The Cuban historian Rolando Gallardo has launched a critical review of the figure of Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, regarded as the "Father of the Cuban Nation," pointing out that the hero did not truly free his slaves during the Grito de Yara, but rather took them into battle as "cannon fodder" after keeping them as slaves until the very day of the uprising on October 10, 1868.
Gallardo raised the question during an interview with Tania Costa for CiberCuba, where he issued a direct challenge to the official patriotic narrative: "I want someone to give me the name of a single slave of Céspedes who survived the first stage. None. He kept them as slaves and then used them as cannon fodder."
The historian's main argument is that Céspedes had the option to free his slaves unconditionally. "He could have freed them too and told them to leave. He took them into battle," he stated, emphasizing that the decision to involve them in the war was not an act of emancipation but rather of exploitation. "Goodness, Céspedes. We need to reassess his figure, don't we?" he concluded.
This reading contrasts with what is presented by critical historiography on the Grito de Yara: according to Britannica, Céspedes allowed the enlistment of slaves in the rebel army only with the permission of their owners, and favored a "gradual and compensated emancipation" to avoid alienating the planters of western Cuba.
Gallardo also addressed the death of Céspedes, which occurred on February 27, 1874 in San Lorenzo, Sierra Maestra, and noted that the mambises themselves deliberately abandoned him to his fate.
To support his argument, the historian referred to the personal diary of the hero. "Go directly to Céspedes' diary. There he clearly states that he was first left without an escort, that they denied him a passport to go to the United States, and that he knows they are doing this with a mean-spirited intent."
Gallardo connected those words with a fact recorded in history. He referred to a former slave of whom the President of the Republic in Arms was at that moment, who was seen entering the place where Céspedes was, and immediately the Spanish battalion of San Quintín went out to search for him.
"Clearly, they left it in an easily accessible place. They did not leave it in a secure location," the historian pointed out, implying that it was either handed over or intentionally abandoned.
Gallardo's criticism extended to the mambises in general, whom he described as "a continuation of Spanish corruption. It is the same and it is just the same."
The historian supported that claim by pointing to the republican narrative. "The entire Republic of Cuba until 1940 was governed by mambises. The Mambisa Republic that we refer to as the Neocolonial Republic." Estrada Palma, José Miguel Gómez, Alfredo Zayas, and Gerardo Machado were all mambises, Gallardo noted, before concluding: "We teach in Cuba to hate the living mambises and to love the dead ones."
These reflections are framed within a broader debate about the role of the Cuban Creole elites in the maintenance of slavery, a theme that Gallardo developed in an article published in CiberCuba on July 22, where he argues that the historical responsibility also lies with the Cubans themselves and not solely with the Spanish metropolis.
It is important to remember that the total abolition of slavery in Cuba was not a direct consequence of the uprising in 1868, but rather a process that culminated in 1886 by a Spanish colonial decree, eighteen years after the Grito de Yara, which the official narrative presents as the beginning of emancipation.
Filed under: