Castelli and Monteagudo, the pair of patriots who fought against the Spanish

In Upper Peru, Marshal Nieto, whom Mariano Moreno, like most of the patriots, did not have much appreciation for, had sent all available troops to fight the patriots, in support of the no less despicable frigate captain José of Cordova.

The university city of Chuquisaca had been left virtually helpless. Bernardo de Monteagudo, eager to join the approaching patriot ranks, He decided to prepare a plan to escape from the prison where he was serving a sentence for being one of the leaders of the revolutionary attempt of May 25, 1809.

Claiming to “have a snack with some madams” in the adjacent garden of the prison, he obtained the coveted key that allowed him to leave. (1)

On November 4, 1810, Monteagudo regained his freedom. He left for Potosí and placed himself at the disposal of the expeditionary army, which under the command of Juan José Castelli had taken the strategic city on November 25. The delegate of the Board, who knew the revolutionary background of the young man from Tucumán, did not hesitate to appoint him as his secretary.

The duo began to make royalists and Saavedraists alike nervous, who saw in them the “minions of the Robespierrian system of the French Revolution.”

Monteagudo confirmed that he was in the right place when he witnessed the harshness of the measures applied by Castelli and the fulfillment of Moreno’s orders, who insisted: “The circumstances of being Europeans who have only distinguished themselves against our army in the last attack, produces the circumstance of removing them from Potosí, reaching the point that there is not a single one left in that village.”

Thus, on December 13, 1810, the first fifty-three Spanish exiles left for the city of Salta.

The list was compiled personally by Castelli, who based the measure on these terms: “The tranquility, peace and public safety of this great town in which the Superior Government of the Province is interested and dedicated requires some sacrifices and mortifications that we must not do without.” without venturing the fate of the most interesting work.

By this principle I proposed to qualify the subjects who in this neighborhood were suspected for their previous behavior, so that they would not remain within it, where they could give rise to ideas of concern at the risk of greater misfortunes than those caused by their reckless and obstinate conduct”.

And then he briefly detailed the “résumé” of one of the undesirable guests that he sent to Chiclanathen governor of Salta:

“Dr. Otondo, priest, is a hypocrite, haughty and daring, prevailed by the consideration that reconciles his character; He dared to claim the privileges of his jurisdiction to thwart my order of elimination, and although my decree must have dented his pride, ordering him an escort in case of failure to punctually observe what was ordered,

warning him that all privileges, privileges and canons are subject to political law, and that if his character has been due consideration on my part, they did not lend him a title to impunity; I warn you that I am sending you to the Bethlemític Convent, for accommodation, with a prohibition on confessing, because these means and public proclamation have been used to directly promote the party of despotic revolution.

Of the others, none are good, and Your Excellency must not miss the opportunity to assign them without delay as has been foreseen by the Superior Government.” (2)

1. Cf. Mariano A. Pelliza, Monteagudo, his life and his writings, Buenos Aires, Lajouane, 1880.

2. General Archive of the Nation, Buenos Aires Government Archive, Buenos Aires, 1961, volume II.