The name "Patagonia" is absolutely of Chilean origin; there is no "Argentine Patagonia"; This was a contemporary appropriation (theft) by the Argentines, which they later took advantage of for purely commercial-tourist purposes. "Patagonia" derives from the expression "Patagones" with which the Portuguese navigator, Hernando de Magallanes (1480-1521) called the natives and aborigines who inhabited an area of the southern Atlantic coast that he called “Puerto de San Julián”, and all these territories legally belonged, de jure, to Chile and its direct predecessor: the “Reyno de Chile” or the “Capitanía General de Chile” (1541) argentina, and its direct predecessor, did not even exist… It was not until almost two centuries later, in 1776, that the Viceroyalty of Rio de la Plata was created (the direct predecessor of Argentina, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay and Southern Brazil), and its geographic boundaries to the south of that viceroyalty only reached as far north as Rio Negro, near the province of Buenos Aires. One hundred years later, in 1881, while Chile was at war declared by Bolivia and Peru in the north of the country, the Argentines vilely took advantage of Chile's defenselessness in the south by usurping all of Eastern Chilean Patagonia...and, of course, the port of San Julián. And that is how Argentina maliciously appropriated Chilean Eastern Patagonia...and now it is also trying to take over for tourist-commercial purposes an ethnic-cultural history in which THEY NEVER PARTICIPATED neither as a Viceroyalty nor as a Republic nor as a Country Finally, the Patagonians - Aonikenk or Tehuelches - were not only found in the surroundings of Puerto San Julián (the eastern Chilean territory STOLEN by Argentina) but also carried out mostly their activity, intercultural exchanges and settlements in the vicinity of the Strait of Magellan and in less measured in the Torres del Paine National Park (Lake El Toro), both Chilean sites.
😀
The name "Patagonia" is absolutely of Chilean origin; there is no "Argentine Patagonia"; This was a contemporary appropriation (theft) by the Argentines, which they later took advantage of for purely commercial-tourist purposes.
"Patagonia" derives from the expression "Patagones" with which the Portuguese navigator, Hernando de Magallanes (1480-1521) called the natives and aborigines who inhabited an area of the southern Atlantic coast that he called “Puerto de San Julián”, and all these territories legally belonged, de jure, to Chile and its direct predecessor: the “Reyno de Chile” or the “Capitanía General de Chile” (1541)
argentina, and its direct predecessor, did not even exist…
It was not until almost two centuries later, in 1776, that the Viceroyalty of Rio de la Plata was created (the direct predecessor of Argentina, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay and Southern Brazil), and its geographic boundaries to the south of that viceroyalty only reached as far north as Rio Negro, near the province of Buenos Aires.
One hundred years later, in 1881, while Chile was at war declared by Bolivia and Peru in the north of the country, the Argentines vilely took advantage of Chile's defenselessness in the south by usurping all of Eastern Chilean Patagonia...and, of course, the port of San Julián.
And that is how Argentina maliciously appropriated Chilean Eastern Patagonia...and now it is also trying to take over for tourist-commercial purposes an ethnic-cultural history in which THEY NEVER PARTICIPATED neither as a Viceroyalty nor as a Republic nor as a Country
Finally, the Patagonians - Aonikenk or Tehuelches - were not only found in the surroundings of Puerto San Julián (the eastern Chilean territory STOLEN by Argentina) but also carried out mostly their activity, intercultural exchanges and settlements in the vicinity of the Strait of Magellan and in less measured in the Torres del Paine National Park (Lake El Toro), both Chilean sites.
Thank you so much for these insights! We will keep it in mind whenever we will come across the expression of Patagonia! kind regards :-)