These biographies recapitulate the lifetimes of two vastly different Uruguayan political figures. Aparicio Saravia (1856-1904) and José Batlie y Ordóñez (1856-1929) played distinctive and briefly inter-related roles in their country’s historical development. Saravia, a rough-hewn rural caudillo and Blanco adherent, exemplified Uruguay’s long, tumultuous struggle for national unity. Conversely, Batlle, an urbane intellectual and nominally a Colorado, guided the republic’s emergence into modern statehood.
Their careers first converged when they separately opposed President Juan Idiarte Borda’s unpopular Colorado regime from 1894 to 1897, as Saravia headed a military uprising while Batlle launched editorial assaults. Assassination of Idiarte Borda in 1897 led to a truce that resulted in Batlie’s presidential accession in 1903. Saravia soon rebelled against Batlle’s administration, but his death in 1904 from battle wounds closed Uruguay’s gaucho-caudillo age. Ironically, Batlle, a sometime duelist, had condoned Idiarte Borda’s murder but he wept upon learning of Saravia’s death. Batlle’s victory symbolized the rise of the urban industrial oriented Colorados and the decline of the rural agrarian based Blancos.
Both works have been essentially based upon previously published syntheses, offer largely conventional analyses, and seem to be directed at a general audience. Perhaps the major contribution of the Batlle biography is its presentation of insights about the extent to which positivism and spiritualism might have influenced his ideological stances. The Saravia study examines the countryside roots of Banda Oriental caudillismo, focusing special attention on military capabilities and Brazilian involvement in his insurrections. The less well-known gaucho stands out as a folk hero who had unwittingly become a disruptive, anachronistic force in the twentieth century. In consonance with the rationale for a series on notable national figures, each protagonist receives generous measures of adulation.
Neither work devotes substantial attention to background developments such as immigration, technological innovations, or arts and letters. Unfortunately, the respective authors criticize the Idiarte Borda administration for its shortcomings without offering much by way of indepth analysis, which is a regrettable omission of perspective in view of its significance to careers of both Saravia and Batlle.
