Jean-Baptiste Debret, Mineiro cruzando un río. En este ejemplar el barco tiene el lujo de una borda de madera.

La pelota era un barco improvisado de cuero utilizado en América del Sur y Central para cruzar ríos. Era similar en algunos aspectos al bull boat (bote de cuero) de América del Norte o al coracle de las Islas Británicas, pero a menudo no tenía armazón de madera ni estructura de soporte interna, y dependía enteramente de la rigidez del cuero para mantenerlo a flote. Por lo tanto, podía transportarse a caballo y montarse rápidamente en caso de emergencia, y era una habilidad rural común. El barco era remolcado por un animal o un nadador humano, siendo las mujeres consideradas especialmente diestras. Las pelotas podían transportar cargas sustanciales (lo común era alrededor de un cuarto de tonelada) e incluso pequeñas piezas de artillería. Continuaron utilizándose hasta bien entrado el siglo XX.

Necesidad edit

General Manuel Belgrano recalled taking a small revolutionary army across the Corriente River in 1811 with nothing but two bad canoes and some pelotas. The river was about a cuadra (80 metres) wide, and unfordable. He noted that most of his men knew how to use a pelota, implying that it was standard rural knowhow.[1]


Not all countrymen knew how to swim, however: it depended on the region. The cavalry troopers of General Paz were from the Province of Corrientes, where everyone did. Crossing a river at night, holding on to the mains or tails of their swimming horses - their arms, ammunition, uniforms and saddles safely dry in pelotas, which they had improvised from rawhide saddle blankets - they surprised and defeated the enemy at the Battle of Caaguazú.[2]


Valle Cabral, Alfredo do (1877). "Noticia das obras manuscritas e inéditas relativas á viajem philosophica do Dr. Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira, pelas capitanias do Grâo-Pará, Rio-Negro, Matto Grosso e Cuyabá (1783-1792)". Annaes da Bibliotheca Nacional do Rio de Janeiro (in Portuguese). Vol. III. Retrieved 17 May 2024.

at 350-1



Pimenta Bueno, Francisco Antonio. Memoria justificativa dos trabalhos de que foi encarregado à provincia de Matto Grosso (in Portuguese). Rio de Janeiro: Typographia Nacional. Retrieved 17 May 2024.



Mansilla, Lucio V. (1875). Reglamento para el ejercicio y maniobras de la infantería del Ejército Argentino (in Spanish). Buenos Aires: Imprenta y Librerías de Mayo. Retrieved 16 May 2024.

Chialchia de Contreras, Amalia Nélida; Contreras Roqué, Julio Rafael (2005). "El primer contacto de don Félix de Azara con la naturaleza del área guaranítica". Tras las huellas de Félix de Azara (in Spanish). Madrid-Huesca: Primeras Jornadas Azarianas. pp. 104–128. Retrieved 18 May 2024.


=Fuentes edit

Echevarría, Cecilio; Contreras, Ramón (1875). Informe acerca de la provincia de Corrientes presentado a la comisión directiva de la Exposición Nacional de Córdoba en 1871. Buenos Aires. Retrieved 15 May 2024.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)










xxx edit

1. "Paraguayan War" is the preferred usage in the English language, certainly in serious scholarly writing.

The JSTOR library is a database of nearly all recent high-quality scholarly articles in the English language. The facts speak for themselves:

Articles in JSTOR database that mention the phrase:
"paraguayan war" "war of the triple alliance" "triple alliance war"
in title 49 7 2
anywhere in article 1,069 450 2

(Source: JSTOR, interrogation of search engine provided, 29 April 2024, all articles.)

The larger (albeit lower quality) Google Scholar database paints a broadly similar picture:

Google Scholar hits
"paraguayan war" "war of the triple alliance" "triple alliance war"
3,880 2,610 814

Likewise, there are clearly more books with "Paraguayan War" in the title, than "War of the Triple Alliance. (Source: Google Books, interrogate intitle:field.)

2. The 1864-1870 war is little known outside South America.[3] By itself, the title "War of the Triple Alliance" doesn't tell the international reader anything. Which triple alliance? There have been quite a few in human history. To suppose "Triple Alliance", without context, must mean the South American one, is parochial. "Paraguayan War" at least points the reader to the right continent.

3. The title "War of the Triple Alliance" was increasingly hijacked by the revisionists of the 1970s, with their conspiracy theories of an invisible plot to "get" Paraguay. But it was the war that caused the triple alliance — eventually — not the other way round. The war actually began and developed in 1864, between Paraguay and Brazil alone; there was no triple alliance then, just a Paraguayan army sacking the Mato Grosso's capital. Not until after Argentina's province of Corrientes was invaded in April 1865 did Argentina make an alliance with Brazil - its traditional enemy.[4]: 260, 358 

  1. ^ Belgrano 1867, p. 332.
  2. ^ Mansilla 1875, pp. Xi–XIII.
  3. ^ *Whigham, Thomas L.; Kraay, Hendrik (2004). "Introduction: War, Politics and Society in South America". In Kraay, Hendrik; Whigham, Thomas L. (eds.). I Die with my Country: Perspectives on the Paraguayan War, 1864-1870. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska. ISBN 0-8032-2762-0., p.1
  4. ^ Whigham, Thomas L. (2018). The Paraguayan War: Causes and Early Conduct (2nd ed.). University of Calgary Press. ISBN 978-1-55238-994-2.