Just for Keesje's benefit, I thought I'd link back to this post from early in 2012
http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...ml#post7111325
I don't like to quote myself, but its worth reiterating this:
"Something to bear in mind was that the southern part of modern Argentina was never actually part of the Spanish empire. They never got that far, and the Mapuche Indians were able to hold them off until the late 1800's. It was really only when the Welsh settled in Patagonia that the Argentines and Chileans began to show an interest.
In 1860 the various Mapuche tribes got together and declared their own Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia - and appointed a frenchman as their king. The Chileans quickly moved in and deposed him, but since then the Kingdom still exists, though in exile in France. However the Kingdom predates any annexation of territory by Argentina or Chile.It also appears that the UK -at the time -recognised the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia as the valid controlling power"
Essentially Chile - not Argentina - moved into Patagonia to usurp the Indian Kingdom in 1862, while the Argentines made a move into the territory in 1880 as they wanted to grab land, disputing the territory with Chile. However its worth remembering that the majority of the settlers during that initial land grab, into the part of Patagonia closest to the Falklands were - Welsh. Not Spanish. Not Argentine.
Welsh. And the land only really became Argentine when those settlers decided in a plebescite to accept Argentine rule in preference to Chilean.
Before 1880 Argentina had no claim, either through de facto rule, or historic precendent from the Spanish Empire, of control over the part of Patagonia closest to the Falklands
Again, its worth reposting a map of the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia
