By Molly Quinn

 “The avidity and the enthusiasm of the public for the emperor have been very great, even more marked, it appears to me, than on his previous arrivals. But it is a totally personal homage; because […] the republican creed has made since his departure last year enormous advances   which impress everybody; and, notwithstanding the economic prosperity during the present year, never, for the past 40 years, has the situation of the Brazilian monarch appeared more shaky than today”

-The Comte d’Eu, on D. Pedro II’s return from a trip to Europe in 1888. [1]

            “Well, if all is lost, be calm. I have no fear of misfortune”

-D. Pedro II, November 15, 1889. [2]

 

The end of the Brazilian Monarchy was unusual in two respects. As the first quote indicates, Dom Pedro II was incredibly popular among the Brazilian people throughout his reign, including during the months leading up to the military coup that ousted him from power. As the second quote suggests, Pedro accepted his dethronement calmly and without protest. Objectively, the ousting of a popular ruler, and the ruler’s then passive acceptance of exile, seems bizarre. However, widespread discontent among the military, the rise of republicanism, and growing resentment among politicians were all forces working against the establishment of the monarchy in the late 1880s. Still, these forces alone were not enough to guarantee the demise of the crown. Had Dom Pedro II been more flexible in sharing power with other political entities and taken a more active role in politics in the last years of his reign, the fall of the monarchy could have been averted or at least postponed. [3]

The economic success of republics such as the United States and Argentina in the 1870s, the ascendancy of an active and critical press, power-hungry politicians, stagnant government revenue, and a more polarized and partisan political environment due to the recent struggle for abolition all made the situation in Brazil ripe for revolution in the late 1880s.[4]. The lack of power granted to regional politicians due to Pedro II’s supervision caused mounting frustration and resentment toward the emperor.[5] Although his supervision was done with “a gentleness, a good humor, and a skill which gave no formal cause for complaint or counterattack,” the politicians nonetheless felt bitter towards the emperor.[6] While the older generation of politicians saw Pedro II as necessary for the nation’s survival because of the chaos they had witnessed during the years of the regency, younger politicians had not experienced the regency and therefore were inclined to see the monarchy as disposable.[7] A growing number of organized interest groups, including women, caused the government to become more complicated and inefficient.[8]

The republican movement was strong in the provinces but had little success on the national level. Republicanism was popular among students and intellectuals, but there was a divide among those in  favor of a gradual transition to parliamentary republicanism through elections and those who wanted a “dictatorial, technocratic republic” achieved through revolution. The latter was strongly influenced by the positivist school of thought emphasizing “Order and Progress”[9]. Prior to the signing of the 1888 “Golden Law” abolishing slavery, republicans had been entrenched in the struggle for abolition. After its achievement, republicans returned to their fight against the monarchy.[10] However, in 1889 republicanism was still a relatively weak force on the national level and it alone did not pose a significant threat to the establishment of the monarchy.

Discontent among the military was the immediate cause for the 1889 coup.[11] The military had been greatly expanded during the war with Paraguay, which lasted from 1864 to 1870. Veterans of the war had been exposed to the caudillismo of Paraguay, Argentina and Uruguay during the war and began to admire the spirit of their Hispanic peers.[12] Veterans began to feel that the government did not pay them enough, did not give them enough credit for their service, and did not provide them with enough opportunities for promotion.[13]

While there were numerous factors that made revolution probable in 1889, the emperor’s personal quirks and apathy for his role as emperor made a coup much more likely to succeed.  Pedro II’s intense intellectualism posed distinct challenges to the survival of the monarchy. Pedro once wrote in his diary that he was born to consecrate himself to the humanities and sciences ( “Nasci para consagrar-me às letras e às ciencias”).[14] While Pedro II felt devoted to his country and his responsibilities as emperor, he did not feel the same dedication to being emperor as he felt to scholarship. As Pedro aged, his “craving for knowledge” grew “out of control”[15]. According to a prominent newspaper editor, toward the end of Pedro’s reign “reappeared an old mania which is now his constant occupation: composing verses and charades”[16].  For the emperor, intellectual pursuits were of primary importance while his duties as emperor were of secondary concern. The emperor was therefore not as upset as a typical ruler might be upon dethronement. Intellectually, Pedro II himself was drawn to the ideals of republicanism and even wrote that he would be “happier as president of a republic than as a constitutional emperor”[17]. Because of Pedro’s inclination towards republicanism, “he had taken a consistently indulgent attitude…towards the growth of republicanism” that “tended to prevent him from working energetically on November 15[^th] to save the monarchy”[18].

While Pedro II saw that Brazil was on a trajectory toward republicanism and even supported an eventual transition to a republic, he remained stuck in the ways of the monarchy and expected obedience and devotion from his subjects.[19] The general public began to view Pedro II as out-of-date, a perception exacerbated by his old-fashioned clothing and the ancient, dilapidated imperial vehicle.[20] The emperor’s reputation as an intellectual took a hit in the late 1870s and early 1880s as scientific discovery advanced rapidly and Pedro II ceased to be associated with the most modern ideas and learning.[21]  While Pedro II viewed himself as an enlightened nineteenth century scholar, he struggled to keep up with the advances that would mark the approaching twentieth century.

Pedro II allowed respect toward the crown to dwindle by failing to maintain the pomp of the monarchy, the physical upkeep of the palace and the importance of the palace as a social center of high society.[22] Pedro often expressed apathy regarding the survival of the monarchy, once stating: “let the country govern itself as it thinks best and consider right whoever may be right”[23]. In part due to Pedro’s apathy and his tolerance of anti-monarchist propaganda, the monarchy failed to win the allegiance of young intellectuals and politicians.[24] Rising intellectuals and politicians thus began to view the monarchy as inessential for the survival of Brazil.

Due to Pedro’s lengthy trips abroad, he became increasingly detached from Brazilian politics and less interested in serving as emperor.[25] Pedro expressed in his diary that he considered Brazil a “desert,” and truly wanted to live in Europe.[26]  A senator wrote on April 11, 1889: “The emperor [is] everyday more forgetful of current matters and remote from political questions”[27]. Pedro II is characterized as being “quite unaware of the gravity of the situation” of political unrest and frustration with the monarchy in 1889.[28]  The emperor’s declining health due to the onset of diabetes further hindered his enthusiasm for acting as emperor and exacerbated his detachment.[29] Numerous health scares made the emperor’s death seem imminent, and most republican leaders eagerly anticipated Pedro’s death so that they could carry out a transition to a republican government without having to deal with such a popular figure.[30] On three separate occasions, Dona Isabel, Pedro II’s daughter, ruled as regent during the emperor’s absences in Europe. [31] The last of these absences, a fifteen month trip to Europe in 1887 and 1888, was undertaken for Pedro II to receive medical treatment.[32] This absence prevented Pedro from exerting his presence in the political scene during a critical time for the regime.[33] Upon his return, the emperor “was subjected to a medical regimen which probably withheld from him knowledge of political matters which might have caused him worry”[34]. When he arrived in Rio de Janeiro on August 5, 1888, massive festivities took place that belied the vulnerability of his position as monarch. [35]

Pedro II’s personality posed further problems. He was stubborn, conservative, passive and unwilling to address crucial issues.[36] During his weekly meetings with the Council, Pedro II would discuss in great detail matters that he found interesting but that were of little real importance, such as the ideal structure of universities.[37] He “refused to devote his attention to anything of which he disapproved,” making it difficult for the government to tackle pressing problems.[38] His unwillingness to address the demands of the military proved to ultimately be critical, as it was the military that carried out the 1889 coup.[39] Despite a large debt and the advice of the Comte d’Eu, Pedro II decided not to decrease the size of the military after the war with Paraguay.[40] Pedro may have hoped to enhance the reputation of Brazilian military strength, but this decision certainly made the military a more difficult force to reckon with.[41] According to Barman, “Pedro II’s passivity deprived him of his former utility. By his continued presence he prevented any redistribution of power within the political system and so a peaceful evolution of that system”[42]. Had Pedro abdicated, actively worked for change in the system or passed the throne to Dona Isabel, who may have taken a more active role and who had a considerable following among the lower classes due to her role in abolition, the monarchy may have been salvaged. Pedro II’s passivity and willingness to calmly accept loss may stretch back to the childhood loss of his father, stepmother and older sister when his father abdicated and returned to Portugal in 1831.[43] To cope with such a loss, Pedro II had, from a young age, “schooled himself to endure deprivation and disappointment”[44]. Pedro II’s passivity was aggravated by fatigue due to his poor health and due to his forty-eight year long reign.  Serving as emperor was becoming a “burden which D. Pedro II no longer welcomed but which his sense of dedication and his pride did not permit him to renounce”[45]. With abdication out of the question, “the overthrow of the regime provided an honorable means of escape”[46].

D. Pedro exhibited his passivity and detachment during the events of November 14^th and 15^th, 1889. It is even claimed that “his reactions on November 15[^th ] were such as might have been expected” because of his personality, his failure to take seriously the military threat, and his reliance on the allegiance of his citizens [47]. Pedro II was slow to act and to summon the council of state since he, “as civil head of the Empire […] abhorred the thought of giving way to dictation of the military” [48]. After receiving an initial message in his palace in Petrópolis of the events unfolding in Rio, the emperor went on with his day as normal but looked into taking a train into the city.[49] A second telegram announcing the Council’s resignation prompted Pedro II to immediately take a train into Rio.[50] The emperor’s relaxed approach towards the crisis showed “that the emperor believed that the uprising reported by the president of the council had no larger implications and that he could restore order and authority without much difficulty”[51]. Upon his arrival in Rio, Pedro II looked for solutions for the crisis, still not realizing the severity of the situation. The emperor proposed dissolving the army units, to which the Comte d’Eu pointedly asked: “how do you plan to dissolve troops which are in revolt against you?”[52]. The emperor refused to accept the resignation of the Cabinet, to which the Comte pointed out: “But the ministers are prisoners of the rebels”[53]. Pedro made efforts to form a new government incorporating rebellion leader Marshal Manuel Deodoro da Fonseca. However, these efforts were too little too late and did not reach Fonseca until after he had already been declared president of the republic.[54] To the unfolding of events and to the disintegration of the regime, the emperor, D. Isabel and the Comte d’Eu were “virtual spectators”[55].

Pedro II’s realization of his dethronement, when it finally did occur, was typical of his passive, calm personality. One politician, upon seeing this realization of the emperor, wrote: “I did not note in the emperor’s face the slightest sign of resentment or anger. His words, as sober as usual, were the same at the end as at the start […] He questioned, he listened, he reflected, and he maintained himself unmoved”[56]. On the morning of November 15^th, the royal family awoke imprisoned inside the palace.[57] While the Comte d’Eu could not sleep because of the stress of the coup and rose early, “Pedro II awakened late and spent his time quietly reading his scientific journals”[58]. Pedro II’s ability to sleep late and focus on scientific journals in the midst of this crisis may have reflected the apathy that he felt toward his job, but also was surely a coping mechanism that he had long relied on in moments of crisis. The new government then demanded that the family leave for exile in the middle of the night of the 16^th in order to curtail public protests.[59] Despite the ensuing drama, the dethroned emperor still “maintained a dignified calm”[60]. This “dignified calm” can also be interpreted as Pedro II moving “like an automaton” incapable of emotional response.[61] During the events of November 14^th, 15^th and 16^th, the emperor did not at any point “make any effort to seize the initiative or to take control of the situation…” [62]. Resistance to the ordered exile, however, would have likely been futile since the emperor lacked military backing. [63]

Although he managed to remain calm and composed during the events of November 14^th through 16^th, D. Pedro II surely felt a deep sadness because of the exile from his homeland.[64] Pedro II wrote a heartfelt message of farewell to the Brazilian people that expressed no ill-will toward the new government. He wrote: “Absenting myself, then, I, with all the members of my family, will cherish for Brazil the deepest, most yearning remembrance, while praying earnestly for its greatness and prosperity”[65].

Pedro II’s response to the outcome of the coup has been described as relief that there was relatively little violence. [66] However, he was hurt by “how readily most officers of the Empire had recognized the new order and sought its favor”[67]. With time and reflection, Pedro II adopted “an impersonal and forgiving attitude” toward his dethronement.[68] Towards the new regime, “his attitude […] was kindly but patronizing and, in many respects, paternal”[69]. In later years, Pedro II remarked on his hope for a republican government in Brazil: “I should have desired […] that the civilization of Brazil had made possible the immediate admission of the republican system, which, to me, is the most perfect possible in human affairs…I wanted only to contribute towards a social state in which the republic could be ‘planted,’ so to speak by me, and could bring forth fruit in proper season” [70].  In his diary, he similarly wrote that he would have been a republican, had he judged Brazil advanced enough for a republican government (“[…] mas como ja disse eu seria republicano, se julgasse o Brasil bastante adiantado para tal forma de governo.”) [71]. D. Pedro feared that Brazil, if democratically governed, would fall to military dictatorship like other Latin American republics since the masses were uneducated and ignorant of democratic ideals. He believed that the constitution under the Monarchy, with its allocation of a moderating power to the emperor, was therefore best as it allowed him to protect Brazil from a repressive military dictatorship. While D. Pedro legitimately hoped for the transition to democratic rule, he did not deem Brazil advanced enough in 1889.[72] In regard to the new Constitution, Pedro found it lacking in protection of electoral rights and less fitted to the “temperament of the Latin race” than the Constitution under the Monarchy (“Nada vejo sobre os direitos eleitorais…A Constituição atual é mais prudente atendendo a índole da raça latina.”) [73].

Pedro II approached exile not as a punishment but as “an unexpected but welcome vacation from the cares of state, a vacation which he could use to enhance his knowledge and so his abilities to serve Brazil”[74]. Upon leaving Brazil, Pedro II may not have anticipated that his exile would be permanent. While on the Alagôas, the boat carrying the royal party to Europe, Pedro II generally seemed “resigned to the loss of his throne” and even mentioned plans “for study and for visits in Portugal” [75]. During his journey into exile, Pedro II is described as acting  “as if nothing were amiss in the world” [76]. He spent his time reading, conversing about non-political subjects, and teaching his grandsons.[77] When attempts to regain the throne were brought up, the dethroned emperor vehemently insisted: “I shall never conspire to return, and I do not want any one to conspire in my name; but, if they call me spontaneously, I shall not hesitate a second: I shall go at once and with pleasure” [78]. Pedro II’s only wish after his exile was to “live quietly for the rest of [his] days,” which again highlights his fatigue due to health problems and the stresses of his lengthy rule.[79] While adamantly opposed to conspiracies to overthrow the new government and to reinstate the crown, Pedro II wished for the success of Brazil and considered serving Brazil a high priority.

The new regime elicited “a noticeable lack of enthusiasm” from the public.[80] However, no substantial protest took place on behalf of the emperor’s reinstatement. For many former supporters of the monarchy, “Pedro II’s passivity and his physical weakness both personified and signified a regime in its last stages of existence”[81]. Despite Pedro II’s popularity, the public calmly accepted his dethronement in much the same manner that Pedro himself accepted exile. After Pedro II’s death in 1891, a “genuine sense of regret” swept the nation.[82] Pedro II’s corpse was not allowed back into Brazil until 1921. When it finally arrived, the emperor’s corpse was met with massive festivities reminiscent of his 1887 return from Europe.[83] The return of Pedro II’s corpse marked an important step in national reconciliation between monarchists and republicans. A restoration of Pedro II’s legacy thus began in the 1920s. With the 1930 revolution, the republican regime that had ousted the monarchy fell[84]. The presence of Getúlio Vargas at Pedro II’s 1939 reburial in Petrópolis signified the complete transformation of Pedro II’s legacy from that of a weak, anachronistic ruler to that of a “philosopher king”(O Rei filósofo) worthy of national remembrance and academic study.[85] One American scholar gushingly wrote in her 1937 biography of Pedro II:

His modesty, simplicity, and democracy; tenacity of high purposes; devotion to duty as he saw it; unwearied enthusiasm for learning; subordination of material values to intellectual and spiritual ones; his integrity, magnanimity, understanding pity, and enduring kindness made him one of the finest personalities of modern times. Because of this rare combination of individual qualities he was, in truth, a credit and an honor to humanity. For greatness of character is the supreme greatness”[86].

Academic research of the monarchy, however, fell out of style in Brazil by the mid-1970s. The end of the twentieth century saw relatively little new scholarship on Pedro II after the 1975 publication of a five-volume biography by Pedro Calmon.[87]  Today, while Pedro II’s name “evoke[s] both traditional values and the nation’s heritage,” the accomplishments of D. Pedro and his role in the creation of contemporary Brazil are “largely forgotten”[88].

---