Balkanised Brazil?

[Pikers3]

With a POD of 1810, how many countries could Brazil split into? The Spanish Viceroyalties split into many different countries. Could Brazil have done the same?

 

[SvoHljott]

With a POD of 1810, how many countries could Brazil split into? The Spanish Viceroyalties split into many different countries. Could Brazil have done the same?

The difference is that the Spanish colonies were based on different ethnic bases (Argentina = mostly European origin, Peru = Andean peoples, Colombia = a very big mix, etc etc.

There were strong historic, cultural and to a lesser extent ethnic divides. Brazil however was fundamentally a multicultural state with one culture, its own, Brazilian culture, much like the USA's culture. I suppose the best you could have for a divided Brazil would be a breakaway state in Rio Grandé do Sul (a disproportionate amount of white Europeans compared to the rest of Brazil, and a fair amount of German speakers too), and perhaps some sort of 'Amazonian' state created as a buffer in a war with Colombia in the 1800s (assuming Colombia is the victor). You could even have something like Portugal somehow holding onto Portuguese Guiana (modern Amapá).

I can't see much more than that, though. It's simply not as divided as Spanish America was and is.

 

[Keperry]

There were several attempts to secede from Brazil in its earlier years--Pernambuco, Ceara, and Paraiba as the Confederation of the Equator in 1824, Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina as the Piratini and Juliana Republics during the War of the Farrapos from 1835-1845, Grão-Pará in the Cabanagem from 1835-1840. If one or more of these had been successful you could see more countries in Brazil.

 

[Lecen]

The difference is that the Spanish colonies were based on different ethnic bases (Argentina = mostly European origin, Peru = Andean peoples, Colombia = a very big mix, etc etc.

There were strong historic, cultural and to a lesser extent ethnic divides. Brazil however was fundamentally a multicultural state with one culture, its own, Brazilian culture, much like the USA's culture. I suppose the best you could have for a divided Brazil would be a breakaway state in Rio Grandé do Sul (a disproportionate amount of white Europeans compared to the rest of Brazil, and a fair amount of German speakers too), and perhaps some sort of 'Amazonian' state created as a buffer in a war with Colombia in the 1800s (assuming Colombia is the victor). You could even have something like Portugal somehow holding onto Portuguese Guiana (modern Amapá).

I can't see much more than that, though. It's simply not as divided as Spanish America was and is.

Argentina was mostly mestizo between 1810 and 1840. That only changed after the waves of European immigrants during the 1860s and beyond that the whites became the largest ethnic group there.

The same occurred in Rio Grande do Sul: most were caboclos (the Brazilian equivalent to mestizos). The province only became largely white by the late 1800s. Until at least 1850 Rio Grande do Sul was mostly caboclo.

And the divisions of former Spanish Amerixan colonies had NOTHING to do with ethinicities, but with geographical and political reasons.

 

[Lecen]

There were several attempts to secede from Brazil in its earlier years--Pernambuco, Ceara, and Paraiba as the Confederation of the Equator in 1824, Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina as the Piratini and Juliana Republics during the War of the Farrapos from 1835-1845, Grão-Pará in the Cabanagem from 1835-1840. If one or more of these had been successful you could see more countries in Brazil.

Minor groups in Ceará, Paraíba and Pernambuco attempted to secede in 1824. The provinces themselves remained loyal to Brazil. That's why the rebellion was so easily subdued.

All of the rebellions that occurred between 1835 and 1845 were loyal to the crown. Cabanagem and Sabinada were attempts of secession only until Pedro II was a minor. Their leaders were very clear about that. Balaiadawas not a secessionist revolt. The Ragamuffin War is an odd case: the "republican" rebels celebrated Pedro II's birthday every year and their leader, Bento Gonçalves, was an staunch monarchist. Their attempt to secede was more to bargain with the central government to have more autonomy.

 

[Lampiao]

Minor groups in Ceará, Paraíba and Pernambuco attempted to secede in 1824. The provinces themselves remained loyal to Brazil. That's why the rebellion was so easily subdued.

All of the rebellions that occurred between 1835 and 1845 were loyal to the crown. Cabanagem and Sabinada were attempts of secession only until Pedro II was a minor. Their leaders were very clear about that. Balaiadawas not a secessionist revolt. The Ragamuffin War is an odd case: the "republican" rebels celebrated Pedro II's birthday every year and their leader, Bento Gonçalves, was an staunch monarchist. Their attempt to secede was more to bargain with the central government to have more autonomy.

Name ONE revolution/seccession that didn't start demanding more freedom whitin the central power.
All the Brazilian political centres were unhappy with the centralization in Rio throughout the entire 19th century and the fact that monarch was a symbol of union helped a lot, that's a fact. However, a real seccession is quite improbable given the geography of country: all the population is close to the sea and most of the big cities are closely interconnected (politically and economically) by the Atlantic ocean - pretty much like the 13 colonies.

For argument's sake, I'd say that the most probable seccession state would be an Amazonian one (centered in Belém or São Luís) given that this area had closer economic ties to Europe than to Southeastern Brazil. Secondly, the South with the Ragamuffin war. And finally, states centered in Salvador (Bahia) and Recife (Pernambuco, Paraíba, Rio Grande do Norte and Ceará), which were important economic centres in colonial times and experienced decadence in the 19th century given the centralization in Rio.