| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | Foreigners | |||||||||||||
The historian’s own opinions become confused with those of the monarch he is studying. One could even regard him as a disciple of the monarch on the importance of history and public opinion, the defence of liberty and equality, of progress and education, and of the broad public interest against those of the individual. They shared a great interest in travelling and knowledge, the same cosmopolitan taste for Europe, the same understanding of the importance of social and political progress in Portugal. Furthermore, it would be unfair not to acknowledge that the researches that he carried out at Windsor contributed to new readings of D. Pedro’s reign. Despite his eulogies to D. Pedro, in his historiographical work Ruben Andresen Leitão was a careful scholar who tried to bring a critical approach to his work. He repeatedly states, for example, that despite being cultured and thirsty for knowledge, D. Pedro was too young to lead a country with so many problems. His travel diaries, considered highly relevant for an understanding of his reign, bear witness to a precocious intelligence, enabling him to write in French and English, but they also had the defects of excessive youth (errors and imprecisions in the writing, some naïve thoughts, etc.). As has been stated here, what Ruben Andresen Leitão saw in D. Pedro was the same desire to change Portugal, to learn, to travel, to understand what was modern in Europe, along with a cosmopolitanism, a struggle against national backwardness caused by the mediocrity of politicians such as the Duque de Loulé — a figure of whom Ruben Andresen Leitão would say, by way of epigraph, that he was worthless (ibidem). |
|||||||||||||