Could you please elaborate? I don't see what circumstances you are referring.
Would Brazil be able to keep Portugal?
- Thread starter ronaldo
- Start date
in the mid 1800s the anti-revolutionary alliance breaks down so the Brazilian monarchs won't be able to count on continental allies putting down a Portuguese revolution for them, and at midcentury moving an army of their own over to Portugal to do the fighting themselves would be quite the feat.
Makes sense. However, there are some circumstances I think could help Brazil securing the region. Example: if there's a member of the royal family acting as a regent (one who doesn't try to get the throne to himself and who can act as a mediator between Portugal and Brazil), or/and if they keep a good relationship with Britain.
If there isn't a Portuguese revolution around the time when it happened IOTL, the issue of the opening of the ports will just die. Assuming a competent and non-repressive administration in the kingdom of Portugal it's unlikely that a revolution would happen at all, unless another issue emerges that divides the elites on both sides of the Atlantic...
I imagine if there were some sort of revolution in the mid XIX century the great powers, namely Britain and France would try to impose a new monarch in Portugal. This could either be a scion of the Portuguese royal house or more than likely they will try to install a German prince from one of the minor Catholic families, such as Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen. That seemed to be de rigeur at the time, just look at Belgium, Greece, Romania, and Bulgaria.
Getting into the name issue; I think it is likely that this union will adopt the name of Lusitania and be known as the Lusitanian Empire, Dom Pedro I / IV could have adopted the name of Emperor of the Lusitans.
The name Empire of Lusitania or Lusitanian Empire would be a better name for the symbolism of this new union, while a new name different from the old name '' portuguese empire '' represented a new beginning for Brazil, now elevating it to the united kingdom status with portugal; and at the same time the name '' Lusitania '' would still show the presence of the old regime for Portugal, since it was adopting the old name of Portugal.
Wouldn't "Portugal-Brazil" be more likely, as Austria-Hungary? Lusitania = Portugal, so Brazil would be erased out just after being elevated to the United Kingdom status.
there massive difference, Austria and Hungary were to different cultures all together, Lusitania means the common Lusophone heritage
Remember that Brazilian identity in this world was developed differently, in our world, Brazil, after independence, distanced itself from Portuguese identity and created its own culture; In this world, Brazilian culture is part of a larger culture, the culture of the Lusitanian world, a nation that spans all continents.
And for Brazil it would be good to have the name of Lusitania so that Portugal and European nations, recognize this new regime as the continuation of the Portuguese empire.
I think it would look like the name "British Empire".
Within the British empire there are the domains of autralia, canada and etc. but they are part of the British Empire.
Then we would have the Lusitanian empire and within the empire we would have the kingdom of brazil, the kingdom of portugal and its colonial territories
For the world this nation would be called Lusitania, but within the Lusitanian Empire there would be the kingdoms of Brazil and Portugal.
Last edited:
In this world would Brazil and Portugal be more stable and more powerful? In part, Brazil because it did not have the expenses of an independence war and kept the Portuguese army, and Portugal did not lose Brazil and did not have a succession war
But it is the revolts that took place during the period of the empire, such as the Farroupilha Revolution, Cabanagem, Sabinada, Balaiada and etc; wouldn't it happen since the Brazil-Portugal union is more stable than the Brazilian empire in our timeline?
The brazil empire of our timeline spent much of its military power to contain revolts, the Brazil-Portugal union would use its military power to expand its territories in south america and expand the overseas empire.
But in this world, wouldn't there be major revolts in Brazil and Portugal or would the Brazil-Portugal union be similar to the history of the United States in the 19th century? (most of the US military force was used to expand to the west and in American history you hear only one major "revolt" which was the civil war itself).
Would the Brazil-Portugal union have its 19th century history similar to that of the USA or could it be similar to the history of England or of which other nation?
And getting into a controversial issue: what would be the society and economy of slavery and slavery in general of that union? And when would the abolition of slavery occur? and the slave trade what would it be like? (since portuguese africa and brazil are still united)
Last edited:
The UKPBA could face some revolts, but many of the ones which happened in OTL would be butterflied away, as many of them happened during the regency, after the emperor Pedro the 1th's departure to Portugal. In this TL, Pedro I/IV would stay as the king of both countries and his influence would change the circumstances. A example? The Sabinada.
>Sabinada was an autonomist revolt of a transitory separatist character, having occurred from November 6, 1837 to March 16, 1838. It took place in the Province of Bahia at the time of Imperial Brazil, its leaders were the doctor and journalist Francisco Sabino and the lawyer João Carneiro da Silva[1] . The rebels proposed the existence of a Bahian Republic of transitory character until Emperor Dom Pedro II reached the age of majority.[2] The study on Sabinada is important to broaden the understanding of a crucial and turbulent period in the History of Brazil, the Regential Period (1831-1840).[3]
Miguel Lanius
Banned
If a revolt will happen, the Cabanagem is the most likely. It was a revolt against the portuguese elite ruling over Grão-Pará, even after independence.
Then again, it might get butterflied by no Brigue Palhaço slaughter.
Then again, it might get butterflied by no Brigue Palhaço slaughter.
Miguel Lanius
Banned
I think that if the United Kingdom remains and continues stable, then it will eventually fight wars in the Prata, similar to the ones Brazil did.
Brazil-Portugal however, are stronger and richer here. I think there's a good chance the Kingdom will conquer Uruguay. A conquered Cisplatina would allow the basing of fleet and armies right next to Buenos Aires.
Brazil-Portugal carving the Argentinian Confederacy is a real chance.
I suspect that it would maintain pretty friendly relations with Paraguay, but the Paraguayans would need to be assured navigation in the River Prata.
Brazil-Portugal however, are stronger and richer here. I think there's a good chance the Kingdom will conquer Uruguay. A conquered Cisplatina would allow the basing of fleet and armies right next to Buenos Aires.
Brazil-Portugal carving the Argentinian Confederacy is a real chance.
I suspect that it would maintain pretty friendly relations with Paraguay, but the Paraguayans would need to be assured navigation in the River Prata.
I just do not see a Portuguese-Brazilian Union achieving the industrial growth of Great Britain or even the United States during the period. It would likely be a secondary power in terms of world ranking. By 1850 its navy would be behind that of Great Britain, France and Russia in terms of size, but ahead of the Netherlands, Sweden-Norway, the United States, Denmark or Spain. Militarily, its standing army would behind France, Great Britain, Prussia, Austria, Russia, Spain and the Ottoman Empire. Economically, it would also be a secondary power with its most valuable exports being coffee and wine. Capital would be largely dependent on Great Britain and to a much lesser extent France, meaning that British capital would be dominant.
In regards to slavery, it was one of the most economically important activities of the Portuguese and Brazilian Empires at the time. IOTL Portuguese and Brazilian slave traders embarked over 1.6 million African slaves between 1816 and 1852, of those 1.3 million arrived in Brazil. Portuguese Africa exported 1.4 million slaves in the period, and of those fewer than 20,000 were sent to regions other than Brazil. Over 1.1 million slaves were taken from Angola and over 250,000 from Mozambique during 1816 to 1860. Slavery was the cornerstone of the expanding coffee economy and was the only significant export from Portuguese Africa at the time. What's more was the slave traders overwhelmingly embarked males and then in Brazil itself conditions were so poor that even with constant imports the slave population declined.
This trade was widely criticised in Britain and the British government attempted to pressure both Brazil and Portugal to suppress the trade. To that end the United Kingdom signed a treaty with Brazil in 1826 that would prohibit Brazilian-flagged vessels from engaging in the trade after 1830. Hitherto, Brazilians had dominated the trade and the falling number of Brazilian ships in Angola and Mozambique in 1829 had created an economic panic in both Luanda and Mozambique. In Angola, the slave trade was such an important part of the economy that the decline in slave raiding led several African sobas (chiefs) to and threaten to storm Benguela. For many of the African rulers in Angola and Mozambique slavery constituted their major source of wealth, trading slaves for rum, tobacco and other goods.
To bypass the 1826 treaty, the Portuguese consul in Rio de Janeiro began registering Brazilian ships under the Portuguese flag with Brazilian crews being granted Portuguese nationality. As a result the trade picked up again and the 1830s was among one of the busiest period for the slave traders. This would lead to British pressure upon Portugal, as a result in 1836, the Portuguese government banned the slave trade. However, the Portuguese government did little to enforce this and smaller slave ports in Angola and Mozambique began handling clandestine traffic. For the next three decades over 800,000 slaves were carried on Portuguese ships with over 600,000 arriving in Brazil. The number of deaths onboard increased as riskier routes were used causing more sinkings. Under the threat of a naval blockade of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil finally imposed a ban on the importation of slaves in 1850, though smaller scale smuggling would last until the 1852.
Part of the reason that slavery continued was that Brazil had a chronic shortage of labour until the 1890s. Between independence and 1876, Brazil received just over 350,000 immigrants, with nearly half coming from Portugal, just under 50,000 from German states, and 20,000 from Italy and Spain. In 1830, the imperial government signed a law prohibiting it from providing economic assistance to immigrants, and the result was that the provinces were charged with providing meagre assistance. With slavery abolished, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish labourers were recruited en masse to work in the coffee plantations. The same happened in Cuba when slavery was abolished there in 1886, the number of Spaniards migrating to the island (many temporarily) would remain high into the 1920s.
In 1842, a pamphlet by Elias Regnault was translated from French and distributed in Rio de Janeiro and Lisbon criticising English treatment of the Irish. This was before the famine, but there were those in Brazil calling on the British government to assist Irish emigrants to settle in Brazil. It criticised British treatment of the Irish and referred to the English as "criminals" and treating the Irish as "white slaves". Perhaps mass assisted immigration to Brazil gains traction 60 years earlier.
Moving of the court to Brazil had been proposed by Luís da Cunha to John V in 1736 stating that Brazil was necessary for Portugal's survival, but Portugal was not necessary for the survival of Brazil. He argued that Brazil's economic wealth would allow the King much greater leverage on the world stage than remaining in Portugal. This idea was revived in 1755 after Lisbon's earthquake, as this had been the second such event destroying much of the kingdom's wealth (the first in 1531). He also argued that Rio was geographically closer to Portuguese territories in Africa and India. This was important because in times of war, reinforcement of forces in those regions could be achieved in a shorter time. It would also allow the entire empire to flourish and grow with him mentioning expansion to the Island of Saint Lawrence (Madagascar).
Due to the low population in Brazil, da Cunha had called for the agricultural colonisation with far more Portuguese settlers to alleviate the overall poverty of the kingdom. The landless peasantry of Portugal could be granted large tracts of land. He was particularly adamant about colonising Southern Brazil to grow the same plants as in Portugal. He emphasises cultivating wheat in Colonia do Sacramento and how grapes should be planted for wine. Brazil would be strengthened and if Spain attempted to attack or invade Portugal, a strong Brazil could threaten the Spanish possessions in America. And he does go on to say that the Portuguese would be able to expand in Southern Brazil at the expense of the Spaniards.
Perhaps the greatest argument that he made was that Portugal's small size in Europe made it vulnerable to invasions from Spain or other powers. This point was reiterated in 1821 when there were those advising King John VI to remain in Brazil. Between 1640 and 1812, Portugal had been at war with Spain and or France over half a dozen times. With invasions every few decades, it was thought that more would occur. Additionally, the Dutch and British had shown the effectiveness of blockading Lisbon by sea, further strangling the main source of the crown's wealth. By concentrating the treasury along with the bulk of imperial forces in the New World, the Portuguese Empire would have been more secure.
Finally, by moving Brazil it was argued that the King of Portugal would by free from intriguing nobles from Portugal and coupled with being far from the courts of Europe, could now enact a truly independent domestic and foreign policy. He also suggested that the title of Emperor be adopted. In 1736, this would have elevated the status of the king, by making him equal to the Holy Roman Emperor.
Due to the low population in Brazil, da Cunha had called for the agricultural colonisation with far more Portuguese settlers to alleviate the overall poverty of the kingdom. The landless peasantry of Portugal could be granted large tracts of land. He was particularly adamant about colonising Southern Brazil to grow the same plants as in Portugal. He emphasises cultivating wheat in Colonia do Sacramento and how grapes should be planted for wine. Brazil would be strengthened and if Spain attempted to attack or invade Portugal, a strong Brazil could threaten the Spanish possessions in America. And he does go on to say that the Portuguese would be able to expand in Southern Brazil at the expense of the Spaniards.
Perhaps the greatest argument that he made was that Portugal's small size in Europe made it vulnerable to invasions from Spain or other powers. This point was reiterated in 1821 when there were those advising King John VI to remain in Brazil. Between 1640 and 1812, Portugal had been at war with Spain and or France over half a dozen times. With invasions every few decades, it was thought that more would occur. Additionally, the Dutch and British had shown the effectiveness of blockading Lisbon by sea, further strangling the main source of the crown's wealth. By concentrating the treasury along with the bulk of imperial forces in the New World, the Portuguese Empire would have been more secure.
Finally, by moving Brazil it was argued that the King of Portugal would by free from intriguing nobles from Portugal and coupled with being far from the courts of Europe, could now enact a truly independent domestic and foreign policy. He also suggested that the title of Emperor be adopted. In 1736, this would have elevated the status of the king, by making him equal to the Holy Roman Emperor.
Would a transfer be possible if the Spanish are more successful during the Fantastic War?
During that period a lot really depends on the Marquis de Pombal's policy, but had he not been minister it would have probably been much more likely as Central Lisbon was still in ruins and an invasion would have only worsened things.
If the Spanish capture Lisbon in a nasty fight that damages the city even further just seven/eight years after the earthquake, could that convince Pombal that the place just wasn't worth rebuilding? The guy was pretty much a dictator at this point, so if he decides to go to Rio de Janeiro or Salvador said transfer would probably happen.
One event that I think would also have a big butterfly effect would be if the British invasions in Argentina during the Napoleonic wars were successful.
I wonder if the British conquests of the Spanish region of the River Plate would have been beneficial for the Brazil-Portugal union, this region being controlled by the British would be divided between the two powers and being stable and possibly without wars, the resources that Brazil used to exerting influence in the silver region could be directed to other places.
In my opinion if Brazil-Portugal has a good diplomacy it could attach everything that is in brown and beyond