The group of military that the anti-sparterist opposition called in a derogatory tone as the "ayacuchos" has its origin in the relations that the chiefs and officers under the orders of General José de la Serna, of liberal ideas, maintained during their stay in Peru.[3]
Shortly after assuming the regency at the end of 1840, Espartero was accused by certain sectors of the army and the moderate and progressive parties that his policy of military appointments—and in some cases also civilian—favored only the members of his military camarilla known by his opponents as the "ayacuchos".[3]
To the favoritism towards the "ayacuchos" was added the uneasiness of the army due to the delays in the payments to the officers and the difficulties they had to promote and develop their military career. But this was not Espartero's fault, but rather the existence of an underlying problem: the excessive number of officers, chiefs and generals at that time, a product of the almost permanent wars in which Spain had been involved between 1808 and 1840. A problem notably aggravated by the Convention of Vergara that allowed the entrance in the army of the Carlist officers, and to which many of them had been welcomed. Thus, the State was unable to face the economic cost of an army with an inflated staff, which the republican Fernando Garrido defined some years later as "the most expensive in the world". Thus "pay became more and more sporadic and the army became a source of protests. One regiment even went on strike in 1841".[5]
According to Juan Francisco Fuentes, "this created a vicious circle that was very difficult to break: the military wanted to collect their pay, prosper in their career and have a destination in accordance with their rank. The rulers, for their part, whether civilian or military, lacked the political courage to address the necessary reform of the army, which required a drastic reduction in the ranks, but by maintaining such a state of affairs, they perpetuated the discontent of the military and their willingness to participate in all kinds of political adventures".[6] He also encouraged the creation of a corporatist and militarist discourse through the newspapers with such significant names as El Grito del Ejército, or El Archivo militar, which he even wrote in his issue of September 30, 1841:[7]
We cannot and do not want to say: the State is us, but we will say: the homeland, or if you please, the purest part of the homeland is us.
The sabre rattling during the Spanish Transition was a constantly present element, which only materialized in the coup d'état attempts, the most spectacular of which was the 23 F. Also decisive was the role of the military democrats in different governments (Gutiérrez Mellado and Sáenz de Santamaría).[8]
^ abcdBahamonde, Ángel; Martínez, Jesús A. (2011) [1994]. Historia de España. Siglo XIX (in Spanish). p. 230.
^Fuentes, Juan Francisco (2007). El fin del Antiguo Régimen (1808-1868). Política y sociedad (in Spanish). p. 144.
^Fuentes, Juan Francisco (2007). El fin del Antiguo Régimen (1808-1868). Política y sociedad (in Spanish). pp. 144–145.
^Fuentes, Juan Francisco (2007). El fin del Antiguo Régimen (1808-1868). Política y sociedad (in Spanish). p. 145.
^Fuentes, Juan Francisco (2007). El fin del Antiguo Régimen (1808-1868). Política y sociedad (in Spanish). pp. 145–146|. It was only the beginning of a process fraught with long-term political consequences, as professional dissatisfaction turned into a rejection of civilian power, which was blamed for the army's ills.
Bahamonde, Ángel; Martínez, Jesús A. (2012). Historia de España. Siglo XIX (in Spanish). Original edition: 1994 (6th ed.). Madrid: Cátedra. ISBN978-84-376-1049-8.
Fuentes, Juan Francisco (2007). El fin del Antiguo Régimen (1808-1868). Política y sociedad (in Spanish). Madrid: Síntesis. ISBN978-84-975651-5-8.