# Almanack/Issue 25/The Forgotten in the Independence Process

Almanack, Issue 25
THE FORGOTTEN IN THE INDEPENDENCE PROCESS: UA HISTORY TO BE MADE
Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira das Neves
ABSTRACT
       This article proposes another approach to the history of the Independence of Brazil in addition to the greater characters known by historiography and makes it possible to bring up individuals so many times forgotten about in this process. However, such a proposal does not mean choosing a non-original character but only a name whose path is sought to be reconstructed, without its insertion in the broader context of the conjuncture that marked the separation of Brazil from Portugal. Making use of short life stories, it is possible to find those who also elaborated arguments that made possible reinterpretations of such a process. They also structured a discourse that made possible decipher the languages of that time and answer questions through practices and principles that, to a certain extent, translated the political cultures of that time.
KEYWORDS:
       Memory / Oblivion - Independence - Brazilian Empire - Biography - Political cultures
       […] le problème de toute mémoire officielle est celui de la crédibilité, de son acception, et aussi de sa mise en forme. Pour qu’émerge dans les discours politiques un fonds commun de références qui peuvent constituer une mémoire nationale, un intense travail d’organisation et de mise en forme est indispensable pour surmonter le simple bricolage idéologique, par définition précaire et fragile.
In a thin and provoking review of a book by Alain Corbin entitled Le mondee retrouvé de Louis-François Pinagot, sur les traces d’un inconnu, 1798-1876, whose aim was to write the biography of a common man who had no particular trati, harassing any kind of heroism, Sabina Loriga criticizes the idea of the ‘invisible biography’ idealized by the author, which sacrifices the quality of life of individual figures who never appear as social actors, since they have no singularity, no identity. Thus, for Loriga, the rediscovery of biography must ‘give voice to a wide variety of individuals who, in some way, are inserted in their contexts as social actors in a historical process that provides them with some singularity, ie, their small x. It is necessary to ‘give to the men of the past not only a name, but also some trace of vital capacity.
This perspective of analysis explains partially what I want to highlight in this article : another approach to the history of the Independence of Brazil which allows to bring to the person the forgotten and unknown individuals of this process. Such a question does not mean, however, choosing a non-original character, just a name whose path is possible to reconstruct without inserting a broader contex of the conjuncture that marked the separation of Brazil from Portugal. It ​is a concern to find other figures in addition to José Bonifácio, Pedro I, the empress Leopoldina, José da Silva Lisboa, Joaquim Gonçalves Ledo and many other interestresting and well known characters (that, undoubtedly, can reveal new contributions), that also made the Independence. Looking at lives and actions that remain anonymous can bring consequences through new sources and approaches that allow a rethought of the Independence process, aimed not only at its borders but at a dialogue that finds in the Atlantic the point of union of their ideas and actions.
In this sense, in which the field of the historian, as Jacques Revel affirms, has nothing to do with the individual’s sovereignty, but with social choices and strategies, it is possible to find unknown figures, who cannot and should not be reduced to pieces in a field of impersonal forces, since they left traces in the formation of a new empire - that of Brazil, from 1822. However, how can we find such clues and individuals?
Perspectives on the centenary of Independence (1822-1922)
Upon completing one hundred years on September 7th, 1922, the history of the construction of the Brazilian Empire was still essentially turned to the study of the facts and the great characters who had achieved the Indepenedence. Despite the festivities and celebrations that caused some suspicion on the part of the later historiography due to its official nature, little news emerged to explain the process. Undoubtedly, one of the fundamental works that came to ​light in that period was the work of Manuel de Oliveira Lima, initiated by the return of D. João and the ‘causes and effects of the Portuguese Revolution of 1820’ and ended with the coronation of D. Pedro and the intrigues and plots between the groups of José Bonifácio and Gonçales Ledo. Despite using a detailed and erudite narrative but a ‘narrative in its best sense’ - a rare phenomenon in Brazilian historiography, under the view of Evaldo Cabral de Mello - and based on rigorous documentary criticism from still unexplored sources from foreign archives as well as in letters exchanged between D. Pedro and his father in the sessions of the Lisbon Court, travellers, periodicals and pamphlets, Oliveira Lima was a pioneer by demonstrating the importance of studying the brazilian history in coordination, harmony and even confrontation with the histories of Portugal and the Portuguese Empire with American neighbors, Spain and Portuguese Africa.
It also innovated by seeking to go beyond narration, seeking a procedural vision of Independence in which structures and events were mixed. Malgré tout, individuals did not fail to make themselves present as those largely responsible for the Independence: the pers​picacity of Brazilian deputies in the Lisbon Courts, the brilliant understanding of the Brazilian question by José Bonifácio, “the indefatigable apostolate of public opinion by a Ledo, a Januário, a Sampaio, a José Clemente’ and the lucidiy of the ‘curious’ Leopoldina.
When the images are identified and the articles of periodicals prepared for the celebration of the Centenary of Independence are read, the permanence of the great heroes are seen: José Bonifácio, Gonçalves Ledo, Januário da Cunha Barbosa, Diogo Feijó, the empress Leopoldina and, undoubtedly, D.Pedro I. The following picture (Figure 1) taken from the September 7th, 1922 edition of the Gazeta de Notícias, can testify this position by pointing the great vultures of Independence as well as those of the First and Second Kingdoms:
Figure 1 - 100 Years of the Independence of Brazil
Source: Gazeta de Notícias
Other proposals for interpretation that changed the historical narrative emerged in the 1970s. Inserted in the dynamic metropolis/colony in the circuits of the primitive accumulation of capital, the Independence became the result of the crisis in the late 18th century of ​the colonial system of the Modern Times, whose model can be sought in the anti-imperialist struggle to decolonize African and Asian countries. In the same perspective, in the early 1970s, other historical studies interpreted independence as the starting point of a long process of rupture, the result of the breakdown of the colonial system and the assembly of the national state. In another line, Maria Odila Silva Dias demonstrated that the political separation did not bring any rupture within her, but paved the way for a reworking of the colonial past that can be explained in terms of the interests of the metropolitan and colonial elites, which gained greater strength with the coming of the Court in 1808. The perspective acquired greater breadth with the innovative work of José Murilo de Carvalho.
In the last decades of the twentieth century, other demands of historiography, which confirmed the long-term permanence of Brazilian social formation, enabled the emergence of a series of studies, both in Brazil and Portugal, and started to seek to insert Independence in the most dynamic of the Old Regime, highlighting the political and cultural factors that provoked dispute for hegemony within the Portuguese-Brazilian empire. Within this more recent perspec​tive of works, other concerns emerged - the participation of the popular strata; independence and the formation of national identities; political debate and the study of political vocabulary; the formation of sociability spaces -, enriching the quality of the debate on Independence. In addition to these issues, studies have also emerged on the various parts of Brazil at the time of the process of political emancipation, demonstrating the complexity that exists between the various provinces and the Rio de Janeiro court, as Evaldo Cabral de Mello has already mastered, stating that “the foundation of the Empire is still today a story told exclusively from the Rio de Janeiro ​point of view”. All this renewal of historiography provided innovative clues regarding the separation process between Brazil and Portugal, but, when referring to the figures of Independence, he made little progress in identifying those who, members of the most diverse segments of society, remained in the shadow, although they fought and interfered in some way in the direction of the split. Undoubtedly, the studies opened up new perspectives to analyze the role of the middle and popular strata over these years. But much remains yet to be done.
Anonymous Independence and their horizons of expectations
Bringing to light rich documentation, mostly unpublished or little explored by historical researches about the period, such as flyers, handwritten and printed pamphlets, newspapers or even correspondence and various documents, can provide new clues about the constitutionalist movement that Brazil has known in 1821, as well as different interpretations of its process of separation from Portugal. This material constitutes the history of a time, because the facts and characters that are narrated there, can be seen as records with which historians elaborate the reconstruction of a moment in the past. Finally, these are memories that, when presenting different views of the same fact, serve as foundations of history because they also serve to think and rethink the history of Brazil. In this case, it is sometimes ​possible to come across unknown characters or a range of anonymous people who were also protagonists of Independence.
First, it is possible to recover the anonymous. Those whose face or name are often not found, but whose traits they left reveal other interpretations of the Independence of Brazil. I am referring here to the really unknown authors of the handwritten pamphlets between 1821 and 1823. It will hardly be possible to know who they were one day. Sometimes called paper or flyers, since they were presented in loose sheets, sometimes vertical, sometimes horizontal, they were placed on the walls and posts of public places, as shown by the remains of the limestone in the few examples found today in the archives. Always without indication of authorship, they revealed through their writing a simple and direct style, seeking to impact the recipient and facilitate the understanding of the message. They were full of misspellings, for example, in a proclamation entitled To the Weapons Portuguese to the Weapons lovers of your Nation, which can be read in the original manuscript: “To the Weapons inhabitants of this City, it is already time to break the fetters where you have lived for so long…” This fact demonstrates that it was probably a text written by individuals who presented some degree of study but were certainly not literate graduates in Coimbra or versed in the ideas of the century of the Enlightenment that, as a general rule, are considered as key-characters to the process that allowed the former Portuguese-Brazilian Kingdom to enter political modernity, leading to the formation of a new independent State from Portugal. Consequently, if the printed pamphlets of that same time reveal intense political debate among scholars about the most significant political issues of constitution​alism and separatism, the manuscripts stand out for indicating the presence of this literary war on the streets.
This point can be confirmed by the nature of the language more violent and forceful than that of more moderate tone of the printed writings. In this case, they also provide some clues to the origin of a more popular nature than the first ones. It must be remembered, however, that at that time, in Brazil, there was a distinction between people and commoners. In the political language of the time, people represented “the least educated and least addicted part of the nation, the most laborious and the poorest”; the commoners represented the “populace”, that is, the lowest levels of society, which, in Brazil, included slaves and some free men.
Thus, it can be seen that if, on the one hand, the drivers of the struggle for the constitutionalization of the kingdom and for the independence of Brazil - landowners, traders, bachelors, clerks and the military - preferred to act with more prudence, while proclaiming obedience to the sovereign, to the dynasty and to the “conservation of holy religion”, on the other hand, through these handwritten pamphlets, a more emphatic language began to circulate in the streets of the city of Rio de Janeiro, Bahia and Maranhão, inciting the people to join to the constitutionalist movement of 1821, closely linked to the 1822 process:
To the guns Citizens It’s time To the guns Not a moment more, you should lose If by the force of reason, the Kings do not yield From weapons to [sic] power kings must give up
​This provocation was permeated by the rhetoric of the texts of the French Revolution of 1789 - “Citoyens! Aux armes!” - even if it did not reflect the same climate, as the objective was not to dethrone the reigning dynasty - that of Bragança, since they believed in the sovereign’s innocence -, but rather to remove their ministers and the validated. The proposal therefore intended to break the shackles of despotism that had been so long, it was believed, oppressed the Portuguese-Brazilians. An acceleration of time was envisaged for these men who perceived a new proposal for the organization of politics in society that differed from the past. That present experienced by such individuals constituted a fundamental key to build the future.
Thus, through these sources, produced in moments of political turbulence and still very little explored, a new dimension of events unfolds, that is, the political involvement of the popular strata in this process. Consequently, new actors come to the surface, becoming unique due to their anonymity and bringing other perspectives that allow different explanations of the past.
Another point that deserves interest and analysis, as there are still few studies on the subject due to the rarity of the sources, is the role of slaves in the process of separating Brazil from Portugal, especially regarding their role in the Independence wars. Anonymous, for the most part, formed distinct groups that often opposed each other - the Creole and brown slaves, born in Brazil, and the Africans. In addition to what has already been studied by João José Reis, the role attributed to a “black party” in the Independence movement, as reported by a French informant, probably written after 1823, was that this “party of blacks and people of color ”was the most dangerous,“ ​because [it was] the strongest numerically speaking ”. Undoubtedly, in provinces with a strong presence of slaves, their behavior in the face of conflict was contrary to the Portuguese, who monopolized the sale of basic subsistence products by manipulating their prices according to their interests. Of course, many also opposed the white elite born in Brazil.
Sometimes, the slaves tried to obtain a clearer political role in the victory of those favorable to the “Brazilian cause”, as in Bahia. Maria Bárbara Garcez Pinto, an important lady from Bahia, owner of mills in Bahia, married to Luís Paulino d’Oliveira Pinto da França, a deputy for the province of Bahia in the Lisbon Courts, when writing to him she informed that: “the negroes from Cachoeira made requirements to be set free”, believing that in an orderly way they could have a greater intervention on the public scene. Still in her letter, she stated that there were some individuals in Bahia, perhaps white, who sent “requests to the Courts” on the subject. However, despite the “negroes” were “infamous” and “haughty” - a “devil’s gang” - there were “good laws” that could listen to them, but also punish them. After all, “they are foolish, but can be whip treated!” This rebellious attitude was reported later, in 1823, by the Idade d’Ouro do Brazil which attributed “this worrying phenomenon [the possibility of freedom of the slaves] to the bad example of the patriotic masters”.
On the other hand, during the wars of independence, especially in Bahia, several slaves fled to engage in Brazilian forces. They believed that, in fighting for Brazil’s freedom, they could also fight for ​their own freedom. They envisioned a new “horizon of expectation”. Even later, the imperial government sought to reward these men, recommending that their masters give their freedom by means of a fair payment with resources from the Provincial Board of Finance. Thus, much remains to be discovered behind the shadows of these anonymous faces, although some advances have been made by studies, such as the one already mentioned by João José Reis and Hendrik Kraay.
In the figurative language of journalists and pamphlet writers, another fundamental point came to light in relation to slavery and the Independence process: Brazil as a slave to Portugal. In this case, the idea promoted many times by adherents of the Portuguese cause was the possibility of a revolution in Brazil along the lines of Haiti if its separation from the old metropolis were configured.
On the eve of the election of the district attorneys in April 1822, the unrest was intense, especially in Rio de Janeiro. Several flyers appeared in the city calling “the people to arms to depose the São Paulo ministry”. It was determined that the police force should check the gatherings of “people who are suspicious and disturbing the peace and public security” that could perform an act against the said elections. This was followed by a series of arrests of Portuguese suspected of links to the movement, as they were disturbing the “peace and tranquility of the inhabitants of this capital”, being obliged to ​embark to Portugal with passports that the authorities rushed to provide. Other Portuguese left of their own free will.
In parallel, some news came to light and contributed to making the environment even more charged. The Correio de Rio de Janeiro, for example, accused one of the prisoners, Father José Pinto da Costa Macedo, known by the pseudonym of Filodemo, of plotting a terrible conspiracy against Brazilians.
       This demo, devil or something below, or above, prepared the greatest scourge that could suggest to our disgrace the evil geniuses deliberating in council.
       going to the house of such a demo, a black man, a shoemaker, to take some boots by order of his master, and being received with much urbanity by the same demo, the latter, after closing the door, ordered him to sit next to him in the same chair and told him - not to be surprised because everyone was equal and citizens! That the Courts had decreed the freedom of slavery, and that S. A. R. hid those papers in order to preserve the infamous captivity of the citizens! May he share these truths with all his acquaintances and partners, so that they would get ready to kill their masters, when he demonstrated, the devil or monster of a human figure, declared to him that it was time; and offered him money and weapons!!!.
Considered by its postures of a more radical liberalism, it is unlikely that the Correio do Rio de Janeiro intended to frighten those in favor of Brazilian autonomy with this implausible news, based on the deepest fears of the slave-owning mentality, especially after the French Revolution and the revolt of Saint Domingos. However, it is curious that, using the main argument of several Portuguese authors ​to justify the need for Brazil to remain united to the old metropolis, transform the Portuguese liberals into radical Jacobins, with the evident effect of intensifying animosity already present against the Courts.
Thus, several Portuguese writers opposed to the split between Brazil and Portugal brought to light the fear of a slave revolt, such as José Liberato de Carvalho, editor of O Campeão Português em Lisboa. In his point view, the possibility of independence at that time was a premature idea, since not all provinces were in agreement with this separation, which could lead to fatal dangers. Brazil’s new government would be weak and fragile, because there were “natural barriers” that separated the provinces and the possibility of a civil war, which could easily break up the country. This civil war, in the opinion of O Campeão, would depopulate and ruin all the riches of Brazil’s precious agriculture. In addition, it would expose Brazil to the most fatal of all dangers, which is to pass from master to slave; or to have these same African and black slaves for masters, which for the moment can only contain supported by the ancient and venerated aegis of the power of Portugal. Indeed, those who, as Brazil currently have such powerful political gangrene within them, cannot, in their perfect judgment or even with the smallest love of the country, expose themselves to the dire danger of having their beautiful country reduced to a barbaric colony of black Africans.
And, to better elucidate his opinions, he cited Haiti’s “terrible example”, trying to spread a social fear among the ruling elites, who lived in a country in which “there are at least six slaves for one master”. ​In this sense, under various names - Creoles, browns, blacks, Africans - slaves and freedmen became important figures in the process of separation, whether in their own performance in the struggle for independence in the provinces, such as Bahia and Maranhão, as a threatening force, that is, a new representation of the Haitian revolt, which the Portuguese used to avoid the final outcome of the separation between the two peoples who were once brothers.
Drafters of pamphlets and their performance between the years 1821 and 1824
If there are anonymous people, other sources may reveal original actors and processes in Independence. The printed pamphlets, as well as the periodicals that sprout from the relative freedom of the press in 1821, also bring out figures that had a significant participation in that conjuncture. Such circumstantial writings conveyed political events to a wider audience in an unprecedented way, allowing a public discussion of this whole process and bringing to light characters little commented between the years 1821 and 1822. Although many being anonymous or written from pseudonyms, it is possible to identify some of its authors inserting them in a network of sociability and identifying their participation in the process of entering the Brazilian Empire in modern politics, when they split up with the mother country.
An unknown instigating figure in historiography was José Anastácio Falcão, Portuguese born probably in 1786. He was the author of pamphlets, periodicals and manuscripts between the time of the French invasions and the rise of D. Miguel to the Portuguese throne ​in 1828. As a general rule, in his writings he defended constitutional ideas, presenting a fundamental peculiarity: in his trajectory he circulated between Portugal, Africa and Brazil, getting involved in numerous controversies at the time of the establishment of constitutionalism in the Portuguese Empire and its dissolution. Arrested in Lisbon for falsifying Santa Casa de Misericórdia lottery tickets, according to a police official’s report in 1828, he was sentenced to exile in Angola. With the first news of the Revolution of 1820, he tried to implant in that part of the Portuguese kingdom the bases of the Constitution of Portugal to break the irons of despotism. He then came to Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, where he obtained forgiveness from Prince Regent D. Pedro. According to Raphael Rocha de Almeida, in a recent study that takes up this character, one can raise the hypothesis that Anastácio Falcão would receive money to publish texts favorable to the government in Portugal, where he returned.
In Rio, he wrote O alfaiate constitucional and Os anti-constitucionais. The first printout could be found in several bookstores in the Imperial Court and sold overseas, according to an advertisement published in Gazeta do Rio, which shows the wide circulation of printed matter and political information from one side of the Atlantic to ​the other. The work was successful, as the advertisement described: “Having completed the first part of the Alfaiate Constitucional with incredible brevity, from which there is evidently great acceptance that deserved from the Respectable Public, O Alfaiate Constitucional was reprinted and is already on sale at Loja da Gazeta ”. The pamphlet discussed the main themes of the constitutionalism of the years 20, through instigating satirical and fictional dialogue, as confirmed by the announcement: “this is a severe criticism against the abuses and perversity of the Despots, being at the same time pleasant by the joking style”. The main character - a tailor defending constitutional ideas - carries out his main job at home, where he received several customers, ideal types of the society of that time: a hunchback, a constitutional, clerics, a tradesman, a nobleman, a merchant, a scholar and a commander, in the manner of The Spectator of 1711. The central theme of the dialogues is adherence to liberal ideas and constitutional fashion, symbolized by the use of jackets, the tailor’s main specialty. The repercussion of the pamphlet brought problems to the editor, since in the reports of the Rio de Janeiro Police Intendency it is said that he was severely reprimanded by João Inácio da Cunha, in November 1821, for the publication of the pamphlet. Although he opposed the separation of Brazil from Portugal, José Anastácio Falcão is an example of a character, like many of the time, who circulated in the different regions of the old Portuguese Empire. Likewise, in some moments, albeit sparse, he joined royalty again, after the movement of Vila Francada in 1823, only to later defend a representative government. In 1826 he wrote a long exposition in Portuguese and French about the state of Portugal, denouncing an arbitrary government and requesting support for a political change from the Diplomatic Corps ​that Court. Thus, he underwent numerous constraints, revealing the transatlantic character of the struggles over the new constitutional and liberal order in political spaces inheriting the old and then partially fragmented “pluricontinental monarchy of Bragança”, in the expression of António Manuel Hespanha.
Another example refers to the author of three letters - written in the form of pamphlets, including two in response to the editors of Malagueta and Espelho. He signed his pamphlets as Tresgeminos Cosmopolitas. The most striking and original was the letter entitled “Brazil seen from above: letter to a lady on the issues of time”, published in Rio de Janeiro in 1822. This writing contained two original points: first, it was addressed to a lady and second, he used the artifice of using the balloon to present the situation in Brazil at that time. To José Murilo de Carvalho, an inspiration for the text certainly came from Jacques Garnerin (1769-1823), a French balloonist who caused a sensation when he proposed to take a flight accompanied by his wife. The text mixed a geographical narrative with political postures of a moderate liberal, but who did not show great enthusiasm for democracies. It was a thought-provoking pamphlet that even raised the possibility of danger of racial war in Brazil. Who was Tresgeminos Cosmopolitas? The tradesman José Silvestre Rebello was hiding under this strange name, he was well known since 1824, when he was named to do business in Washington in January with the mission to obtain or use the recognition of Brazil by the United States. The fact was reached in May of the same year, despite their disagreements ​with another Brazilian consular agent - Antônio Gonçalves da Cruz - or the famous Cabugá of the Revolt of 1817. However, to reach this post in 1824, our pamphlet left its mark on the process of constitutionalization and separation of Brazil. Data about Rebello is scarce, but it is known that he came to Brazil still young, dedicating himself to commerce, probably, at the beginning, as a traveling salesman. But how did he get caught up in politics?
In February 1821, Silvestre Rebello was appointed by D. João VI as Judge of the Mixed Commission between Portugal and Great Britain. This Commission was a kind of court dealing with imprisoned illegal slave ships, located in Rio de Janeiro and Freetown, Sierra Leone. In the midst of his pamphlet activity, in which he defended the idea of ​​a constitutional government whose sovereignty was shared between the King and the Nation, he founded in 1822, together with José Bonifácio (its president) and Count of Palma, the Philotechnica society, becoming its secretary. According to Oliveira Lima, it was an association that, behind its veneer of knowledge, had a political bias in order to bring together the different provinces in Brazil in a community of shared ideas of which the most illustrious spirits of the time should have been part of; thus, even in the view of the same author, it was sought to use intelligence to guide and discipline the “spirits”. Its operation was authorized by the then prince regent D. Pedro. That same year, the Society published the print Annaes Fluminences de Ciências, Artes e Literatura, prefaced anonymously by José Bonifácio. However, the activities of this society did not continue and it was extinguished together with its periodical. In tune with the political ideals of the Patriarch of Independence, he was one of the first to join the Brazilian cause, being one of the constitutional citizens who contributed to the celebrations of the Empire, as can be seen in the Diário do Rio de Janeiro of November 11th, 1822. In this ​way, with this trajectory and performance in the Independence process, in line with José Bonifácio’s stance, his appointment as head of US business is understandable. His stance also indicates that the old Portuguese versus Brazilian dichotomy was not always followed to the letter, demonstrating the multiple interests of traders in this process of separation. Years later, he was together with Januário da Cunha Barbosa and Raimundo da Cunha Matos, one of the founding partners of the IHGB. It appears, therefore, that our simple merchant and dealer, author of an important work published in 1820, entitled Comércio Oriental - a repertoire of information about the ports, goods, weights and measures of the route from Cabo da Boa Esperança to Japan -, became he became a political man operating in the Independence process and in the first Reign, no doubt not only for his merits, but also for his network of sociabilities.
The authors who are also instigating are those who make comments about the governmental boards authorized by the Courts in the decree of April 18th, 1821, after the Constitution and its bases were sworn in. The joints were, according to correspondence inserted in the journal Revérbero Constitucional Fluminense, “a necessary act, such as accession and identification to the general ideas and the constitutional reform of the government of the Nation”. For historiography, they have become the foundation for a constitutional Brazil. However, the formation of these joints brought countless tensions and conflicts to the government of Regent Pedro I. They were established motivated by a spirit divided between the consent to the Courts and the repulsion to the central control, exercised by the regency of D. ​Pedro. Composed by the local political elites, they organized themselves assuming wide autonomy in internal affairs, transforming, in the expression R. Barman, into the government of “small homelands”. They were, therefore, at the origin of the local influence in the administration and fiscal affairs of the provinces, which came to characterize the political structure of Brazil in the Empire, seeking to prevent any attempt by a powerful centralized government in Rio de Janeiro.
One of those involved in these imbroglios was Cassiano Espiridião de Melo e Matos. Born in Bahia, graduated in law in Coimbra in 1819, he returned to Brazil, being dispatched as a judge from outside Ouro Preto. Thus, as the 1821 movement took over the main regions of Brazil, Cassiano Espiridião took a favorable position to the formation of a governing board, in opposition to captain-general Manoel de Portugal and Castro, who accused this attempt to be a turmoil organized by “revolutionaries, rioters of the troops and the people”, who wanted “absolute independence from the province of Minas Gerais”, having taken immediate steps to stifle the rebellion. However, spirits did not calm down, with conflicts arising between the old administration and those who proclaimed a constitutional system, along the lines of the one implemented by the Lisbon Courts. Such disagreements transpired in a controversy in the newspapers of Rio de Janeiro, involving different letters and opinions. In one of these controversies, there was Espiridião de Melo e Matos. In a letter to the editor of Gazeta do Rio de Janeiro, our character criticized the anti-constitutional attitude of his editor, emphasizing that the provisional governments had not been installed with the sole purpose “to ​swear the Constitution and send deputies to the Courts”; they aimed at other objectives, “perhaps even more precise [sic] ends”, such as “extirpating abuses, extinguishing despotisms, taking the baton off generals and beautiful uniforms and making them dress accordingly with the peoples”. Thus, it became evident that Cassiano Espiridião was in favor of Portuguese constitutionalism, seeing in the colonial system only an oppression of the Old Regime. Later, removed from his post, he opposed Brazil’s independence - a vote against the noblest of causes, in the words of Joaquim Manoel de Macedo, which “could be tolerated in a Madeira or an Avilez, but never in a Brazilian”. Author of a pamphlet letter, although already known in politics, it is interesting to follow the later trajectory of this Brazilian against the “national” cause. Forgiven by the Emperor, he was assigned to the List of Pernambuco in 1824, at the time of the Confederation of Ecuador. Placing himself in favor of Paes Barreto etpour cause Pedro I he was arrested. Later, he was also a judge at the Relação da Bahia (1830), remaining in the period of abdication and the Regency as a faithful defender of the monarchy and the Crown, being elevated to senator of the Empire in 1836.
One of the most thought-provoking and curious characters, not because of his trajectory as an actor in the process, but as a formulator of ideas and the messages that his text brings, was Antônio Barbosa Correa - a rustic miner, as he called himself in his pamphlet Manifesto ao Grão Brasil. Although published in 1824, it describes the history of ​Portugal and the history of Brazil based on prophetic literature and Portuguese chronicles, especially in Bandarra’s prophecies. Gonçalo Annes Bandarra was a Portuguese shoemaker of the 16th century and author of troves that were linked to sebastianism and Portuguese millenarianism. At every moment of tension and crisis in Portugal, the troves were reissued, as in the time of the Napoleonic invasions, resuming the myth of the Encoberto, that is, the return of King D. Sebastião to remove the kingdom from the deep crisis he experienced. Little is known about Barbosa Correa, author of the pamphlet, except what he describes in his pamphlet. Coming from Minas Gerais, he said he was a “sheep victim of wolves”, as the prophecies of Bandarra indicated: “I see the wolves eat / The beheaded sheep / The mounted cows / And the lambs groan”. He had a farm in Minas, where he cultivated, with 12 slaves, whatever allowed him to survive. Since March 2nd, 1819, however, when he went to the Court of Rio de Janeiro, he had to commit a slave named Fortunato to pay his expenses. This situation was the result of the arrest of his brother-in-law by order of the District Ordinance Commander. Barbosa Correa had taken the side of his brother-in-law, publicly calling the commander incapable. Despite having filed a complaint with the governor of the province - D. Manoel de Portugal e Castro -, he suffered persecution, this being his great crime, which made his wife a widow, although she had a husband, and his children, orphans but having a father. But what did Antônio Barbosa Correa preach? What was his interpretation on the Brazilian Independence process?
​Based on Bandarra’s prophecies, which he considered “extremely true”, although mysterious, as they were not mistaken in one point of the premeditated facts, Antônio Barbosa made an extraordinary interpretation of the process of separating Brazil from Portugal, unlike any other. For him, the Independence of Brazil ensured dynastic continuity, legitimacy, popular sovereignty and a messianic-providential aspect. On the one hand, the process entailed close ties with a revolutionary project, idealized, in large part, by the Masonry. On the other hand, Independence was much more than a simple break with Portugal. When establishing a model of power wrapped in prophetic and apocalyptic mysticism, which intended to be “materially Divine”, Brazil became “a new Portugal”. In this way, the Independence of Brazil was identified with the history of Portugal and, especially, with Bandarra’s prophecies. Pedro I assumed the providential charism of D. Sebastião, while Brazil became the legitimate successor of Portugal, as the seat of the Fifth Empire, just as it placed the prophetic and apocalyptic literature that permeated all of Portuguese history. Therefore, for Antônio Barbosa, the real Encoberto was no longer D. Sebastião, but Pedro I. And the realization of the Fifth Empire, already recommended by Antônio Vieira, took the form of the Empire of Brazil: “The trunk is yet to come / I can already see us raised to Cedar / Little goes from Pedro to Pedro / If the trunk branch measures”. The hidden island described in the troves, from which the true king would arrive, was not Portugal; nor was the king D. Sebastião, as he had always been interpreted. The island was “happy Brazil”, chosen by the divine providence to “rise the Almighty Monarch of the Monarchs of the World”. This king was D. Pedro who soon would also take his domain to Portugal. A happy time in the year 1826 when, by chance or not, D. João VI passed away, thus bringing the whole succession process in Portugal. They were prophecies: “extremely true, as well ​as mysterious; and it has evidently been identified in the qualified periods marked, without missing a point, by premeditated facts”. Prophecies, no doubt, but not the by prognostications of modern language, in Koselleck’s perspective: “a concrete history matures amidst expected experiences and expectations”. In the case of Antônio Barbosa, it was not this vision that guided his horizon of expectation.
Women: participating members of civil society?
Finally, it can still be highlighted in a forgotten group - women in the process of independence. In a society deeply hierarchical as in the Old Regime, it is possible to imagine the almost invisible role of these ladies. However, their presence can be detected, in addition to their effective action in fights for separation of the new empire, by letters in newspapers, by private correspondence and even by the writing of political pamphlets. In the last case, for example, in Bahia, there can be found regrets of a woman from that place due to the crisis faced in her homeland due to the constitutional despotism of the Auxiliary Troop of Portugal, commanded by General Madeira de Melo. He said it was a 13-year-old girl, in her anonymity and closed in her room, writing verses “washed in tears”. Another, Maria Clemência de Silveira Sampaio, was considered the first poet of Rio Grande do Sul.
The participation of women as members of political society, however, was also reflected in petitions, requests and letters that claimed their civil rights. In 1823, before this climate of antagonism between Portuguese and Brazilians, there was a representation written by women addressed to Emperor Pedro I. These women - Brazilian - asked for their Portuguese husbands, threatened with expulsion from Bra​zilian lands. They were startled “upon hearing” that “some evil and ambitious” wanted to reduce them “to a new state in human history: that is, being married without a husband, widows with a spouse, having children without parents, orphans with them”. The argument used was straightforward: if European women married to Brazilians were not persecuted, why should Europeans married to Brazilian women, who had sworn independence, should lose their country? And they asked José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva, married to a European woman, if that was fair. After all, “what privilege should men have in this case?” They also regretted that they still did not have “certain civilian forums”, which was “a universal fashion” and probably “a male tyranny”, demonstrating between the lines the social injustice being practiced. Although they affirmed that they followed “the lessons of the old universal morality”, not being philosophers, but possessing “soul, Religion and heart”, they claimed to be truly recognized, as effective citizens, capable of transmitting through their blood, the new nationality to their husbands.
In fact, they did not ask for the recognition of political rights, but in the argument it was clear the possibility of acquiring civil rights in order to guarantee the integrity of their husbands. As in almost all petitions and requirements written in the Empire of Brazil, however, they ended with the classic abbreviation “E. R. M.”, that is, “And will receive mercy”. A third of the Brazilian ladies signed. An anonymous representation, as the names of the ladies did not come up, but that demonstrated the feeling of the elite women of that time.
In 1823, after Brazil’s independence, already in the midst of the discussions and tensions of the Constituent Assembly, another type of document was that of letters written by women who, at times, addressed them to politicians and pamphleteers. For example, the case ​of those women from Paraíba who published in the Sentinela da Liberdade na Guarita de Pernambuco newspaper, that year, by the authorship of Cipriano Barata and reproduced in another periodical in Rio de Janeiro. The first one was signed by Leocádia de Melo Moniz, written in July, who thanked the writers who taught how to use the national law, excommunicating ‘hunchbackism’ and despotism. Two more letters were published in this journal. Despite not claiming the right to vote or political participation, it appears from these missives that these women placed themselves in equality with men due to their patriotism and struggle for freedom. In addition, the letters also revealed that these ladies followed the political discussions of the time, given that lady Leocádia wished to become a subscriber of the pamphlets written by Cipriano Barata who called these ladies as “valuable spartans from Paraíba”. It must be noted that Cipriano Barata was considered a radical liberal who, elected deputy to the Constituent Assembly of 1823 by Bahia, refused to participate, preferring to use the press to defend his ideas.
Finally, it is worth remembering the already mentioned Maria Bárbara Garcez Pinto, lady of the Aramaré mill, in Bahia. Born in Portugal, there she married the Brazilian Luís Paulino d’Oliveira Pinto da França, a deputy for the province of Bahia in the Courts of Lisbon. Here, they raised a family. Her performance was remarkable throughout the Independence wars, when her husband, accused of favoring the Portuguese, remained in Portugal after the separation from Brazil. She was known in ‘Recôncavo’, where she had her home, as a severe and energetic woman. Through intense correspondence with her husband, there is the possibility to investigate some points considered to be consecrated regarding the Independence of Brazil. In her letters, there are personal issues, such as the ​intense passion for her husband, but this never removed her sense of responsibility to the point of abandoning everything to return to Portugal and live in peace in a northern farm with Luís Paulino. And on the other hand, political issues, when she sensibly and objectively, analyzes the political events of that time, condemning both “Brazilian extremists” and “Portuguese radicals”. With a keen perspective, she stated that the distinction between Brazilians and Portuguese, or “Europeans”, was already a reality before Independence. It was just a matter of “birthplace”. Her husband was “Brazilian”, because he was born in Cachoeira; she was Portuguese, because she was from Penafiel. Such a point of view did not mean, however, that those born in Portugal were necessarily against Independence, and those from Brazil adhered to the national cause. One of her phrases reveals the balance of her position: “I love Portugal, I like Brazil and I wish only he good, because I am neither selfish nor ambitious”. In several missives, she criticized the brutal attitudes of the Portuguese general Madeira de Melo against the Brazilians: “make no mistake there: they do nothing with the Brazilians by force. Sweetness and more sweetness, equality and more equality”. And she concluded, vehemently: “Brazilians are not stepchildren, they are children”. She faces the difficulties of war and makes decisions for herself, despite having two children, born in Portugal - Bento and Luís -, in the most difficult moments, such as financial crises and political struggles. Against the opinion of his son Bento, defender of the Portuguese constitutional cause, she left Salvador and went to the interior to ensure the possession of her mill at the height of the civil war, when the Portuguese cause seemed lost. Her other son, Luís, adopted Brazil as a “home​land of law”, joining forces loyal to Pedro I, being part of the army of Labatut. She still had two daughters: one married to a Brazilian born who followed the cause of Independence from an early age, and the other, still a child, who always accompanied her mother.
Maria Bárbara still lived in Brazil for many years. Her husband died in 1824, when, as a representative of Portugal, arrived in Brazil on the Rio Maior mission (1823) and was banned from landing in Bahia and died on high seas on the trip back to Portugal. A widow, however, despite her choice for Portugal, she ended up recognizing the role of D. Pedro as fundamental for saving Brazil from anarchy. There are records of her presence in the halls of the capital of Bahia as a great lady, praised for her kindness. As Wanderley Pinho describes, she was a striking presence in the salons, being considered by some as a goddess to whom many offers were dedicated.
From this mosaic of thought-provoking individuals - social agents - some questions can be raised, enabling different approaches and new sources to re-discuss the Independence of Brazil. It turns to the examination of the past, which, by definition, no longer exists and which, therefore, it is up to the historian to reconstruct from what was left of the safest - his sources that are in the present.
First, it appears that, through the analysis of the handwritten pamphlets, anonymous writers are found, whose language was more violent and forceful than that used in the printed pamphlets, justifying the origin of the former’s popular nature. In this sense, the information that contains this material offers different perspectives on the constitutionalist movement that Brazil knew in 1821 as well gives ​us unexpected clues about its process of separation from Portugal. The social base of such movements is broadened, consecrated by historiography as a process in which only the political and intellectual elites acted. Of course, such elites were the drivers of the movement, but it must not be forgotten that the politician increased his spectrum and started to be discussed in public squares.
In addition to the question of fear of Haitianism, a constant threat from Portuguese deputies and journalists, who inflated the fear of a slave uprising in Brazil, this set must still be expanded with the presence of slaves and freedmen. News circulated in pamphlets and newspapers on such a theme, so much so that the Revérbero Constitucional Fluminense refuted such rumors, arguing that it was
       Surely very stupid this continuous threat of slave upheaval is well established. How can these moles not see that the slave uprising in which they speak so much [to the Portuguese] will be more fatal than to us. [...] The brown and black in Brazil are divided into two classes - freed and captives - the former ones have enough to fear the uniformed automatons of Portugal; Brazilians fear nothing from the second ones.°
In other words, the threat of a slave rebellion did not prevent from the expectation of Brazil as independent and constitutional state, since maintaining slavery represented the only possibility of guaranteeing the order within the constitutional monarchy under construction. It involved, however, another fundamental matter: was the discussion of the concept of independence at that time, limited to that of politics for Brazil or did it include that of the individual to the slave?
The second point to highlight is the role of women. Such characters deserve to be more detailed, because, when they do not require a new look, like the well-known Soror Joana Angélica or Maria Quitéria, they remain in the limbo of ignorance. In this sense, the study ​of some pamphlet writers, representations they presented or the private letters they wrote can contribute a lot. In this case, we find the letters of Maria Barbara, the great lady of the mills from Bahia, which demonstrates the ease and originality of expression in a woman who was born into a family of the Portuguese rural aristocracy. Maria Barbara showed a strong personality and played a role that women are usually denied at the time. Able to quote Camões and reproduce Latin maxims, she knew the new concepts of the language of constitutionalism, such as homeland, nation, independence and constitutional power, and she did not hesitate to make her own decisions in difficult times without subjecting herself to the guidance of her children. Her letters also reveal the multiple independence that occurred, putting down the idea of a broader and more unified process in Brazil, through a friendly agreement between colony and metropolis. There is a description of a very complex reality in which, if at first Portuguese and Brazilian constitutionalists were united, later the divisions that go beyond the old dichotomy between Portuguese and Brazilians multiplied. Dichotomy that justified for many years the process of separation and constitution of the new Brazilian Empire. In addition, the letters still allow us to glimpse that Independence is not limited to September 7, but involves a process that started with the constitutional movement of 1820, which can be considered, in part, finalized in 1825 with the Recognition Treaty by Portugal of the new Empire. Therefore, they bring to light an unfriendly process, which involved the struggles and disputes, such as the wars of independence and the tension of the Confederation of 1824, despite the fact that many of these actors proclaimed that the union of the provinces came to represent the strength of the new Brazilian state.
Finally, it is important to insist on printed political pamphlets and the study of their writers. When transformed into instruments of public debate, such writings allowed the instruction of readers and ​the formulation of questions that represented interests of different sectors of society, understood from the experience that contemporaries experienced in the past, leading to the accumulation of experiences and the possibility of rising a different horizon of expectations, formulated through the new political languages ​​available - that of constitutionalism and that of liberalism. By ignoring them we run the risk of making anachronistic interpretations.
The identification and knowledge of its writers, often anonymous, contribute, in turn, to map those who are part of this game. Fundamental agents, they elaborated arguments that made possible the readings of the process, although they were often forgotten. Not by chance, many of the authors mentioned were not able to find a unique portrait. They were men, however, who, as a general rule, were known as novelties of the time and intended to assure a different future from that experienced in the politics of the old regime. These individuals climbed political posts throughout the First Reign depending on the ties of the sociability levels acquired and made it possible to see how the old Portuguese Empire was interconnected between Europe, America and Africa. It is, therefore, a direction of investigation that can take men in their diversity and concrete experience.
To conclude, it is worth to highlight the value that the study of those forgotten allows to go beyond the borders of a history whose fulcrum meets an idea of nation. Through meetings, exchanges and contacts between different parts of the Portuguese Empire, as narratives of their actions pointed to a need to know and comparatively analyze the selection processes of English America and Hispanic America. From this effort, new assumptions about the concept of independence (or independences) can emerge at that time. No background, from this point of view, or that is shown is how much the Luso-Brazilian Empire was not indifferent to the upheavals that the West experienced between the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century. In other words, they were not indifferent to this Sattelzeit, that is - for R. Koselleck and the other authors of the ​Dicionário de conceitos histéricos fundamentais - this type of behavior, which is in a situation of transition from traditional societies of the old regime to the modern world. However, contrary to some recent interpretations that have been trying to demonstrate, in parallel with a multiplicity of new languages — such as the old constitutionalism, a political economy and natural rights -, old values, such as this surprising one, remained active and, often, preponderant attempt to see, by means of Bandarra’s troves, or the Empire of Brazil as the accomplishment of the V Empire, and Pedro I, as the covert king. After all, until today a good part of the inhabitants of Brazil seems to continue to ignore the prognosis to deal with prophecies...
Bibliography
ABREU, Capistrano de. Correspondencia de Capistrano de Abreu. Rio de Janeiro: Civilizacao Brasileira, 1977. v. 2.
ADELMAN, Jeremy. Sovereignty and revolution in the Iberian Atlantic. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
ALEXANDRE, Valentim. Os sentidos do Imperio: questao nacional e questao colonial na crise do Antigo Regime portugues. Porto: Afrontamento, 1993.
ALMEIDA, Raphael Rocha de. A trajetoria politica e as ideias de Jose Anastacio Falcao em meio a crise do imperio atlantico portugues (1808-1828). In: SIMPOSIO NACIONAL DE HISTORIA, 30., 2019, Recife. Anais [...]. Sao Paulo: Anpuh, 2019. Disponivel em: https://bit.ly/sehgVto. Acesso em: 18 jun. 2020.
BARATA, Alexandre Mansur. Maconaria, sociabilidade ilustrada e Independencia do Brasil (1790-1822). Sao Paulo: Annablume, 2006.
BARATA, Cipriano. Sentinela da liberdade e outros escritos. Org. e ed. Marco Morel. Sao Paulo: Edusp, 2008.
​BARMAN, Roderick. Brazil: the forging of a nation (1798-1852). Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988.
BERBEL, Marcia Regina. A nacao como artefato: deputados do Brasil nas cortes portuguesas (1821-1822). Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 1999.
BRASIL. Decisao 113, de 30 de julho de 1823. In: BRASIL. Coleccao das decisoes do governo do Imperio do Brazil de 1823. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1887, p. 82.
BRASIL-Estados Unidos, 1824-1829. Rio de Janeiro: Centro de Historia e Documentacao Diplomatica, 2009.
CANECA, Frei do Amor Divino. Dissertacoes sobre o que se deve entender por patria do cidadao e deveres deste para com a mesma patria. In: MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de (org.). Frei Joaquim do Amor Divino Caneca. Org. Evaldo Cabral de Mello. Sao Paulo: Editora 34, 2001. p. 53-99.
CARDOSO, Antonio Manuel Monteiro. Introducao. In: FRANCA, Antonio d’Oliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Antonio Manuel Monteiro (org.). Cartas baianas: o liberalismo e a Independencia do Brasil (1821-1823). Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional, 2008, p. 33-45
CARTA dirigida a Cassiano Spiridiao de Mello e Mattos, pedindo a definicao de corcunda ou constitucional, datada de 17 de dezembro de 1821. Rio de Janeiro: Imp. Nacional, [1821].
CARVALHO, Jose Murilo de. A construcao da ordem: a elite politica imperial. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 1980.
CARVALHO, Jose Murilo de. Historia intelectual no Brasil: a retorica como chave de leitura. Revista Topoi, Rio de Janeiro, v. 1, n. 1, p. 123-152, 2000.
CARVALHO, Jose Murilo de. Introducao ao volume I. CARVALHO, Jose Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello (org.). Guerra literaria: panfletos da Independencia do Brasil (1820-1823). Vol. 1: Cartas. Belo Horizonte: Editora da UFMG, 2014. p. 69-70.
CARVALHO, Jose Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello (org.). As armas cidadaos! Panfletos manuscritos da Independencia do Brasil (1820-1823). Sao Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2012.
CHARTIER, Roger. A historia cultural: entre praticas e representacoes. 2. ed. Lisboa: Difel: 2002.
COELHO, Geraldo Martires. Anarquistas, demagogos e dissidentes: a imprensa liberal no Para de 1822.Belem: CEJUP, 1993.
​CORBIN, Alain. Le monde retrouve de Louis-Francois Pinagot: sur les traces d’un inconnu (1798-1876). Paris: Flammarion, 1998.
CORREA, Antonio Barbosa. Manifesto ao Grao Brasil, Imperio dos Imperios do Mundo, oferecido aS. M. Imperial Defensor Perpetuo do Brazil por Antonio Barbosa Correa Mineiro Rustico: ligado as profecias do Bandarra, e de outros profetas. Org. Loryel Rocha.Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Mukharajj, 2017.
CORREIO DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 13, 24 abr. 1822.
COSMOPOLITAS, Tresgeminos. Carta ao redactorda Malagueta. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, [1822].
COSTA, Wilma Peres. A Independencia na historiografia brasileira. In: JANCSO, Istvan (org.). Independencia: historia e historiografia. Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 2005. p. 53-118.
CRUZ, Abner Neemias da. As praticas politicas de Silvestre Rebello: um diplomata brasileiro nos Estados Unidos da America, 1824-1829. 2015. Dissertacao (Mestrado em Historia) — Faculdade de Ciencias Humanas e Sociais, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Franca, 2015. Disponivel em: https://bit.ly/zeeWYsY. Acesso em: 28 dez. 2019.
DIARIO DO GOVERNO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 86, 18 abr. 1823.
DIARIO DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 23, 25 jun. 1821.
DIAS, Maria Odila Silva Dias. A interiorizacao da metropole (1808-1853). In: MOTA, Carlos Guilherme. 1822: dimensoes. Sao Paulo: Perspectiva, 1972. Pp. 160-184.
FALCAO, Jose Anastacio. O alfaiate constitucional: dialogo entre o alfaiate e os freguezes. Partes I-IV. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Nacional, 1821.
FALCAO, Jose Anastacio. Os anti-constitucionaes: prova-se que sao maos christaos, maos vassallos: e os maiores inimigos da nossa patria. Parte I. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Regia, 1821.
FRANCA, Antonio dOliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Anténio Monteiro. Cartas baianas: 1821-1824: subsidios para o estudo dos problemas da opcao na Independencia brasileira. Sac Paulo: Companhia Editora Nacional, 1980.
GAZETA DE NOTICIAS. Rio de Janeiro, n. 206, 7 set. 1922. Disponivel em: https://bit.ly/sdgQxhr. Acesso em: 3 jan. 2020.
GAZETA DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 97, 13 out. 1821.
GENIO CONSTITUCIONAL. Porto, n. 41, 17 nov. 1821.
​HERMANN, Jacqueline. No reino do desejado: a construcao do sebastianismo em Portugal, seculos XVI e XVII. Sao Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1998.
HERMANN, Jacqueline. O sebastianismo e a Restauracao Portuguesa. Voz Lusiada, Lisboa, n. 11, p. 3-16, 1999.
HESPANHA, Antonio Manuel (ed.). Poder e instituicoes na Europa do Antigo Regime. Lisboa: Fundacao Calouste Gulbenkian, 1984.
IDADE D’OURO DO BRAZIL. Salvador, n. 8, 28 jan. 1823.
JANCSO, Istvan (org.). Independencia: historia e historiografia. Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 2005.
JANCSO, Istvan; PIMENTA, Joao Paulo G. Pecas de um mosaico (ou apontamentos para o estudo da emergencia da identidade nacional brasileira). In: MOTA, Carlos G. (org.). Viagem incompleta: a experiencia brasileira (1500-2000): formacao: historias. Sao Paulo: Ed. Senac, 2000. p. 127-171.
KAFER, Eduardo Luis Flach. Entre memoria e historia: a historiografia da Independencia nos cem anos de emancipacao. 2016. Dissertacao (Mestrado em Historia) — Escola de Humanidades, Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2016.Disponivel em:https://bit.ly/30V4Ndd. Acesso em: 30 jan. 2020.
KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Los estratos del tiempo: estudios sobre la historia. Barcelona: Ediciones Paidos, 2001.
KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Futuro passado: contribuicao a semantica dos tempos historicos. Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto, 2006.
KRAAY, Hendrik. “Em outra coisa nao falavam os pardos, cabras e crioulos”: o “recrutamento” de escravos na guerra da Independencia na Bahia. Revista Brasileira de Historia, Sao Paulo, v. 22, n. 43, p. 109-126, 2002.
KRAAY, Hendrik. A invencao do Sete de Setembro, 1822-1831. Almanack Braziliense, Sao Paulo, n. 11, p. 52-61, 2010.
LAMENTOS de huma bahiana na triste crise, em que vio sua patria oppressa pelo despotismo constitucional da tropa Auxiliadora de Portugal. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1822.
LEFEBVRE, Georges. O grande medo de 1789: os camponeses e a Revolucao Francesa. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Campus, 1979.
LIMA, Alceu de Amoroso. O Jornal. Rio de Janeiro, n. 1247, 4 fev. 1923. Disponivel em: https://bit.ly/3d£GTLW. Acesso em: 20 dez. 2019.
​LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independencia (1821-1822). Sao Paulo: Ed. Melhoramentos, 1922.
LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independencia: o Imperio Brasileiro (1821-1889). 4. ed. Sao Paulo: Ed. Melhoramentos, 1962.
LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independencia: 1821-1822. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia, 1989.
LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independencia: 1821-1822. 6. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1997.
LORIGA, Sabina. Alain Corbin: Le monde retrouve de Louis-Francois Pinagot, sur les traces d’un inconnu, 1798-1876. In: COMPTES rendus: approches de l’histoire. Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales, Paris, ano 57, n. 1, p. 204-244, 2002. p. 240-242.
LORIGA, Sabina. O pequeno X: da biografia a historia. Belo Horizonte: Autentica, 2011.
LUSTOSA, Isabel. Insultos impressos: a guerra dos jornalistas na independencia: 1821-1823. Sao Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2000.
LYRA, Maria de Lourdes Viana. A utopia do poderoso imperio: Portugal e Brasil: bastidores da politica: 1798-1822. Rio de Janeiro: Sette Letras, 1994.
MACEDO, Joaquim Manoel de. Anno Biographico Brazileiro, 1876. Vol. III. Rio de Janeiro: Typographia e Litographia do Imperial Instituto Artistico, 1876.
MALERBA, Jurandir (org.). A Independencia brasileira: novas dimensoes. Rio de Janeiro: Editora FGV, 2006.
MARTINS, Rocha (coord.). Correspondencia do 2º visconde de Santarem: I volume: 1827-1828. Lisboa: A. Lamas Motta & Cia, 1918. p. 41-43. Disponivel em https://bit.ly/3ee1B0d. Acesso em: 18 jun. 2020.
MATTOS, Cassiano Spiridiao de Mello e. Snr. Redator da Gazeta do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. de Moreira & Garcez, 1821.
MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de. Prefacio. In: LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independencia: 1821-1822. 6. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1997. p. 11-16.
MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de. A outra independencia: o federalismo pernambucano de 1817 a 1824. Sao Paulo: Editora 34, 2004.
MELO, Jeronymo de Avelar Figueira de (org.). A correspondencia do Barao de Wenzel de Mareschal. RHIGB, Rio de Janeiro, t. 77, v. 129, p. 165-244, ​1914.
MELO, Jeronymo de Avelar Figueira de (org.). A correspondencia do Barao de Wenzel de Mareschal. RIHGB, Rio de Janeiro, t. 80, v. 134, p. 10-148, 1920.
MEMORIA Explicativa do Anti-Constitucional o Excellentissimo Senhor D. Manoel de Portugal e Castro, Governador e Capitao General de Minas Geraes, tanto no Acto do Juramento das Bases da Constituicao no dia 17 de julho, como no das Eleicoes de Comarca nos dias 19 e 20 de agosto deste anno de 1821. [S. l.: s. n.], 1821.
MENEZES, Francisco d’Alpuim. Portugal e o Brazil: observacoes politicas aos ultimos acontecimentos do Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: Imp. Nacional, 1822.
MOREIRA, Maria Eunice (org.). Uma voz ao sul: os versos de Maria Clemencia da Silveira Sampaio. Florianopolis: Ed. das Mulheres, 2003.
MOREL, Marco. As transformacoes dos espacos publicos: imprensa, atores politicos e sociabilidades na cidade imperial (1820-1840). Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 2005.
MOTA, Carlos Guilherme. 1822: dimensoes. Sao Paulo: Perspectiva, 1972.
MOTTA, Marly Silva da. A nacao faz 100 anos: a questao nacional no centenario da Independencia. Rio de Janeiro: Editora da Fundacao Getulio Vargas, 1992.
NEVES, Guilherme Pereira. Do Imperio Luso-Brasileiro ao Imperio do Brasil (1789-1822). Ler historia, Lisboa, v. 27-28, p. 75-102, 1995.
NEVES, Guilherme Pereira. E recebera merce: a Mesa da Consciencia e Ordens e o clero secular no Brasil, 1808-1828. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Nacional, 1997.
NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. O Imperio Luso-Brasileiro redefinido: o debate politico da independencia (1820-1822). Revista do IHGB, Rio de Janeiro, v. 156, n. 387, p. 297-307, 1995.
NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. A “guerra de penas”: os impressos politicos e a independencia do Brasil. Tempo, Rio de Janeiro, n. 8, p. 41-65, 1999.
NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. Corcundas e constitucionais: a cultura politica da Independencia (1820-1822). Rio de Janeiro: Revan, 2003.
NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. Napoleao Bonaparte: imaginario e politica em Portugal: c. 1808-1810. Sao Paulo: Alameda, 2008.
​NOTA de que consta nesta Intendencia Geral da Policia acerca de Jose Anastacio Falcao, datada em 24 de marco de 1828. In: MARTINS, Rocha (coord.). Correspondencia do 2º visconde de Santarem: I volume: 1827-1828. Lisboa: A. Lamas Motta & Cia, 1918. p. 41-43. Disponivel em https://bit.ly/3ee1B0d. Acesso em: 18 jun. 2020.
NOVAIS, Fernando. Portugal e Brasil na crise do antigo sistema colonial (1777-1808). Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 1979.
O CAMPEAO PORTUGUES OU O AMIGO DO POVO E DO REI CONSTITUCIONAL. Lisboa, v. 1, 1822.
OLIVEIRA, Cecilia Helena L. de Salles. A astucia liberal: relacoes de mercado e projetos politicos no Rio de Janeiro (1820-1824). Sao Paulo: Icone, 1999.
PALHARES-BURKE, Maria Lucia Garcia. The Spectator: o teatro das luzes: dialogo e imprensa no seculo XVIII. Sao Paulo: Hucitec 1995.
PIMENTA, Joao Paulo Garrido. Estado e nacao no fim dos imperios ibericos no Prata (1808-1828). Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 2002.
PIMENTA, Joao Paulo Garrido. A Independencia do Brasil: um balanco da producao historiografica recente. In: CHUST, Manuel; SERRANO, Jose Antonio (ed.). Debates sobre las independencias iberoamericanas. Madrid: Iberoamericana, 2007. p. 143-157.
PINHO, Wanderley. Saloes e damas do Segundo Reinado. 3. ed. Sao Paulo: Martins, 1959.
POLICIA da Corte. Codice 323, v. 6, fl. 101. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Nacional do Rio de Janeiro,1821.
POLLACK, Michael. Memoire, oublie, silence. In: POLLACK, Michael. Vienne 1900: une identite blessee. Paris: Metailie, 1993. p. 28-29.
PRADO JUNIOR, Caio. Evolucao politica do Brasil. Sao Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 1933.
REBELLO, Jose. Carta ao redactor do Espelho sobre as questoes do tempo. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Santos & Sousa, 1822.
REIS, Joao Jose. O jogo duro do dois de julho: o “partido negro” na independencia da Bahia. In: REIS, Joao Jose; SILVA, Eduardo. Negociacao e conflito: a resistencia negra no Brasil escravista. Sao Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1989. p. 79-98.
REQUERIMENTO, rasao e justica: representacao dirigida a D. Pedro I de mulheres no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1823.
​REVEL, Jacques. Entrevista com Jacques Revel. Entrevistadora: Marieta de Moraes Ferreira. Revista Estudos Historicos, Rio de Janeiro, v. 10, n. 19, p. 121-140, 1997.
REVERBERO CONSTITUCIONAL FLUMINENSE. Rio de Janeiro, n. 7, 15 dez. 1821.
REVERBERO CONSTITUCIONAL FLUMINENSE. Rio de Janeiro, n. 16, 10 set. 1822.
RIBEIRO, Gladys Sabina. A liberdade em construcao: identidade nacional e conflitos antilusitanos no Primeiro Reinado. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumara, 2002.
RIBEIRO, Maria Aparecida. Imagens do Brasil na obra de Garrett: invocacoes e exorcismos. Revista Camoes, Lisboa, n. 4, p. 115-127, 1999. Disponivel em: https://bit.ly/37DT5VM. Acesso em: 18 jun. 2020.
RIO de Janeiro. Lata 195, maco 06, pasta 02. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Historico do Itamarati, 1821.
RIO de Janeiro. Lata 195, maco 06, pasta 13. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Historico do Itamarati, [1821].
RODRIGUES, Jose Honorio. Independencia: revolucao e contrarrevolucao: as Forcas Armadas. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria Francisco Alves Editora S.A., 1975.
SENTINELA DA LIBERDADE NA GUARITA DE PERNAMBUCO. Recife,n. 32, 23 jul. 1823.
SENTINELA DA LIBERDADE NA GUARITA DE PERNAMBUCO. Recife,n. 39, 19 ago. 1823.
SENTINELA DA LIBERDADE NA GUARITA DE PERNAMBUCO. Recife,n. 50, 24 set. 1823.
SILVA, Maria Beatriz Nizza da. Movimento constitucional e separatismo no Brasil: 1821-1823. Lisboa: Horizonte, 1988.
SLEMIAN, Andrea. Vida politica em tempo de crise: Rio de Janeiro (1808-1824). Sao Paulo: Hucitec, 2006.
SOUZA, Iara Lis Carvalho. Patria coroada: o Brasil como corpo autonomo 1780-1831. Sao Paulo: Editora Unesp, 1999.
VAINFAS, Ronaldo. Os protagonistas anonimos da Historia: micro-historia. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 2002.
Recebido em: 08/04/2020 – Aprovado em: 12/05/2020
* ↑ Text linked to the project Cientista do Nosso Estado / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ), 2018-2021 (Civil war, mutiny and revolution in the early days of the Empire of Brazil: the political pamphlets of 1822-1825), to the Productivity Scholarship of the National Council of Scientific and Technological Development and to Prociência / University of the State of Rio de Janeiro. Support from Faperj to carry out the English version. I thank Celia Cristina Migliaccio for the translation.
* ↑ University of the State of Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro – Rio de Janeiro – Brazil.
* ↑ Full Professor of Modern History at the History Department of the Institute of Philosophy of Human Sciences at the State University of Rio de Janeiro. E-mail: lubastos52@gmail.com.
* ↑ POLLACK, Michael. Mémoire, oublie, silence. In: POLLACK, Michael. Vienne 1900: une identité blessée. Paris: Métailié, 1993. p. 28-29.
* ↑ For the quotes, see LORIGA, Sabina. Alain Corbin: Le monde retrouvé de Louis-François Pinagot, sur les traces d’un inconnu, 1798-1876. In: COMPTES rendus: approches de l’histoire. Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales, Paris, year 57, n. 1, p. 204-244, 2002. p. 240-242. Para o Pequeno X, cf. Idem. O Pequeno X: da biografia à história. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2011.
* ↑ ADELMAN, Jeremy. Sovereignty and revolution in the Iberian Atlantic. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
* ↑ REVEL, Jacques. Interiew with Jacques Revel. Interviewer: Marieta de Moraes Ferreira. Historical Studies Magazine, Rio de Janeiro, v. 10, n. 19, p. 121-140, 1997.
* ↑ For the study of the 100 years of the Independence Celebration, cf. MOTTA, Marly Silva da. The Nation turns 100 years: the national issue in the Independence Centennial. Rio de Janeiro: Publisher of Fundação Getúlio Vargas, 1992.
* ↑ LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independência (1821-1822). São Paulo: Melhoramentos Publisher, 1922. See chapters I and XXI. This work was criticized in many aspects at the time by Capistrano de Abreu; cf. letter of August 3rd, in ABREU, Capistrano de. Correspondência de Capistrano de Abreu. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 1977. v. 2. It was also criticized at the celebration of the 150 years of the Independence by RODRIGUES, José Honório. Independência: revolução e contrarrevolução: as Forças Armadas no Rio de Janeiro. Publisher Livraria Francisco Alves S.A., 1975. p. 16.
* ↑ MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de. Prefácio. In: LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independência: 1821-1822. 6. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1997. p. 11-16. Last phrase p. 16.
* ↑ LIMA, Alceu de Amoroso. O Jornal. Rio de Janeiro, n. 1247, 4 feb. 1923. Available in: https://bit.ly/3dfGTLW. Accessed in Dec 20, 2019. Part of this article appears in the bookflap of LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independência: 1821-1822. 6. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1997.
* ↑ For the writing analysis of the history in Oliveira Lima, cf. KÄFER, Eduardo Luis Flach. Entre memória e história: a historiografia da Independência nos cem anos de emancipação. 2016. Dissertation (Master in History) - Escola de Humanidades, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2016. Available in: https://bit.ly/30V4Ndd. Accessed in Jan 30th, 2020.
* ↑ LIMA, Alceu de Amoroso. O Jornal... Op. Cit.
* ↑ GAZETA DE NOTÍCIAS. Rio de Janeiro, n. 206, Sep 7th, 1922. p. 3. Available at: https://bit.ly/3dgQxhr. Accessed in Jan 3rd 2020
* ↑ PRADO JUNIOR, Caio. Evolução política do Brasil. São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 1933.
* ↑ NOVAIS, Fernando. Portugal e Brasil na crise do antigo sistema colonial (1777-1808). São Paulo: Hucitec, 1979; MOTA, Carlos Guilherme. 1822: dimensões. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 1972.
* ↑ DIAS, Maria Odila Silva Dias. A interiorização da metrópole (1808-1853). In: MOTA, Carlos Guilherme. 1822: dimensões. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 1972. p. 160-184.
* ↑ Cf. CARVALHO, José Murilo de. A construção da ordem: a elite política imperial. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 1980.
* ↑ SILVA, Maria Beatriz Nizza da. Movimento Constitucional e separatismo no Brasil: 1821-1823. Lisboa: Horizonte, 1988; ALEXANDRE, Valentim. Os sentidos do Império: questão nacional e questão colonial na crise do Antigo Regime português. Porto: Afrontamento, 1993; LYRA, Maria de Lourdes Viana. A utopia do poderoso império: Portugal e Brasil: bastidores da política: 1798-1822. Rio de Janeiro: Sette Letras, 1994; NEVES, Guilherme Pereira. Do Império Luso-Brasileiro ao Império do Brasil (1789-1822). Ler história, Lisboa, v. 27-28, p. 75-102, 1995; NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. O Império Luso-Brasileiro redefinido: o debate político da independência (1820-1822). Revista do IHGB, Rio de Janeiro, v. 156, n. 387, p. 297-307, 1995; NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. Corcundas e constitucionais: a cultura política da Independência (1820-1822). Rio de Janeiro: Revan, 2003; BERBEL, Márcia Regina. A nação como artefato: deputados do Brasil nas cortes portuguesas (1821-1822). São Paulo: Hucitec, 1999; SOUZA, Iara Lis Carvalho. Pátria coroada: o Brasil como corpo autônomo 1780-1831. São Paulo: Editora Unesp, 1999.
* ↑ Cf., among others, KRAAY, Hendrik. A invenção do Sete de Setembro, 1822-1831. Almanack Braziliense, São Paulo, n. 11, p. 52-61, 2010; RIBEIRO, Gladys Sabina. A liberdade em construção: identidade nacional e conflitos antilusitanos no Primeiro Reinado. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará, 2002; JANCSÓ, István; PIMENTA, João Paulo G. Peças de um mosaico (ou apontamentos para o estudo da emergência da identidade nacional brasileira). In: MOTA, Carlos G. (org.). Viagem incompleta: a experiência brasileira (1500-2000): formação: histórias. São Paulo: Ed. Senac, 2000. p. 127-171; PIMENTA, João Paulo Garrido. Estado e nação no fim dos impérios ibéricos no Prata (1808-1828). São Paulo: Hucitec, 2002; OLIVEIRA, Cecília Helena L. de Salles. A astúcia liberal: relações de mercado e projetos políticos no Rio de Janeiro (1820-1824). São Paulo: Icone, 1999;COELHO, Geraldo Mártires. Anarquistas, demagogos e dissidentes: a imprensa liberal no Pará de 1822. Belém: CEJUP, 1993; NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. A “guerra de penas”: os impressos políticos e a independência do Brasil. Tempo, Rio de Janeiro, n. 8, p. 41-65, 1999; LUSTOSA, Isabel. Insultos impressos: a guerra dos jornalistas na independência: 1821-1823. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2000; MOREL, Marco. As transformações dos espaços públicos: imprensa, atores políticos e sociabilidades na cidade imperial (1820-1840). São Paulo: Hucitec, 2005; e BARATA, Alexandre Mansur. Maçonaria, sociabilidade ilustrada e Independência do Brasil (1790-1822). São Paulo: Annablume, 2006.
* ↑ For further analysis on the historiography of Independence, cf. COSTA, Wilma Peres. A Independência na historiografia brasileira. In: JANCSÓ, István (org.). Independência: história e historiografia. São Paulo: Hucitec, 2005. p. 53-118; MALERBA, Jurandir (org.). A Independência brasileira: novas dimensões. Rio de Janeiro: Editora FGV, 2006; e PIMENTA, João Paulo Garrido. A Independência do Brasil: um balanço da produção historiográfica recente. In: CHUST, Manuel; SERRANO, José Antonio (ed.). Debates sobre las independencias iberoamericanas. Madrid: Iberoamericana, 2007. p. 143-157.
* ↑ About the study of the Independence in other provinces cf., above all the articles that constituted the book organized by JANCSÓ, István (org.). Independência: história e historiografia. São Paulo: Hucitec, 2005
* ↑ MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de. A outra independência: o federalismo pernambucano de 1817 a 1824 SãoPaulo: Editora 34, 2004. p. 11.
* ↑ As an example, for the issue of slaves cf. REIS, João José. O jogo duro do dois de julho: o “partido negro” na independência da Bahia. In: REIS, João José; SILVA, Eduardo. Negociação e conflito: a resistência negra no Brasil escravista. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1989. p. 79-98. For the popular layers, cf. CARVALHO, José Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello (org.). Às armas cidadãos! Panfletos manuscritos da Independência do Brasil (1820-1823). São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2012.
* ↑ For the study of anonymous protagonists, cf. VAINFAS, Ronaldo. Os protagonistas anônimos da História: micro-história. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 2002.
* ↑ For the study of handwritten panphlets, cf. CARVALHO, José Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello. Às armas cidadãos! … Op. cit.
* ↑ RIO de Janeiro. Lata 195, maço 06, pasta 02. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Histórico do Itamarati, 1821. Transcrito em CARVALHO, José Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello. Às armas cidadãos! … Op. cit., p. 132-133.
* ↑ GÊNIO CONSTITUCIONAL. Porto, n. 41, 17 nov. 1821.
* ↑ DIÁRIO DO GOVERNO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 86, 18 abr. 1823.
* ↑ RIO de Janeiro. Lata 195, pack 06, folder 13. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Histórico do Itamarati, [1821]. Transcripted by CARVALHO, José Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia; BASILE, Marcello. Às armas cidadãos! … Op. cit., p. 128. The date of 1821 is attributed since the Mareschal, representative of Austria in Brazil, affirmed that in September 1821, sedious posters began to appear summoning the Portuguese to arms. Cf. MELO, Jeronymo de Avelar Figueira de (org.). A correspondência do Barão de Wenzel de Mareschal. RHIGB, Rio de Janeiro, t. 77, v. 129, p. 165-244, 1914.
* ↑ As regards rhetoric, cf. CARVALHO, José Murilo de. História intelectual no Brasil: a retórica comove de leitura. Revista Topoi, Rio de Janeiro, v. 1, n. 1, p. 123-152, 2000.
* ↑ KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Los estratos del tiempo: estudios sobre la historia. Barcelona: Ediciones Paidós, 2001.
* ↑ Um documento inédito para a história da Independência. Transcripted by Luiz Mott em MOTA, Carlos Guilherme. 1822: dimensões ... Op. Cit., p. 482.
* ↑ Cf. REIS, João José. O jogo duro... Op. Cit.
* ↑ FRANÇA, António d’Oliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Antônio Monteiro. Cartas baianas: 1821-1824: subsídios para o estudo dos problemas da opção na Independência brasileira. São Paulo: Companhia Editora Nacional, 1980, p. 36 e 39.
* ↑ IDADE D’OURO DO BRAZIL. Salvador, n. 8, 28 jan. 1823.
* ↑ KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Futuro passado: contribuição à semântica dos tempos históricos. Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto, 2006, p. 305-327.
* ↑ BRASIL. Decisão 113, de 30 de julho de 1823. In: BRASIL. Colecção das decisões do governo do Império do Brazil de 1823. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1887, p. 82.
* ↑ REIS, João José. O jogo duro ... Op. Cit.; KRAAY, Hendrik. “Em outra coisa não falavam os pardos, cabras e crioulos”: o “recrutamento” de escravos na guerra da Independência na Bahia. Revista Brasileira de História, São Paulo, v. 22, n. 43, p. 109-126, 2002.
* ↑ MELO, Jeronymo de Avelar Figueira de (org.). A correspondência do Barão de Wenzel de Mareschal. RIHGB, Rio de Janeiro, t. 80, v. 134, p. 10-148, 1920. Ofício 20 abril 1822, p. 58.
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 58-59.
* ↑ CORREIO DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 13, 24 abr. 1822.
* ↑ O CAMPEÃO PORTUGUÊS OU O AMIGO DO POVO E DO REI CONSTITUCIONAL. Lisboa,v. 1, 1822.
* ↑ Ibidem.
* ↑ Ibidem. Cf. MENEZES, Francisco d’Alpuim. Portugal e o Brazil: observações politicas aos últimos acontecimentos do Brazil. Rio de Janeiro: Imp. Nacional, 1822, p. 14, my emphasis: “Quem lhe afiançaria que o pavoroso flagelo da anarquia, esta assoladora peste das sociedades, não arvorava o seu negro pavilhão?”.
* ↑ This conceipt is used under the perspective of CHARTIER, Roger. A história cultural: entre práticas e representações. 2. ed. Lisboa: Difel: 2002, p. 13-28. For the idea of social fear in times of commotion, cf. LEFEBVRE, Georges. O grande medo de 1789: os camponeses e a Revolução Francesa. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Campus, 1979.
* ↑ NOTA de que consta nesta Intendência Geral da Polícia acerca de José Anastácio Falcão, datada em 24 de março de 1828. In: MARTINS, Rocha (coord.). Correspondencia do 2º visconde de Santarém: I volume: 1827-1828. Lisboa: A. Lamas Motta & Cia, 1918. p. 41-43. Available at: https://bit.ly/3ee1B0d. Accessed on Jun 18th, 2020.
* ↑ ALMEIDA, Raphael Rocha de. A trajetória política e as ideias de José Anastácio Falcão em meio à crise do império atlântico português (1808-1828). In: SIMPÓSIO NACIONAL DE HISTÓRIA, 30., 2019, Recife. Anais […]. São Paulo: Anpuh, 2019. Available at: https://bit.ly/3ehgVt0. Accessed on Jun 18th, 2020.
* ↑ Cf. FALCÃO, José Anastácio. O alfaiate constitucional: diálogo entre o alfaiate e os freguezes. Partes I-IV. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Nacional, 1821; Idem, Os anti-constitucionaes: prova-se que são maos christãos, maos vassallos: e os maiores inimigos da nossa patria. Parte I. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Regia, 1821.
* ↑ GAZETA DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 97, 13 out. 1821. The subscription to the work was reported by the DIÁRIO DO RIO DE JANEIRO. Rio de Janeiro, n. 23, 25 jun. 1821. In the add, it was stated that the work should also please the Audience, as it was conceived “in such a sense, that it can only stimulate those whose shoes would fit”.
* ↑ Cf. PALHARES-BURKE, Maria Lúcia Garcia. The Spectator: o teatro das luzes: diálogo e imprensa no século XVIII. São Paulo: Hucitec 1995, p. 52-55.
* ↑ POLÍCIA da Corte. Códice 323, v. 6, fl. 101. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Nacional do Rio de Janeiro,1821. Cf. também SLEMIAN, Andréa. Vida política em tempo de crise: Rio de Janeiro (1808-1824). São Paulo: Hucitec, 2006, p. 149-150.
* ↑ Nota de que ... Op. Cit.
* ↑ HESPANHA, António Manuel (ed.). Poder e instituições na Europa do Antigo Regime. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 1984.
* ↑ COSMOPOLITAS, Tresgeminos. Carta ao redactor da Malagueta. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, [1822]; REBELLO, José. Carta ao redactor do Espelho sobre as questões do tempo. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. Santos & Sousa, 1822.
* ↑ CARVALHO, José Murilo de. Introdução ao volume I. CARVALHO, José Murilo de; BASTOS, Lucia (MEU NOME NÃO TEM ACENTO); BASILE, Marcello (org.). Guerra literária: panfletos da Independência do Brasil (1820-1823). Vol. 1: Cartas. Belo Horizonte: Editora da UFMG, 2014. p. 69-70.
* ↑ BRASIL-Estados Unidos, 1824-1829. Rio de Janeiro: Centro de História e Documentação Diplomática, 2009, p. 9-15.
* ↑ LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independência: o Império Brasileiro (1821-1889). 4. ed. São Paulo: Ed. Melhoramentos, 1962, p. 137, nota de rodapé 12.
* ↑ There is a master’s thesis on the author, focusing mainy on his performance in the United States, defended in 2015: CRUZ, Abner Neemias da. As práticas políticas de Silvestre Rebello: um diplomata brasileiro nos Estados Unidos da América, 1824-1829. 2015. Dissertação (Mestrado em História) - Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Franca, 2015. Disponível em: https://bit.ly/3eeWY5Y. Acesso em: 28 dez. 2019.
* ↑ REVÉRBERO CONSTITUCIONAL FLUMINENSE. Rio de Janeiro, n. 7, 15 dez. 1821.
* ↑ Cf. LIMA, Manuel de Oliveira. O Movimento da Independência: 1821-1822. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia, 1989, p. 96-97.
* ↑ BARMAN, Roderick. Brazil: the forging of a nation (1798-1852). Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988, p. 75
* ↑ At the University of Coimbra, he was a colleague of Almeida Garrett, being later one of the characters invoked in his work under the name of Spiridião Cassiano di Mello i Matoôs. Cf. RIBEIRO, Maria Aparecida. Images of Brazil in the work of Garrett: invocações e exorcismos. Revista Camões, Lisboa, n. 4, p. 115-127, 1999. Available at: https://bit.ly/37DT5VM. Accessed in Jun 18th, 2020.
* ↑ Explanatory memory of the Anti-Constitutional Mr. Manuel de Portugal e Castro, Governor and Captain of Minas Geraes, both in the Act of Oath of the Bases of the Constitution on July 17th and in the District Elections on the 19th and 20th of August in the year of 1821 [s.n.t.], p.2.
* ↑ MATTOS, Cassiano Spiridião de Mello e. Snr. redator da Gazeta do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro: Tip. de Moreira & Garcez, 1821, p. 4. There is an answer to this article, written by Francisco Adjuto Garcia, accusing Cassiano of hunchback. Cf. CARTA addressed to Cassiano Spiridião de Mello e Mattos, asking for the definition of hunchback or constitutional, dated December 17th, 1821. Rio de Janeiro: Imp. Nacional, [1821].
* ↑ MACEDO, Joaquim Manoel de. Anno Biographico Brazileiro, 1876. Vol. III. Rio de Janeiro: Typographia e Litographia do Imperial Instituto Artistico, 1876, p. 56.
* ↑ Ibidem.
* ↑ CORREA, António Barbosa. Manifesto ao Grão Brasil, Império dos Impérios do Mundo, oferecido à S. M. Imperial Defensor Perpetuo do Brazil by António Barbosa Correa Mineiro Rústico: ligado às profecias do Bandarra, e de outros profetas. Org. Loryel Rocha.Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Mukharajj, 2017.
* ↑ For the analysis of sebastianism: cf. HERMANN, Jacqueline. O sebastianismo e a Restauração Portuguesa. Voz Lusíada, Lisboa, n. 11, p. 3-16, 1999. HERMANN, Jacqueline. No reino do desejado: a construção do sebastianismo em Portugal, séculos XVI e XVII. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1998. For the reissue of Bandarra’s verses at the time of the Napoleonic invasions, cf. NEVES, Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira. Napoleão Bonaparte: imaginário e política em Portugal: c. 1808-1810. São Paulo: Alameda, 2008, p. 251-254.
* ↑ CORREA, António Barbosa. Manifesto ao Grão Brasil ... Op. cit. p. 102-103.
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 103-104.
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 6-7, emphasis of the author
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 55
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 65.
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 57.
* ↑ KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Futuro passado: contribuição ... Op. Cit., p. 309.
* ↑ LAMENTOS de huma bahiana na triste crise, em que vio sua patria oppressa pelo despotismo constitucional da tropa Auxiliadora de Portugal. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1822, p. 3-4.
* ↑ MOREIRA, Maria Eunice (org.). Uma voz ao sul: os versos de Maria Clemência da Silveira Sampaio. Florianópolis: Ed. das Mulheres, 2003.
* ↑ NEVES, Guilherme Pereira. E receberá mercê: a Mesa da Consciência e Ordens e o clero secular no Brasil, 1808-1828. Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Nacional, 1997.
* ↑ REQUERIMENTO, rasão e justiça: representação dirigida a D. Pedro I de mulheres no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Imprensa Nacional, 1823, f. 1.
* ↑ SENTINELA DA LIBERDADE NA GUARITA DE PERNAMBUCO. Recife, nº 32, 23 de julho de 1823.
* ↑ Ibidem, n. 39, 19 ago. 1823; Ibidem, n. 50, 24 set. 1823.
* ↑ Ibidem, n. 32, 23 jul. 1823. Data on Leocádia de Melo Moniz could not be found yet. For a study of Cipriano Barata, cf. BARATA, Cipriano Sentinela da liberdade e outros escritos. Org. e ed. Marco Morel. São Paulo: Edusp, 2008.
* ↑ For the conceipt, cf. CANECA, Frei Joaquim do Amor Divino. Dissertações sobre o que se deve entender por pátria do cidadão e deveres deste para com a mesma pátria. In: MELLO, Evaldo Cabral de (org.). Frei Joaquim do Amor Divino Caneca. São Paulo: Editora 34, 2001, p. 53-99.
* ↑ FRANÇA, António d’Oliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Antônio Monteiro. Cartas baianas: 1821 ... Op. cit., p. 37, carta de 13 de abril de 1822.
* ↑ Ibidem, p. 82, letter dated August 24th, 1822.
* ↑ For the conceipt, cf. CANECA, Frei Joaquim do Amor Divino. Dissertações sobre o ... Op. cit.
* ↑ Cf. FRANÇA, António d’Oliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Antônio Monteiro. Cartas baianas: 1821 ... Op. Cit., p. 125-126.
* ↑ Cf. PINHO, Wanderley. Salões e damas do Segundo Reinado. 3. ed. São Paulo: Martins, 1959, p. 296.
* ↑ REVERBERO CONSTITUCIONAL FLUMINENSE, Rio de Janeiro, n. 16, 10 set. 1822.
* ↑ Cf. CARDOSO, Antonio Manuel Monteiro. Introdugdo. In: FRANGA, Anténio Oliveira Pinto da; CARDOSO, Antonio Manuel Monteiro (org.). Cartas baianas: o liberalismo e a Independência do Brasil (1821-1823). Lisboa: Imprensa Nacional, 2008, p. 33-45.
* ↑ KOSELLEGK, Reinhardt. Futuro passado: contribuição ... Op. cit., p. 97-118.
* ↑ KOSELLECK, Reinhart. Futuro passado: contribuigao ... Op. cit., p. 31-39.
This work is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows free use, distribution, and creation of derivatives, so long as the license is unchanged and clearly noted, and the original author is attributed.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse