That ship shown in the image at minute 3:00 is Chilean, not Peruvian :)

@TheMarinersMuseum

Жыл бұрын

Sorry about that! John mixed the two up a few times throughout the program.

Thank you, for the image of Miguel Grau, a real glorious heroe of the Pacific war.❤

Truly appears to be little known outside those involved, hard for those interested like myself to learn. Thanks for the lecture!

The analysis of the war made by the speaker is too simple, he missed a lot of other factors such as political situation, discipline of the armies, he did not talk about the firsts landings in the army modern history made in the north of Perú by the chilean army. At the end it was a kind of poem to Miguel Grau, who was an awesome sailor, no doubt about it. But, he was in a monitor, Arturo Prat was in a woodden vessel. In addition, the skills of the commander of the Covadonga Mr. Condell, another wooden ship who trapped and sunk the most important ship of Perú, the Independencia is something that was not pointed out as it should be. According to my opinion, a very light analysis for a far complex conflict that still today is part of the relationships of the countries involved. Regards

@TheMarinersMuseum

Жыл бұрын

This was absolutely a brief introduction to the material. This subject could take hours to talk about in a more detailed way. Perhaps we will do another lecture on the subject in the future. Thanks for your feedback.

@davidmurphy8190

11 ай бұрын

G. A. Ballard wrote a good book on Royal Navy warships from HMS WARRIOR to the last of the RN ironclads. The book was titled, The Black Battlefleet. Some other authors wrote great pieces on the other warships of the period. The HUASCAR was discussed in several monographs.

Saludos desde 🇨🇱

What book is the speaker talking about at 14:40 ? I can’t find any book under that title by Joseph Conrad and I’m very curious what the book is.

@TheMarinersMuseum

11 ай бұрын

Nostromo: A Tale of the Seaboard

The border’s dispute between Chile and Bolivia was permanently resolved by the 1866’s international treaty: “ Art 1.- the Parallel 24 is the limit between Chile and Bolivia” (13 years before de war).

Before the War, the borders between Perú and Bolivia were perfectly determined and internationally recognized: the Loa river (please see British and Chileans maps before 1879). There were no borders between Peru and Chile.

With absolutely sincerity, J.M. Balmaceda (Chile’s Foreign Relationships Minister during the War), declared: “ the (conquest of)nitrates territories in Antofagasta (Bolivia) and Tarapaca (Perú) were the true cause and direct goal of this war” - Official Letter of Dic 24, 1881). All kind of excuses are used until today, to cover-up the true origen of this war of conquest (aka: territorial robbery) and try to blame the countries affected.

@habibishapur

Жыл бұрын

said like a true sore loser.

@mcg000

10 ай бұрын

There were many causes. The situation at that time was very difficult for the 3 countries. On top of that Chile has another country to worry about... Argentina wanted to join Peru and Bolivia against Chile. So, please, if you are sided tell us the truth. No more lies. Peru and Bolivia lost a war they started.

@pslchile4410

9 ай бұрын

stop lying

@halberggb3124

6 ай бұрын

​@@mcg000a war they started? Bolivia decides what they do in their land, not the Chilean companies.

@robertortiz-wilson1588

3 ай бұрын

@@halberggb3124well, it’s Chilean land by natural conquest now then right?

The monitor, "Huascar",was commanded with high skills,by Miguel Grau, who put check,the whole chilean fleet, one single monitor, that because of the high skills and courage of Miguel Grau, the most important heroe of the pacific war.

@csillsg

5 ай бұрын

Courage? Escaping from Chilean army and not confronting because he knew he will loose…. Which happened indeed.

@luisibanez3600

5 ай бұрын

@@csillsg 5 ships against one , indeed you must high values to fight against all the enemy fleet.the enemy always fought with advantage, like good cowards.

@csillsg

4 ай бұрын

So having superiority makes your opponent a coward?? Do you know Prat??

@isaacjelvez7651

Ай бұрын

​@@luisibanez3600Un pequeño país les ganó por paliza, muy cobardes los vencedores..ja,ja...recuerda ..el Huáscar tenía un andar muy superior a los buques Chilenos,lo que Chile tuvo que corregir, para luego cazarlo,ya siempre se escapaba...y no es fácil ...el mar es inmenso Tontín y en esos tiempos ...😅🤫

@luisibanez3600

Ай бұрын

@@isaacjelvez7651 cuando atacas un pais mal armado,practicamente desarmado y con un ejercito mas grande 4 contra 1 ,y una flota mas numerosa ,eso si es cobardes, y eso fue hace 150 años , ahora que somos mas y mejor armados la verga que ganaria tontin.

Chile beat them both up at the same time

@luisibanez3600

7 ай бұрын

With the help of England, economic, weapons, amuniccion,military clothes,guns,even boots.Peru was desarmed, and chile took advantage of political and economic situacion of Perú and Bolivia, there is no honest merit .

@raymondjblaze7761

7 ай бұрын

@@luisibanez3600 some Peruvian guy I work with was old me the same thing

@MrATL90

6 ай бұрын

@@luisibanez3600 Englan help? do you have a source or you are just talking bullshit you hear in Peru

@luisibanez3600

6 ай бұрын

@@MrATL90 read history.

@csillsg

5 ай бұрын

Not true. Just historic fake trying to justify Peruvian loss. England was neutral.