So Far From God (Mexico 1836-'76)

[unmerged(59077)]

Ah, fortuna. Velut luna variabilis.

Not that he really didn't have it coming.

 

[Cinéad IV]

I look forward to Santa Anna's downfall. For all his success at seeing off the Americans, Mexico clearly needs a change of direction.

I'd also recommend that you keep that northern border well guarded. The Americans will be back, I can guarantee it. I usually spend most of the 1850s investing in vast quantities of artillery if I'm playing as Mexico.

 

[ComradeOm]

Lecture Nine: To Hell or to Havana (1848-'50)

"Stop quoting laws, we carry weapons!"
Pompey Magus
​

Following the disintegration of the santanista cabinet in 1848 Santa Anna attempted to shrug off its loss and, as if trying to prove his doubters wrong, reapplied himself to the matters of government with a renewed energy. However, in lacking the judgement of his former ministers the President's initiatives were generally misguided and ill executed. Considerable sums of money were lavished on grand vanity projects to little effect, the delicate balancing act between domestic landowners and foreign financiers collapsed into mutual animosity, and the economy went nowhere fast. Even Santa Anna's deft political touch seemed to have deserted him and his policies increasingly alienated the many diverse factions in Mexican politics. Crucially he somehow forgot to award the military its annual swathe of promotions and merits during Christmas 1847. Discontent, already obvious prior to 1848, continued to mount as the desired political and economic reforms failed to materialise. Finally the inevitable occurred on 1 May 1849 when General Paredes y Arrillaga (1797-1852)* launched a pronunciamiento and declared himself for a new government. The President's stock had fallen low enough amongst the political class, if not the general populace, that the revolt was generally well received by both conservatives and federalists. The victories over the US were forgotten as it became increasingly clear that Santa Anna was not the man to save Mexico. Naturally such concerns did not trouble the President and his response to the revolt was to decamp from the capital and lead an expedition to seek out and defeat Paredes’ army at Guadalajara. In a lethargic campaign it took the presidential forces several months to cross the country and when the town itself was quickly cleared of rebels (23 Oct 1849) Paredes and the bulk of his soldiers merely retreated to the nearby stronghold of Puerta de Hierro (lit: the Iron Door). Santa Anna lacked the necessary cannon to assault the fortress and so maintained a brief desultory siege while his men vented their anger on nearby villages. Unable to secure Guadalajara, despite several bloody attempts, and alarmed by reports from the capital, the government army decamped after a week and began the long trek back to Mexico City. It had been a most unsatisfactory campaign

The Puerta de Hierro near Guadalajara. Fortified monasteries such as this were a common sight in the chaotic Mexican countryside​

The failure to crush Paredes‘ revolt did much to encourage the growing legion of Santa Anna's foes but it was events in Mexico City that proved the real threat to his power and that had forced him to lift the siege of Puerta de Hierro. In the absence of Don Antonio, and with the continuing estrangement of many former santanistas, there was little to keep rival factions in check. President Gabriel Valencia (1799-1849), the latest in the long line of Don Antonio’s pliant temporary replacements, was hopelessly out of his depth and unable to rely on either Congress or the military for support. In any case there is probably little that Valencia could have done with discontent in Mexico City mounting sharply as Santa Anna meandered through Mexico in search of General Paredes without scoring a significant victory. There was again a sense of inevitability when on 16 October 1849 Congressman José de Herrera (1792-1854) convinced the soldiers of the capital's garrison to support Congress in impeaching the President. Discontent erupted into open revolt throughout the city as crowds, encouraged by radical liberal politicians, tore down statures and busts of the former president. In the most extreme example, the mausoleum that housed Santa Anna's amputated leg was ransacked and the rotten limb carried through the streets to cries of "Death to the Cripple, Long Live Congress". This explosion of anger was short, being aptly labelled the 'Three Hour Revolution', but by the next day the capital was firmly in the hands of a liberal Congress, President Valencia was dead, and Santa Anna declared a traitor and outlaw

These were the circumstances that forced Santa Anna to end his investment of Guadalajara and hurriedly return to Mexico City with his loyal soldiers. There was widespread fear that the capital would be subjected to pitched battle, a fate visited upon the city surprisingly rarely during these turbulent decades, and this certainly seems to have been the original intent of the loyalist army. However on reaching Toluca, mere days march from his objective, Santa Anna seemingly realised the degree to which his support had deteriorated. The National Army, less his own regiments of course, would not stand by him and virtually all state legislatures, the exception being Veracruz, had declared in support for the new government. Never fond of lost causes, Don Antonio demobilised his army at Toluca and skirted the capital before proceeding towards Veracruz with a small armed escort. He did not renounce the presidency, which had reverted to him on Valencia’s death, but publically confirmed that he planned to enter exile "for the good of the country". Whether he actually planned flight from Mexico was rendered irrelevant when his travelling party was intercepted and captured by rebel soldiers outside Puebla on 19 December 1849. For the first time in his life Santa Anna entered captivity but even he must have been relieved that he was not summarily executed a la Gabriel Valencia

Santa Anna surrenders to rebel forces outside Puebla​

The capture of Santa Anna, still the constitutional President, placed a dilemma before the rebel government. There were certainly few fans of Don Antiono amongst the federalist leadership but his role in the formation of the Republic, and its defence from both Madrid and Washington, had not been entirely forgotten. Amongst the general population he was still considered the finest Mexican hero since Independence and was one of the very few politicians who was a household name across the entire nation. Conversely the precedent was clear - four of the five heroes of Independence had died at the hands of Mexican firing squads** and Santa Anna's stature made him an obvious threat to any new government. What ultimately saved the President from execution was a combination of his own cunning and the accelerating pace of events elsewhere. No sooner had the federalist movement secured victory over the conservatives than it collapsed into open infighting. The radical liberals (puros) demanded nothing less than the restoration of the 1924 Constitution and the resumption of the anticlerical campaign of Farías. In contrast the moderate liberals (moderos), led by de Herrera, were unwilling to simply turn the clock back by two decades or antagonise the conservatives for little cause or gain. It was as the prospect of liberal infighting began to crystallise that Santa Anna chose to bargain for his life. He agreed to resign the presidency to de Herrera, thus conferring a sense of legitimacy on the moderates, and enter exile in exchange for a guarantee that both his life and landholdings in Veracruz would be spared. There was a personal element to this drama - it had been de Herrera who convinced the young Santa Anna to abandon the Spanish cause three decades previously during the Wars of Independence - but such concerns did not prevent the new government from holding their prisoner in appalling conditions for several months. Distracted by the developing rift between moderate and radical, de Herrera finally caved and ordered Santa Anna's immediate release and escort to the coast. The new President even allowed his shamed predecessor to draw from a state pension while in exile... the General of Tricks had once again survived against the odds

Santa Anna and his extended family left the country on 4 April 1850 from the port of Tampico (the government was not foolish enough to let him depart from his stronghold of Veracruz) for Cuba. It was the first time that Don Antonio had ever been outside Mexico and he surely must have appreciated the irony of sailing into exile on a vessel named the Itribue. A few days later the exiled clan arrived in Havana and began a new life that had much in common with the old. Certainly Santa Anna enjoyed his time in the Spanish colony - he struck up an immediate friendship with Governor O'Donnell, a colourful and ruthless character in his own right, and spent much of his days gambling and womanising. Supported as he was by funds from Mexico (a government pension, earnings from his private estate, and hidden accounts established during his time in office) it is safe to say that this was not a particularly harsh exile. Yet despite the relative luxury of his exile the ex-president's mind was rarely far from his home country. His confidents in Veracruz and Mexico City kept him well informed of the latest developments at home and a constant stream of letters made their way across the Caribbean waters. With his typical political acuteness and boundless ego Santa Anna constantly maintained that it was only a matter of time before he returned to Mexico in triumph. It would take three years and civil war but ultimately he would be proven correct

-----​

* General Paredes had been a prominent co-conspirator of Santa Anna in the revolts against Nicholas Bravo during the Triangular Revolt of 1841. Indeed he had been the leading planner and participant in that affair and had been bitterly resentful when his more famous comrade had reaped both the plaudits and rewards of the revolt. Fate was not to be no kinder to the General in 1849 when it was de Herrera that profited greatest from his second pronunciamiento

** These were Miguel Hidalgo (1811), José María Morelos (1815), Agustín de Iturbide (1924), and Vicente Guerrero (1929). Of these original heroes only Guadalupe Victoria survived the often murderous Mexican politics to die of natural causes in 1843

 

[ComradeOm]

stealtherella: That map was indeed a pain. I tried automated ways to make the borders stand out (the Cartoon filter in GIMP) but in the end decided that it was best to manually draw them. Even that wasn't too bad (most provinces having fairly straight/regular border) but then I had to manually remove every last pixel from the original map. Otherwise when I painted in a new colour you'd have odd red and grey pixels polluting things

I'm a perfectionist

robou: Everything tends to move quickly with Santa Anna. I'd like to be able to spend more time elaborating on the troubles he faces but this AAR is slow paced enough as it is. I don't think there's any real desire, amongst myself or the readers, for delving even further into the byzantine Mexican politics. Safe to say that these are turning against him as reform fail to materialise

RGB: That's one thing I enjoy about my AAR characters - they always deserve what they get. Although that's not necessarily the same as getting what they deserve

Cinéad IV: The US hasn't been forgotten although, for reasons I'll mention later, its taking a back seat for now. And yes, this fall of Santa Anna is well over due given that it comes five years after his first historical exile and a over a decade after his historical capture by the Texans!

 

[robou]

Very foolish of de Herrera, he should know that Santa Anna would return. So now, Mexico will once again be subjected to the rule of the trickster. Poor Mexico, it cannot find any kind of footing... the people so ready for democracy, with rulers that wish for nothing but endless power.

 

[ComradeOm]

Lecture Ten: As Above, So Below (1850)

"Learn from the masses, and then teach them"
Mao Tse-Tung​

If life in Havana was relatively comfortable, for exiled presidents at least, then it is worth pausing to examine Mexico and its inhabitants at the beginning of the 1850s. It is easy to forget that the events and personalities that shape our narrative were of interest to a very small percentage of the Mexican population. In this, and many other regards, the country had not changed since the colonial era and Mexican society remained one of yawning inequalities. The Spanish peninsulares were no longer present, in any real number at least, but it was still possible to walk through parts of Mexico City and be convinced that one was in a prosperous Iberian city. Dressed in the latest French fashions and animatedly discussing the various scandals of European courts, the wealthily criollos who dominated Mexican politics and society shunned their Mexican roots and darker skinned cousins. While there was no official discrimination against those of native descent, and certainly the odd Indian did rise to positions of power, the higher ranks of the clergy, army, and body politik were almost invariably comprised of those of European extract. Such racial distinctions only highlighted the vast differences in wealth that saw virtually all of the Indian population (over a third of the population) living, alongside poor mestizos and criollos, in a state of semi-serfdom. The hacienda estate system was a holdover from the earliest days of the Spanish presence in Mexico (having been established by Cortez himself to reward his soldiers) and was essentially feudal in nature with a set number of estates passing through the generations. Following Independence the fairly rigid network of hacienda gradually began to break down, as lands were consolidated into larger estates and freely bought or sold by wealthy citizens, but this made little difference to the peasant communes who worked the land itself*. The new landowners expected the peasants to continue to fulfil their feudal obligations (including providing free labour) while introducing new hardships - such as forcing peasants to buy solely from landowner-run stores (the hated tiendra de raya) at greatly inflated prices

Such semi-serfdom was not the only suggestion that Mexico had never really emerged from colonial times. For the rural population Independence and technological progress had made little to no difference to their daily lives, which had not seen any real change since the 17th C. Some of the more innovative landowners, including Santa Anna, did invest in new mechanical farming techniques but these were very much the exception and the economy remained rooted in subsistence farming. Similarly the post-Independence decades saw the birth of Mexico's nascent rail network but on a severely limited scale. Santa Anna's government may have begun the construction of the Mexico City-Veracruz railway in 1846 but it would be decades before this hugely important economic link was completed. Needless to say there was virtually no industrialisation of the economy outside of the fabric industry of Mexico City. Life was not particularly kind to urban workers either but the harsh realities of the factory did not dissuade the tens of thousands of migrants who flocked to the capital annually... creating a vast network of slums surrounding the city proper by the mid-century. This was one of the few examples of significant urbanisation in an overwhelmingly rural country. Even the government sponsored efforts to colonise the northern lands won from the United States came to little as Mexicans of all classes stubbornly refused to make the dangerous trek north. A vast swathe of land (stretching from the Pacific almost to the Mississippi) remained largely empty save for pre-existing native groups and the odd large cattle ranch**. Despite their penchant for raiding, shared by Mexican bandits throughout the poorly policed countryside further south, the various Indian tribes generally fitted in well with the largely absentee governance of Mexico City. By 1855 the pressures of civil war, and threat of US intervention, had even led the government to arm many of the Indian tribes and recruit them into the military reserve

Mexican City street circa 1890​

Given all of the above it is no wonder that Mexican society remained fragmented and it is little exaggeration to say that the country was a nation in name only. Despite the despair of politicians, conservative and liberal alike, the horizons of the average peasant never extended past his own commune and even middle class merchants and artisans remained staunchly provincial in their outlook. The suspicion that Mexico was less a nation than a collection of bickering states was reflected by the continuing federalist efforts to reverse the 1836 constitution (and its even more centralist 1845 revision). The victorious war against the United States, and the ever-present threat of a resumption of hostilities, notably failed to foster any real feelings of nationhood as various army commanders appropriated military triumphs to bolster their own careers. Santa Anna was amongst the most notorious of the latter - the festivities in Mexico City that greeted the US capitulation of 1843 were almost entirely a celebration of his victory and not that of the Mexico or its people. In the Age of Santa Anna - the age of the caudillo - personalities were undoubtedly bigger than the nation

Similarly Mexican politics remained primarily a multifaceted festival of patronage devoid of principles or ideology. The major factions of national politics during the mid-century decades - monarchist, conservative, santanista, moderate-liberal, and radical-liberal - are largely a construct of later historians seeking to impose some semblance of order on a chaotic and fluid political scene. Freemason activities aside, none of these factions were organised into any form of a political party or group and existed solely as amorphous collections of like-minded politicians with the height of organisation being the occasional partisan newspaper or political club. Much of Santa Anna's success can be explained by his ability to navigate this political jungle - a task considerably eased by the absence of party/ideological politics - and dominate through sheer charisma and force of personality. For a figure who repeatedly claimed to be above such factional politics he possessed considerable political acumen. Of course such an environment was perfectly characteristic of South American politics of the time as the sudden absence of Spanish administration, and incestuous nature of the small political class, made it natural that party politics would take some decades to develop. By the late 1840s it was evident that Mexico was indeed moving along this path - the country still did not possess political parties, at least not in the European sense, but the various factions were increasingly solidifying around certain core ideals. The violence that led to and followed the exile of Santa Anna in 1849 further polarised the nation and effectively forced politicians of similar ideals to cooperate closely

Above all the shift in Mexican politics across these decades was generational as the first batch of politicians who had never known colonial rule, or the struggles to end it, began to make themselves felt. Concurrently, the ambitious personalities who had fought for Independence, and then struggled for decades over its spoils, began to pass away either through simple old age or retributory execution. While there was obviously an upswing of the latter during the civil war years, it should not be forgotten that many of those warhorses of Mexican politics had been born in the 18th C and were well advanced in years by the 1850s. Santa Anna himself was 55 at the time of his exile and he had been a young man when the Republic was founded. He would be one of the few of his generation to survive the 1850s as death claimed a score of influential figures. Between 1853 and '54 alone a host of notables passed away - including Tornel, Alaman, Bustamante, de Herrera, Bravo, and Arista. The next generation were products of a different era; they had had no great struggle in which to prove themselves, no glorious victories with which to launch their careers, and no oppression by a foreign power on which to blame all their woes. If Santa Anna epitomised the old guard, in all its flamboyance and vainglory, then the rising generation of politicians was captured by Benito Juárez. Social liberal, Indian, lawyer, career politician... he was the diametric opposite of the self-styled Napoleon of the West. The next decade of Mexican history would be largely defined by the peculiar conflict between these two men

-----​

* The Mexican peasant commune bears a striking resemblance to the Russian mir of the same century in that both were essentially self-contained societies with their own customs and bodies of local government. Such communes were essentially beyond the jurisdiction of Mexico City or St Petersburg and functioned as their own little worlds. Indeed the Russian mir translates as 'world'. See ‘Figes, O., (1998), A People’s Tragedy’ for more on this Russian characteristic

** The notable exception of course being California where the 1848 gold rush had led to a sudden population surge as prospectors from across the Pacific converged on the Sacramento river in their hundreds of thousands in search of precious metals. See, ‘Hill, M., (1999), Gold: the California story’

 

[ComradeOm]

What an odd week. My last AAR somehow managed to get more responses than this current effort. Now I know that I've only myself to blame for both the erratic update schedule of late and my absence from others' AARs, but this low level of feedback is still depressing. All I ask of anyone is that if you read an update then let me know. I eagerly welcome critical responses, suggestions for improvement, etc, but this apathy is hard to bear

Coincidently this weeks update was deliberately written in the style of Sins of the Fathers in that its a very broad look at the social and political sphere. I feel that Santa Anna's story has reached the halfway point so it was worth pausing to note how little Mexico had actually changed

robou: Santa Anna will return but much has occurred in his absence. All will be revealed in the next update. Your comment about the people yearning for democracy is however remarkably prescient... well in a way at least

 

[robou]

That was good, I like those broad studies, especially done so well. With a firm opponent like Juàrez, of a different structure and generation, Santa Anna will find it more and more difficult to return home, unless the battle between them begins with Juàrez inviting Santa Anna back. Otherwise, I am sure Mexico itself will call the Napoleon of the West back from retirement sooner or later.

 

[unmerged(96020)]

Mexican politics is just depressing. o

A country with so much potential, so much spirit...wasted in the oppression of the bickering racist upper classes.

You have to end this tale the way your Papal AAR did -- with an Earth-shattering socialist revolution! Oh, and Santa Anna's corpse to celebrate its bloody eve. I know he's the hero here but seriously, I never liked the man. With his power and charisma, he could have transformed Mexico for the better, but no...

P.S. Otherwise, your narrative is both gripping and at the same time very accessible and clear. Excellent job by the way: don't despair over a lack of comments; people read, they just don't comment often because lurking has a certain charm to it.

 

[ComradeOm]

Lecture Eleven: Children of the Republic (1850-'55)

"Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?"
Victor Hugo​

In the four full years that had passed since the departure of Santa Anna Mexican politics had seemingly managed the impossible by becoming even more fragmented and unstable in the caudillo's absence. As his predecessor enjoyed the women and wine of Havana, President de Herrera struggled to hold together his unstable coalition of moderates and radicals while fending off increasingly terse US offers to purchase land. Nonetheless de Herrera did succeed in maintaining a relative peace until General Paredes, clearly believing that third time was the charm, led a revolt that toppled the government on 24 February 1851. This time the General succeeded in reaping the rewards of his efforts and installed himself as dictator in Mexico City. Sadly for Paredes this was not a position that he held for long and several months later a combination of liberal militancy and his own incompetence as ruler swept his regime away. On 2 November 1851 the liberal general Juan Álvarez (1790-1867) was declared president and he rapidly assembled a Congress even more radical than the last. Prominent amongst his cabinet was one Benito Juárez (1806-'72) who, as Minister of Justice, delighted in infuriating the conservative elements of society. He went too far however with his controversial Ley Juárez - a code of laws that explicitly attacked the privileges of the Church and military and abolished their traditional fueros*. This was a direct descendent of the anti-clerical laws tabled by Farías some two decades earlier and, as with that earlier programme, the proposals divided liberals and infuriated conservatives. A furious backlash forced the Álvarez government to resign on 17 May 1852. It was the third Mexican government to collapse in just over a year

Presidents of Mexico: (L-R) Generals de Herrera, Paredes, and Álvarez ​

Given this chaos it is understandable that many observers had become somewhat disenchanted with Mexican politics. In thirty years the Mexican Republic had staggered from crisis to crisis and now appeared to be entering a period of rapid and terminal decline. Many politicians, particularly conservatives and former santanistas, began to believe that merely investing hope in a particular president was not enough; the entire state structure required a drastic overhaul. In casting around for alternative forms of government a number of conservatives returned to the initial plan for the Mexican state - a constitutional monarchy headed by a European prince. This was the understandable outcome of what one historian has referred to as the "period of despair" with many politicians resigning themselves to the idea that the Mexican people were simply not capable of governing themselves, as the previous three decades had supposedly demonstrated. It was with the discreditation of Santa Anna and resulting victory of a liberal Congress that monarchist sentiments in Mexico rose to the surface and the search for a European prince - primarily focused on the sprawling Hapsburg family tree - intensified throughout the early years of the 1850s. Of course, for all the grand talk of saving Mexico the monarchists were undeniably the party of reaction and their appeal was limited to the conservative sectors of society - in particular the Church and military - with a desire to defend their own traditional privileges being the primary motivation behind the outrage over the Ley Juárez and proposed revisions of constitution. On 7 September 1853 discontent spilled over into open revolt as General Felix Zuloaga (1803-'98) launched his Plan de Tacubaya in opposition to continuing radical reforms of Congress. A prominent and powerful military commander, Zuloaga was also a capable strategist and his coup was well timed and organised. Pre-arranged demonstrations in support of the revolt took place throughout the country and the General himself triumphantly entered Mexico City on 13 November 1853. In a novel twist however the defeated parties did not concede defeat and enter exile but rather retreated to Veracruz where former president Álvarez organised a second government and vowed to resist the conservative machine. The War of Reaction, also known as Mexico's Civil War, had begun

Militants of Civil War: (L-R) Benito Juárez and Felix Zuloaga​

Amongst the number of foreign parties keenly observing these internal woes was Santa Anna in Cuba, with the former president carefully noting the passing of events as he sought to engineer a return to his homeland. Even while abroad his presence in Mexican politics was considerable and Havana saw an upsurge of well dressed visitors as notables from all the major Mexican factions came to court the support of the 'Founder of the Republic'. The victories over Spain and the United States were clearly more memorable to contemporaries than his failings as president, and a lack of strong affiliation to any one faction made him attractive to all. For his part Santa Anna continued to despise the factionalism and partisan politics that he blamed for all of Mexico's woes but the lukewarm reception to his so-called 'exile manifesto' * in 1851 made it clear that he needed the parties as much as they needed him. Given his history as conservative president and strong centralist, many would say 'despotic', tendencies, the liberals were understandably wary of approaching Santa Anna but his federalist past, military reputation, and relative detachment from politics made him a promising ally. Furthermore his endorsement would strengthen the position of the moderates within the liberal alliance and weaken the resolve of the conservative military opposition. For his part Don Antonio naturally sympathised with the conservative cause on a range of issues but was adamantly opposed to the eventual monarchist aim of installing a European prince in Mexico City. Other significant factors in these calculations were the death of Tornel in 1853 which removed a strong advocate of centralism from Santa Anna's circle (the two old friends having reconciled shortly after the latter's exile), and the position of the liberals to guarantee the security of his family estates. Regardless of the cause, on 21 December 1853 the 'Benefactor of the Fatherland' brought his exile to a close and arrived by ship in Veracruz to a rapturous homecoming reception worthy of a president. This must have been deeply disturbing to the liberal leadership, which was based in the same city, but Santa Anna acted swiftly to dispel any concerns by placing himself at the disposal of the liberal government and reaffirming that he harboured no presidential ambitions. Perhaps unnerved by the adoring crowds, or eyeing a propaganda coup, President Álvarez lost little time in appointing the caudillo Minister for War in his new cabinet

It was at this point that Santa Anna first met Benito Juárez, Minister of Justice in the Álvarez government, and the two figures immediately clashed. The latter was an Indian lawyer who had risen from the very lowest levels of Mexican society and whose radical social conscience placed him on the far left of the liberal spectrum. There could hardly have been a greater contrast with the wealthy crillo career soldier. If there was a similarity between the two it was their ability to lead others - Juárez inspired through the boundless energy and dedication with which he approached his tasks, while Santa Anna's natural charisma is already well documented. Both figures rapidly became the defining figures of the government, no small feat given the calibre of its other ministers, and it was not long before the ministries of Justice and War represented very different futures. Through the former Juárez responded to every conservative offensive with a raft of anti-clerical and anti-military laws which continued to push the government down the radical path, while Santa Anna, who scorned the state militias that the liberals had previously employed to little effect, set about building a professional army loyal to him personally. It was at the head of the new Army of Central Mexico that Santa Anna took to the campaign trail in March 1854 as he led the defence of his home province during the conservative offensive of that year. This spring campaign was vital in that the defeat of the invading armies secured the immediate future of the liberal government and dashed all conservative hopes of a quick war. As well as instilling new discipline and organisation in the ranks of the liberal army, Santa Anna also made a point to recruit as many former comrades-in-arms as possible. By 1855 the liberal military machine, much to the alarm of Juárez, bore little resemblance to that of a year previously

-----​

* The fueros of the Church and military were a series of medieval privileges traditionally afforded to members of both castes. By the mid 19th C the many of these had been rendered obsolete or revoked but crucially both soldiers and the clergy retained the right to be tried according to their own respective institutional laws, ie by Inquisition or court martial as opposed to Mexican civil authorities

** This document, written in Havana during 1850, is typically taken as the definitive summary of Santa Anna's politics, insofar as one can exist. While this is overly simplistic - as we've seen, the man was extremely opportunistic and prone to changing his political colours when the occasion warranted - the manifesto does display some of the constants of Santa Anna's career. In it he berates the corrupt and insulated politicians for destroying Mexico with their bickering and factionalism, charging them with causing and furthering the post-Independence instability and chaos. Only an impartial arbitrator (ie, him) could unify the country and rule for the best of all. This was the essence of both the santanista project and S American anti-politics in general. See, ' Loveman B., et al, (1997), The Politics of Antipolitics: The Military in Latin America' for a broad and international analysis of this political current

 

[ComradeOm]

Early on in this AAR I was curious/worried as to whether people would find Mexican politics gripping enough to follow this byzantine tale of personal betrayers and bickering. Clearly not o

robou: I'm enjoying writing political-heavy updates such as the above but I have to admit that it doesn't really come off particularly well in this format. But then it would be almost impossible to tell the same story in the broader social style of Sins. What Lecture 10 does do however is set the stage/background for the political struggles of the next one or two updates

Irenicus: Yeah, the subject matter here isn't the most appealing ( ) but then I find flawed heroes, or a lack of them, to be fascinating. Its clearly not to everybody's tastes but am working towards a definite ending... if not exactly "Earth-shattering". We'll see, I've yet to write the last few chapters in this tale

As for comments, and this isn't directed at yourself specifically, I do keep half an eye on the thread views but really there's no substitute for feedback. Even taking a few seconds to scribble a quick 'Nice/terrible update' is appreciated. No matter how cool lurking is

 

[unmerged(62478)]

Lol every war is a civil war if the participants are counted as homo homo sapiens lol.

 

[Capibara]

Benito Juárez enters the picture, the unavoidable crash happened and all what's left to happen is civil war. Let's hope it does'nt last long or Mexico could have more problems.

 

[Cinéad IV]

Fantastic stuff Om! And might I add, long overdue...! And I, for one, am enjoying the complexities of Mexican politics. I look forward to seeing how Santa Anna and Benito Juarez will clash. I expect it to be spectacular

 

[unmerged(96020)]

Oh, Juárez, now there's a hero!

...okay, so he isn't perfect (not by all means), but the young liberal politician should prove the most worthy foe of Santa Anna yet -- except the American military juggernaut if we count it. I wonder how much damage Juárez could do against the aristocrats and the church who held down Mexico's potential for so long before Santa Anna betrays the liberals and flips again. For some reason I think the "Civil War" will not end with just the monarchists' defeat...

It would certainly be quite a tale if Benito ends up leading liberal Mexican rebels supported by the United States government not against a European "Emperor," but Santa Anna himself. That would put quite a spin on what it means to be a Mexican nationalist.

 

[robou]

So the two must work together? An interesting flurry of events there, and now Mexico is once again at war with itself. Let us hope that Don Antonio can return to Mexico City, but he has a strong opponent, by the looks of it, in Zuloaga...

 

[CCA]

Hoooray for update! Looks good, hope Santa Anna doesnt become a dictator again

 

[Eams]

Oh, Juárez, now there's a hero!

Precisely, and with the prologue now over, I ask that someone pass the popcorn as we settle in to watch these two giants duel.

ComradeOm, for me the reason why this is good (which it is) rather than spiffing brilliant like most of your other work is what I perceive as a lack of development in your writing; this is a bit too similar to the style which you've perfected in "Sins of the Fathers", and quite frankly I'd rather see you try something new and fail at that. Camus' "The Plague" is a deeply flawed book, but it's still a lot more interesting (partly thanks to those flaws) than if he had simply tried to rewrite "The Stranger" in a new setting and with a somewhat new story.

For instance, your lessons are informative and neutral, in fact they're a bit too much of the latter for me, who've never attended one where the prejudices and opinions of the lecturer hasn't come shining through (but then, you've might have tried that and done it far too subtly for me to notice o)

Besides, all the really cool artists get to die before they're recognized

 

[ComradeOm]

No update this week I'm afraid. I do have one (mostly) written but I'm not particularly happy with it. After reading some of the above feedback (thanks yet again) I'm going to take another week to split it into two updates and expand on the role of both Juarez and the US in the upcoming instability

In the meantime, below is a very quick map I did of the civil war landscape. Again, this is all fiction and did not actually occur in-game

-----​

Delex: Its a nice quote. This was one of those occasions where I didn't have a particular quote in mind for the update so I just went surfing for a decent comment on civil war

Capibara: It was probably inevitable (in both histories) that continued instability would give way to an "unavoidable crash" but in many ways my Mexico is much worse off. With Santa Anna back in the country and a bitter US to the north it could well be that Mexico's troubles are only beginning...

Cinéad IV: Thanks. Although who is to say that the two figures will clash? They might become great friends and rebuild Mexico as a global superpower... *cough*

Irenicus: Obviously I don't want to give anything away but I'll give you a cookie if your prediction comes off

But Juarez certainly seems to be popular around here. I suppose its not hard to see why given that he's probably the first politician I've introduced to have any degree of personal integrity or genuine desire to help the Mexican people. But then this is a timeline where Santa Anna remains the brightest star in Mexican politics...

robou: I don't want to spend too long on this civil war - it is after all only filler between in-game events - but I expect it to have a profound impact on Mexico. The relationship between Santa Anna and Juarez will be key but there are other figures, not just Zuloaga, to be introduced and who will have a role to play. I looking to give at least one or two of these major parts in the rest of the AAR

CCA: At this stage Mexico will be doing well to have a single dictator or ruler. But, whatever their protestations to the contrary, you can be sure that the presidency is the prize that both Santa Anna and Juarez value above all else

Eams: Once again you've touched on something that I've given quite a lot of thought to myself. Humour me for a moment...

I am a highly self-critical author and I am constantly evaluating my past AARs. One little vanity that I do have is the idea that each one has been different/innovate in some way and that I've learned something from each. That this particular AAR is less so than others largely the result of two factors:

1) I hugely enjoyed writing Sins and I've, largely, enjoyed writing this. When the time came to pick a new project I had a format that I liked along with some subject material that I enjoyed. So I went for evolution rather than revolution (to wheel out an old cliché) and make minor changes for what was intended to be a relatively minor project

2) The last time I went for a major shift in genre and abandoned the historybook format I got my fingers badly burned. I like elements of Les Journals but the whole AAR was really just a disaster to write and manage. I actually only finished that AAR after Sins and its, relative, failure was weighing on my mind when I sat down to plan out my current project

That said, while the format remains largely the same (some minor innovations were planned but disregarded as too time consuming) I think this AAR remains somewhat different in tone and subject. Certainly I think I'm learning plenty - from writing intrigues to plotting to graphics - even if my mind does often wander to more ambitious projects

And, for the record, I'd rather live a long life rather than dying young

 

[ComradeOm]

Divisions in Mexico (1855)

A (very) rough breakdown as to the loyalties of the Mexican states during the early civil war period
Dark Green: Strongly Conservative
Pale Green: Leaning Conservative
Dark Yellow: Strongly Liberal
Pale Yellow: Leaning Liberal
Mustard: In favour of independence
Blank: Foreign or Neutral​