AHC: A more stable first reign in Brazil

I was really confusing about posting this question in the ASB page or here, but finally i chose. Also, it has a long exposition text, so be patient.
The reign of Pedro I as emperor of Brazil, also known as the first reign, was marked by instability and rebellions (including the only successful separatist movement in the country's history). Many of this problems were caused by the emperor, as Pedro closed the first Constituent Assembly because he didn't like the preliminary draft of the constitution they made (The draft established that only owners of a certain amount of land could vote; Pedro imposed a voting system based on income, instead). In doing so, the emperor gained the antipathy of the Brazilian agrarian elite and came to be seen as a tyrant. This motivated many revolts, like the separatist movement called "Confederação do Equador", and made the his popularity fall.

So your challenge is to make this period at least less of a mess. Bonus if you keep all the provinces (no independent Cisplatina/Uruguay) or/and if you can keep Dom Pedro I in the throne until his death.
 
Why did you consider posting this on ASB? Out of all the nonsense we usually see here on a daily basis, you think making the first ten years in independent Brazil slightly less chaotic is ASB?
 
Why did you consider posting this on ASB? Out of all the nonsense we usually see here on a daily basis, you think making the first ten years in independent Brazil slightly less chaotic is ASB?
Not exactly. I originally wanted to post it as a WI, and so i began to doubt because the own emperor caused most of the problems and he would need to change his personality (perhaps a better education?), so i decided to post as a challenge.
 
No one? I know it can be difficult (i even dont know how), but there is no way to make the first reign less chaotic?

Maybe let Pedro not be so enamoured of Napoléon. I mean, he practically hero-worshipped the man. Or let him wed a Russian grand duchess (João tried both St. Petersburg and Vienna for a bride for his son in the hopes of offsetting the British power in South America) instead. Said grand duchess might not be able to influence Pedro in the same way as Maria Leopoldine did. In fact, said grand duchess might temper Pedro's more liberal sentiments. @nandalf?
 
Maybe let Pedro not be so enamoured of Napoléon. I mean, he practically hero-worshipped the man. Or let him wed a Russian grand duchess (João tried both St. Petersburg and Vienna for a bride for his son in the hopes of offsetting the British power in South America) instead. Said grand duchess might not be able to influence Pedro in the same way as Maria Leopoldine did. In fact, said grand duchess might temper Pedro's more liberal sentiments. @nandalf?
Pedro's problems in Brazil had more to do with his "authoritarian-liberal" napoleonic ways ("the whole world must learn our peaceful ways by force!" almost describes his rule in Brazil) than with his liberal sentiments. He was frequently accused to be a absolutist by the brazilian elite for imposing his will and allying with portuguese merchants. I don't know if a queen from a autocratic regime would help with this ways.
 
I've read that Pedro had the wrong temperament to effectively rule. He was impetuous and unskilled in the nuances of diplomacy. He wanted a liberal gov't, but he also wanted a lot of the power of an autocrat. And he (allegedly) never met a damsel he wouldn't do the boom boom with, and eventually openly flaunted his mistress. He simply wasn't the man for the job. Perhaps a different sperm hits the egg at conception, and he has a better temperament.

the cisplatine war is going to be a tough one. Uruguay did not want to be part of Brazil, identifying more with the Spanish Argentina. Both sides were young nations lacking military ability. Ultimately, it was a very costly war which Brazil was unable to fight effectively. While you're conjuring up PODs, perhaps a freak wave capsizes and drowns the 33. Maybe that POD allows the OTL Pedro to maintain control. No war means more time to develop as a nation, with more money, and Pedro doesn't go south to command the army, where he meets the mistress (forget her name) who he brings back to Rio and parades her around in public. With time, maybe he learns to accept Leopoldina as a mate who has some political wits.
 
And he (allegedly) never met a damsel he wouldn't do the boom boom with

He's no worse and no better than most other male monarchs (and some female ones) in that regard. However, Pedro did grow a conscience when he married his second wife, since apparently he never looked at another woman. And his dying(?) words were "Leopoldina, forgive me!" (his infidelities?)
 
He's no worse and no better than most other male monarchs (and some female ones) in that regard. However, Pedro did grow a conscience when he married his second wife, since apparently he never looked at another woman. And his dying(?) words were "Leopoldina, forgive me!" (his infidelities?)[/QU reigm??









Let me try to add something to the topic:

1-D.Pedro I did look to other women after he maried Dona Amélia,but he did learn something from dona leopoldina´s death,he respected his 2 wife in not being public about his affairs. Paulo Rizzuti tels about it inhis book about D. Pedro.

2-The problem with having a russian grand duchess instead of Leopoldina is that you wouyld derail the independance movement completly,dona Leopoldina took the brazilian side way before D.Pedro,and was a key factor in bringing him to the movement,she was also one of the leaders of the " resistance" movement,better keeo her.

3-Dona leopoldina was a lot more prepared to govern than D.Pedro,even politicaly,so why not use her as a ruler for the first reign?The congress and army sent a delagation to ask her to rule the country,they would acclaim princess maria that Glória and force D.pedro to abdicate,they went to her claiming she was respected,popular and everybody would accept her leadership,her answer was that altough meaning well,she could not accept,because her husband would fell betraued and would never forgive her.

4-kill d.Pedro at the cisplatina war and let the emprees survive and rule the empire.
 
Last edited:
His father doesn't leave Brazil to topple his reactionary brother Miguel who literally ripped apart the Portuguese constitution? Pedro was just five years old when he became emperor.
 
His father doesn't leave Brazil to topple his reactionary brother Miguel who literally ripped apart the Portuguese constitution? Pedro was just five years old when he became emperor.
that's Pedro II who ascended the throne at 5.

discussion is about Pedro I (the father).

If Pedro I stays in Brazil, it's a good possibility he gets thrown out. not a foregone conclusion, but Pedro didn't really have what it takes to sooth a fractured country.
 
Perhaps a different sperm hits the egg at conception, and he has a better temperament.

This may be the easiest form. Also, OTL Pedro had not been involved in politics before being turned into prince regent of Brazil, and so he lacked experience as a ruler. So the ATL Pedro should be introduced to political affairs early and have a better education in general.
 
This may be the easiest form. Also, OTL Pedro had not been involved in politics before being turned into prince regent of Brazil, and so he lacked experience as a ruler. So the ATL Pedro should be introduced to political affairs early and have a better education in general.
one reads about heirs not being properly educated/prepared quite a bit. Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. you would think a decent education would be mandatory for those at the top of the line.
 
one reads about heirs not being properly educated/prepared quite a bit. Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. you would think a decent education would be mandatory for those at the top of the line.

It's a counter-measure from those at the top of the line. A politically educated heir is a possible threat to the monarch. (See Emperor Paul's issue with Alexander I).
Maria I wasn't educated for the role (neither was Maria Theresia or Queen Victoria), and ISTR REFUSED the suggestion that her eldsst son be removed from his parents' care to be educated by Pombal (she might've feared (like Paul did) that the minister would convince José I to bypass her in the succession).
 
It's a counter-measure from those at the top of the line. A politically educated heir is a possible threat to the monarch. (See Emperor Paul's issue with Alexander I).
Maria I wasn't educated for the role (neither was Maria Theresia or Queen Victoria), and ISTR REFUSED the suggestion that her eldsst son be removed from his parents' care to be educated by Pombal (she might've feared (like Paul did) that the minister would convince José I to bypass her in the succession).
It's been a while since I've read that period of Portuguese history, but I thought I had read that Jose I was raised to be king. Joao was the one left unprepared when Jose I died before reaching the throne.

I get the reasoning (should have mentioned that in my post), I just don't agree with it. People are going to be a threat whether they're educated or not - that's a personality trait, IMO, and personality isn't something you learn. Being uneducated is just going to make it easier to be used/manipulated. I suspect (from my vantage point several centuries distant) Maria was more afraid of Pombal's machinations than Jose's. There are 'darned if you do, darned if you don't' arguments on either side of the coin, but in the long run, leaving an heir unprepared isn't good for the country. Of course, I'm not a pampered royal more concerned about my divine living than the fate of the country, but my inclination would be to work with my progeny since the better the state of the country the better my (and my family's) state of living can be. Plus, there's that whole 'keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer' thing. I've read enough history to know that a lot of monarchs didn't share my way of thinking.
 
It's been a while since I've read that period of Portuguese history, but I thought I had read that Jose I was raised to be king. Joao was the one left unprepared when Jose I died before reaching the throne.

I get the reasoning (should have mentioned that in my post), I just don't agree with it. People are going to be a threat whether they're educated or not - that's a personality trait, IMO, and personality isn't something you learn. Being uneducated is just going to make it easier to be used/manipulated. I suspect (from my vantage point several centuries distant) Maria was more afraid of Pombal's machinations than Jose's. There are 'darned if you do, darned if you don't' arguments on either side of the coin, but in the long run, leaving an heir unprepared isn't good for the country. Of course, I'm not a pampered royal more concerned about my divine living than the fate of the country, but my inclination would be to work with my progeny since the better the state of the country the better my (and my family's) state of living can be. Plus, there's that whole 'keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer' thing. I've read enough history to know that a lot of monarchs didn't share my way of thinking.

I agree with you. And admit there are a lot of second sons who have succeeded to thrones (whether unprepared or not is sometimes debatable). Henry VIII was a second son who was raised very differently to heir apparent Arthur, for instance. Or in Iberia, Isabel Clara Eugenia was groomed as a possible successor from childhood. One book dealing with her wrote "she was studying the art of statecraft when most girls her age were studying the art of adornment in the glass". But, Felipe II refused to educate his sons (D. Carlos or Felipe III) in like fashion. Not sure why. Although I suspect Isabel might've been his favourite.
 
D.João did not allow Pedro to participate in state business, he feared that Pedro would depose him. D.pedro was loyal to him though. I guess his experience with his wife, queen Carlota Joaquina, who was always plotting against him, had something to do with his insecurity. By the way, it was hard to tutor and teach a Bragança crown prince, since the tutor could not order the prince to do anything against his will, basically he had classes if he wanted. It was such a crazy situation that even when the prince was to be reprimanded, his best friend took the punishment in the hope that the prince would have pity on him, thus behaving better. It is really hard to teach someone, anyone, on these conditions.
 
Last edited:
was such a crazzy situation,that even when the prince was to be reprimended,his best friend took the punishment in the hope that the prince would have pity on him and behave better

Whipping-boys we're hardly unique to the Braganças, but it is rather an ineffective method of punishment
 
Top