Talk:Bolívar's War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] NPOV

I think this "article" is both not NPOV ("After much of the local aristocracy had abandoned the cause of independence, blacks and mulattos carried on the struggle. Elites reacted with open distrust and opposition to the efforts of these common people"?) and redundant (with Bolívar's biography).

Piotr, 8 Jan 2006

Perhaps merge it (back?) into Bolívar's War, which needs more flesh on its structural bones. It can be refactored/demerged at a later date if necessary. Rd232 talk 20:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Calling it "Bolivar's War", which nobody in Latin America does by the way, is extremely insulting to all the other heroes of the South American Independence Wars (Miranda, Santander, Sucre, O'Higgins, San Martin) and indeed, it is also false to call it such becaue the wars started before Bolivar entered the scene and he was not THE supreme leader in all of South America for San Martin liberated the South while Emperor Pedro I did so in Brazil. Please merge this article with the "South American Wars of Independence" to mend these grave mistakes.

[edit] re:NPOV

I think that it is all right, it just needs more info... and this "After much of the local aristocracy had abandoned the cause of independence, blacks and mulattos carried on the struggle. Elites reacted with open distrust and opposition to the efforts of these common people" seems okay. Everything else in this talkpage is just nonsense.Matthew Luke Gordon 02:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rename?

Rather than merging it, which may not be the best alternative, I think that this article should be renamed to something else (I'm not sure to what, at this moment). The number of references to "Bolivar's war" in Google is very low (less than 700 as of today) and, looking at the article's history, it appears that not only is the name far too personalist (Bolivar's own campaigns aside, the origins and initial developments within the independence movements/republican governments had little to do with him personally, at least for the first few years, outside of Venezuela), but it's also almost exclusively a Wikipedia originated label (with a couple of references derived from its inclusion here).

I also haven't seen the term in formal works either (though checking them now could provide better names for this collection of Independence Wars). Thoughts?. Juancarlos2004 19:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I would recommend a merge into South American wars of independence. Both articles would benefit from some substantial improvements, but the title of this article better represents the scope of that time period and the large number of participants (from american and european countries).
Bolívar's campaigns are definitely worth an article on their own merit. I support a rename for this article, perhaps to something like Bolívar's Military Campaigns
This article needs substantial work to be NPOV and complete. e.g. The Independence movements in the northern part of central america began prior to Miranda's arrival (When Bolívar travelled to London to seek support from the British, he was a guest of Miranda's). Perhaps references to these movements should be limited to Bolívar's contributions. Another example that caught my attention, was the line referring the 1813 campaign and the "guerra a murte" motto. Bolívar did write a document espousing "war to the death", but he later moved away from philosophy after witnessing the atrocities committed by Boves' llaneros.
That was a lenghty rant, sorry. In summary:
  1. Merge this content into South American wars of independence.
  2. Repurpose this article into an encyclopedic account of Bolívar's work as a military man, not a history of south american independence. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Srice13 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] No for Merging

The wars of Bolivar should stay a diferent article because the South Americans war of independece is composed of diferent campaings,people,countries,idelogies so it is unfair to just tagged it all like the same.One clear example is the political views of their major liders Bolivar and San Martin,San Martin wanted to create a monarchy in america,Bolivar favoured Republicanism.Besides the fact that South America isnt a political entity so it should have their separeted independance articles.The American Revolutionary War has around 55 kilobytes while independence of latin america(a much more bigger region than the USA omposed of different states and less cohesive movement) is compossed of mainly stubs and unreferenced articles.Rather than merging i suggest expanding this articles.--Andres rojas22 04:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] YES FOR MERGING

This article is entirely and completely useless and it is embarrasing that it even exists in Wikipedia, which is more often than not a very reliable and respectable source of true and clear information. Respectfully, I think Andres rojas22 is wrong in the reasons he provides against the merging of the articles. None of the reasons he states(the ideological differences between San Martín and Bolívar, the small size of the original Independence War article, and the different components of the Wars of Independence) are at all valid.

The point is that the term "Bolivar's War" makes the different aspects, theatres and components of the South American Wars of Independence possessive to Simón Bolívar alone. It is, I think, unnecessary to remind any person who has even the most cursory knowledge of Latin American History, that Simón Bolívar was not the only leader in this movement, indeed he wasn't even the original one. In Venezuela that title is held by Manuel Gual, Pedro España or Francisco de Miranda who all led the calls for independence before Bolívar was anywhere in the political landscape. Indeed, Simón Bolívar wasn't even one of the signatories of the Act of Independence of July 5. He was the most important leader of the posterior conflicts which achieved independence but not the creator of something called "Bolívar's War".

Further, the name is insulting to people like José Félix Ribas, Antonio José de Sucre, Francisco de Miranda, José Antonio Páez, Santiago Mariño, Francisco Rodriguez del Toro and many, many others who provided leadership and sometimes gave their lives to fight for the independence of the Viceroyalties of New Granada (present day Colombia, Venezuela and Ecuador) and Perú (Bolivia and Perú), which were the countries in which the fight led by Bolívar took place.

I would suggest first merging this article with the South American Wars of Independence article, and then, if needed, taking the relevant information on each country (again, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuardor, Perú and Bolivia) to each country's article on its own War of Independence. Please stop insulting the memory of the very many men and women who died and fought for independence by allocating every and all credit to a single, albeit enormously important, man. It is not only morally wrong, but enormously historically and informationally erroneous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agammemnon (talk • contribs) 20:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

I'm very aware that Bolivar din't liberate these countries by himself and who those men were,and i dont think it's insulting at all the term Bolivar's war,but for a better explanation i'll do a brief recounting of the independance of Northern South America:the first calls for revolution were heard in america in the end of the XVIII century(Jose Leonardo Chirinos in Venezuela,comuneros uprising in New Granada,Túpac Amaru revolt in Perú..)but they were succesfully represed by the crown becaused they usually lacked the suport of the mantuanos who feared a social revolution like happened in Haiti.When the french invaded Spain the mantuanos saw an oportunity to gain political independence(i point the fact that the mantuanos wanted a political independence so they could maintain their power and the status quo,but were against a social change for the same reason)this movements wich saw the independence declarations in the different countries wass soon also in a big crisis because many people of the lower class saw whit suspicion the mantuanos plans and they dint support them or even join the royalist army to figth the insurrection,probably the most brutal example wass Jose Tomas Boves in Venezuela who making use of the hatred of the lower classes for the mantuanos,succesfully disbanded the first venezuelan republic.Soon the independence movements under the mantuanos fell short of energy(some aristocrats pledged the king for amnesty,some even joined the royalist) the colonial administration wass restablished in Quito and Perú,leaving just in New Granada and Venezuela small bands fighting whit little succes,pluss the divisions of the patriotic lines and the expedition of Morillo almost ended the patriot's cause.
It is in this context,the failure of the separetaly indepence move that Bolivar makes his crucial move and is the justification for the name Bolivar's war.Bolivar's saw the futility of the regional divisions and thaugh that to succed it would be necesary to unite the independance movement's,give it a continental esence.He invaded New Granada(this is way after the campaña admirable)and in a series of battles the venezuelan-grenadin forces defeated the spanish.After the stablishment of the Great Colombia,the Colombian army continued campaining in Venezuela,Quito and Perú therefore actually liberating these republics.
Therefore,you see, the name Bolivar's wars does not mean that Bolivar liberated this countries alone but refers to the time when under Bolivars direction(remember that he wass the only president of the Great Colombia,just being replaced by Santander his vicepresident when he campaigned)the movements of northern south america efectivly joined forces in a continental and consolidated movement and broke whit the situation of aislation and local war that didnt brought results--Andres rojas22 19:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

My 2 cents: I believe that the article should be merged into South American wars of independence (or vice versa) because both articles appear to cover substantially similar ground and have a lot of information that is the same. The phrasing of certain parts of both articles is similar.

Any judgement on merging should not be done without a side-by-side comparison of both articles and identification of the parts that cover common ground and the parts that discuss different material. It is likely that once the common parts are merged there may be little left. In the future, it is possible that the various wars may be covered in separate articles and as such there may be little left that would demand the maintenance of separate articles that give an overview of these wars. --B.d.mills 07:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The United States of Latin America/No for merging

Somebody needs to check his/her sources.

Simón Bolívar had a dream of uniting all South American, Central American and Caribbean countries and turning them into a single, economically independent country, which he had planned to name The United States of Latin America.

Bolívar's plan was to create the Gran Colombia (Miranda's idea, by the way), which he did, not The United States of Latin America! Brazil and others were not on his plans, although he considered action at some point in a Brazilian-Argentinean conflict and an early Cuban independence.

In another topic, I find the idea to summarize Bolívar's campaigns into Bolívar's War very original and on target. This is a good point to organize the several battles in America's struggle for independence, which when divided by country lead to a poor understanding/perspective of the whole process.

Bolívar was, obviously, not alone in the fight against Spain; however, he was the commander in chief of the armies and designer of the revolution, which in fact started when he invaded Venezuela from Colombia in "La Campaña Admirable". I doubt we would have been free from Spain until late the 19th century like Cuba, had it not being by Bolívar, which of course, had lots of worthy predecessor, like Miranda and Gual & España; and loyal partners like Sucre and Ribas. However, all those battles and skirmishes that avoided us having to speak with z’s instead of s’s, can definitely fit under the topic Bolívar's war.

Sadly, Gran Colombia doesn't exist today thanks to some of those same "loyal partners" he had during the war, especially Paéz and Santander, who definitely deserve to be under Bolívar's shadow. You just need to read their correspondence, everything they did before Bolivar's downfall, was follow his orders.

To Matthew: It is a common misconception having blacks, Native Americans, mulattos, etc, fighting only for the republican side. The so called "Spanish army" who fought the South American independence war was packed with local, non white, people, who resented local terratenientes, a condition Spaniards like Boves took advantage of. Besides, in the realist side, they had food, clothing and weapons, something that in spite of all the great heroic paintings all over SA, was almost inexistent among the republicans. In fact, you can call almost the whole struggle a civil war. And yes, many local aristocrats despised the independence movement, since it was against their best interest. I mean, you are rich, own huge pieces of land, and free tame slaves; the only thing they hated was paying taxes, but they rather deal with the King, than with Bolivar’s socialist ideals.

Gmlegal

In another topic, I find the idea to summarize Bolívar's campaigns into Bolívar's War very original and on target. This is a good point to organize the several battles in America's struggle for independence, which when divided by country lead to a poor understanding/perspective of the whole process.
Several months later, I still think that it's way too original for what is supposed to be an encyclopedic article (even if it doesn't look like one). The fact is that the term is, at this point in time and in this particular use, practically a Wikipedia invention. There must be better terms that serve the same function, but I guess nothing will change until someone's bold enough to look them up, discuss the issue and then move the article (not me, as I'm already too busy). Juancarlos2004 17:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When did this happen?

In spring 1820, Bolívar's republican forces took....

When did this happen? Equatorial countries have tropical seasons, not temperate-zone seasons, so this seasonal reference is inappropriate here. If possible, substitute this with a date or a month. --B.d.mills 07:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Errors

This article has a lot of mistakes.. I don't think that it should be refer to as "South American" countries since Panama is part of Central America.. and other territory such as the Mosquito coast was also under the possession of the Gran Colombia.

Also a proper name for the article would be Wars of independence from Spain in the Americas or something similar.--Zer0~Gravity (Roger - Out) 22:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)