WI Brazil remains part of Portugal?

Well, I think that the most difficult person to Brazil remain portuguese would be Pedro. If he had died still young the situation could be different. D. Miguel was an absolutist, and he, like his mother, didn't liked Brazil as his father or his brother. So, without the influence of Pedro, any movement for independence would be weaker. If even this way, there was people rising against any intention of Portugal to turn Brazil in a colony (assuming brazil had gotten the status of kingdom), they would probably had to fight a war of independence, because D. Miguel wouldn't freely give them Brazil.

Another way of Brazil remaining portuguese and still have the royal family in Brazil (withou killing D. Pedro), is to cut down on several laws. When the royal family and the court arrived in Brazil the only thing common to the various capitanias was the language, and even that was a weak link. The capitanias (I'm not certain if that status still existed at this time, but nonetheless the Brazil was "mentally divided") didn't had trade links, cultural and such. Many of them had more in common with Angola than wich other. So if D. João VI never approved the law wich allows the capitanias to trade between them, they never could start exchange cultural, linguistic and even economical links. The other act wich maintains the burgoise out of the independence fight is the one that opens the Brazilian ports to the international commerce. That way the only people with business in Brazil would be portuguese, we never would saw the appearance of a brazilian business class and international ideals such as liberalism and economical powers with interest in brazilian riches would never touch the colony.

Third cenerio to mantain Portugal and Brazil together but with a change in the status quo would be Pedro to never give the imperial crown to his son Pedro II of Brazil, win the Portuguese civil war and once afain don't abdicate in favor of his daughter. The liberals in Spain in 1826 asked Pedro become their King. This way Brazil would certainly belong to the same country as Portugal (Who doesn't want to belong to such great Empire?), but it wouldn't be his colony nor a kingdom joint with him. BTW, this would be a great TL.
 
Well, I think that the most difficult person to Brazil remain portuguese would be Pedro. If he had died still young the situation could be different. D. Miguel was an absolutist, and he, like his mother, didn't liked Brazil as his father or his brother. So, without the influence of Pedro, any movement for independence would be weaker. If even this way, there was people rising against any intention of Portugal to turn Brazil in a colony (assuming brazil had gotten the status of kingdom), they would probably had to fight a war of independence, because D. Miguel wouldn't freely give them Brazil.

The problem is that Miguel would make things even worse, being an extreme absolutist. In 1821 and 1822 many people still defended to keep the union with Portugal as an united kingdom, but under the (until then considered as such) "liberal" Pedro. If Miguel is the heir then he would be fewer supporters in Brazil. There would be a civil war, and probably Brazil would break in many different republics. Portugal would keep Pará and Maranhão, the two Captaincies where the population was more pro-union, and it would become a kind of "Brazilian Canada".

Another way of Brazil remaining portuguese and still have the royal family in Brazil (withou killing D. Pedro), is to cut down on several laws. When the royal family and the court arrived in Brazil the only thing common to the various capitanias was the language, and even that was a weak link. The capitanias (I'm not certain if that status still existed at this time, but nonetheless the Brazil was "mentally divided") didn't had trade links, cultural and such. Many of them had more in common with Angola than wich other. So if D. João VI never approved the law wich allows the capitanias to trade between them, they never could start exchange cultural, linguistic and even economical links. The other act wich maintains the burgoise out of the independence fight is the one that opens the Brazilian ports to the international commerce. That way the only people with business in Brazil would be portuguese, we never would saw the appearance of a brazilian business class and international ideals such as liberalism and economical powers with interest in brazilian riches would never touch the colony.

Actually the captaincies could have commerce between them, and this commerce gave many profits to the crown, as the taxes paid by the cattle and leather tranported from Rio Grande do Sul to Minas Gerais. It just happened that some didn't have commercial exchanges because they produced exactly the same things. Pernambuco and Bahia didn't have much commerce because they produced the same goods (sugar and tobacco), but Minas Gerais was dependent of meat produced in the South.
The great change was when they were allowed to have free commerce with other countries, the "oppening of the ports" of 1808. But that was a British exigence to make the transportation of the royal family, and the court needed to have access to foreign markets. If they didn't have made it then the captaincies would be more dependent of Portugal. But even then they would have the example of their Spanish neighbours, and soon or later someone would realize that they don't need Portugal to have commerce with other countries and neither they have to send their taxes to Lisbon.
The appearance of economical liberalism had already appeared, as José Bonifácio de Andrada and Hipólito José da Costa can show. What happened is that IOTL it was merged with the coming of the court to Rio, and so wasn't linked so early with an independence movement.

Third cenerio to mantain Portugal and Brazil together but with a change in the status quo would be Pedro to never give the imperial crown to his son Pedro II of Brazil, win the Portuguese civil war and once afain don't abdicate in favor of his daughter. The liberals in Spain in 1826 asked Pedro become their King. This way Brazil would certainly belong to the same country as Portugal (Who doesn't want to belong to such great Empire?), but it wouldn't be his colony nor a kingdom joint with him. BTW, this would be a great TL.

The idea of Pedro as king of Spain is interesting indeed, IOTL he refused to go to Spain because he believed that first he needed to consolidate the monarchy in Brazil.
For the idea of Pedro never abdicating, what about this: John VI dies in 1821, before going back to Portugal, and Pedro is crowned in Rio as Pedro IV of Portugal, Algarve and Brasil. The courts still demand his presence in Lisbon, but he has no intention to leave. He decides to send his brother Miguel to Lisbon instead. Miguel makes a coup and is proclaimed by the courts as king, but soon the liberals realize how much absolutist he was. Brazilian independence was never proclaimed, and so many recognize Pedro as the legitimate king of Portugal.

Pedro needs support from Brazil to regain his throne in Europe, and he receive it. He goes to Portugal, leaving his wife as regent in Brazil. The Miguelists are crushed, Pedro is recognized as king by the courts. However, among the exigences of his Brazilian supporters are the stablishment of Cortes in Brazil as in Portugal. He does it, and Brazil receives a Parliament, but with limited powers in relation to the one in Lisbon (for example, Brazilians can't have their own foreign policies, they need to follow the indications of Lisbon). With time this advance to something similar to the British Dominions.
 
The problem is that Miguel would make things even worse, being an extreme absolutist. In 1821 and 1822 many people still defended to keep the union with Portugal as an united kingdom, but under the (until then considered as such) "liberal" Pedro. If Miguel is the heir then he would be fewer supporters in Brazil. There would be a civil war, and probably Brazil would break in many different republics. Portugal would keep Pará and Maranhão, the two Captaincies where the population was more pro-union, and it would become a kind of "Brazilian Canada".


Actually the captaincies could have commerce between them, and this commerce gave many profits to the crown, as the taxes paid by the cattle and leather tranported from Rio Grande do Sul to Minas Gerais. It just happened that some didn't have commercial exchanges because they produced exactly the same things. Pernambuco and Bahia didn't have much commerce because they produced the same goods (sugar and tobacco), but Minas Gerais was dependent of meat produced in the South.
The great change was when they were allowed to have free commerce with other countries, the "oppening of the ports" of 1808. But that was a British exigence to make the transportation of the royal family, and the court needed to have access to foreign markets. If they didn't have made it then the captaincies would be more dependent of Portugal. But even then they would have the example of their Spanish neighbours, and soon or later someone would realize that they don't need Portugal to have commerce with other countries and neither they have to send their taxes to Lisbon.
The appearance of economical liberalism had already appeared, as José Bonifácio de Andrada and Hipólito José da Costa can show. What happened is that IOTL it was merged with the coming of the court to Rio, and so wasn't linked so early with an independence movement.



The idea of Pedro as king of Spain is interesting indeed, IOTL he refused to go to Spain because he believed that first he needed to consolidate the monarchy in Brazil.
For the idea of Pedro never abdicating, what about this: John VI dies in 1821, before going back to Portugal, and Pedro is crowned in Rio as Pedro IV of Portugal, Algarve and Brasil. The courts still demand his presence in Lisbon, but he has no intention to leave. He decides to send his brother Miguel to Lisbon instead. Miguel makes a coup and is proclaimed by the courts as king, but soon the liberals realize how much absolutist he was. Brazilian independence was never proclaimed, and so many recognize Pedro as the legitimate king of Portugal.

Pedro needs support from Brazil to regain his throne in Europe, and he receive it. He goes to Portugal, leaving his wife as regent in Brazil. The Miguelists are crushed, Pedro is recognized as king by the courts. However, among the exigences of his Brazilian supporters are the stablishment of Cortes in Brazil as in Portugal. He does it, and Brazil receives a Parliament, but with limited powers in relation to the one in Lisbon (for example, Brazilians can't have their own foreign policies, they need to follow the indications of Lisbon). With time this advance to something similar to the British Dominions.

I know that Miguel would only make things worse. My only idea was the same as yours. Maybe some of the territories would maintain loyal to Portugal, while the rest would divide themslves without a figure like Pedro to unite them.


Well, according to what you say, sonn or later the colonies would try to get economical emancipation. This way it would be hard to keep Brazil undeveloped and stick the colonial status to him.

So the third option can be more difficult to achieve, but do you think it would stabilize more the empire?
 
So the third option can be more difficult to achieve, but do you think it would stabilize more the empire?

Well, it would keep the territories united for a longer time, but it doesn't mean they would be stabilized. You still have conflicts between liberals and conservatives, Portugueses and Brazilians, monarchists and republicans... It all depends on how these conflicts would be solved.
 
Top