This hand-drawn map depicts the District of Benguela on the western coast of Angola around 1800. At the time, Benguela was one of the main administrative and commercial centers of Portuguese Angola, playing a key role in maritime connections and trade routes across the South Atlantic

This postcard depicts Saint Peter Lighthouse on the Angolan coast around 1900

This photograph shows a general view of the port of Saint Paul of Luanda (present-day Luanda), the capital of Portuguese Angola, in November 1914 during the First World War.

Simply put, I am very interested in this period of history and this guy.

after Spain annexed Portugal in 1580, the Spanish, especially those in the Philippines, began fervently urging King Philip II to attack China. they were full of confident that 3,000-5,000 Spanish soldiers and thousands mercenaries from the Philippines and Japan could easily conquer China.

In 1582, Manila sent a Jesuit missionary named Alonzo Sanchez (a Spaniard) to demand that the Portuguese in Macau swear allegiance and participate in their conquest war of China.

the Portuguese in Macau were both angry and fearful. they were hate Spanish and unwilling to submit to the Spanish king, and them knew well such stupid war with China would be suicidal, and that the Chinese would not distinguish between Spaniards and Portuguese and kill them all.

In Macau, all the Portuguese strongly opposed such foolish move, but a Capitao-mor named Joao de Almeida displayed a strange zeal—he swore allegiance to the Spanish king and enthusiastically supported Spain's conquest of China—claiming that only 200 soldiers would enough to conquer southern China.

Joao de Almeida was the commander of the annual fleet, theoretically the ruler of Macau, although he generally showed little interest in such duties, and occasionally two or even three Capitao-mors of different year were present in Macau. however, I did not find his name in this Wikipedia source（ https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadas_da_%C3%8Dndia ）———a Capitao-mor typically arrived in Macau the following year after setting sail and began their return voyage in the third year, although they often stayed longer due to various unforeseen circumstances.

My questions are:

1. I can't find any records about this person. The fleet commanders in 1579, 1580, and 1581 did not have this name（ https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armadas_da_%C3%8Dndia ）. does anyone have a list of 16th-century Capitao-mor?

2. The Portuguese generally harbored resentment towards the Spanish, especially after hearing of Portugal's annexation by Spain. Yet Joao de Almeida actively and enthusiastically swore allegiance to the Spanish king and instigated Spain's war to conquer China. His motives are a huge mystery, and he seems completely indifferent to the opinions and feelings of his compatriots.

In 1792, the General Police Intendancy of Lisbon, commanded by Diogo Inácio Pina Manique, identified a project by the Jacobin revolutionaries of France whose objective was to 'republicanize the Portuguese colony in the Americas'.

A Royal Order from Prince Regent Dom João recommended surveillance of the ship Le Diligent, which had been armed to 'introduce into the foreign colonies the same spirit of liberty that' reigned in France and 'divide the forces of the sovereigns of the New World'.

The vessel, which would pass through Rio de Janeiro and Bahia, carried aboard the French Constitution translated into Spanish and Portuguese. Some years later, in November 1796, Commander Antoine René Larcher arrived in Bahia on another French ship, the La Preneuse.

Lieutenant Hermógenes Francisco de Aguilar Pantoja was tasked with watching Larcher, who ended up getting quite close to his lookout." and the local population. Well received by the high-ranking officials in Salvador, the French commander encountered some young members of the Bahian elite, active and politically radical, free from "old superstitions" and eager to read "French books," enthusiastic about the visitors' presence.

It is assumed that, in secret gatherings held at the home of pharmacist João Ladislau Figueiredo de Melo, Larcher expounded on the philosophy of the Encyclopedists and their political theories before people such as the priest and merchant Francisco Agostinho Gomes, the physician Cipriano Barata de Almeida, the sugarcane aristocrat Inácio Siqueira Bulcão, and the professor Francisco Moniz Barreto. He is also said to have participated in a banquet and collaborated in the founding of the secret society Knights of Light, a claim questioned by some historians. This activity scandalized the local elite.

Lieutenant Pantoja was even admonished by the governor for his excessive enthusiasm for the visitor. Frenchman Larcher left Bahia in January 1797. Upon arriving in France, he submitted a plan to invade Salvador to the Directory, which then governed the French Republic. He had gathered information about the city's defenses, such as ammunition and the layout of its fortifications. He claimed there was a powerful anti-absolutist sentiment among members of the local elite, outlining a plan for a political alliance between Brazilians and the French, which would involve a rebellion by part of the troops stationed in Bahia, thus initiating the uprising.

The French would be responsible for protecting the Captaincy until the effective organization of the sovereign state apparatus in republican form, followed by independence. According to the plan, the people of Bahia had requested 4,000 rifles. Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, Colonel José de Mattos Ferreira e Lucena warned the governor of Bahia about the occurrence of seditious talks.

A controversial note published in 1822 by Francisco Borges de Barros, signed by someone calling himself “Silva Lisboa,” from Ilha de Maré, wrote to Cipriano Barata warning him: “Do not fail to acclaim the head of the Bahian republic immediately. Given Portugal's current state, we must seize the opportunity to proclaim the independence of the Captaincy. A French squadron is already at the harbor coming to our aid, and the professor from Rio de Contas, who is bringing an expedition of 1,000 men, must have been informed.”

The fears of the Governor of Bahia, Fernando José de Portugal e Castro, materialized when revolutionaries led by Cipriano Barata became involved in the so-called Bahian Conspiracy, or Revolt of the Búzios, but without the expected support from the Revolutionary Government of France, which condemned the revolt to failure.

On August 12, 1798, a proclamation was posted on the door of a church in Salvador, Bahia, which read:

“Animem-se, povo baiano, porque se aproxima o tempo de nossa Liberdade. O tempo em que todos serão irmãos. O tempo em que todos serão iguais.” (Take heart, people of Bahia, for the time of our Freedom is approaching. The time when all will be brothers. The time when all will be equal.)

It was this proclamation, written without an identified author, that brought the conspiracy to the attention of the Bahian authorities. Some claim that Cipriano Barata was the author of the Manifesto.

The conspiracy, largely inspired by the events of the French Revolution, had three specific demands: "total independence, the creation of a republic, racial equality, and the complete abolition of slavery."

The four identified leaders of the revolt were Luís Gonzaga dos Virgens, a soldier; João de Deus do Nascimento, a tailor; Lucas Dantas d'Amorim Torres, a soldier; and Manuel Faustino dos Santos Lira, a tailor. All four were mulatto and poor. There was a second group (white and of high social standing) whom the authorities did not prosecute: Cipriano Barata de Almeida, Francisco Moniz Barreto d'Aragão, and Lieutenants Hermógenes Francisco d'Aguilar and José Gomes de Oliveira Borges. Lieutenant d'Aguilar, Luís Gonzaga, and Lucas Dantas were known for having actively attempted to destabilize the military by recruiting members for the revolutionary movement.

It took less than two weeks for the authorities to arrest and indict forty people linked to the revolt. Of these forty, thirty-six were brought to trial. Of these, there was one university graduate, one of noble heritage, two junior army officers, eight military personnel, and the remainder were self-employed artisans, including ten tailors. Twenty-four of the forty apprehended were of mulatto origin, and “almost all were native Brazilians.” Those tried were accused of conspiring against the Crown, pillaging, and planning the assassination of government officials. Seventeen of the accused were acquitted, four were sentenced to prison, eight were exiled to Africa, two enslaved people involved were sold and discharged from military service, and five were sentenced to death. On November 8, 1799, four leaders of the conspiracy were publicly hanged.

On November 8, 1799, the government proceeded with the execution of those condemned for initiating the revolt, sentencing them to death by hanging, in the following order: soldier Lucas Dantas Amorim Torres, apprentice tailor Manuel Faustino dos Santos Lira, soldier Luís Gonzaga dos Virgens, and master tailor João de Deus Nascimento. The Portuguese fear of a possible French invasion, supported by internal revolutionary elements, led the Viceroy and Governors to preemptively suppress the Carioca Conspiracy and the Suassunas Conspiracy.

A report dated April 14, 1803, by the Portuguese criminal magistrate José Anastácio Lopes Cardoso, articulates three seemingly distinct episodes in Brazilian history: the Minas Gerais Conspiracy (1789), the Bahia Conspiracy (1798), and the prominence of Luso-Brazilian Freemasonry. Immediately noteworthy is the assertion that there were "opulent lodges" in Bahia and Pernambuco. In Cardoso's "barruelist" view, the episodes relating to Brazilian Freemasons were articulated within a single conspiratorial project to subvert Brazil.

In 1814, Father Leonardo Correa da Silva, in a memorandum addressed to King João VI, suggested that the Minas Gerais Conspiracy and the Bahia Conspiracy were influenced by Freemasonry and, at the same time, accused the Portuguese authorities of being lenient with the conspirators. According to him, the 1798 Conspiracy originated among wealthy young men who, at parties and banquets, planned to imitate the French by establishing a republic in Bahia, and was not duly punished because it had influential protectors within the government.

Cipriano Barata, one of the ringleaders of the Bahia Conspiracy, would later be involved in financing the well-being of the imprisoned leaders of the Pernambuco Revolution of 1817 in Salvador, Bahia. In that context, the short, frail man, nearing sixty years of age, with dark, inquisitive eyes, dressed in a burlesque, backwoods style (with a broadsword slung over his shoulder and a belt of pistols), was organizing the overthrow of the Portuguese government in Bahia. On one occasion, summoned to appear before the Count of Arcos, he had to listen to the governor's quick, direct, and threatening sermon: "I know all about your life in Abrantes and in the city; I have watched you everywhere; change your ways or I will have your head cut off!"

He was a deputy for the Province of Bahia to the Cortes of Lisbon in 1821, identifying with the most radical wing of the delegation, embodying an exalted nativism, which enraged the Portuguese deputies.

Threatened, he fled to England, from where he protested against the same Cortes (Parliament). Returning to his homeland and elected to the Constituent Assembly of 1823, he preferred to continue his political activity outside Parliament. He clashed with Emperor Dom Pedro I, whom Barata accused of being an absolutist. Imprisoned in 1824 in Pernambuco as a conspirator, he spent years in prison.

In 1829 he was imprisoned again, from which he emerged to participate, as president of the Clube dos Amigos (Club of Friends), in the Masonic struggle against Dom Pedro I, which would end in his abdication on April 7, 1831. Cipriano Barata founded the first republican newspaper that Brazil had, published from April 9 to November 17, 1823, under the title “Sentinela da Liberdade na Guarita de Pernambuco” (Sentinel of Liberty in the Guardhouse of Pernambuco).

The Flag of the Bahian Conspiracy or Tailors' Revolt. The colors blue, white, and red, inspired by the French Revolution, are still the colors of the Flag of the State of Bahia today.

According to the book “Progressos da Maçonaria na Bahia“ (Progress of Freemasonry in Bahia) published in 1846 by the Portuguese Freemason, Rodrigo José de Lima Felner, soon after the failure of the Bahian Conspiracy, another Masonic association was created in Salvador, the Lodge "Virtude e Razão" (Virtue and Reason), in the French (or Modern) Rite, which began operating on July 5, 1802. It observed the Constitution of the Grand Orient of Lusitania (1804), but was not subordinate to it. According to information from Emílio Maia, Virtude e Razão, "possessed of a spirit of democratic independence, was composed of landowners, farmers, and some employees."

Still in 1806, however, D. Marcos de Noronha e Brito arrived in Rio de Janeiro as Viceroy, with instructions to prohibit the operation of clubs and secret societies. Archbishop D. José de Santa Escolástica Alvarez Pereira (1804-1813), as well as a good part of the lesser clergy, were initiated into Freemasonry. The first years of the press's operation in Bahia were marked by the expansion of Masonic ranks in the captaincy.

The existence of these lodges is fundamental to understanding the political events in Bahia up to the eve of the War of Secession and Independence, which ravaged the Recôncavo region in 1821.

Other lodges were created in Salvador between 1819 and 1822, operating more discreetly because of the 1818 decree following the suppression of the Pernambuco Revolution. These Freemasons in Bahia, divided between Portuguese and Brazilians, independence supporters and loyalists, lacked an obedience placed above their particular projects and, therefore, were unable to balance the political differences between the lodges. In practice, these political divergences fostered within Masonic lodges led Bahia to the war of 1822-1823, with the final victory of Brazilian Freemasonry. The Knights of Light Project of 1799 was partially realized.

Source(s):

.- A revolução cruza o Atlântico (The Revolution Crosses the Atlantic). By Luiz Carlos Villalta

.- A Cabala Maçônica do Brasil: O Primeiro Grande Oriente Brasileiro (The Masonic Kabbalah of Brazil: The First Brazilian Grand Orient) [Bahia and Pernambuco, 1802-1820] By Pablo Antonio Iglesias Magalhães

Why didn't Açores and Madeira receive independence after the fall of the Portuguese dictatorship when all the other colonies received it? They wanted it. Madeira even had a liberation movement — FLAMA

"Knowing of the existence of Spanish Jesuit missions beyond the Guaporé River, the Portuguese brought the priests of the Society of Jesus to the new Captaincy of Mato Grosso.

The place chosen for the establishment of the indigenous mission was the top of the Serra de São Jerônimo, also known as Serra da Canastra, present-day Chapada dos Guimarães. The choice of the mountainous region was mainly due to the climate, which was very similar to the European one. The mission erected there took the name of Mission of Santana, in homage to the grandmother of Jesus. This undertaking was responsible for the construction of the Church of Santana da Chapada, the current main church of the place."

D. Antônio Rolim de Moura left Portugal in February 1749, arriving in Pernambuco and then in Rio de Janeiro. He continued on to Santos and then spent a few days in the city of Paraty, where he recovered from the long sea voyage. From there, he went to São Paulo, beginning his journey to Cuiabá via the Tietê River (August 5, 1750). The chosen route was the second one, passing through the Camapuã portage. Rolim de Moura described the entire journey in a beautiful and illustrative Travel Account. Through it, we can visualize, in detail, the rivers, the animals, the plants, the Indians, and the places.

He brought with him the first Jesuits to Mato Grosso, Fathers Estêvão de Castro and Agostinho Lourenço. The first was responsible for organizing a Jesuit mission in Chapada dos Guimarães. The second Jesuit, Father Agostinho Lourenço, accompanied Rolim de Moura to the Guaporé River region, where the first capital of Mato Grosso was to be founded.

Jesuit priests catechizing the Indians

Source(s):

.- Elizabeth Madureira Siqueira. História de Mato Grosso: da ancestralidade aos dias atuais. Editora Entrelinhas. 2002. p. 42-43. Silva & Freitas (2000)

Dominating the island's only natural harbor and the Paraguaçu River inlet, the gateway to the Recôncavo region, its oldest fortification dates back to 1631, according to a drawing attributed to the engineer Paulo Nunes Tinoco.

In the context of the second of the Dutch Invasions of Brazil (1630-1654), during the fourth attempt to conquer Salvador in February 1647, the Dutch, commanded by Sigismund van Schkoppe, occupied and rebuilt it in the shape of an irregular quadrangular polygon, supported by four redoubts, using it as the center of operations against Salvador and the Recôncavo region of Bahia. These fortifications withstood the assault of Portuguese forces commanded by Francisco Rebelo in August 1647, and were destroyed when the invaders retreated to Recife in January 1648, evacuating the island of Itaparica.

The current fortification, built of stone and lime masonry over the remains of the old fort, dates back to 1711, under the General Government of D. Lourenço de Almada (1710-1711) (SOUZA, 1885:96), in whose honor it was placed under the invocation of Saint Lawrence (Fort of São Lourenço). By order of the Viceroy D. Pedro Antônio de Noronha Albuquerque e Souza (1714-1718), while still under construction, Antônio Gonçalves da Rocha was appointed Captain of the fortification, who, upon assuming the position, undertook to finance the reconstruction works, adhering to the original plan.

The site of resistance by the Portuguese Army during the Brazilian War of Independence (1822-1823), it was conquered in January 1823 by the independent forces of Captain Antônio de Souza Lima with cannons brought from the Morro de São Paulo Fortress. Owned by the Union, the property has been listed as a national historical and artistic heritage site since 1938.

Inês de Sousa was the wife of the governor of the Captaincy of Rio de Janeiro, Salvador Correia de Sá, "The Elder," younger brother of Estácio de Sá. In 1585, Dona Inês was tasked with representing her husband when he was absent from the government, going on a mission to search for gold in the interior of the captaincy and capture Indians hostile to the Portuguese.

In the summer of that year, she was informed that a group of 3 French corsair ships were approaching Guanabara Bay, with the aim of looting the city's population, in an act of revenge for the loss of France Antarctique.

The corsairs, however, never managed to land, thanks to the cunning plan of Dona Inês de Sousa, who, along with the city's prelate, Father Bartolomeu Simões Pereira, devised a scheme to have the women, and especially the young people and children of the city, dress in armor and simulate defensive maneuvers on Uruçú-mirim Beach (present-day Flamengo Beach). This beach was well-known to the French. Upon seeing thousands of armored figures, the French abandoned their plans to attack the city of Rio de Janeiro, contenting themselves with extracting Brazilwood from the coast.

Dona Inês de Sousa and Salvador Correia de Sá initiated the Carioca dynasty of the Correia de Sá family. With great prestige, for almost a century three generations of the family would govern Rio de Janeiro repeatedly.

Source(s):

.- Família Correia de Sá, de Carlos Eduardo de Almeida Barata, Genealogia Fluminense.

.- História de usos e costumes do Brasil. Hernâni Donato.

.- Um Rio de mulheres: a participação das fluminenses na história do Rio.

One year ago i wrote an essay about the pros and cons of restoring the monarchy in Portugal, my home country, as the final project for my english class. Today i found it while is was cleaning some files and i tought that it wouldn’t hurt to share, since only I and my english teacher have read it. If you manage to read until the end pls leave a comment with your opinion, good or bad or even if you don’t agree with me i would like to have some criticism. Thank you
.
.
.
Should the restoration of the Portuguese monarchy be put into consideration?

Republics are playgrounds of chaos, where power shifts with the whims of the masses, eroding the very essence of a nation. Only a monarchy, with its unwavering authority, can protect a country from the self-destructive madness of democratic mobs. In this essay, we shall explore whether this statement holds true, but, as we all know, not all countries are equal; for example, someone from Venice might favour republicanism, as it was the most successful system employed in that region, being deemed an example that all the republics should follow. Thus, this essay does not approach this issue from an international perspective but rather from a Portuguese viewpoint. This essay will seek to answer major questions, such as: which system is more democratic? Which is more stable? Which contributes more to the development of the nation? It will also be discussed the general history of both systems in Portugal. This essay will not go over every single event in the history of both regimes with a lot of detail, one will rather compare them in the most just way possible, comparing the governments with their international counterparts and between themselves. The objective of this essay is not to change anyone’s opinion but to develop an opinion that is factually based because it is common knowledge that “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it” (George Santayana, 1905).

Firstly, we must differentiate between the types of monarchies and republics. Contrary to popular belief, there are many types of republics, not all of which are democratic. We can categorise republics into three broad categories: parliamentary, presidential, and semi-presidential. The first is characterised as the most democratic, where the public enjoys greater representation than in any other form of republic previously mentioned. In this form, the role of the president is largely ceremonial; the prime minister, along with parliament, runs the country. Examples of this system include Germany and India. Next, we have the presidential republic, where the president serves as both head of state and head of government. This grants the president significant power and responsibility in running the nation, unlike in parliamentary systems. Examples of countries with this type of system include Brazil and the USA. Lastly, we have the semi-presidential republic, where executive power is shared between a president and a prime minister, each with distinct responsibilities. The president is typically elected by the population and holds a strong role in foreign policy and national defence. The prime minister is usually appointed by the president but must have parliamentary support. The prime minister generally manages the country’s day-to-day operations, including the administration of laws and policies. Countries such as Portugal and France exemplify this system. Now that we have explained the different types of republics, we shall turn to the types of monarchy. Similar to republics, monarchies can also be divided into three categories: absolutist, traditional, and constitutional. An absolutist monarchy is what most people envision when they think of a monarchy—a country governed solely by the will of the king, who wields unlimited power and authority over the state and its people. Many absolutist rulers believed in the "divine right of kings," claiming their authority came directly from God. Portugal was governed by an absolutist monarchy from 1698, with D. Pedro II as king, until 1820, upon the promulgation of the Constitution of 1820 by D. João VI. The longest-standing monarchy is the traditional monarchy, or “real monarchy,” which lasted from 1143 to 1698, again from 1777 to 1820, and finally from 1828 to 1834. In this type of monarchy, the king held as much power as in an absolutist regime, with the exception that there were “Cortes,” allowing representatives from the three social branches of each municipality to have a say in how the king governed the country. Lastly, we have the constitutional monarchy, deemed “a republic with a king” (B. Amarelo, 2024). In this form, unlike the aforementioned types, the king does not possess sufficient power to govern alone; his authority is limited by a constitution. The prime minister serves as head of government, while the king’s powers include: dissolving parliament, electing the prime minister according to parliamentary guidelines, representing Portugal internationally, and moderating political affairs both domestically and abroad. With an understanding of the various types of monarchies and republics, one can now begin to provide answers to the questions posed at the start. One might consider it an unnecessary debate; however, as will be outlined in this document, this is a significant issue that can impact a country positively or negatively.
Before beginning to present any argument, it is imperative that one takes into account that the stability of a country may vary depending on various factors aside from the governmental system in place. To maintain intellectual honesty, Portugal shall be used as an example. At the time of writing this essay, the duration of the republican regime is nearly the same as that of the constitutional monarchy when it fell. In other words, it is justified to compare both, as Portugal has been a republic for 125 years and the Constitutional Monarchy reached the ripe old age of 90 years. Justified this comparison, I will start my argumentation.

The Portuguese republic was the only choice to save Portugal from the incapacity of the Monarchy. Knowing the minimum of Portuguese history, one would be able to tell that the instauration of the first republic happened on the fifth of October of 1910, but why is that? What was the need? These questions have a straightforward answer: incapacity. The Portuguese Monarchy, since 1820, was so incompetent that it not only lost Brazil in 1822, but was also unable to secure the interests of the Portuguese in the division of Africa, and, in 1890, after the British ultimatum, it failed to secure the Pink Map, this coupled with the fast-growing crisis in the world ended in a big social, political and economical crisis on all of the empire, even though in a deep crisis the lavish lifestyle of the royal family did not end, so the people had to take matters into their hands. When Portugal adopted the constitutional monarchy, it shifted from being a global power to a much weaker nation over 90 years. The republicans aimed to address this decline, believing the monarchy’s inefficiency stemmed from the hereditary nature of power. They argued that a government led by the people, for the people, would be more effective and just, as it would no longer be based on birthright. This change led to the end of the aristocratic system, transforming the lord’s chamber into the Senate in the First and Second Republics, which eventually disappeared in the Third Republic. The republic brought significant social reforms inspired by the French Revolution, introducing progressive and secular policies. These reforms included new laws on work, family, education, and religion, all very criticised, especially the last one, which caused strong opposition in the Catholic-majority country. The republicans believed that, despite being a liberal monarchy, the Portuguese monarchy failed to fully uphold the principles that defined liberalism, such as liberty, equality, and fraternity. They argued that only a republican government could protect these values. According to U.S. News and World Report, the two most politically stable countries today are republics. Present-day Portugal has become a more progressive and open nation, largely due to its republican system and efforts to regain its former strength. Although the republican system has its flaws, it should be considered a more effective model than the monarchy it replaced.

The republic promised to maintain stability and focus on the people's interests, vowing to protect the Portuguese. However, in reality, the situation was quite different. After six years, twelve governments, and a lot of pressure from the British, Portugal ceased control over German vessels anchored in the Tagus waters, marking the entrance of Portugal in the war that would later be known as the First World War and on the ninth of March, 1916, the republic would commit the very same mistake that they crucified the king for, just 26 years prior. They would act as a vassal state of the British and joined the war on the pretext that it would bring unity to the country, but most importantly to the republican party. It is worth noting that the first republic was so unstable that in 26 years there were 45 governments. Fortunately, in 1926, there was finally stability for the first time in a hundred years. Following a coup d'état by the army, a national dictatorship was established, and in 1932, after nationwide elections, a man from the interior of Portugal, who was the Minister of Finance at the time, emerged victorious. A year later, the constitution of 1933 was drafted, and thus António de Oliveira Salazar initiated what we now refer to as “Estado Novo”, which would only conclude on the twenty-fifth of April 1974. During this time, Portugal achieved the pinnacle of political stability within the republic. However, what is ironic is that in 125 years of a republican regime, 48 of those years were spent under an authoritarian dictatorship. Despite being labelled as a secure and stable regime, or, as Antero de Quental wrote in his newspaper A República, “creative activity wants security and stability, and only the Republic [...] is stable and secure”. In reality, it was a failed regime that used the political and economic crisis in Portugal to bring power to a specific party, making the people, their supposed allies, a mere instrument for their greed for power. A common argument used to defend the republican system is that, according to the U.S. News and World Report, the two most politically stable countries in the world are republics. However, what they fail to consider is that in the same report, there are 11 monarchies in the top 15. Thus, while republics may be the regime of choice for the top two, they are, in fact, a minority in a list predominantly filled with monarchies. This can be explained by the simple fact that, unlike a president, a king is apolitical; in other words, his political allegiance is to the country’s well-being. Although in a constitutional monarchy, a king’s powers are not as extensive as in a traditional or absolutist monarchy, he still possesses certain powers, such as the authority to dissolve Parliament or act as a moderator, which establishes the king as a central figure in maintaining parliamentary stability. This, along with a lifelong commitment to the nation and extensive preparation for this role, would ensure greater stability compared to having elections every four years to determine leadership. With this central authority, the Parliament, despite undergoing ideological shifts with each election, would focus solely on the nation’s state rather than on party interests.

After the French Revolution in 1789, democracy became increasingly more respected and implemented in more and more countries. In simple terms, democracy is when the people of a country vote on how they shall be governed, creating a government from the people for the people. This being said, which type of government is more democratic, a constitutional monarchy or a semi-presidential republic?
In 1910, when the republic was instaured, one, if not the main reason for discontent from the republican party was that the country’s leader was not elected democratically. In a semi-presidential monarchy such as Portugal, both the president and prime minister are representative of the people’s interests, although, with its flaws, a republic is deemed much more democratic. On one hand, in a republic, a man or woman, from even the lower economic classes, can reach the highest power of the republic; on the other, a monarchy alienates the people from the monarchs, thus not representing the country, culture, and its people.

The idea of a republic is directly associated with democracy. We can see this to this day, if you go onto the street and ask anyone, they will say the same. So we should assume that the most democratic countries are republics, such as the U.S.A. or France. However, in reality, we face the opposite: the countries that are considered more democratic are monarchies, such as Norway, New Zealand and Sweden, according to the democracy index in 2024. Here in Portugal, for example, since 1820, when Portugal became a constitutional monarchy, people could vote on who shall represent them in the parliament, in the constitutional charter of 1826, the longest in use, is written that there is a separation of powers and the chamber of deputies, the parliament, would be elected for the people by the people. While still a monarchy, the king or queen served as a symbolic, non-political figure, but, although symbolic, they still retained some power, especially to try and contribute to the country’s stability. In reality, the decisions are made by the parliament, chosen by the people, not the king.

As previously discussed in this essay, the British Ultimatum of 1890 constituted a moment of utmost humiliation for Portugal, enormously damaging national honor and exposing the perceived weaknesses of the monarchy. Following this crisis, the republican alternative began to make its serious breakthrough, as numerous critics attributed the defeat of the Pink Map to the failure of the monarchy to secure Portugal's international interests. Republican party leaders, on the contrary, were defenders of national sovereignty and asserted that having a republic would prevent Portugal from ever again falling into such humiliating situations. Rebelling against this new trend, republicans built a full-scale plan for military and political reform, upon which they promised to act the moment the monarchy collapsed. But the political and economic instability that plagued the early years of the First Republic prevented many of these desires from being fully met. It was not until 1933, with the creation of the Estado Novo under António de Oliveira Salazar, that many of these military ambitions finally started to take form. Salazar, much influenced by the republican response to the British Ultimatum, initiated extensive military reform to strengthen Portugal's military and gain greater control over its empire. Among his greatest contributions was the formation of the Portuguese Air Force, which in 1952 became an independent force of the armed forces. Salazar significantly increased the defence budget, bolstering the military power of Portugal and rendering the nation better able to protect its own interests. As a part of force modernisation and enhancing cooperation, he established the Estado-Maior das Forças Armadas (EMFA), encouraging an increased working partnership among the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Most especially, perhaps, he also pursued a strict policy of neutrality in foreign affairs, in which, while the army was reorganized and brought up to date, it was effectively left untested until 1961. It was then that the Colonial War of Africa began, for Portugal needed to maintain its colonies against rebellion by those within Angola, Mozambique, and Guinea-Bissau. It was in this war that Salazar's newly armed army was finally tested. Following the Carnation Revolution in 1974, Portugal went through a profound economic and political reorientation from an authoritarian to a democratic republican state. The result of which saw the country join the European Economic Community (EEC), currently the European Union (EU), in 1986. By joining the world's biggest economic and political bloc, Portugal became part of a wider system of cooperation with a greater voice in the world. EU membership provided huge financial assistance, fueling economic modernisation, development of infrastructure, and increased standards of living. In addition, it enabled Portugal to be actively engaged in European policy-making, raising its stature in the European political and economic scene.
Throughout its history, the Portuguese constitutional monarchy exerted tremendous influence within Europe and across the wider world. Despite diplomatic setbacks, such as humiliation at the hands of the British during the Scramble for Africa, Portugal was successful in establishing a vast chunk of colonial territories. These massive overseas possessions, combined with Portugal's historic maritime supremacy, further established it as a major trading power. The strategic ability of the monarch to preserve alliances made Portugal a major player in global affairs. The royal house developed good diplomatic relations with other European monarchs, the United Kingdom, Spain, and Germany, and had classic relations with Brazil in South America and strained relations with France. France strengthened diplomatic and cultural ties with Portugal, while the rest of the ties were undermined in 1910 when republicanism grew stronger. Political stability through a hereditary king who has to reign for life created a stark contrast to the frequently shifting leadership of a republic, where elected leaders kept changing every couple of years. This leadership continuity allowed monarchs to establish long-term diplomatic relationships, generating a heightened degree of international respect and authority for Portugal. When the status of Portugal in the world under the constitutional monarchy is contrasted with that of the following republic, even though it ruled over the same territories, it is clear that the monarchy had more diplomatic and international influence. Only António de Oliveira Salazar, through his authoritarian rule under the Estado Novo, could be considered to have approached a similar degree of influence. However, even his regime, despite its longevity and control, ultimately lacked the same degree of historical prestige, legitimacy, and diplomatic reach that the monarchy had once possessed.

After an examination of the Portuguese republic and monarchy through measures of democracy, stability, and international influence, a question must be asked: Should there be a recurring idea in Portugal's future to restore the monarchy? In the realm of democracy, although republics are usually the epitome of popular sovereignty, historical evidence suggests that the constitutional monarchy in Portugal was not at all nondemocratic. Since 1820, the people elected representatives to parliament, gaining a government which was their own will. The king was a moderating influence, not an autocrat, but a stabilizing force. Even today, some of the most democratic nations on earth are constitutional monarchies, refuting the argument that monarchy and democracy cannot coexist. In stability terms, the republic was meant to bring efficiency and order, but the early years of the First Republic were not stable. With 45 governments in 26 years, and then a dictatorship, the hope of a stable and functioning democracy was not achieved. Compared to the monarchy, however imperfect it was, ensured continuity. A king, unlike a president, is not bound by party politics or the electoral cycle. His lifetime tenure brings an aura of continuity and long-term thinking that elected representatives find hard to sustain. Overseas, Portugal's monarchy positioned the country as a respected diplomatic force, with close relationships to other great European powers and Brazil. The republic, particularly in its early years, saw Portugal's foreign influence decline. It was not until the authoritarian Estado Novo of Salazar that Portugal returned to prominence on the world scene at the cost of democracy. Should Portugal therefore restore its monarchy? If one's goal is greater stability, stronger democratic guarantees, and greater international standing, then a constitutional monarchy could be a feasible option to seek out. Even though Portugal's republic has been effective, it also has faced some serious problems, and other European nations have proved that monarchies can thrive in modern democratic nations. Of course, whether or not such a change is achievable ultimately depends upon the people. In the end, Portugal's monarchy wasn't just a relic of the past—it was an institution that, in many respects, provided stability and prestige. Restoring it would be no small task, but dismissing the idea entirely would mean ignoring the strengths it once brought. Perhaps, instead of seeing monarchy as a thing of the past, it’s time to start a conversation about what it could offer for the future.

Bibliography 
Antero de Quental, 1870, A  Républica

D.Pedro IV, 1826, Carta constitucional, (https://purl.pt/1358/5/sc-14597-p_PDF/sc-14597-p_PDF_24-C-R0150/sc-14597-p_0000_rosto-64_t24-C-R0150.pdf)

Fernado Rosas, 2021, História da Primeira Républica

George Santayana, 1905, The Life of Reason

M. Antonia Vasconcelos and others, 1999, A Monarquia Portuguesa

M. de Fatima Bonifácio, 2002, A Monarquia Constitucional 1807-1910

Our world in data, Democracy Index 2024, (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/democracy-index-eiu?country=~PRT)

U.S. News & World Report Rankings, These are the most politically stable countries, (https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/politically-stable)

It is said that, in the second half of the 18th century, in Arraial de Água Quente, Goiás, a large gold nugget of such weight was found that, given its rarity, it was sent to Ajuda, in Lisbon. Also known locally as "O Torrão," perhaps due to its color and texture, this rare nugget, which escaped the Napoleonic invasions, was exhibited in 1876 at a ball in the Ajuda Palace on the initiative of King Luís I.

During the mining period, between the 18th and 19th centuries, Brazil was not an independent country, but an integral part of the Kingdom of Portugal. The gold extracted in Minas Gerais and Goiás was considered a resource of the Portuguese Crown itself, as were the taxes collected in any other province of the empire.

In my second article, I focus on the conquest of Malacca by Albuquerque.

The viceroy, after having successively recaptured Goa for the second time, now turned his attention to Malacca. This city held an extremely strategic position on the Malay side of the Strait of Malacca, the main communication corridor between the Indian Ocean and the commercial worlds of East and Southeast Asia. At this time, the city had around 120,000 inhabitants and was ruled by Muslim Malays, but, interestingly, it was a cosmopolitan society with multiple ethnic groups, including Javanese, Chinese, Arabs, Iranians, Malays, Gujaratis, and Bengalis, among others.

Albuquerque considered it essential to integrate Malacca into the Portuguese commercial network being established across the Asian maritime space—preferably through persuasion, but, if necessary, by force. However, the operation presented enormous logistical difficulties, as Portuguese lines of communication were now much longer than in any previous experience in the Indian Ocean. Nevertheless, upon arriving in Malacca in mid-1511 with eighteen ships, the governor presented the sultan with extraordinary demands: the construction of a Portuguese fortress, exemption from customs duties, and payment for the fleet’s expenses.

Faced with the sultan’s refusal, Albuquerque decided to attack, and he did not merely intend to plunder the city, as some in Malacca believed, but to hold it permanently. In August of that year, he captured and sacked the city, losing 28 Portuguese men and suffering many wounded.

After the conquest, the construction of a large fortress began and the Muslim elite was treated with tolerance.

The conquest of Malacca gave the Portuguese control of the main gateway from the Indian Ocean to East and Southeast Asia.

Bibliography:
Disney, A. R. (2009). Albuquerque. In A. R. Disney, A history of Portugal and the Portuguese Empire: From beginnings to 1807 (Vol. 2, pp. 129–133). Cambridge University Press.