On February 10, exactly two centuries ago, José de San Martín embarked on the French ship Le Bayonnais with his daughter Merceditas.
Remedios de Escalada, his wife, had died on August 3 of the previous year and the girl had been left in the care of her grandmother, Tomasa de la Quintana.
The ship's destination was the French port of Le Havre and after two months of travel, San Martín immediately moved to London, installed his daughter at Hampstead College and they stayed until the end of the year, before taking up residence in Brussels.
"In one hour I leave for Europe with the aim of accompanying my daughter to put her in a school in that country and I will return to our country throughout this year, or sooner if the sovereigns of Europe try to dispose of our fate
," he told her. the Liberator wrote to Colonel Federico Brandsen, in what would be the last known letter before the voyage.
San Martín never set foot on our soil again, even when he attempted a return at the beginning of 1829: under the name of José Matorras and on the steamship Conttes of Chichester, he was close to disembarking.
The news of the country on the brink of civil war, including the execution of Dorrego, discouraged him.
It was the last attempt.
The risk
The liberation campaigns, already led by other leaders, also concluded in that key year of 1824 with the battles of Junín and Ayacucho.
San Martín's last public intervention was his resignation as Supreme Chief of Peru, on September 20, 1822, shortly after Guayaquil's interview with Bolívar.
He managed – and was granted – a Peruvian pension for his stay in Europe.
There are multiple theories about that period that spans from his renunciations to his trip.
He had some properties and installation projects around here (Mendoza, the Banda Oriental) but there are multiple testimonies that he never wanted to intervene in internal politics, whose destinies were decided in armed confrontations.
The crack of those times.
San Martín was also affected by the animosity, resentment and envy typical of public life.
Not even his military feat, nor the results of his epic, which changed the destiny of a continent, managed to keep him safe.
A text by the historian and academic Miguel Angel De Marco recalls a letter from the governor of San Fe, Estanislao López:
“He warned San Martín that upon his (eventual) arrival in Buenos Aires he would be tried by a court martial of officers for having disobeyed. his orders when he was summoned to participate with the Liberation Army in the civil war.
And he offered to wait for you and take you in triumph to the Plaza de la Victoria. San Martín became upset at the content of the message and told Olazábal: 'I cannot believe in such a procedure.
I will go, but I will go alone, as I have crossed the Pacific and as I am among my Mendoza'.
And he added: "But if fate so wishes, I will give my saber as an answer, the freedom of a world, the Banner of Pizarro and the flags of the enemies that fly in the Cathedral, conquered with those weapons that I did not want to dye in Argentine blood.
No, Buenos Aires is the cradle of freedom.
The people of Buenos Aires will do justice
.”
Four years earlier, the father of his wife Remedios also warned San Martín:
“My beloved son, you give so much splendor to my house, despite so many envious enemies that you have here…”.
Lobby in London?
In his biography “History of the Liberator”, José Otero noted: “Very little is known about the activities of San Martín in England.
It is known, certainly, that he remained there from May to December 1824."
There he met again with one of his former protectors, Lord Macduff, also with his doctor from the Grenadiers, Dr. Paroissien, and other characters such as the Mexican Agustín Iturbide (he did return to his country, where he was executed).
Rodolfo Terragno – one of the relevant intellectual and political personalities of our country and a columnist for our newspaper – investigated hitherto unknown aspects of the life of San Martín.
His trilogy includes: Maitland and San Martín, the intimate diary of San Martín and Josefa.
The second of these works – published by Sudamericana – refers to the London period of San Martín.
There Terragno maintains that the Liberator did not travel for personal reasons, but that his objective was to seek English recognition of the new nations, given the risk of another Spanish or French invasion.
This is how he details it: “
In 1824, San Martín did something very important in London: he lobbied for England to recognize the independence of Peru.
The Holy Alliance (Russia, Prussia and Austria), together with France and Spain, were preparing an expedition to reestablish the colony or impose a new one.
The recognition of England would prevent that purpose, turning it into a European conflict that that alliance did not want.
At the beginning of 1825, already in Brussels, San Martín wrote to a friend: 'There you have the independence of Peru recognized by England.
The task is accomplished.”
Few resources
During those months that marked his return to London – the city from which he had left to begin the liberation feat during the previous decade – San Martín resided at number 23 Park Road, in the Regent Park area.
A plaque still commemorates him there today, while a statue stands in his honor in Belgrave Square.
He had few documents (in France they seized almost all of his papers) and only financial support from the Peruvian pension.
He found generous hands to support himself and it is believed that James Duff or MacDuff, now the Earl of Fife, not only opened the doors of his castle in Scotland to him but also that of other figures of political weight.
They had met under completely different circumstances, on the battlefields of Talavera de la Reina, when this Duff decided to fight alongside the Spanish against the Napoleonic invasion.
Exiles
Terragno said several times that his interest in the subject arose when he himself was exiled in Venezuela, during the dictatorship.
His attention was drawn to the fate of the protagonists of the liberating deeds (San Martín, Bolívar, O'Higgins, also Miranda or Andrés Bello. And some phrase from Bolívar himself: “In these lands, the only thing you can do is emigrate. ”.
Terragno adds that “Saint Martin died in France after 26 years of voluntary exile.
I asked myself then if exile was a South American fate.
I thought about writing about it and when I moved to London I wanted to investigate the life of San Martín in the first stage of his exile, which he went there.
Little or nothing was known about that, but I began to find unpublished things that years later led me to tell in San Martín's intimate diary what he had done in London, almost day by day.
Images
Despite all the tendencies – destructive and self-destructive – towards our historical protagonists, the figure of Saint Martin resists the passage of time.
The story written by Miter built an image that, perhaps today, is excessive.
But modern historians and researchers help to better illuminate his figure.
And without forgetting that, from time to time, a provocative voice may appear, as happened a few weeks ago, when the economist and historian Emilio Ocampo (one of Milei's candidates for the Central Bank) was offensive:
“San Martín was neither the Liberator nor the the father of the country
".
Something easily refuted by historians of all tendencies.
Terragno considers that San Martín
“had virtues that I wish all political leaders had: vision, ability to face great obstacles, perseverance, efficiency, honesty and a rejection of the cult of personality
. ”
He is more cautious – saving the distances of time – with San Martín's beliefs that
“our countries should be governed with a strong hand
. ”
Luis Alberto Romero wrote in Clarín that
“many heroes lost their place and even their statue.
The processeras are no longer eternal and everything can be revised, except the figures of San Martín and Belgrano.
They are undisputed
.”
Of course, depending on the time, politicians and intellectuals interpret them according to their own beliefs.
In one of his books, De Marco states that
“Saint Martin is in bronze for what he did, overcoming his human shortcomings and weaknesses;
not because they lacked them.
That is his example, as current as it is necessary in our days.
His honesty, his vigorous enthusiasm, his tireless attitude of service constitute a true incentive today.”