|
Lucia Maria Bastos Pereira das Neves The forgotten in the independence process: a history to be made |
Almanack, Guarulhos, n. 25, ef00220, 2020 http://doi.org/10.1590/2236-463325ef00220 |
zilian lands. They were startled “upon hearing” that “some evil and ambitious” wanted to reduce them “to a new state in human history: that is, being married without a husband, widows with a spouse, having children without parents, orphans with them”. The argument used was straightforward: if European women married to Brazilians were not persecuted, why should Europeans married to Brazilian women, who had sworn independence, should lose their country? And they asked José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva, married to a European woman, if that was fair. After all, “what privilege should men have in this case?” They also regretted that they still did not have “certain civilian forums”, which was “a universal fashion” and probably “a male tyranny”, demonstrating between the lines the social injustice being practiced. Although they affirmed that they followed “the lessons of the old universal morality”, not being philosophers, but possessing “soul, Religion and heart”, they claimed to be truly recognized, as effective citizens, capable of transmitting through their blood, the new nationality to their husbands.
In fact, they did not ask for the recognition of political rights, but in the argument it was clear the possibility of acquiring civil rights in order to guarantee the integrity of their husbands. As in almost all petitions and requirements written in the Empire of Brazil, however, they ended with the classic abbreviation “E. R. M.”, that is, “And will receive mercy[1]”. A third of the Brazilian ladies signed. An anonymous representation, as the names of the ladies did not come up, but that demonstrated the feeling of the elite women of that time[2].
In 1823, after Brazil’s independence, already in the midst of the discussions and tensions of the Constituent Assembly, another type of document was that of letters written by women who, at times, addressed them to politicians and pamphleteers. For example, the case
29
