The ‘Brasileiro’: a 19th century transnational social category

The “B asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y Isabel Co êa da Sil a 10. 222 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in in oduc ion This a icle is he esul o he in e sec ion be ween he wo main his o ical ields I ha e been s udying in ecen yea s: 19 h cen u y Po uguese and B azilian poli ical cul u e. I syn hesises, e iews and jux aposes conclusions and da a ha I ha e ga he ed du ing my esea ch on 19 h cen u y Luso-B azilian ela ions, Po uguese emig a ion o B azil, libe al eli es and he poli ical cul u e o he Po uguese cons i u ional mona chy. I compiles and diges s in o ma ion aiming o make a con ibu ion o he unde s anding o a social s e eo ype ha , o mo e han a cen u y, has conce ned Po uguese ic ional and non- ic ional li e a u e: he “B asilei o” (Sil a 2013; Ramos, Ca alho and Sil a 2018). The Po uguese emig an s who e u ned om B azil in he 19 h cen u y wi h enough weal h o ascend socially and o en poli ically in hei homeland we e nicknamed by hei con empo a ies and ha e come down o us as “B asilei os” (B azilians). Th oughou hei li es hese emig an s, who in hei own coun y we e called he “B asilei os” and in B azil we e s igma ised as he “Po uguês” ( he Po uguese), ha e been subjec o he p essu e o o e lapping exclusion and inclusion. This si ua ion no only condi ioned hei in eg a ion bo h in he hos coun y and homeland, bu also had a g ea impac on hei pe cep ion o hei own na ional iden i y. The pu pose o his a icle is o e lec on he social cons uc ion o ha ca ego y by analysing he Po uguese libe al cul u e’s c i e ia o social inclusion and exclusion in he 19 h cen u y. The ope a i e use o he concep “ ansna ional” allows he pe spec i e o be widened beyond he social, economic, o e en egional (cen e e sus in e io ) and e en acknowledge he phenomenon wi hin a his o ical e lec ion conce ning issues o na ionali y. The a icle also aises se e al ques ions and shows he many unce ain ies in ou knowledge abou he social con ex ha p oduced he ca ego isa ion. he po uguese in 19 h cen u y b azil, om colonise o immig an : he “po uguês” A e he independence o B azil, in 1822, and long be o e se iously conside ing he economic explo a ion and exploi a ion o i s A ican e i o ies, Po ugal ealised he absolu e and u gen need o es uc u ing i s economy, o in he he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 223 wo ds o a con empo a y: o “ inding in wo k he means o li e ha i had in he colonies” (Ramos 1990, 153-223). None heless, he yea ning o p i ileged economic ela ions wi h B azil conce ned Po uguese diplomacy igh om he yea s immedia ely a e i s independence. Successi e ailed a emp s o sign a comme cial ea y ma ked he pano ama o Po uguese-B azilian ela ions h oughou he 19 h cen u y. Ag eemen s we e on he e ge o being signed in 1826, 1836, 1840, 1889, 1892 and 1908. Bu none was. Ye his obsession wasn’ me ely impe ial nos algia. I was ac ually p opelled by a e y empi ical phenomenon ha a he spon aneously assu ed he con inui y o a special link be ween Po ugal and B azil: emig a ion. In ac , du ing he 19 h cen u y, he Po uguese in B azil wen om colonise s o immig an s. The ela i ely sho pe iod o ime in which his ans o ma ion happened enabled he con inui y o many hings, among which he con inui y o a e ashioned esen men . The dep ecia i e eelings behind he ca ica u ed images o he “Po uguês” ( he Po uguese man) su i ed he cen u y wi h jus some adjus men s. Recu en wa es o Lusophobia la ed up in he i s decades a e independence and cha ac e ised he na ion- building p ocess o he B azilian Empi e, while mos commonly limi ed o u ban con ex s and mos ly mo i a ed by economic i al y conce ning he con inui y o he Po uguese sla e ade monopoly (Lessa 2008, 237- -256; Alencas o 1988, 30-57; Ribei o, 2002). Being he mos Po uguese o B azilian ci ies, Rio de Janei o was also he mos p opi ious s age o he ising o hese an i-Lusi anian eelings. In ac , om he 18 h o he 20 h cen u y, he low o Po uguese emig a ion was ne e in e up ed in his ci y. Po uguese emig an s in es ed la gely in u ban eal es a e and small comme cial p ope ies, ha ing he monopoly o e ail ade and he e o e con olling an impo an sha e o he job ma ke (Ribei o 1990). La e , his se ing would be cen al o he mobilisa ion, ecep ion, and in eg a ion o he men and women who embodied he mass mig a ion phenomenon begun in he 1870s and eached i s apogee a he u n o he cen u y, when Rio de Janei o became, a e Lisbon, he ci y wi h he la ges Po uguese popula ion in he wo ld (Oli ei a 1919, 15). In his new scena io, he adi ional ype o mig an om he colonial imes – he single boy a elling alone a he age o 12 o 13 wi h minimal li e acy, o en wi h he oyage paid o by his amily, wi h he pu pose o aising some money and hen o e u n – was no longe o be ound. This was eplaced by a dis inc pa e n o mig a ion, cha ac e ised by he a i al o en i e amilies, 224 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in e y poo , illi e a e, and wi h no p ospec o e u ning. The s e eo ype, which lou ished in he B azilian socie y a ound ha ime, o he igno an , g eedy, and ude Po uguese is a combina ion o eelings owa ds hose wo ypes o mig an s: esen men agains he o me , disdain owa ds he la e . In any case, he esul was a so o unin en ional cha ac e assassina ion o a pa icula social and e hnic g oup due o ie ce compe i ion o jobs and inc easing na ionalism. O cou se, his hos ili y was no exclusi ely di ec ed a he Po uguese: as in any mel ing po socie y, he e was p obably no o eigne sa e om some p ejudice. Howe e , he Po uguese immig an communi y had speci ic cha ac e is ics ha dis inguished i om o he g oups o mig an s, s a ing wi h he ac ha i s membe s sha ed a his o ical, social, and cul u al backg ound wi h hei hos s. A ci cums ance ha , i on he one hand, en ailed much awkwa dness; on he o he , enabled a kind o amilia i y ha was c ucial o he colony’s in e nal o ganisa ion and o mig an in eg a ion in B azilian socie y. Un o una ely, he e a e no eliable o icial s a is ics on 19 h cen u y Po uguese emig a ion.1 App oxima e numbe s o he exodus o Po uguese emig an s a e a ailable o some pe iods, bu i is no possible o e alua e he size o he Po uguese immig an communi y in B azil solely based on such da a. Con empo a y es ima es o i s size a he beginning o he 20 h cen u y a ied be ween 700,000 and one million. Bu i is possible o d aw some conclusions i we na ow ou inqui y o he ci y o Rio de Janei o: acco ding o he 1906 B azilian census, he e we e 132,529 Po uguese indi iduals li ing in Rio, amoun ing o abou 70 pe cen o all o eigne s and o one i h o he ci y’s o al popula ion.2 Al hough he s a is ics do no gi e us accu a e igu es o he size o he Po uguese communi y in Rio, hey can in o m us abou i s ci ic o ganisa ion. Da a om 1913 abou wel a e ins i u ions in Rio de Janei o e eal he exis ence o 24 Po uguese associa ions wi h app oxima ely 63,000 membe s, meaning ha a ound 40 pe cen o hese immig an s we e 1 Fo he nex wo pages, I’ll ollow he in oduc ion o my a icle (Sil a 2017). 2 José Ba bosa, As Relações Luso-B asilei as, A Imig ação e a Desnacionalização do B asil (Lisbon: s.n., 1909), 45 and “Le e om King Ca los o he Duchess o Uzès,” 12 h Decembe 1907 in Rod igues Ca alhei o, D. Ca los i e o B asil (Lisbon: O p in om he Diá io da Manhã, 1957, 20). he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 225 in eg a ed in ne wo ks o cul u al o social assis ance.3 These associa ions p o ided heal h suppo , inanced immig an s who wished o e u n home, helped newcome s o se le, assis ed in con ac s wi h he homeland ( ega ding co espondence, emi ances e c.), p omo ed pa io ic cul u al ac i i ies such as lec u es, e ening classes on Po uguese his o y, cul u e and language, as well as book lending and ac i i ies celeb a ing na ional holidays. So a , he s udy o hese associa ions has been ega ded wi h suspicion in Mig a ion S udies, seen as he “ oam o mig a ion wa es” and he e o e un ep esen a i e o he whole Nuñez Seixas (2016, 141). Howe e , my esea ch has led me o belie e ha associa i e sou ces a e o g ea signi icance no only because hey allow us o keep ack o he collec i e o ganisa ion, bu also con ibu e o he sociological desc ip ion o g oups which, mo e o less olun a ily, held some kind o mo al and in o mal leade ship in he communi y (Pey ou 2015). This ins i u ions-o ien ed pe spec i e allows us o iden i y and cha ac e ise an eli e g oup ha would include people possessing social capi al and capable o poli ical in e en ion such as en ep eneu s, weal hy shopkeepe s, me chan s, jou nalis s, publishe s, w i e s, i led indi iduals, diploma s and consula au ho i ies. An eli e ha , ega dless o i s lack o an o icial accoun abili y, played he ole o in o mal ep esen a i e o he mig an communi y. Keeping in mind ha we a e only dealing wi h a “social sample”, which is a om gi ing us he whole pic u e, hese a e he men ha by hei geog aphical mobili y, emo ional and poli ical engagemen and by hei economic beha iou ga e shape o a ansna ional social ca ego y om mo e han a cen u y ago (Øs e gaa d-Nielsen 2003, 775). Excluding diploma s and consula o icials, mos o hese eli e indi iduals sha ed a common expe ience in li e (a i ing in B azil in he mid-19 h cen u y, aged om 13 o 20, coming om modes backg ounds o engage in comme cial ac i i ies), as well as e hics ounded on p inciples o me i oc acy, philan h opy, and hones y. This se o alues no only p o ided hem wi h a dis inc indi iduali y bu also o e ed hem a speci ic sense o belonging, no jus o a class o socio-p o essional ca ego y, bu o a mo e subjec i e g oup o an “imagined communi y” simul aneously ela ed o B azilian and Po uguese na ionali ies bu , a he same ime, ex e nal o bo h. 3 Assis ência Pública e P i ada no Rio de Janei o, His ó ia e Es a ís ica. Comemo ação do Cen ená io da Independência (Rio de Janei o: Typ. “Anuá io do B asil”, 1922); and Fonseca (2009). 226 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in Pa e ns o cul u al and social ep oduc ion in he Po uguese communi y in B azil ha e e lec ed his eeling o an incomple e belonging in such sub le o ms as: aluing me i oc acy; encou aging an e hic o sac i ice and wo k; os e ing a pa io ic consciousness deeply bound o he homeland bu simul aneously independen om na ional poli ics. In ac , i was he e y his o ical na u e o his consciousness ha d o e he Po uguese immig an s o ega d hemsel es as an impo an pa o he de elopmen o B azilian na ionali y – as hei s and con inue s o he Po uguese colonising mission. Po uguese emig an s also exp essed hei sense o dual loyal y when choosing he des ina ion o he p oceeds o hei wo k. Fo ob ious easons, he p ima y bene icia y was he B azilian economy, bu he “mi age o e u n” always played an impo an ole in he s a egy o asse managemen , and in his sense mig an s p omo ed a signi ican mo emen o capi al in opposi e di ec ions be ween he sending and ecei ing coun ies. In ac , a he u n o he cen u y, Po ugal’s inances we e conside ably dependen upon money ans e s om immig an s in B azil, and Po uguese go e nmen s did no hing o dispa age ha sou ce o e enue, which played a c ucial ole in ensu ing a su plus in i s c edi balance in London.4 Mo eo e , Po uguese mig an s li ing in B azil also con inued o consume p oduc s om he homeland, and in he i s decade o he 20 h cen u y, his consump ion ep esen ed a ound 18 pe cen o all Po uguese expo s (Lains 2003; Pe ei a, 1983; Al es, 1994). The wills le by hese men illus a e his ansna ional mindse : a g ea pa o hem ins uc ed ha hei money and p ope y was di ided be ween hei hei s in bo h B azil and Po ugal. And in he e y common cases in which he e we e no di ec hei s, he o une was no mally assigned o cha i able ins i u ions, he building o schools and hospi als, and o he simila kinds o ini ia i es on bo h sides o he A lan ic (Pilo o 2014). Remi ances, nos algic pa e ns o consump ion and in es men s we e only he economic ace o an exis ence ha was al eady socially and emo ionally sp ead be ween he “he e” and he “ he e”. Unsu p isingly, his ansna ional li e cou se also a ou ed he ise o ansna ional poli ical p ac ices, a phenomenon ha would be o g ea consequence o Po uguese domes ic poli ics a he end o he Mona chy and i s yea s o he Republican egime (Sil a 2017). 4 This scena io had some simila i ies wi h he con empo a y B i ish Empi e (Magee and Thompson 2006). he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 227 he po uguese emig an e u ned om b azil: he “b asilei o” Long be o e eaching a na ional impac , which only happened a he beginning o he 20 h cen u y, he poli ical engagemen o hese Po uguese emig an s in B azil was al eady e y aluable a local and egional le els. In 1881, an Indus ial Na ional Su ey concluded ha in he egion o Opo o “ he aluable capi als acqui ed in B azil and he close ela ions ha he cons an emig a ion o his dis ic main ains wi h he Ame ican empi e a e mo e o less p esen in all hese indus ies, which anima es ag icul u al ac i i y and explains he high p ice o p ope y.”5 Ano he su ey speci ically abou emig a ion, published some yea s be o e, concluded ha a ound 50% o he emig an s ha came back om B azil be ween 1863 and 1873 managed o sa e enough o be conside ed o li le o a e agely weal hy, al hough o hese only one hi d showed a o une abo e he 10 “con os”. 6 As op imis ic as his scena io may seem, we mus no o ge ha we a e dealing wi h da a ha , by de aul , excludes he cases o ailu e. Acco ding o he es imony o he Po uguese consul in Rio de Janei o o he same Emig a ion Su ey o 1873: “o 1000 emig an s, a ound 10 manage o be ich, a ound 100 o sa e enough o li e on medium s anda ds, he es ege a e only i hey do no die.”7 Unde s andably, only he wo i s g oups had he means o e u n home. Hence, he label “B asilei o” by de aul implied someone wi h some means. Because hey had always main ained a ansna ional allegiance, when se ling back home hese emig an s had a e y posi i e impac on he de elopmen o hei communi y o o igin. Ac ually, hey we e engines o mode ni y in many di e en aspec s, such as inance, indus ialisa ion, a chi ec u al inno a ion, o philan h opy. In ac , he houses o he “B asilei o” s ood ou om he u al scene y o he ime, and a e s ill, e en oday, a hallma k o he u al landscape in no he n Po ugal. They b eak wi h he egional pa e n in e ms 5 Inqué i o Indus ial de 1881 quo ed in Ma ia Filomena Mónica (1987, 829). 6 Fo a co ela i e no ion o hese alues, i is use ul o know ha an a isan would ha e a ound a 400 “ eis” daily wage, and a peon 200 “ eis”. So 1 “con o” o “ eis” would ep esen a ound 6 o 12 yea s o wo k a home, assuming he e was ull- ime employmen , see Al es (1994, 261-270). 7 Documen os Ap esen ados às Co es na Sessão Legisla i a de 1874 pelo Minis o e Sec e á io de Es ado dos Negócios Es angei os – Emig ação Po uguesa (1874), documen o n.º 222: “Respos a do s . An ónio de Almeida Campos, cônsul ge al de Po ugal no Rio de Janei o ao s . And ade Co o” Anexo F, quo ed in Pe ei a, Polí ica Po uguesa…, 275-282. 228 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in o s yle; building ma e ials; olume ic and a e ecognisable a a glance. No su p isingly, mos p obably because o hei de ia ion om he na ional s anda d, hey we e conside ed bad as e by he Po uguese social eli es o he ime (Mon ei o 2000, 2007). Philan h opy was p obably whe e he “B asilei os” made a majo di e ence, as a as local de elopmen was conce ned. Cha i y was a common p ac ice among libe al eli es, bu hese emig an s had a pa icula p edisposi ion ha was ob iously ela ed wi h hei li e ime expe ience wi hin he immig an communi y in B azil. They we e p obably he mo e impo an philan h opis s o hei ime ega ding educa ion. Building a school in hei home own became almos a ule. No o men ion some ex ao dina y cases like ha o he Coun o Fe ei a, whose will s ipula ed he building o 120 schools h oughou he coun y (A aújo 2013). I is also impo an o no ice ha bo h sides o he s o y s essed he ansna ional na u e o he “B asilei o”. I was p edominan ly e oked symbolically, bu was o en also used in ope a i e ways conce ning many di e en aspec s o daily li e, such as escaping om mili a y se ice o o he ci il obliga ions. The comme cial almanacs o Opo o, whe e he name o he “B asilei os” businessmen appea ed ollowed by he abb e ia ion B az., a e a i id example o his olun a y dis inc ion, since we know hese almanacs only published he in o ma ion p o ided by each indi idual (Al es 1994). By choosing o delibe a ely appea iden i ied as “B asilei os”, hese men we e using he exclusion de ice o hei own bene i : hey we en’ o eigne s, because hese almanacs had speci ic lis s o o eigne s, bu hey didn’ wan o be seen as any o he Po uguese businessman. They pe o med hei own ansna ional iden i y. Th oughou he 19 h cen u y, he Po uguese c own was well awa e o he signi ican con ibu ion o hese weal hy “B asilei os” o he de elopmen o hei homeland, as well as hei dedica ion o he ne wo k o solida i y wi hin he mig an communi y in B azil. As a sign o ecogni ion, kings g an ed i les ei he o nobili y, chi al y, o hono i ic o de s o p ac ically all hose Po uguese emig an s who managed o each a place o some signi icance in he hea o he colony, o who e u ned home weal hy enough o gene ously se e hei bi h communi y. His o iog aphy has no ye su icien ly no iced he a en ion ha go e nmen s o he Po uguese cons i u ional mona chy de o ed o he many dimensions o he ansna ional dynamic de eloped by he “B asilei os”. Tha is why i may be su p ising o ealise ha om 1850 onwa ds, and un il he end o he mona chy (1910), he e we e abou 160 i les o nobili y g an ed he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 229 o emig an s ei he li ing in B azil o who had al eady e u ned om B azil. The majo i y o hese new i le-holde s we e o e y modes o igins, mainly om he no h o cen al in e io o Po ugal (Minho, T ás-os-Mon es and Bei as), wi h a li e ime o ha d wo k engaged in comme cial ac i i ies. Jus conside ing he amoun o new i les a e 1850 (a o al o app oxima ely 950), he amoun g an ed o Po uguese emig an s in B azil (156) o o B azilian na ionals (47) co esponds o abou 21% o he o al.8 The e a e a leas h ee commen s we can make on hese numbe s ega ding he ela ionship be ween poli ical powe and he “B asilei os”. Fi s , he consis en commi men o he s a e o g an ing o icial ecogni ion o a ce ain g oup o people who only had in common he commendable cha ac e is ic ha hey had pu hei weal h a he se ice o hei ellow coun ymen. We should no e ha , o he mos pa , hese men we e me chan s and inancie s wi h li le o no connec ion o na ional poli ics, and he e o e he i le o nobili y could ha dly wo k as a ecompense o poli ical a ou s. Howe e , nei he did i wo k as ecogni ion o ci il en ep eneu ship; as i was, o ins ance, in he case o he O de o Indus ial Me i , c ea ed by King Ca los in 1893 o ha speci ic pu pose. Ce ainly, he i led “B asilei os” i in o a pa adigm o me i ewa d, bu hey also apply o a new way o unde s anding he se ice o he mona chy, conside ing i beyond he adi ional ame o he C own and S a e adminis a ion. These “B asilei os” we e ewa ded because hey had se ed he Po uguese mona chy, pe cei ing i as he Po uguese na ion, a a he mode n and ye imp ecise concep ha comp ised all Po uguese men and women, including hose ha li ed ou side he na ional e i o y. Second, we should no e ha he numbe s abo e co obo a e wha we ha e al eady w i en abou he s ong desi e o Po uguese go e nmen s o main ain good ela ions wi h B azil. In ac , wi h 34%, B azil anks i s on he lis o all Po uguese i les g an ed o o eigne s h oughou he whole 19 h cen u y. I is ollowed by B i ain (24%), F ance (14%), Spain (9%), and Ge many (5%). I is easy o ind coincidences be ween his anking and he able o na ional expo s. I is also easy o unde s and how one way o cu y a ou wi h he B azilian go e nmen was by he in luence o he Po uguese colony eli e, who we e a signi ican lobby in some B azilian s a e a ai s, o ins ance by con olling an impo an pa o he Rio de Janei o p ess. 8 An es ima e based on he da a compiled by Vasconcelos (2003). 236 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in o cul u al na ionalism. This was he pe iod o he Luso-B azilian jou nals such as O pheu (1915), Águia (1920-21), A lân ida (1915-1920); o ambi ious edi o ial p ojec s, such as he His o y o Po uguese Coloniza ion in B azil (1921-1923), o he Po uguese ae ial c ossing o he sou h A lan ic (1922). I was also he ime o P esiden An ónio José de Almeida’s o icial isi o B azil (1922), who e e ed o he A lan ic Ocean as “ he g ea Lusi anian Sea, enclosed be ween he sho es o A ica and B azil, ha ing Lisbon as sa e ha en. (De oue 1923). I is easy o unde s and how Po uguese emig an s in B azil we e in e es ed in encou aging his ideology. No by coincidence, he His o y o Po uguese Coloniza ion o B azil was published hanks o he inancial suppo o he “B asilei os”, wi h he pu pose o being dis ibu ed in ins almen s in Po ugal and B azil (Dias 1921). I is also easily comp ehensible how his new na ionalis ic end helped o ehabili a e he image o he “B asilei os”, who s a ed o be acknowledged as media o s o he Luso-B azilian a e ni y ha become a key ea u e o he impe ial and colonial Po uguese discou se du ing he i s Republic and, la e on, du ing he au ho i a ian egime o he Es ado No o. conclusions and u u e esea ch The pu pose o his o e iew and ques ioning on 19 h cen u y Po uguese eli es was mainly o e eal he idiosync asies and complexi y o he wo ld ha was in e cep ed by he “B asilei o”. By iden i ying he condi ions o inclusion ha he “B asilei os” lacked, we hope o ha e con ibu ed o a deepe unde s anding o Po uguese 19 h cen u y socie y, which p oduced ha classi ica ion, and o a mo e accu a e knowledge o he c i e ia ha wo ked as ga ekeepe s o he highe anks o ha socie y. Viewed as social ca ego y, he “B asilei os” a e indeed a e y e ile case o hink abou dynamics o inclusion and exclusion in 19 h cen u y Po ugal. No only because i obliges us o go beyond he economic o e en poli ical no ion o inclusion, bu also because i calls o a sha pe lens when looking o he g ounds o social exclusion. These men had he means and he o icial ecogni ion sus aining hei s ance as membe s o an eli e, bu appa en ly hey did no ha e he capabili ies no he expe ience equi ed o be assimila ed and ecognised by he eli es. Mo eo e , he “B asilei os” seem o con i m he he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 237 link ha li e a u e iden i ies be ween “ he bi h o he mode n wo ld” and he g adual uni o misa ion o he sys em o p ac ices in which eli es we e os e ed. Mo e han genealogy o weal h, he mode n s a us egimes we e g ounded on manne s, and equi ed he pe o mance o a ce ain code (o d essing, o beha ing e c.) (Bayly 2007). The e o e, i on he one hand, he mode n wo ld e ec i ely leads o a democ a isa ion o eli es wi h mo e widesp ead and inclusi e c i e ia o in eg a ion; on he o he , i s end owa ds a s anda disa ion c ea ed new exclusion c i e ia, by d as ically educing he accep ance o di e si y. The “B asilei os” also allow us o look a inclusion in e ms o na ional and cul u al iden i y, since hey hough o hemsel es and ac ed as ansna ional playe s. In ac , 19 h cen u y no elis s and jou nalis s al eady acknowledged wha an h opologis s and sociologis s iden i y oday as a “co ela i e imagina y” o a dual e hnic sensibili y o ansna ional mig an s (Wes wood and Phizacklea 2000), pic u ing he “B asilei o” as a cha ac e doomed ne e o ha e a comple e sense o his own na ionali y: in B azil he will ne e cease o be he Po uguese, in Po ugal he is hopelessly he “B asilei o.” Ye , in he ansi ion o he 20 h cen u y, in he his o ical con ex o he eme gence o new impe ialism ha cha ac e ised he pe iod, he “B asilei os”, pa icula ly hose who we e s ill li ing in B azil, we e edeemed, o some ex en , by an eme gen poli ical cul u e ha saw hen as impo an asse s o deal wi h in e na ional p essu e ega ding i s colonial Empi e. Symbolically ea u ing he inhe i o s o o me colonise s and playing agen s o p opaganda o Po uguese impe ial ambi ions, Po uguese emig an s in B azil played a key ole in he s a egy o showing he successes o he ex-colony o p o e Po ugal’s capaci y o unde ake a “ci ilising mission.” The ime when a new ype o na ionalism imp egna ed wi h impe ial aspi a ion and nos algia a ose was simul aneously ha when 19 h cen u y ci ic libe al cul u e ell. This new end owa ds a na ionalis poli ical cul u e ehabili a ed he “B asilei os”, o some deg ee, by making poli ical p o i om hei ansna ional cu iculum. Thei ansna ional ea u e was inally seen as he in e es o a new ideological discou se exul ing he Luso-B azilian a e ni y and o eseeing a common ci ilising des iny o Po ugal and B azil. Ye , i on he one hand, his con ex p omo ed he poli ical c i e ia o inclusion o he “B asilei os”; on he o he , i was ne e able o o e come he social c i e ia o exclusion. 238 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ____________________________________ isabel co êa da sil a Ins i u o de Ciências Sociais, Uni e sidade de Lisboa A . P o . Aníbal Be encou 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Po ugal [email p o ec ed] o cid.o g/0000-0001-7854-0902 ____________________________________ e e ences alencas o, L. F. 1988. “Esc a os e p ole á ios”. No os Es udos Ceb ap, 21: 30-57. almeida, P. T. de. 1995. A Cons ução do Es ado Libe al. Eli e Polí ica e Bu oc acia na “Regene ação” (1851-1890). phd hesis, Lisbon: Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas, Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa. al es, J. F. 1994. Os B asilei os. Emig ação e Re o no no Po o Oi ocen is a. Po o: s. n. a aújo, M. L. de, coo d. 2013. Os B asilei os enquan o Agen es da Mudança: Pode e Assis ência. B aga/Rio de Janei o: ci cem – Uni e sidade do Minho/Fundação Ge úlio Va gas. Assis ência Pública e P i ada no Rio de Janei o, His ó ia e Es a ís ica. Comemo ação do Cen ená io da Independência. 1922. Rio de Janei o: Typ. “Anuá io do B asil”. ba bosa, J. 1909. As Relações Luso-B asilei as, A Imig ação e a Desnacionalização do B asil. Lisbon: s. n. bayly, C.2007. The Bi h o he Mode n Wo ld. 1780-1914. Global Connec ions and Compa isons. Ox o d: Blackwell. ca alhei o, R. 1957. D. Ca los i e o B asil. Lisbon: Sepa a a de Diá io da Manhã. c uz, M. A.1999. Os Bu gueses do Po o na Segunda Me ade do Século xix. Po o: Fundação Engenhei o An ónio de Almeida. de oue , L.1923. Duas Pá ias. O que oi a Viagem do S . D . José An ónio de Almeida ao B asil. Lisbon: Soc. Ed. O Mundo. dias, C. M., di . 1921. His ó ia da Colonização Po ugueza no B asil. Po o: Li og a ia Nacional. one , N. 1997. “Wha ’s new abou ansna ionalism? New Yo k immig an oday and a he u n o he cen u y”. Diaspo a, 6 (3): 355- 375. onseca, F. T. da. 1993. “Eli es e classes médias”. In His ó ia de Po ugal, di . J. Ma oso, ol. , O Libe alismo. Lisbon: Cí culo de Lei o es. onseca, V. M. da. 2009. “Bene icência e auxílio mú uo no associa i ismo po uguês: Rio de Janei o, 1903-1916”. Re is a Mig ações, 5: 221-237. on ana, J. 1975. “T ans o maciones ag a ias y c escimen o economico en la España con empo ânea”. In Cambio económico y a i udes poli icas en la España del siglo xix, 2.ª ed. Ba celona: A iel. o jaz, J. 2012. Me cês Hono í icas do Século xx (1900-1910). Lisbon: Gua da-Mo . gay, P. 2005. Une Cul u e bou geoise. 1815-1914. Lond es, Pa is, Be lin. Biog aphie d’une classe sociale. Pa is: Édi ions Au emen . godinho, V. M. 1971. Es u u a da An iga Sociedade Po uguesa. Lisbon: A cádia. jacobson, M. F. 1995. Special So ows: The Diaspo ic Imagina ion o I ish, Polish, and Jewish Immig an s in he Uni ed S a es. Be kley: Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess. he “b asilei o”: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y 239 lains, P. 2003. Os P og essos do A aso. Uma No a His ó ia Económica de Po ugal, 1842-1992. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais. lessa, C. 2008. “Nação e nacionalismo a pa i da expe iência b asilei a”. Es udos A ançados, 22: 237-256. magee, G. B., A. S. Thompson. 2006. “The global and local: explaining mig an emi ance lows in he English-speaking wo ld, 1880-1914”. The Jou nal o Economic His o y, 66 (1): 177-202. ma ins, C. A. 1992. “Opções económicas e in luência polí ica de uma amília bu guesa oi ocen is a: o caso de São Romão e José Ma ia dos San os”. Análise Social, xx ii, 116-117: 367-404. maye , A. 1981. The Pe sis ence o he Old Regime: Eu ope o he G ea Wa . New Yo k, ny: Pan heon Books. menezes, L. M. de. 1996. Os Indesejá eis. Desclassi icados da Mode nidade. Rio de Janei o: Ed. ue j. mónica, M. F. 1987. “Capi alis as e indus iais (1870-1914)”. Análise Social, xxiii, 99: 819-863. mon ei o, M. M. 2000. “Ma cas a qui ec ónicas do B asilei os na paisagem do Minho”. In Os B asilei os de To na- iagem no No oes e de Po ugal. Lisbon: Comissão Nacional pa a as Comemo ações dos Descob imen os Po ugueses. mon ei o, N. G., I. C. da Sil a. 2018. “Eli es e nob eza na mona quia libe al: um i ine á io c í ico”. In A Mona quia Cons i ucional dos B aganças em Po ugal e no B asil (1820-1910), coo ds. R. Ramos, J. M. de Ca alho and I. C. da Sil a. Lisbon: D. Quixo e. mon ei o, N. G. 1993. “Es ado da ques ão. A is oc acias eu opeias oi ocen is as. Ap esen ação”. Penélope, 12: 83-85. mon ei o, N. G. 2007. Eli es e Pode en e o An igo Regime e o Libe alismo. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais. nuñez-seixas, X. 2016. “Mig an Associa ions: he Spanish ansa lan ic expe ience 1870- 1970”. Social His o y, 14 (2): 136-54. oli ei a, A. de O. 1919. Na Ou a Banda de Po ugal. Qua o Anos no Rio de Janei o. Lisbon: Po ugal-B asil. øs e gaa d-nielsen, E. 2003. “The poli ics o mig an s’ ansna ional poli ical p ac ices”. In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew, 37 (3): 760-86. pe ei a, M. H. 1983, Li e-Câmbio e Desen ol imen o Económico. Lisbon: Sá da Cos a Edi o a. pey ou, F. 2015. “The ole o Spain and he Spanish in he c ea ion o Eu ope’s ansna ional democ a ic poli ical cul u e, 1840-70”. Social His o y, 40 (4): 497−517. pilo o, A. 2014. O Concelho de Vila do Conde e o B asil: Emig ação e Re o no (1865-1913). Vila do Conde: Câma a Municipal de Vila do Conde. quei ós, E. de. 2001 [1890]. Uma Campanha Aleg e de “As Fa pas”. Lisbon: Li os do B asil. amos, R., J. M. de Ca alho, and I. C. da Sil a, coo ds. 2018. A Mona quia Cons i ucional dos B aganças em Po ugal e no B asil (1820-1910). Lisbon: Dom Quixo e. amos, R. 1990. “Desmo onamen o e econs ução da economia”. In Po ugal Con empo âneo, di . A. Reis, ol. i. Lisbon: Al a. eis, J. 1987. “José Ma ia Eugénio de Almeida, um capi alis a da Regene ação”. Análise Social, xxiii (9): 865-904. ibei o, G. S. 2002. A Libe dade em Cons ução: Iden idade Nacional e Con li os An ilusi anos no P imei o Reinado. Rio de Janei o: Relume Duma á. 240 ambiguous inclusions: inside ou , ou side in ibei o, G. S. 1990. Ma a Galegos. Os Po ugueses e os Con li os de T abalho na República Velha. São Paulo: B asiliense. uiz o es, P. 1993. “A is oc acia e e olução libe al em Espanha”. Penélope. Faze e Des aze a His ó ia, 12. san os, M. L. L. dos. 1983. Pa a uma Sociologia da Cul u a Bu guesa no Século xix. Lisbon: P esença. se ão, J. 1970. “Pa a um inqué i o à bu guesia po uguesa oi ocen is a”. In Temas Oi ocen is as – ii. Lisbon: Li os Ho izon e. se ão, J. 1984. “Nob eza. Época Con empo ânea”. In Dicioná io de His ó ia de Po ugal, di . J. Se ão, ol. i . Po o: Figuei inhas. sil a, I. C. da. 2009. “A iagem do ei D. Ca los ao B asil (Junho de 1908) – A hipó ese his ó ica de um não-acon ecimen o”. Ac as do x iii Colóquio de His ó ia Mili a : Polí ica Diplomá ica, Mili a e Social do Reinado de D. Ca los no cen ená io da sua mo e. Lisbon: Comissão Po uguesa de His ó ia Mili a sil a, I. C. da. 2013. Espelho F a e no: o B asil e o Republicanismo Po uguês na T ansição pa a o Século xx. Lisbon: Di ina Comédia. sil a, I. C. da. 2017. “The mona chical engagemen o Po uguese immig an s in B azil: a case o nine een h-cen u y ansna ional poli ics”. A lan ic S udies (published on-line 13 Decembe , 2017). asconcelos, F. 2003. A Nob eza do Século xix em Po ugal. Po o: Cen o de Es udos de Genealogia, He áldica da Família da ump. wes wood, S., A. Phizacklea. 2000. T ans-Na ionalism and he Poli ics o Belonging. London: Rou ledge. ci e his chap e as: sil a, I. C. da. 2018. “The ‘B asilei o’: a 19 h cen u y ansna ional social ca ego y”. In Changing Socie ies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. i. Ambiguous Inclusions: Inside Ou , Inside In, eds. S. Aboim, P. G anjo, A. Ramos. Lisbon: Imp ensa de Ciências Sociais, 221-240. h ps://doi.o g/10.31447/ics9789726715030.10