Excellent point. I guess I have always wondered just how Pedro II, who was not really a "European" monarch, born and raised in Brazil, and well liked by the International Community, how he seems so willing to just accept the loss of his throne when there may have been support for him if he had chose to fight for it. (I don't know that history has given Brazil any more stability over the years since the overthrow of the monarchy.)
Both his sons dying seems to have rather affected him. And yes if he fought he would have won, hell just not coming out with "If it is so, it will be my retirement. I have worked too hard and I am tired. I will go rest then." chances are the government would have quickly dealt with it.This is something I found so weird about him. He didn't even put up a fight against the coup, even though it seems he could have squashed it with little effort given his popularity and Brazil's economic upswing.
To be fair, that may not be very hard. Wolseley considered the casualty rate unsurprising, given the circumstances (i.e. small fort taken by storm).worse than OTL's Fort Pillow
Is it possible that we could get thousands of Confederate slave owners, soldiers, government officials to flee to Brazil after the American Civil War, where slavery was still practiced. Maybe they could even form a government in exile?
Excellent point. I guess I have always wondered just how Pedro II, who was not really a "European" monarch, born and raised in Brazil, and well liked by the International Community, how he seems so willing to just accept the loss of his throne when there may have been support for him if he had chose to fight for it.
True, the only "Western" nations still practicing slavery by the mid 19th century were the United States and the Brazilian Empire, but Brazil still had slavery into the 1880's. Perhaps Pedro II missed an opportunity to abolish it earlier than when he tried to? The delay, somehow may have cost him his throne. The presence of former Confederates may strengthen the resolve of Brazilian slave owners to continue the practice.
Actually several countries still allowed slavery in the middle of the century. It was legal in the Spanish colonies of Cuba (until 1886) and Puerto Rico (1873), in the Portuguese colonies (until 1869), and in the Dutch colonies of Suriname and Aruba/Bonaire/Curaçao (until 1863) as well.
He wasn't very old; he was middle aged. But he was indeed very weak and with bad health.2- He was old and weak, his health was declining too fast since the paraguayan war, he even had spent two years in France for medical help, we could argue that if he had died before the coup, the coup would fail
He wasn't very old; he was middle aged. But he was indeed very weak and with bad health.
Could he have abdicated in favor of his daughter? Would the army and or pro-Monarchist have followed her and or crushed the rebellion in her name?He was 63 years old, this is a lot for the 19th century
Could he have abdicated in favor of his daughter? Would the army and or pro-Monarchist have followed her and or crushed the rebellion in her name?
One of the reasons the military coup happened was in fact because of the prospect of Princess Isabel assuming the throne. Her husband, the Count of Eu, was a very unpopular (and foreign), and she lost whatever support she might have by adopting an unconditional abolition of slavery (some might have supported a gradual abolition, I guess).
One of the reasons the military coup happened was in fact because of the prospect of Princess Isabel assuming the throne. Her husband, the Count of Eu, was a very unpopular (and foreign), and she lost whatever support she might have by adopting an unconditional abolition of slavery (some might have supported a gradual abolition, I guess).
Unfairly disliked I must add....
No, you are misunderstanding
She unconditional abolition of slavery was the position of the imperial family since Portugal abolished slavery in 1791 (yes it continued in Brazil and in the colonies, but due the same reason as Brazil, the local elites wanted slavery). The abolition of slavery made her lose support from most of the elites, but the people was strongly supporting the monarchy, to the point that Deodoro told to the public and the press that he was going to make a military parade to prevent a popular reaction against the coup
If Pedro II died before and Isabel was in the throne and she decided to act, even if the oligarchs supported the army, they would lose as they had virtually no popular support, and the navy was supporting the empire too, as we could see from the first and the second revolts of the armada
I finish to the famous quote of Isabel: If I had a thousand thrones, a thousand thrones I would lose to end slavery