071. 101. ^ English 1985, p. 372 102. ^ a b c Scheina 2003, p. 377 103. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 57 104. ^ Farcau 2000, p. 48 105. ^ English 1985, p. 75 106. ^ Stanislav Andreski Wars, revolutions, dictatorships: studies of historical and contemporary problems from a comparative viewpoint page 105: (...) Chile's army and fleet were better equipped, organized and commanded(...) 107. ^ Helen Miller Bailey, Abraham Phineas Nasatir Latin America: the development of its civilization page 492: Chile was a much more modernized nation with better-trained and better-equipped ^ Scheina 2003, pp. 376377 108. 109. ^ Varas, Jos Antonio, ed. (1884). Recopilacin de leyes, rdenes y decretos supremos concernientes al ejrcito, desde enero de 1878 a fin de 1883. p. 228229. 110. ^ Dorothea, Martin. "Chinese Migration into Latin America Diaspora or Sojourns in Peru?". Appalachian State University. p. 10. http://www.history.appstate.edu/sites/default/files/appalachian-springpapers/2008/dorotheamartinpaper.pdf. Retrieved 25 September 2011. 111. ^ Sater 2007, p. 90 "Happily for the wounded the three warring nations adhered to the Geneva Convention." 112. ^ [1] Page 477 113. ^ [2] Page 90, 93 114. ^ [3] Page 476477 115. ^ [4] Page 192 116. ^ [5] Page 436 117. ^ Cceres, Andrs. "Memorias de la guerra del 79" pg. 231 118. ^ [6] Page 40 119. ^ The Ambiguous Relationship: Theodore Roosevelt and Alfred Thayer Mahan by Richard W. Turk; Greenwood Press, 1987. 183 pgs. page 10 120. ^ Larrie D. Ferreiro 'Mahan and the "English Club" of Lima, Peru: The Genesis of The Influence of Sea Power upon History', The Journal of Military History - Volume 72, Number 3, July 2008, pp. 901906 121. ^ {{cite web More recently, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez brought up the issue and his support for Bolivian irredentism by declaring "Quiero nadar en mares boliviano." (I want to swim in Bolivian seas). Chile for its part has said that there is no question of returning any part of Bolivia's Pacific coast, stating that wars of conquest were normal at that time, that the area has been completely assimilated racially and culturally into Chile, and that Bolivia should accept the outcome of the war as a fait accompli. | first = | last = | author = | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = El da del mar se recordar con ms que un tradicional desfile cvico | url = http://www.bolpress.com/art.php?Cod=2006031515 | archiveurl = | work = | publisher

83.

= Bolpress | location = | page = 1 | pages = | language = Spanish | trans_title = | format = | doi = | date = 15 | month = March | year = 2006 | archivedate = | accessdate = 2 October 2009 | quote = | ref = }} 122. ^ Crow, The Epic of Latin America, p. 180 ^ Foster, John B. & Clark, Brett. (2003). "Ecological Imperialism: The Curse of Capitalism" (accessed September 123. 2, 2005). The Socialist Register 2004, p190192. Also available in print from Merlin Press. 124. ^ Dominguez, Jorge et al. 2003 Boundary Disputes in Latin America. United States Washington, D.C.: Institute of Peace. 125. ^ Ericka Beckman Imperial Impersonations: Chilean Racism and the War of the Pacific University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ^ Farcau 2000, p. 169 126. 127. ^ William E. Skuban Lines in the sand: nationalism and identity on the Peruvian-Chilean frontier page 79: "because it is undoubtedly preferable to be Chilean than Peruvian, because has a cleaner and more glorious history, and its better to belong to the phalanx of the conquerors than that of the conquered, because the Chilean race is more virile, valiant, prouder, nobler and more enterprising than the Peruvian race, which due to reasons of climate will always be enervated" Chilean newspaper El Corvo quote in page 80 ^ "Chile returns looted Peru books" BBC Newshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7082436.stm 128. 129. ^ Scheina 2003, p. 388 130. ^ Larson, Brooke. 2004. Trials of Nation Making: Liberalism, Race and Ethnicity in the Andes, 18101910. Page 178. 131. ^ Farcau, Bruce W. (2000). The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 18791884. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-275-96925-7. http://books.google.com/?id=BsxISMTwsSUC&pg=PA74&dq=farcau,+%22such+was+the+sense+of+chivalry+in+this+war %22#v=onepage&q&f=false. 132. ^ Jose Vargas Valenzuela, Naval Tradition of the Peoples of Bolivia (Editorial Los Amigos del Libro, 1974), 61 133. ^ "Jos Puga, "Alistan estreno de filme chileno que hablar de la hidalgua de Miguel Grau" in El Comercio (Peru). 05 March 2009. Accessed 13 October 2011". Elcomercio.pe. http://elcomercio.pe/noticia/254562/noticia/411287/noticia/411555/claudia-llosa-oscar-permitira-mostrar-que-peruanostenemos-mucho-cine-muchas-ganas. Retrieved 2012-02-28. 134. ^ a b Taylor, Lewis. Indigenous Peasant Rebellions in Peru during the 1880s 135. ^ a b c Bonilla, Heraclio. 1978. The National and Colonial Problem in Peru. Past and Present 136. ^ Larson, Brooke. 2004. Trials of Nation Making: Liberalism, Race and Ethnicity in the Andes, 18101910. Page 196.

Eduardo Abaroa and Topter defenders. Peruvian mediators. Left to right: Fernando Casos, Hernando de Lavalle, and Jos de Lavalle.

Battle of Iquique, oil painting by Thomas Somerscales. Esmeralda vs. Huscar. Battle of Angamos, oil painting by Thomas Somerscales. Huscar vs. Cochrane.

Oil Painting by Juan Lepiani which represents the Battle of Arica on June 7, 1880. Colonel Francisco Bolognesi is the focus of the painting. Infantry regiment of the Chilean Army, formed in Lurn, south of Lima, in January 1881

Design of the Peruvian Toro, the first Latin American submarine design and the first fully functional submarine built in Latin America. El Repase, painting by Ramn Muiz (1888). Chilean soldier executing an order of repaso Bolivian Litoral Department's flag.

Eduardo Avaroa's statue pointing to the sea. The mural reads: "What once was ours, will be ours once again," and, "Hold on rotos [Chileans], because here come the Colorados of Bolivia." During the occupation of Peru civilians were directly involved in the war. This mural reads: "In this town six compatriots were executed by firing squad and history cannot be changed. Eternal glory to the heroes and martyrs of Quequea!" Chilenization of Tacna. Black cross painted on a Peruvian household, despite raising the Chilean flag.

Naval Campaign of the War of the Pacific

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Atacama Desert was a rough terrain to conquer and Ironclads of Chile and Peru at the beginning of the War of the Pacific[1] occupy for long. It was nearly waterless and had few Warship tons Horse- Speed Armour Main Artillery Built roads and railroads. From the beginning of the war it Year (L.ton) power (Knots) (Inch) became clear that, to seize or defend the local nitrate 3,560 2,000 9-12,8 up to 9 6x9 Inch 1874 Cochrane resources in a difficult desert terrain, control of the sea would be the deciding factor.[2] 1874 Blanco Encalada 3,560 3,000 9-12,8 up to 9 6x9 Inch Navies and ships involved In 1879 Bolivia did not 1,130 1,200 10-11 4 2x300-pounders 1865 possess any ships, but on March 26, 1879 Daza formally Huascar offered letters of marque to any ships willing to go to 2,004 1,500 12-13 4 2x150-pounders 1865 Independencia combat for Bolivia.[3] Bolivia had not signed the Paris 1,034 320 6 10 2x500-pounders 1864 Declaration Respecting Maritime Law but the USA, Manco Cpac Britain and France stood by the treaty and refused to 1,034 320 6 10 2x500-pounders 1864 Atahualpa accept the legality of Bolivia's act. Since Bolivia did not have any ports because Chile had occupied them, and because Peru discouraged the use of Letters of Marque, the naval conflict was left to be resolved between Chile and Peru. The power of the Chilean navy was based on the twin central-battery ironclad frigates, Cochrane and Blanco Encalada. The rest of the fleet was formed by the corvettes O'Higgins, Chacabuco, Abtao, and Esmeralda, the gunboat Magallanes, and the schooner Covadonga. The Peruvian navy based its power on the broadside ironclad frigate Independencia and the monitor Huscar. The rest of the fleet was completed by the corvette Unin, the gunboat Pilcomayo, and the coastal monitors Atahualpa and Manco Cpac, purchased from the United States at the end of the Civil War The coastal monitors cannot be classed among the sea-going ships of Per as they were permanently stationed, one at Callao and the other at Arica.[4] Although both the Chilean and Peruvian ironclads seemed evenly matched, the Chilean ironclads had twice the armor and held a greater range and hitting power. Wooden Steamboats of Chile and Peru at the beginning of the War of the Pacific[5] Warship O'Higgins tons Horse- Speed Main Artillery (L.ton) power (Knots) 1,101 300 12 3x115-2x70-2x12-pounders Built Year 1874

Engagements 11 1x115-2x70-2x12-pounders 1874 Chacabuco 1,101 300 The Battle of Chipana took place on April 12, 1,051 300 8 3x115-3x30-pounders 1870 Abtao 1879, during the War of the Pacific between Chile and Peru. It was the first naval engagement 260 11,5 1x115-1x64-2x20-pounders 1874 Magallanes 772 between both navies and it took place in front of 140 7 2x70-3x40-pounders 1859 Huanillos, off the (then) Bolivian coast, as the Covadonga 412 Peruvian corvette Unin and gunboat Pilcomayo 200 8 16x32-2x12-pounders 1855 Esmeralda 854 found the Chilean corvette Magallanes on its way to Iquique. After a two-hour running artillery 1.150 320 13 12x68-1x9-pounders 1864 Unin duel, Unin suffered engine problems, the pursuit 180 10,5 2x70-4x40-pounders 1864 Pilcomayo 600 was called off and Magallanes escaped with minor damage. The Magallanes was able to complete part of its mission of delivering commissioned papers to Iquique, but unable to complete its reconnaissance mission of finding if there were any guano ships still making commerce in the zone. Blockade and battle of Iquique Main articles: Battle of Iquique and Battle of Punta Gruesa In one of the first naval tactical moves of the war, the Peruvian port of Iquique was blocked by of the Chilean Navy. In the Battle of Iquique, which took place on May 21 of 1879, the Peruvian ironclad Huscar, sank the Chilean corvette Esmeralda. At around the same time, the Peruvian frigate Independencia, chased the Chilean schooner Covadonga through shallow coastal zones until the heavier Independencia rammed against a rock and run aground in Punta Gruesa. The strategic result of the naval battles of Iquique and Punta Gruesa were to lift of the blockade of the port of Iquique. Excursions of the Huscar The outgunned Huscar managed to avoid engagement with the superior battleships of the Chilean navy for six months. Among the actions of these "Excursions of the Huscar" are the Battle of Antofagasta (May 26, 1879) and the Second Battle Antofagasta (August 28, 1879). The most successful of the excursions was the capture of the steamship Rmac on July 23, 1879. Not only was the ship captured, but the cavalry regiment Carabineros de Yungay which was on board was also captured, making this the largest loss of the Chilean army so far. This caused a crisis in the Chilean government[6](p78) which in turn caused the resignation of Admiral Juan Williams Rebolledo commander of the Chilean fleet, who was replaced by Commodore Galvarino Riveros Crdenas, who devised a plan to catch the Huscar. Battle of Angamos Main article: Battle of Angamos The decisive battle of the sea campaign took place in Punta Angamos, on October 8, 1879.[7] In this battle, the monitor Huscar was finally captured by the Chilean Navy, despite the attempts of its crew to scuttle the ship and keep it out of enemy hands.[8] Finally the Peruvian Navy was completely defeated during the blockade of Callao,[9] where the Peruvian fleet was set on fire and the coastal defenses of Callao were destroyed or captured and taken to Chile.[10] Warships of Chile and Peru at the beginning of the War of the Pacific[11] Warship Ironclads Chile Cochrane Peru Huscar Independencia Manco Capac Atahualpa Wooden ships Chile Esmeralda O'Higgins Chacabuco Covadonga Magallanes Abtao Peru Unin Pilcomayo 1.150 600 400 180 12x70 1x9* 2x70 4x40 4x12 1864 1873 854 1.101 1.101 412 772 1.051 200 800 800 140 260 300 8x40 4x80 2x6 older 8x115 2x70 4x40 2x6 1874 8x115 2x70 4x40 2x6 1874 2x70 1x40 1x115 1x64 2x20 1x150 4x82 older 1874 1870 1.180 2.004 1.084 1.084 300 550 880 350 11 11 4 4 4 4 10 10 2x250 2x500 Smoothbore 2x500 Smoothbore 1864 1864 1864 2x150 12x70 4x32 4x9 1864 2.082 500 500 13 13 9 9 6x250 2x20 2x9 6x250 2x20 2x9 1874 1874 Blanco Encalada 2.082 Displacement Horsepower Speed Iron armour Number x Lb[12] (Long ton) (Knots) (Inch) of Guns Built Year

References 1. ^ William F. Sater, "Andean Tragedy", pp. 113-114. "There are numerous differences of opinion as to the ships' speed and armament. Some of these differences can be attributed to the fact that the various sources may have been evaluating the ships at different times." 2. ^ Bruce W. Farcau, "The Ten Cents War", p. 65:

"As the earlier discussion of the geography of the Atacama region illustrates, control of the sea lanes along the coast would be absolutely vital to the success of a land campaign there" 3. ^ William F. Sater, "Andean Tragedy", pp. 102 and ff: " to anyone willing to sail under Bolivia's colors " 4. ^ Thomas Wallace Knox "Decisive Battles Since Waterloo" p. 435 5. ^ Cap. Jorge Ortiz Sotelo, "Miguel Grau", pp. 70-71. 6. ^ B.W. Farcau, "The Ten Cents War" 7. ^ Bruce W. Farcau, "The Ten Cents War", p. 83: "As long as the odds had been before against the allies, they seemed truly insurmountable now." 8. ^ William F. Sater, "Andean Tragedy", p. 159: "Garezon [the last Peruvian commander] did his best to deny the Chileans a trophy: he commanded Chief Engineer MacMahon to open the seacocks to scuttle the ship" 9. ^ Elas Murgua, Julio J. (1980). Marinos peruanos en Arica. Peru: Instituto de Estudios Histrico-Maritimos del Per. p. 38. http://books.google.com/books?id=2KIKAQAAIAAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s. Retrieved July 22, 2009. 10. ^ Basadre, Jorge (1961). Historia de la Repblica del Per. Michigan: Ediciones "Historia". p. 2538. http://books.google.com/books?id=9nt-AAAAMAAJ&source=gbs_book_other_versions_r&cad=5. Retrieved July 22, 2009. 11. ^ See Mariano Paz Soldan, "Narracin histrica de la Guerra de Chile contra el Per y Bolivia", Imprenta y Librera de Mayo, calle Per 115, 1884, p. 114 12. ^ Weight of the projectile in pounds

Battle of Iquique

Commander Miguel Grau Seminario. Commander Arturo Prat Chacn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Naval Combat of Iquique - The sinking of the Esmeralda Date Location Result Arturo Prat 1 wooden corvette May 21, 1879 Near Iquique in Peru (present day Chile). Peruvian victory Miguel Grau 1 ironclad turret ship

143 dead 57 prisoners 1 corvette lost

1 dead 7 wounded

The Battle of Iquique (Spanish: Batalla de Iquique or Combate Naval de Iquique) was a confrontation that occurred on May 21, 1879, during the naval stage of the War of the Pacific, a conflict between Chile and Peru and Bolivia. The battle took place off the then-Peruvian port of Iquique. The Peruvian ironclad Huscar, commanded by Miguel Grau Seminario, sank the Esmeralda, a Chilean wooden corvette captained by Arturo Prat Chacn, after four hours of combat. The Bolivian government had threatened to confiscate and to sell the Antofagasta Nitrate & Railway Company, a mining enterprise with Chilean and British investors, by a decree on February 1, 1879. In response, the Chilean government sent a small military force which disembarked and seized control of the port of Antofagasta on February 14. This event made Bolivian President Hilarin Daza declare war on Chile, and also forced Peru to honor a secret 1873 treaty with Bolivia. Although Peru tried to negotiate and to stop the imminent conflict, Chile, knowing of this pact, declared war on both Peru and Bolivia on April 5. Another small Chilean force took control of the city of Calama after its victory in the Battle of Topater on March 23. From the beginning of the conflict, both sides clearly knew that control of the sea was the key to obtaining victory. Whichever country controlled the sea could freely transport troops and land them at any strategic point. So, during the first year of the war, Chilean strategy focused on destroying the Peruvian Navy. In order to achieve this goal, the Chilean naval commander, Juan Williams Rebolledo, planned to sail north with his entire fleet, trying to engage the Peruvian Navy at Callao and achieve domination of the sea once and for all. The main ships of the Chilean Navy were sent towards the Peruvian port of Callao. Two old, wooden ships, the corvette Esmeralda and the schooner Covadonga, commanded by Captains Arturo Prat and Carlos Condell respectively, were left blockading the Peruvian port of Iquique.[citation needed] However, as the Chilean Navy steamed north towards Callao, two ironclad ships of the Peruvian Navy steamed south from Callao, unseen. These ships were the monitor Huscar and the armored frigate Independencia, commanded by Rear Admiral Miguel Grau (then a Captain), the commanding officer of the Peruvian Navy and Captain Juan Guillermo More. Forces in combat The wooden corvette Esmeralda was constructed on 1854 in Henry Pitcher's shipyard, arriving at Valparaso in 1856. This vessel was named Esmeralda after the frigate of the same name captured by Lord Cochrane at El Callao in 1820. The Esmeralda displaced 854 tons, and was armed with twenty 32-pounder cannon and two 12-pounder cannon. In 1868, this was replaced with twelve 40-pounder rifled cannon and four 40-pounder Whitworth cannon.[1] The Peruvian ironclad Huscar was built in 1865 in the Laird Brothers' shipyard. The Huscar displaced 1,180 tons, and was armed with two cannons of 300 lbs., two cannons of 40 lbs, one cannon of 12 lbs and one Gatling machine gun. This ship could reach a speed of 11 knots. Before the battle It was 21 May 1879, 6:30 in the morning, when the fog cleared, Covadonga's lookout shouted: "Smoke to the north!". But, owing to thick marine fog, they were not able to identify the newly arrived ships, but after a few moments they thought it was the Peruvian squadron coming back. At 6:45 a.m., a sailor by Condell's side asked for the telescope, and in a moment of clarity he observed the warships' rigging and said to Condell: "It's the Huscar and the Independencia". "What basis do you have to assert that?" asked Condell, and the sailor answered "From the shape of the platform on top of the foremast". Immediately Condell ordered a shot to be fired in the air to warn the Esmeralda, still anchored in the port. The ships were indeed the Independencia and the Huscar. In that same moment, the Peruvian admiral Grau roused his crew: "Crewmembers and Sailors of the Huscar, Iquique is at sight, there are our afflicted fellow countrymen from Tarapac, and also the enemy, still unpunished. It's time to punish them! I hope you will know how. Remember how our forces distinguished in Junin, the 2nd of May, Abtao, Ayachucho and other battlefields, to win us our glorious and dignified independence, and our consecrated and brilliant laurels of freedom, and as Commandant of the Navy will never let Peru be defeated. For our fatherland, Long Live Peru!" Carlos Condell de la Haza warned Prat, and he, seeing the difference between their forces and the enemies', ordered to hoist the signal: "reinforce the charge", "come to the talks" and "follow my waters(follow his course)" and then inspired the crew with the following words: Lads, the battle will be unfair, but, cheer and have courage. Never has our flag been hauled down before the enemy and I hope this will not be the occasion for it to happen. From my part, I assure you that as long as I live, this flag will blow in its place, and if I die, my officers will know how to fulfill their duties. Long Live Chile! After the speech, the Covadonga came to an halt and Commander Prat then told the crew of the Esmeralda and to the crew of the Covadonga led by Commander Condell: "For lunch people, Strengthening loads, each to his duty!". Condell simply replied, "All right, sir!" A young ordering bugler at the same time was sounding the call to stations, and the Chilean crew then took their positions. After this everyone felt an explosion and a plume of water and foam up on the two ships, the Huascar had fired its first shot. The battle had begun. On land, people awoke to the first shot of the Covadonga's gun and went to the beach to get a a first hand look of the vessels coming to lift the blockade of the city. First phase of the battle At 8:15, the first volley hit between the ships, and Prat ordered the Esmeralda to start moving, followed by the Covadonga. The transporter Lamar was ordered (by Prat) to retreat to the South. At 8:25 a second volley fell and a shot from the Huscar hit fully on the starboard (right) side, passed through Esmeralda's side, killing the surgeon Videla, beheading his assistant, and mortally wounding another sailor. Condell changed his course and went behind the Lamar. Grau ordered the Independencia to block Covadonga and Lamar's way. Prat observed Condell's action and asked himself: "What is Condell doing?" Condell ignored Prat's order and followed the Lamar, but the warship did get away from the Covadonga, and the Independencia under control of Juan Guillermo More followed him. The Independencia pursues the Covadonga, while the Huscar finished the Esmeralda. Prat quickly positioned the ship in front of the coast, 200 meters from it, forcing the Huscar to shoot with a parabolic trajectory to avoid hitting the Peruvian village, whose people gathered in crowds to see the battle. Second phase of the battle General Buenda, commander of the Peruvian garrison of Iquique, had artillery cannons placed on the beach and sent an emissary in a fast rowing boat with a warning to the Huscar that the Esmeralda was loaded with torpedoes. Grau stopped 600m (660 yd.) from her and began shooting with the 300-pound cannons, not hitting her for an hour and a half, owing to the Peruvian sailors' inexperience in the handling of the monitor's Coles turret. The Chilean crew answered with their 30-pound cannons and gunfire, shots that rebounded uselessly from the Huscar's plated armour. At the coast, the Peruvian Army garrison in the town installed a cannon battery manned by gunners and bombardiers, and began to bomb the Chilean ship. A grenade reached her, killing three men. Prat order the warship to move, overexerting the engine and causing one of the boilers to explode, The ship's speed dropped to 2 knots (her engine was defective due to age and lack of maintenance). This move allowed Grau to see the absence of the torpedoes that supposedly filled the Esmeralda. One of Huscar's shots hit directly on board, beheading the ordering bugler and mutilating the gun crews. The position of the Esmeralda was desperate when it began to receive both Huscar and Iquique's beach's cannon shots. Even Grau from his armoured tower exclaimed: It's remarkable how these Chileans fight , impressed by the courage shown by the enemy. Grau, seeing the useless slaughter that was taking place in the dismantled and disgraced corvette and wanting to

end the combat, which had been nearly 4 hours long until that moment, ordered his ship to ram into the Esmeralda. Prat tried to avoid the blow by giving the rod forward and closing a port not managed to sidestep the blow to the mizzen mast height without further damage. When the ships collided, the Huscar fired their ten inches (300 pounds) cannons at close range, causing the deaths of 40 or 50 sailors and marines. By then, Prat raised his sword and cried his final order: "Let's board, boys!" , but due to the roar of the battle only Petty Officer Juan de Dios Aldea and Seaman Arsenio Canave heard it, and both of them and Prat jumped aboard the other ship. Arsenio unfortunately slipped and fell down because of the impact, so only the two officers got to the monitor. Petty Officer Aldea, by then armed with a boarding hatchet and a pistol, received a burst from the artillery tower and fell mortally injured. Only Prat continued advancing armed with a sword and a pistol. Grau gave the order to capture the Chilean captain alive. Once on board, Prat, walked up to the conning tower, on the journey towards he killed the Peruvian Signal Officer, Second Lieutenant Jorge Velarde, but while moving to the Coles Tower a sailor from the artillery tower struck him dead with a shot in the forehead with a rifle in his hand. After the first boarding attempt failed, Grau wanted to give his opponents time to surrender. In the Esmeralda Lieutenant Luis Uribe Orrego by now the ship's acting Captain, then called the official meeting and decided not to surrender to the Peruvian Navy. While this was happening a sailor climbed the mizzen-mast to nail down the Chilean national flag. Grau was soon notified that the truce did not work again and decided to ram again the Esmeralda, rushing at full speed on it, now for the starboard side. Uribe tried to maneuver like Prat and managed to present his side at an angle to spur the monitor Huscar, but this time he opened a water route, entering pouring into the powder magazine and machines. The ship had a crew shortage and without more ammunition than he had on deck. The Huscar again fired guns at such close range that killed several crew members including engineers and firemen who went up on deck and washed away the officers' mess room, which was then also the ship's clinic. Sublieutenant Ignacio Serrano cried again "Stand by for boarding!" and he boarded the Huscar with eleven more men, armed with manchetes and rifles but which was also unsuccessful, falling on the deck of the monitor for Gatling guns and the monitor's crew, some dying immediately due to bullet wounds sustained. Ignacio Serrano was then the only survivor and had received several shot wounds in the groin. Grau quickly had him picked up and carried to the infirmary in a state of shock, where they left him next to the dying petty officer Aldea. 20 minutes after was the third ram, this time in the sector of the mizzen mast accompanied by two guns, the corvette leaned forward and began to sink. When the Esmeralda was sinking, the last cannon shot was fired by Midshipman Ernesto Riquelme, while the main deck was going underwater the Huascar crew heard screams of "Long Live Chile! Glory and Victory!" from the ship's sailors. The Chilean flag was the last part of the warship to go underwater, still flying and nailed to the mizzen-mast. It was 12.10 pm at midday, and that was when Grau realized that Cmdr. Prat had already died in the infirmary. Third phase of the battle See also Battle of Punta Gruesa for a more detailed account The Independencia was in pursuit of Covadonga, which when it was stuck to the beach in the bay of Chiquinata the latter was heading south of the port of Iquique, until the former came on the rocks and shallow waters of Punta Gruesa. Commander Condell ordered an attack on the Independencia which resulted in it being sunk and its crew fleeing using its lifeboats, with only 20 of its crew left. Grau ordered the rescue of the 57 survivors of the Esmeralda, but saw the Independencia at 2:20 pm to 9 miles away and arrived in front of her at 3:10 pm. He found it stranded on the shallow water and with the 20 surviving crew members, including More, since the rest had landed in boats on the shore. The Peruvian armored ship continued the pursuit of Covadonga for three hours until Miguel Grau, convinced that the distance that separated him it could not be shortened before sunset, he returned to the aid of Independencia. Grau estimated then that the loss of the frigate was complete and sent back to Huscar the crewmen on board were still giving the order to burn it. Epilogue After the battle, Rear Admiral Grau gave orders that Prat's personal objects (diary, uniform and sword among others) were to be returned to his widow. Carmela Carvajal received them, as well as an attached letter from the Peruvian Admiral, affirming his rival's personal qualities, his gentility and his high moral values. In Chile, news reached the submarine cable in Valparaiso. On Saturday May 24 the Chilean Navy General Staff, Naval High Command and Admiralty Commission convened a special meeting about the events in Iquique and Punta Gruesa on the 21st, and sent reports of the battles to the War Department, resulting in a mass draft being ordered. Since that time Chile was in a revival of patriotism and many Chileans went voluntarily to the barracks and the naval stations to enlist and participate in the conflict. Aftermath The Naval Battle of Iquique was a Peruvian victory;[citation needed] the blockade on Iquique was lifted and Chile temporarily left the area. However, Peru's loss of the Independencia, one of its most powerful warships, in the following battle of Punta Gruesa was strategically costly, while Chile only lost one of its oldest wooden warships. Also, Cpt. Prat's sudden death while on duty inspired thousands of Chilean youth to join the army and the navy.[citation needed] This is considered by Chilean historians to be one of the most important factors leading to victory in the war. Years later the figure of Prat became so popular that newspapers started to talk about "Pratiotism" and "Patriotism".[citation needed] Since 1905 the date of the battle is a Chilean national holiday as Naval Glories Day (Dia de las Glorias de la Armada) and is honored through celebrations all over the nation. And it was not just Prat that was being honored. Grau, also now known as the "Gentleman of the Seas" due to his actions in the battle and later for his noble gesture toward Prat's widow and the surviving crewmembers, is honored in both Peru and Chile as a gallant naval hero. Notes 1. ^ Mellafe, Rafael; Pelayo, Mauricio (2004). La Guerra del Pacfico en imgenes, relatos, testimonios. Centro de Estudios Bicentenario. References 1. ^ Farcau, Bruce W. (Sep 30, 2000). The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884, ISBN 0-275-96925-8 2. ^ Sondhaus, Lawrence (May 4, 2004). Navies in Modern World History, ISBN 1-86189-202-0 This article was created from the translation of the article Combate naval de Iquique in Wikipedia, licensed under Creative Commons ShareAlike 3.0 and GFDL.

Battle of Punta Gruesa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Naval Combat of Punta Gruesa - The stranding of the Independencia Date Location Result Carlos Condell 1 schooner 3 dead
[1]

May 21, 1879 near Iquique, Peru (present day Chile) Decisive Chilean Victory Juan Guillermo More 1 broadside ironclad
[1]

5 wounded

5 dead[2] 5 wounded 1 broadside ironclad lost

The Battle of Punta Gruesa took place on May 21, 1879 during the War of the Pacific between Chile and Peru. This may be labelled as the second part of the Naval Battle of Iquique, although it is described in many sources as a separate battle. Context During the first year of the war, Chilean war efforts were focused on destroying the Peruvian Navy, since the strategic importance of sea domination. This was in order to enable the Chilean Navy to help the army to conquer Bolivian and Peruvian territories with troop landings and port blockades without interference. During May 1879, the main ships of the Chilean Navy were sent towards the Peruvian port of Callao in order to destroy its navy, while two old, wooden ships -the corvette Esmeralda and the schooner Covadonga, commanded by Captain Arturo Prat and Captain Carlos Condell respectively - were left blockading the Peruvian port of Iquique. However, as the Chilean Navy steamed north towards Callao, two ironclad ships of the Peruvian Navy steamed south from Callao, undetected. These ships were the monitor Huscar and the armoured frigate Independencia, commanded by Captain Miguel Grau and Captain Juan Guillermo More. Forces in combat Armada de Chile Marina de Guerra del Per schooner Covadonga (1859) ironclad Independencia (1866) 3300 3750 Displacement: 630 t Displacement: t[6] Draught: 3,35 m Draught: 6,62 m Armor: none Armor: 114.3 mm Armament: 2 x 70 lb[3] Armament: 1 x 250 lb, 3 x 150 lb, 12 x 70 lb, 2 machine guns Speed: 4 Kn[4] Speed: 11 Kn [5] Crew: 130 Crew: 375 On the morning of May 21, 1879, the lookout of Esmeralda spotted two ships coming from the north. These were the Peruvian Independencia and Huscar. Attempting to escape the Covadonga headed south, but Esmeralda experienced engine problems. By this time, the battle was inevitable: while Huscar engaged Esmeralda, Independencia pursued Covadonga south. Captain Condell of the Covadonga realized that the quicker but heavier Independencia had a deeper draft than his schooner. He kept close to the coast, with Independencia in pursuit, while both ships exchanged fire. The Independencia's lack of trained gunners and the Covadonga's accurate sniper fire prolonged the chase for over three hours. Captain More of the Independencia decided to take a riskier approach and ram the Chilean ship. Constantly sounding the depth, he attempted to do so twice, only to have to call off the attack when approaching the shallows. Close to Punta Gruesa, a shallow cove, Covadonga scraped and barely cleared a reef. The Independencia, attempting to ram for a third time, struck the obstacle and immediately took on water while listing to starboard. The Covadonga then turned around and opened fire, while Independencia's returned fire [2] and tried to float her. As Captain More realized his ship was lost, he ordered her scuttled, but the magazine was already flooded and it could not be blown up. The Covadonga kept firing, but retreated when Huscar was seen coming from the north. Huscar's commander checked on Independencia and decided to pursue the enemy after seeing she was immobilized, but this cost precious time and Covadonga steamed south as fast as possible. Captain Grau realized that Huscar could not catch up on the 10 mile head start before dusk, gave up the chase and returned to assist Independencia and salvage her guns; the crew (those aboard and on the beach) were rescued and the ship set on fire. The Peruvians lost 5 crew with 5 wounded; 3 Chilean crewmen were killed and 5 wounded[3]. Aftermath The naval battle of Punta Gruesa was a Peruvian defeat; One of the most powerful warships in the Peruvian Navy was lost, while Chile only lost one of its oldest wooden warships.

References 1. ^ a b War report Carlos Condell (Spanish) 2. ^ War report Guillermo More (Spanish) ^ The covadonga had two cannons of 70 pounds, after May 21, 1879 were installed two cannons of 9 pounds, 3 3. cannons of 40 pounds. Armada de Chile 4. ^ On May 21, 1879, the Covadonga, had a power of 140 HP engine, that allowed a walk of 4 knots, because only two of his 3 boilers operated (Data from Chile Navy) 5. ^ Combate naval de Iquique, boletines y nacionales y extranjeros de 1879. Guerra del Pacfico. Pascual Ahumada Moreno. Valparaso. 1886 [1] ^ Grieve Madge, Jorge (1983). Historia de la Artillera y de la Marina de Guerra en la contienda del 79. Lima: 6. Industrialgrfica S.A.. p. 220. "Calculo que realiza el autor en base al coeficiente de block" 1. ^ Farcau, Bruce W. (Sep 30, 2000). The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884, ISBN 0-275-96925-8 2. ^ Sondhaus, Lawrence (May 4, 2004). Navies in Modern World History, ISBN 1-86189-202-0

Battle of Angamos

Drawing of the Battle of Angamos From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Date Location Result Juan Jose Latorre 8 October 1879 near Punta Angamos, Bolivia Decisive Chilean victory Galvarino Riveros Miguel Grau

2 ironclads 2 corvettes 2 transports 1 dead 9 wounded[1]

1 ironclad 1 corvette 31 dead 4 missing 162 captured 1 ironclad captured

The Battle of Angamos (Combate naval de Angamos) was fought on October 8, 1879, during the naval stage of the War of the Pacific (Guerra del Pacfico). The Chilean Navy, commanded by Captain Galvarino Riveros and Captain Juan Jose Latorre surrounded and captured the ironclad Huscar, commanded by Rear Admiral Miguel Grau Seminario, who died in combat. After the battle, the crippled Peruvian Navy was unable to prevent the invasion of its territory. The Huascar was repaired and served under the Chilean flag until its decommission, and now sits as a floating museum in the port of Talcahuano. After the Naval Battle of Iquique, the Peruvian ironclad Huascar made several incursions into Chilean waters, challenging the Chilean navy's domination along its entire coast; the Huascar attacked ports and captured transports. Chile's plan was to achieve naval supremacy prior to invading Bolivian and/or Peruvian territory to establish the logistic advantage needed to launch a terrestrial campaign. No attempt to disembark troops could be made by the Chileans, because the Huascar was preventing the entire Chilean Navy from taking control of the sea; the Chilean fleet was in a diminished state of readiness after a long campaign away from its base. In order to initiate the naval stage of the compaign the Huascar had to be eliminated or captured. The Chilean government accelerated their naval campaign to secure the logistic support for the planned land invasion of Peru. On September 20, the Chilean fleet sailed north, escorting an important convoy with troops bound for Antofagasta. Once at the port of Mejillones, Captain Galvarino Riveros reorganized the fleet into two divisions: 1st DivisionCommodore Galvarino Riveros. Ironclad Blanco Encalada : Commodore Galvarino Riveros Schooner Virjen de Covadonga : Lt. Captain Manuel Orella Transport Matias Cousio : Lt. Captain Augusto Castleton. 2nd DivisionCommander Juan Jose Latorre Ironclad Almirante Cochrane : Commander Juan Jose Latorre Corvette OHiggins : Lt. Captain Jorge Montt Alvarez Transport Loa : Lt. Captain Javier Molinas Gacitua. Chilean strategy Commander in Chief Galvarino Riveros on October 1 summoned his officers to a council, where it was decided to hunt down the Peruvian vessel at Arica. The same day Grau in his flagship Huascar gave orders to sail along the Chilean coast as far south as Coquimbo, accompanied by the corvette Union. Because the Chilean fleet sailed close to the shore and the Peruvian fleet was farther out in the open sea, the formations passed in opposite directions without seeing each other. Chilean Minister of War Sotomayor conceived a plan that called for Latorres division to cruise perpendicular to the coast at Mejillones, while Riveros division sailed to Antofagasta to observe and to defend the city. So, if the Huascar tried to attack the port, it would be surrounded by the Blanco Encalada and the heavier warships. On the other hand, if Grau passed by, Riveros could follow, keeping him from escaping southward and forcing the Peruvian admiral northward toward Latorre's division. In Mejillones, on October 7, a plan was approved to deceive the Peruvian ships. Riveros would wait for Grau at Antofagasta while Latorre would set up an east-west barrierlike formation about twenty miles (36 km) from shore. If Riveros spotted the Huascar, he would follow and keep it from retreating to the south until Latorre engaged the Peruvian fleet. During the night the Peruvian warships were sailing off the Chilean coast northward toward Arica when they saw the light of Antofagasta. Admiral Grau decided to engage any Chilean vessel in port, intending to inflict some damage. At 01:10 hrs on October 8, the Huascar searched the bay without encountering any targets. She came up with the Union at 03:00 hrs, and the two warships resumed their northward heading. At the same hour lookouts on the Chilean Blanco Encalada saw two smoke columns on the horizon. Simultaneously, Grau was informed that there were three columns of smoke to the north; he decided to investigate. Both fleets spotted each other and the Peruvian ships turned back to the south. Riveros ordered a reduction in speed of the Chilean ships to make Grau think it was possible to turn back north and sail for Peru. At 05:40 hrs indeed the two Peruvian ships began to slowly turn once again to the north. The Blanco Encalada increased speed and began closing on the Peruvians to discourage Grau from again turning back to the south. At 07:15 hrs, steaming northward, the two Peruvian vessels spotted smoke columns ahead; it was Latorres division approaching. Since the Peruvian Union could manage 13 knots, she was able to sail northeastward and escape, but the Huascar had to stay the course and fight. Off Punta Angamos at 09:25 hrs the Huascar opened fire on the Cochrane. The latter did not return fire but continued to close. She reached her effective cannon range of 2,200 meters 15 minutes later. The Cochrane, Captain Latorre, began to shell the Peruvian ironclad. One of the Chilean shots pierced the Huascar's turret, wounding the twelve crew members manning the 300-pound cannons. Another shot perforated the armour just above the Huascar's waterline, cutting her left rudder chain and leaving her temporarily adrift. The Huascar now was listing hard to starboard and was hampered also by a deformation in the hull acquired when she rammed the Esmeralda during their engagement at Iquique five months earlier. Barely ten minutes later an emergency rudder had been set by the Huascar's crew. At 10:00 hrs another shell from the Cochrane hit the Huascar, piercing the bridge cabin and killing Admiral Grau and his adjunct, Diego Ferre.[2] Command then fell to Lt. Captain Elas Aguirre. The explosion also shattered the vessel's rudder wheel. Lt. Captain Gaonas gunners caused heavy casualties among the Peruvian crew: the Chileans were using Palliser type armor-piercing rounds, which exploded right after penetrating the hull. At 10:10, the Huascar flag was brought down from its hoist by the intense gunfire. Latorre ordered a halt to the fire, thinking that the ship was surrendered. However, the monitor kept his pace and within minutes an unidentified officer hoisted again, resuming the combat.[3] Meanwhile, the Huascar crew had again repaired the rudder wheel. At 10:22 hrs, with the Blanco Encalada and the Covadonga at close range, a shot from Blanca Encalada, Commodore Riveros, perforated the Huascar's artillery tower, killing almost all of the sailors within and damaging the rightmost cannon. Another shot, from the Cochrane, passed through the officers' quarters and wrecked the emergency rudder station, which had been disabled already twice before. The Huascar now could sail only in a wide semicircle to starboard. Once rudder control was regained, Captain Aguirre of the Huascar tried to ram the Cochrane. Latorre was also manoeuvring to ram the Huascar, but the Peruvian ironclad, whose steering was again enabled, suddenly veered to port and both ships passed by each other. Another shell pierced the Huascar's artillery tower 12 minutes later, killing all within, including Captain Aguirre. Command of the ship went to Lt. Pedro Garezon, who in conference with the remaining officers decided to scuttle the ship rather than allow it to be captured. At 10:54 hrs the order was given to evacuate the wounded from the engine room and open the main condensator to scuttle the ship and hence prevent its capture. At 10:55 hrs Huascar flag was bring down for second time. The Chilean warships, noticing that the Huascar was decreasing speed, mustered their boarding parties. At 11:08 hrs, 14 to 20 Chileans sailors boarded the Huascar, without encountering any resistance.

They closed the main condensator water leaks (with 1.2 meters of water in the engine room) and extinguished several fires while the now captured Peruvian crew was being transported to the Chilean vessels as prisoners of war. Consequences With capture of the Huascar, plus the previous neutralization of the Independencia at Punta Gruesa, firepower of the Peruvian Navy was drastically reduced, bringing the sea campaign of the War of the Pacific to an end. From now on, the Chilean Navy was able to use the Huascar as one of its own ships. The decisive victory at Angamos allowed the Chilean Army to freely decide the course of action to attack the Allies, and the land invasion of Peru and Bolivia began. Notes 1. ^ Bulnes, Gonzalo. Guerra del Pacfico, Tomo I, p 490 2. ^ Meliton Carvajal's official report of the Battle of Angamos ^ La Guerra del Pacfico en imgenes, relatos, testimonios, p. 140 3. Bibliography Navy of Chile Ahumada Moreno, Pascual (1884 - 1892). Guerra del Pacfico. Recopilacin de todos los documentos oficiales, correspondencia y dems publicaciones referentes a la Guerra que ha dado a luz la prensa de Chile, Per y Bolivia, conteniendo documentos inditos de importancia. Imprenta del Progreso. Farcau, Bruce W. (2000). The Ten Cents War: Chile, Peru, and Bolivia in the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884. ISBN 0-27596925-8. Navies in Modern World History (2004). Sondhaus, Lawrence. ISBN 1-86189-202-0. External links (in Spanish) Agencia Peruana de Noticias - Animation of the events that took place during the Battle of Angamos Battle of Tarapaca: Brief synopsis (in Spanish, from Website of Peruvian military central command) The Forgotten Heroes The Chilean Navy Battle of Pisagua (Wikipedia: Spanish)

Naval Combat of Angamos by Thomas Somerscales

Chilean corvette Magallanes

Chilean ironclad Blanco Encalada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name: Namesake: Builder: Laid down: Launched: Completed: Fate:

Blanco Encalada Manuel Blanco Encalada Earle's Shipbuilding Co., Hull 1873 8 May 1875 1875 Sunk by torpedo, 23 April 1891

General characteristics Class and type: Type: Displacement: Length: Beam: Draught: Propulsion: Sail plan: Speed: Range: Complement: Armament: Armour: Almirante Cochrane-class ironclad Armoured frigate 3,480 long tons (3,540 t) 210 ft (64.0 m) 46 ft 9 in (14.2 m) 19 ft 8 in (6.0 m) 2 shafts, 2 Trunk steam engines 6 cylindrical boilers Barque rig 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph) 1,200 nmi (2,200 km; 1,400 mi) at 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph) 300 6 9 in (229 mm) muzzle-loading rifles 1 20-pounder gun 1 9-pounder gun 1 7-pounder gun Belt: 4.59 in (114229 mm) Battery: 68 in (152203 mm) Deck: 23 in (5176 mm) Conning tower: 4.5 in (114 mm) Bulkheads: 6 in (152 mm)

Installed power: 3,000 ihp (2,200 kW)

Blanco Encalada was an armored frigate built by Earle's Shipbuilding Co. in England for the Chilean Navy in 1875. She was nicknamed El Blanco. She participated actively in the War of the Pacific, her most important action being the capture of the Peruvian monitor Huscar during the battle of Angamos. Blanco formed part of the congressional forces that brought down President Jos Manuel Balmaceda in the Chilean Civil War of 1891. She was sunk during that conflict on 23 April 1891, becoming the first warship to be sunk by a self-propelled torpedo.[1] Notes 1. ^ "Blanco Encalada, fragata blindada (1).". Armada de Chile. http://www.armada.cl/prontus_armada/site/artic/20090716/pags/20090716194359.html. Retrieved 2009-10-27.(Spanish) References Much of this article was translated from Blanco Encalada (fragata blindada). Gardiner, Robert, ed. (1979). Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1860-1905. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-8317-0302-4. Silverstone, Paul H. (1984). Directory of the World's Capital Ships. New York: Hippocrene Books. ISBN 0-88254-979-0. "Some South American Ironclads". Warship International (Toledo, OH: Naval Records Club) VIII (2): 203204. 1971.

Chilean ironclad Almirante Cochrane

Chilean battery Cochrane From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Name: Builder: Cost: Laid down: Launched: Completed: Out of service: Reclassified: Fate: Cochrane Earle's Shipbuilding Co., Hull 2,000,000 pesos 1873 23 January 1874 December 1874 1908 as training ship, 1898 Scrapped 1934

Decommissioned: 1933

General characteristics Class and type: Type: Displacement: Length: Beam: Draught: Installed power: Almirante Cochrane-class ironclad Armored frigate 3,480 long tons (3,540 t) 210 ft (64.0 m) 46 ft 9 in (14.2 m) 19 ft 8 in (6.0 m) 3,000 ihp (2,200 kW)

Propulsion: Sail plan: Speed: Range: Complement: Armament: Armor:

2 shafts, 2 Trunk steam engines 6 cylindrical boilers Barque rig 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph) 1,200 nmi (2,200 km; 1,400 mi) at 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph) 300 in 1879: 6 9 in (229 mm) muzzle-loading rifles 1 20-pounder gun 1 9-pounder gun 1 7-pounder gun 1 1-inch (25 mm) Nordenfeldt machine gun Belt: 4.59 in (114229 mm) Battery: 68 in (152203 mm) Deck: 23 in (5176 mm) Conning tower: 4.5 n (114 mm) Bulkheads: 6 in (152 mm)

The armored frigate Almirante Cochrane was a ship of the Chilean Navy in the late nineteenth century. She was built, like her twin, the armored frigate Blanco Encalada, in the UK in 1875. She participated in the War of the Pacific, with her most prominent action being her defeat of the Peruvian monitor Huscar in the Angamos naval battle. The Cochrane was part of the forces that defeated President Jos Manuel Balmaceda in the Chilean Civil War in 1891. In 1871 the president of Chile, Federico Errzuriz Zaartu, initiated a bill in the Chilean congress to authorize the executive to purchase two armored vessels. The bill passed with only with a single opposing vote (that of the former president Jose Joaquin Perez Mascayano), and provided for two medium sized ships (frigates) and that the total cost of the purchase would be 2,000,000 pesos. Construction and operation The Chilean ambassador to the United Kingdom, Alberto Blest Gana, was placed in charge of the project. Blest Gana hired the British ship designer E.J. Reed, a former naval architect to the British admiralty, as technical adviser. The order was placed at Earle's Shipbuilding Co. in Hull, Yorkshire. The frigates were to be named Almirante Cochrane and Valparaiso (the Valparaiso was subsequently renamed Blanco Encalada). The construction of the Cochrane began in April 1872. The ship was launched and sailed to Chile in 1874, before having been completed, because of fears of a potential conflict with neighboring Argentina and Bolivia. The Cochrane arrived at the port of Valparaiso on December 26, 1874, commanded by Captain Coneyin and returned to the UK to be completed in January 1877, after her sister, the Valparaiso had arrived. In January 1878, once the dispute with Argentina had been settled, President Anbal Pinto instructed Alberto Blest Gana to arrange for the sale of the two frigates in order to alleviate the economic crisis that had prevailed in Chile for several years. On behalf of Blest Gana, E. J. Reed offered Cochrane to the UK for the sum of 220,000 pounds sterling, but the British declined. Reed then tried to sell the two ships to Russia, but again without success. Design Principle dimensions The Cochrane was 64.0 m long, with a beam of 14.0 m and a draft of 6.0 m. The hull had a maximum displacement of 3650 t when fully loaded with fuel, fresh water, weapons, ammunition, food and crew. The hull was constructed of iron, held with rivets, and was divided lengthwise into eight compartments (counting piques the bow and stern), by seven iron bulkheads. The bow of the Cochrane had, as was customary in the designs of the late nineteenth century, a sharp spur located 2.0 m (6 ft 9 in) under the waterline and projecting 2.2 m (7 ft 6 in) ahead of the forward perpendicular. She was fitted with a cruiser stern. Armament The main armament, which was mounted on the central redoubt (central battery), was six 228 mm (9 in) Armstrong guns divided by three-band, mounted heal Scott central pivot, allowing the bow cannon to fire off the sleeve. The centerpiece fired at an angle of 70 degrees and 35 degrees to bow to stern and the third from the hose to the stern (see picture). Supplementing this was a 20pound cannon, and one 9 and one 7 pounders, and a Nordenfeldt machine gun installed in the COFA's ratchet, one-inch-caliber (25.4 mm), which fired a one pound (454 grams) projectile. The Cochrane also had a steam boat which was equipped with a torpedo on a bowsprit. The only time this boat was used was on the expedition to Callao, where it was used to try to sink Peruvian ships. Armor The ship was protected under the waterline by an armored belt which stretched from around 1.2m (4 feet) under the waterline up to the battery cover. The maximum thickness was 230 mm (9 inches) at the waterline, the center of the ship, and 115 mm (4.5 inches) at the bow and stern. The hull and armor plating were separated by a layer of teak 254 mm (10 inches) thick to reduce the impact of hits. The battery cover, which was flush with the armored belt, was protected by a 76 mm (3 inches) armour in the center of the ship, reducing to 50 mm (2 inches) at the bow and stern. The battery, which had a height of between 2 and 2.5 m, was protected in bands and on the front face by two plates, the lower one 203 mm (8 inches) and the top one 152 mm (6 inches) thick. The back of the battery was protected by armor plating 115 mm (4.5 inches) thick. Like the armor of the hull, this was bolted to a metal structure with an inner lining of teak 304-355 mm (12-14 inches) thick. Propulsion Cochrane was fitted with both steam and sail propulsion, being rigged as a barquentine. The power plant, provided by the company John Penn & sons, consisted of two compound steam engines, six boilers and two propellers. The machines had two horizontal cylinders, one high and one low pressure. The high pressure cylinder had a diameter of 1.16 meters (46 inches) while the low pressure cylinder had a diameter of 1.93 meters (76 inches). The race was two cylinders of 762 mm (2 feet 6 inches). The machines were capable of a maximum total output of 1.23 MW (2,920 HP), providing 90 revolutions per minute. These two machines span propeller blades of four to 4.8 meters (15 feet 9 inches) in diameter and 4.72 meters (15 feet 6 inches) of way. The steam was supplied by six cylindrical tube boilers with a maximum working pressure of 413.6 kPa (60 psi). The total area of 836.12 sq meters of heating era (9000 ft ). This propulsion system allowed the Cochrane, during tests over a measured mile, a top speed of 12.8 knots. However, the maximum operating speed was 12 knots. At this speed fuel consumption was 45 tons of coal per day, with consumption of 35 tons per day at the reduced speed of 10 knots. Pacific War (1879-1883) The Cochrane participated in the Pacific War, most prominently being taking part in the defeat and capture of Peruvian monitor Huscar in the Naval Battle of Angamos, on October 8, 1879. At the start of the war the Cochrane was commanded by Captain Enrique Baeza Simpson and since April 5 was present at the blockade of Iquique. At the end of June 1879 the Cochrane was the flagship of the 2nd Naval Division, in charge of the blockade of Iquique with the gunboat Magellan, the corvette Abtao and the Matias Cousio. On July 16, the Cochrane and Matias Cousio were relieved by the Blanco Encalada and Lamar, respectively, and withdrew to Antofagasta. In August 1879, the Cochrane sailed to Valparaiso and underwent maintenance for the next month. Captain Juan Jose Latorre then took command. Latorre was also head of the 2nd Naval Division, which also consisted of

the Loa and O'Higgins. Cochrane then went on to participate in the decisive naval battle of Angamos . The Cochrane was also present in 1880 when the Peruvian corvette Union broke the blockade of Arica. Civil War of 1891 During the Civil War of 1891 Cochrane was part of the forces that defeated President Jos Manuel Balmaceda. At dusk on January 7, 1891, the Cochrane towed the Huscar, which had had her machines dismantled, from the Bay of Valparaiso to Las Salinas, where the Huscar was prepared for service. On August 23, 1891, she participated in the battle against the forces at Valparaiso, along with the Esmeralda and under the command of Jorge Montt. The Cochrane took between 10 and 12 hits, whilst the Esmeralda took between 6 and 8. References Much of this article was translated from Blanco Encalada (fragata blindada). Gardiner, Robert, ed. (1979). Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1860-1905. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-8317-0302-4. Silverstone, Paul H. (1984). Directory of the World's Capital Ships. New York: Hippocrene Books. ISBN 0-88254-979-0. "Some South American Ironclads". Warship International (Toledo, OH: Naval Records Club) VIII (2): 203204. 1971. External links Chilean Navy (english version)

. Carlos Condell de la Haza

Plan view and profile The Cochranes central battery

Huscar (ironclad)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Huscar when with the Peruvian Navy Career (Peru) Name: Ordered: Builder: Launched: Commissioned: Fate: Career (Chile) Acquired: Decommissioned: Reinstated: Status: 8 October 1879 1897 1934 Museum ship Huscar 4 August 1864 Laird Brothers, Birkenhead, England 7 October 1865 8 November 1866 Captured by Chile at the Battle of Angamos on 8 October 1879

General characteristics Displacement: Length: Beam: Draught: Propulsion: Sail plan: Speed: Complement: Armament: 1,180 long tons (1,199 t) 66.9 m (219 ft) 10.9 m (35.8 ft) 5.7 m (18.7 ft) 1 x steam engine 1500 hp (1120 kW) single screw Brigantine 12 knots (22.2 km/h) 170 2 x 10" (254 mm), 300 lb (136 kg) Armstrong guns in a single Coles turret 2 x 4.75" (120 mm), 40 lb (18 kg) Armstrong guns 1 x 12 lb (5 kg) cannon 1 x .44 cal Gatling gun Armoured ram bow

4.5" (114 mm) iron belt (amidships), tapering to 2.5" (64 mm) (prow and bow) 5.5" (140 mm) iron turret Huscar is a 19th century small armoured turret ship of a type similar to a monitor. She was built in Britain for Peru and played a significant role in the battle of Pacocha and the War of the Pacific against Chile before being captured and commissioned with the Chilean Navy. Today she is one of the few surviving ships of her type. The ship has been restored and is currently commissioned as a memorial ship. She is named after the 16th century Inca emperor, Huscar.[1]

Armour:

History as a warship Huscar was ordered by the government of Peru from the Laird Brothers shipyards in 1864 for the war against Spain. Lairds had extensive experience of these advanced ships, designing and building the Laird Rams. She was launched in Birkenhead on 7 October 1865. Commanded by Chilean Captain Jos Mara Salcedo, who had supervised construction on behalf of the Peruvian Navy, she left for Peru on 20 January 1866 on a trip that saw some trouble: a month-long wait at Brest, a minor collision with the ironclad Independencia on 28 February, refusal of service by neutral countries, a month of repairs at Rio de Janeiro, insubordination by Independencia's commander and the capture and sinking of the Spanish brigantine Manuel. When she finally arrived in port at Ancud in allied Chile to join the rest of the combined fleet on 7 June, it was too late for her to participate in the conflict. Under Captain Lizardo Montero, Huscar prepared at Valparaso to participate in a late 1866 expedition to fight the Spanish fleet at the Philippines. However Montero, with several other Peruvian officers, objected to plans for Rear Admiral John R. Tucker formerly a commander of Confederate warships during the American civil war to be in command of the fleet, and requested to be relieved. Captain Salcedo took back command of Huscar, but the expedition was eventually cancelled. On February 1868, Captain Miguel Grau took command of Huscar and would remain until 1876, becoming her longest-serving commander. His long years aboard the ironclad would prove very valuable later and he would also become Peru's most renowned naval officer. Peruvian Civil War (1877) Huscar participated in the Peruvian Civil War of 1877. Seized in port in Callao by rebels led by retired Captain Germn Astete, she was used to harass, sabotage and disrupt government forces and shipping lanes. During these actions foreign shipping was also affected, leading to British intervention. On 29 May 1877, she fought the inconclusive Battle of Pacocha against two British vessels, the frigate HMS Shah and the corvette HMS Amethyst, commanded by Admiral de Horsey. This battle saw the first use in anger of the newly-invented self-propelled torpedo which, at the time, had just entered limited service with the Royal Navy. Huscar surrendered to the government after almost one month in rebel hands. Although controlled by rebels at the time, popular and press pressure on the Peruvian government resulted in a formal diplomatic protest to the British government for its attack on the Huscar; on another hand the British Parliament came close to censuring Admiral de Horsey for his failure to capture her. Huscar gained fame in Peru, and would later reach legendary status. War of the Pacific (1879-1884) Huscar participated in the War of the Pacific, initially in the service of Peru. Once again under the command of Captain Miguel Grau, she became famous for daring harassment raids on Chilean ports and transports. As a result, during the opening months of the war, the ground invasion was delayed for almost six months until the Chilean fleet could find and stop Huscar. On 21 May 1879, Huscar led the lifting of the Chilean blockade of Iquique. During the battle, Chilean Captain Arturo Prat was killed on Huscar's deck while leading a boarding party from the corvette Esmeralda. After sinking the corvette by repeated ramming, Huscar then rescued the survivors before continuing pursuit of a fleeing enemy ship. Determined to avenge the sinking of Esmeralda and to secure the logistic lines needed for the invasion of Per, the Chileans committed every possible unit to hunt down Huscar. During the next 137 days Huscar not only evaded the confrontation with the enemy fleet but made the coast unsecure for Chilean transport ships. Its biggest prize was Rimac with 260 men of a cavalry regiment. On 8 October 1879, Huscar was captured by the Chilean Navy at the Battle of Angamos, during which Rear Admiral Grau and 32 men of the crew (of total 204 men) were killed. Huscar then entered the service of the Chilean Navy. At Arica she fought an inconclusive duel with the Peruvian monitor Manco Cpac (formerly USS Oneota) while participating in the bombardment of the city where her new commander Manuel Thomson was killed and she also aided in the blockade of Callao. After the war, Huscar was renovated in 1885 and 1887, including renewal of boilers, new screw design, and all-new steam engines to move gun and artillery turrets. On May 1888, as part of a ceremonial division commanded by Rear Admiral Luis Uribe, Huscar brought the bodies of the officers from Esmeralda from their graves at Iquique to a new burial place at Valparaso. Notably, these were the same officers killed on Huscar's deck at the Battle of Iquique; Rear Admiral Uribe had been the Executive Officer aboard Esmeralda and a survivor of the battle. Chilean Civil War (1891) Huscar participated in the Chilean Civil War of 1891 between government and congress. Undergoing major maintenance work at the onset of the war, she was seized and towed out of Valparaso by the rebel-leaning Navy, and readied for action within three days. Commanded by Captain Jos Mara Santa Cruz, she participated in the takeover of the port city of Taltal by the rebels, ran escort duty for convoys and protected rebel-held ports. She returned once more to the port of Iquique, this time to bombard the port city held by government forces. After almost eight months of fighting, the war ended with the government's surrender. Peacetime Huscar went on serving the Chilean Navy until a boiler explosion in 1897 at the Talcahuano military harbour resulted in her decommissioning. Partially repaired, she later served as the first submarine tender in the Chilean Navy from 1917 to 1930. In the early 1930s Huscar was taken in hand for reconditioning as a heritage ship. Recommissioned in 1934, Huscar was now armed with two 8-inch guns, three 4.7 inch guns and four 47mm guns. The 1,870-ton ironclad now wore the flag of the Port Admiral at Talcahuano. As late as 1949 she was listed in Jane's Fighting Ships as a coast defense ship; the photograph of Huscar in that year's edition dated from 1938.[2] History as a memorial ship When she was recommissioned in 1934, Huscar was the oldest vessel of the Chilean Navy. Between 1951 and 1952, work was undertaken with the aim to completely restore her to her 1878 condition and declare her a shrine to the glory of both the Peruvian and Chilean Navies. She became a floating museum and a memorial, displaying many objects and relics recovered from Navy warehouses or donated by private citizens from the Talcahuano and Concepcin area, including: A shrine with portraits of the three commanders that lost their lives on her deck, set at the commander's quarters. A portrait gallery in the boilers room. A prayer room, duly authorized by the Archbishop of Concepcin Between 1971 and 1972, a second restoration phase was undertaken at Chilean Navy drydock in Talcahuano: the hull was completely repaired, and engines rebuilt according to original blueprints obtained in England. Since then, a strict maintenance program ensures survival and preservation for future generations. In 1995, the World Ship Trust conferred the Maritime Heritage Award [1] on the Chilean Navy with for its restoration of Huscar. Huscar is berthed at the port of Talcahuano, Chile and remained on display for visitors until 2010. The Talcahuano Naval Base and Shipyards were devastated by the 2010 Chile earthquake and the resulting tsunami; although Huscar was in the base at the moment she survived with no apparent damage.[3] Significance The Huscar is one of the few early ironclad era warships to survive, and one of the few still afloat. The Huscar remains highly regarded in both Peru and Chile, being considered as the tomb of the Chilean Captains, Arturo Prat and Manuel Thompson, and the Peruvian admiral Miguel Grau.

References 1. ^ "Ships of the World: Huascar". http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/ships/html/sh_046900_huascar.htm. Retrieved 3 February 2010. ^ Francis E. McMurtrie and Raymond V.B. Blackman (editors), Jane's Fighting Ships 1949-50, p. 129. New York: 2. The McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1949. 3. ^ "CNN Video: Chile quake damage from above". http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2010/02/27/vo.chile.aerials.damage.cnn. Retrieved 22 March 2010. External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Huascar monitor Technical descriptions of the ship, by Gerald Wood, in collaboration with Philip Somervell and John Maber, Part I (page 2) and Part II (page 86), Magazine "Warship", Volume 10, UK-ISBN 0-8157-7449-0, US-ISBN 0-87021-985-5,. Retrieved on 27 December 2011. Coordinates: 364219.7S 73641.1W / 36.705472S 73.111417W Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Huscar_(ironclad)&oldid=491523417" Categories: Monitors of the Peruvian Navy Monitors of the United Kingdom Mersey-built ships 1865 ships Ships of the War of the Pacific Captured ships Monitors of the Chilean Navy Museum ships in Chile

Huscar anchored in the harbour at Talcahuano, 27 July 2005