Continuing the Empire of Brazil: The Prince Survives

So we all know the Empire of Brazil collapsed after a very quiet coup which deposed Pedro II from power. Pedro II no longer really cared about the monarchy and simply felt what would happen happened. But what if Prince Afonso survived and learned under his father to become a good ruler? Does that significantly alter the course of SA history as Brazil becomes the regions great power?

I'm intensely curious because I've read about Pedro II for a long time and I've often wondered what might happen if the monarchy did survive in Brazil whether that could allow Brazil to become great power status by the 1900s.
 
Well, Brazil would get where it is in OTL earlier.

And then you'd have a stable, constitutional monarchy that gradually democratizes with its own sphere in South America. At the least the USA will be glad that there's another large stable democracy in the Western Hemisphere, but also be pissed off because South America's less open to their influence.
 
From what I remember from history lessons, Dom Pedro alienated the three bases of power. His masonry and whatever else (can't remember) pissed off the Church; something something pissed off the military, and freeing the slaves etc pissed off the landed nobility/gentry. So you need to rectify that in order to preserve the monarchy.

Alternatively, Dom Afonso survives, and is recalled and groomed for power by Deodoro da Fonseca/Floriano Peixoto, á la Franco and Juan Carlos in Spain.
 
Well, Brazil would get where it is in OTL earlier.

And then you'd have a stable, constitutional monarchy that gradually democratizes with its own sphere in South America. At the least the USA will be glad that there's another large stable democracy in the Western Hemisphere, but also be pissed off because South America's less open to their influence.
Actually, the USA contributed to destabilize South American politics during the 20th century.

I don't know enough of Brazilian history to comment on the OP.
 
From what I remember from history lessons, Dom Pedro alienated the three bases of power. His masonry and whatever else (can't remember) pissed off the Church; something something pissed off the military, and freeing the slaves etc pissed off the landed nobility/gentry. So you need to rectify that in order to preserve the monarchy.

Namely he pissed off Nationalist Army Officers and the Landed Gentry who Owned Slaves. A huge reason why their coup worked was in part because of the loss of his son made Dom Pedro II become so apathetic and depressed about the future of his line (which essentially ended with him) and so he lost the spirit that could have fought the coup-ers..
 
From what I remember from history lessons, Dom Pedro alienated the three bases of power. His masonry and whatever else (can't remember) pissed off the Church; something something pissed off the military, and freeing the slaves etc pissed off the landed nobility/gentry. So you need to rectify that in order to preserve the monarchy.

Alternatively, Dom Afonso survives, and is recalled and groomed for power by Deodoro da Fonseca/Floriano Peixoto, á la Franco and Juan Carlos in Spain.

Well he was absurdly popular with the common people and most of the army. It was the officer corps who disliked him as he had made no major changes to army doctrine or any large contributions to the military in any way. This really annoyed them after they had fought all the recent wars, but it didn't mean that he was disliked as a whole. If the Emperor had merely spoken up and asked the army to step in the coup would have been crushed as the nationalist officers were only a small group.

But the landowners were prospering so outlawing slavery wasn't enough to sincerely tick them off into outright opposing the monarchy. Though they did side with an irritated church. If Afonso became Emperor he would most likely have to soothe those ruffled feathers and support the army. Which if the coup was carried out as per OTL and he stepped in and led forces to crush them might have led to a better lot for the army. Or is he served in the Paraguay War and saw that changes needed to be made.

Namely he pissed off Nationalist Army Officers and the Landed Gentry who Owned Slaves. A huge reason why their coup worked was in part because of the loss of his son made Dom Pedro II become so apathetic and depressed about the future of his line (which essentially ended with him) and so he lost the spirit that could have fought the coup-ers..

True, which is why I'm wondering what other people's opinions are on how his surviving son would have changed his personality.
 
I do think that should Dom Pedro have the force of will then Brazil very easily could be a constitutional monarchy to today.Though I am somewhat curious that if he had two sons or his father had more children if the nationalists may have put another on the throne if they had succeeded.

As for personality changed he probably would have been less depressing and apathetic.
 
The current king was popular enough that if his son hadnt died the coup likely would have been a complete failure, he was popular in the army and amongst Brazilian commoners and the one thing that really made him not oppose the coup was his depression brought on by the death of his son.
 
I think you are all giving too much importance to his sons' deaths as a cause of his depression. Sure, it was a source of it, but not the only one. It probably was caused by his education. When he was a child he his mother when he was only one year old, and later his father left him when he was only 5.

Since he became an Emperor, in order to make him the complete opposite of his father (uneducated, womaniser, bohemian and authoritarian) he was groomed to be the "perfect Emperor". Such education made him a very cult man, a polyglote who liked to study Sanskrit and Hebraic for example, but who had to leave his intelectual interests aside as he needed to face the burden of government since he was only 14.

The death of his sons in the 1840's made him depressed, but by the 1860's he had overcame it. What changed everything after the 1870's was basically three facts. The first was his first travel abroad, when he finally could pursue his intelectual interests (meeting artists, visiting museums and touristic places in Europe). After this, when he came back to Brazil, all he wanted was to plan other travels.

Then there the problems regarding his succession. He knew that his eldest daughter was disliked by the Brazilian elite (as she was too much religious, abolitionist, married with a hated Frenchman, among other things). The doubts about giving the throne to her or passing it directly to her first son or even to his grandson by his other daughter Leopoldina were a burden to him.

Finally, there was his diabetes, that by the end of the 1880's were causing him so much problems (especially somnolence during the day) that he was avoiding most of his public duties.

Also, while a son as a heir could probably help to keep the monarchy it wouldn't avoid the economical and political changes brought by the War of the Tripple Alliance and by Abolitionism. My oppinion is that if you want to keep the Empire the best bet would be avoid the war entirely. Having "Peter III" to succeed his father could delay the fall, but the social forces that made the Republic would still be there.
 
The social forces that made the Republic though we're, in my view on things, a minority. It seemed like the Bolsheviks taking power, only in this case being nationalist military officers and wealthy Land owners. Therefore, it seems possible to defeat, at the least, their Republic. Dom Pedro II was interested in replacing his special position as Emperor. What about his orderly transition?
 
only in this case being nationalist military officers and wealthy Land owners.

Who are exactly the forces that politically matter. If the monarchy loses the support of them, it won't be the former slaves or the tiny urban middle classes (that actually didn't care about the end of the Empire, BTW) that will save them.
 
Who are exactly the forces that politically matter. If the monarchy loses the support of them, it won't be the former slaves or the tiny urban middle classes (that actually didn't care about the end of the Empire, BTW) that will save them.

So, do you think a POD exists that could prevent Brazil from becoming a politically and economically corrupt republic?
 
Afonso survives, and the Emperor takes great pride in raising him up, in a way he never received from his parents. Afonso has military experience in the various wars of the period. By the 1880s, a sickly, world weary Emperor abdicates in the name of a young, energetic heir. Dom Pedro II then spends the rest of his life travelling and tinkering in a private lab.

Dom Afonso I reforms the military (possibly even before he's coronated), and continues the democratisation of Brazil, following in his father's liberal footsteps.

I can see the Empire lasting into the 20th century but really, you'll probably need a line of excellent monarchs to see survive to the present day. If Afonso is a beloved as his father and oversees economic growth, he may well set the course but who knows.
 
So, do you think a POD exists that could prevent Brazil from becoming a politically and economically corrupt republic?

Stop the Tripple Alliance War from happening. Kill Solano Lopez and put someone sensible (in the Paraguayan case, anyone but him) in his place. Without the war and the can of worms it oppened the Army would never get the political strenght it did IOTL.
 
Yes, I agree with Gonzaga. Avoid the war and you have an Empire today. That said, I'd be more interested in a TL where Prince Imperial Dom Pedro (1848-1850) survives, instead of Dom Afonso.

My reason is that there was a prohecy attached to the House of Bragança that the firstborn of the King/Queen would die prior to his parents. It has not failed until today (not counting the period when both branches had lost their thrones).

Not that I would not read this one.
 
As a supporter of the Empire of Brazil, I give my support to anyone who pushes a TL. Otherwise I'll do it and I have so many TLs already.
 

Sorry, but I stated that when the monarchy loses the support of the Army and the landowners the slaves and the urban middle classes wouldn't save it, as they didn't have neither political power or even the will to do it. Could you point where in these Wikipedia articles is writen anything that contradicts what I said?
 

scholar

Banned
Sorry, but I stated that when the monarchy loses the support of the Army and the landowners the slaves and the urban middle classes wouldn't save it, as they didn't have neither political power or even the will to do it. Could you point where in these Wikipedia articles is writen anything that contradicts what I said?
It was the parentheses that I disagreed with.

However he had support from the army. He had support from the landowners. He did not have support from many higher up, more elitist, military officials. The landowning class didn't support him, but didn't directly oppose him.
 
It was the parentheses that I disagreed with.

They didn't care. Could you point me any rebellion or opposition brought by urban middle classes after the fall of the monarchy? Only former slaves caused troubles after November 15th, and even them were quickly suppressed.

However he had support from the army. He had support from the landowners. He did not have support from many higher up, more elitist, military officials. The landowning class didn't support him, but didn't directly oppose him.

You are confusing two things here. The Emperor Pedro II had support from part of the army and landwoners, basically because he was old and seen as a good ruler. But the institution of monarchy did not. By 1889 almost all the officers were against the civilian government, and their most important leaders were already Republican. Regarding the landowners, in the beggining of the 1880's the owners of coffee plantations in Western São Paulo (that was becoming the most important agricultural region) were already among the oppositors of monarchy, and the owners of sugarcane plantations in Northeast Brazil were going that way too. After Abolition in 1888 the Empire lost their last supporters in Northeast and in the tradition coffee regions of Rio de Janeiro and Eastern São Paulo. They could like Pedro II, but they would never accept his daughter, who gave freedom to their slaves without any financial compensation to the masters.

Even if Pedro II has a son he would probably still need to deal with Abolitionism (and the first leaders of the movement were most them Republicans too). And it would still damage the monarchy, as the government simply didn't have any financial conditions to give compensations to the masters, thanks to the economical crisis brought by the Tripple Alliance War (we spent in the war the same as 11 years of the entire annual budget of the imperial administration). As I said, if you want to keep the monarchy, you need to avoid the war entirely. Personally, I think that without it any attempt to keep the monarchy would only (in the best chances) only delay the inevitable.

If you want to know more about why the Army was becoming increasingly Republic then I recommend "Soldier of the Fatherland", by Frank McCann. You can find parts of it on Google Books. http://www.amazon.com/Soldiers-Patr...r_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330141465&sr=1-10
 
Top