The process of Independence of Brazilit was quite complex. At the time course on what D. John VI he was in Brazil (from 1808 to 1821), in which the nation went from Cologne to member of the United Kingdom of Portugal and Algarves, the first manifestations of the desire for total independence emerged, some of them of a regional and republican separatist character, such as the Pernambuco Revolutionof 1817.
At the same time, after the fall of Napoleon in 1815, the political climate in Europe began to undergo major changes. In 1820, it originated in the city of Harbor, in Portugal, a revolution that demanded the immediate return of D. João VI and the summons of the Polite to decide the fate of the Empire. Many Portuguese traditionalist politicians advocated the recolonization of Brazil and the end of the United Kingdom. Brazilian politicians, in turn, started to defend the nation's sovereignty and independence. The break with Portugal, however, depended on the adhesion of the then prince regent, D. Peter I, who was in Brazil, to the “Brazilian cause”.
Check out five important and interesting points about the Independence of Brazil:
1. Freemasonry in the Independence process
The independence of Brazil would not have been possible without the interference of masonry. Since the 18th century there were Freemasons in Brazil, and many of them were involved in political movements against the Portuguese Crown. It was the case of InconfidenceMinas Gerais, for example.
On June 17, 1822, when the Brazilian reaction to the claims of the Portuguese courts was already at its peak, there was the creation of the Masonic organization Grande Oriente Brasilic, which separated from the Grande Oriente Lusitano, which already had Masonic lodges in Brazil. D. Pedro I, on August 2, 1822, was initiated into one of the typically Brazilian stores, called “Comércio e Artes”, adopting the code name of Guatimozin. The organizers of Independence were Freemasons and were part of the Grande Oriente Brasilic. Among the main ones were José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva, Joaquim Gonçalves Ledo and José Clemente Pereira. The three were responsible for convincing D. Pedro to permanently join the cause of Independence, even though Bonifácio was a rival of the last two.
2. The "Fico" and the Avilez Rebellion
Since the end of 1821, Pedro I started to receive sequential ultimatums from the Portuguese courts to return to Portugal. The then Prince Regent was about to return, but was persuaded to remain in the country through a mobilization organized by the same group of Freemasons mentioned above.
The officialization of Pedro I's option took place on January 9, which became known as “day of stay”. The Portuguese official in charge of finishing Pedro I was Jorge Avilez Tavares, who was governor of the Arms of the Court and Province of Rio de Janeiro. After the prince's decision, Avilez mutinied with about 2,000 soldiers in order to try to overthrow the prince. Peter I then ordered about 10,000 Royal Guard soldiers to surround the mutiny. Defeated, Avilez had to comply with the order given by D. Pedro to return to Portugal.
3. August 1822 Manifests
the calls August 1822 Manifests they were also of great importance in the independence process and were written by two of the main leaders of this process, two of which were already mentioned Freemasons: Gonçalves Ledo and José Bonifácio. Each of these manifestos defended a political orientation to be followed by Brazil after independence. The first manifesto, dated August 1, was by Ledo and had a radically anti-Portuguese content, making explicit the desire for a total break with the Portuguese Crown. The second manifesto, of August 6, was by José Bonifácio and brought a less inflamed defense of independence, raising the characteristic of importance that an independent Brazil with a monarchic regime would have before the "Friendly Nations" in the American continent, full of republics.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
4. Brazilian Independence Decree was signed by D. Leopoldine
On August 13, 1822, Pedro I named his wife, Leopoldine from Austria, Head of State and acting Princess Regent of Brazil. She did this because she needed to travel to the province of São Paulo in order to resolve some political conflicts there that could make the independence process unfeasible. Pedro I would remain in São Paulo until September 5th. However, the atmosphere at Cortes, in Lisbon, was already quite tense, especially after Pedro I refused to return to his native country. After receiving another ultimatum, Leopoldina, as interim political head, summoned the State Council in Rio de Janeiro and signed, in September 2nd, a decree declaring Brazil officially separated from Portugal.
5. Intestinal disorders of D. Pedro I on September 7th
Pedro I, as mentioned above, was visiting the Province of São Paulo on the occasion of the definitive rupture between Brazil and Portugal. On September 5, even without the news reaching him, he was leaving for Rio de Janeiro. However, on the 7th (day of the “Ipiranga cry”), riding with his entourage, the prince regent started to suffer recurrent bouts of dysentery, which are narrated by the historian Otávio Tarquínio de Sousa:
A change of food, a sip of less pure water, whatever it was, the truth is that your intestinal functions accused impertinent disturbances, which forced him to change the pace of the march, to separate from the entourage, in parades incoercible. One of the traveling companions, Colonel Manuel Marcondes de Oliveira Melo, in a statement given, resorted to a curious euphemism to disguise the rudely prosaic nature of D. Peter. Alluding to the dysentery that affected the prince, he reports that this forced him to get off his mount at all times "to provide for himself". [1]
It was on that same day, in the midst of these crises, that D. Pedro received the news of the rupture and proclaimed the famous “Independence or Death!”.
GRADES
[1] SOUSA, Otávio Tarquínio de. “The Life of Dom Pedro I (vol. 2)”. In: History of the founders of the Empire of Brazil. Volume II. Brasília: Federal Senate, Editorial Board, 2015. pp. 394-95.
By Me. Cláudio Fernandes
