From this evolutionary and teleological scheme of a supposed "development" of historical research and knowledge in Brazil, a broader dichotomy stands out, between "the old" and "the new," which would have important implications for his more essayistic and interpretative works on Brazilian reality from the 1950s onwards, such as Aspirações nacionais [The Brazilians: Their Character and Aspirations] and Conciliação e reforma no Brasil [Conciliation and reform in Brazil]. According to José Honório Rodrigues, since colonial times there has been a tradition in Brazil of "conciliation," a modus operandi of the Brazilian elites to avoid clashes of interests and violent and open conflicts with "the people" (such a tradition would have been inaugurated by Diogo Álvares in his interactions with the indigenous populations in the Bahia region at the beginning of the 16th century). The result of this long trajectory of "conciliation" would be the tendential and preponderant impediment of the "people" as the protagonists of Brazilian history. However, despite the persistent portrayal of this history as peaceful—a perspective criticised by Rodrigues—there were periods when conflicts of interest could not be resolved through "conciliation." During these times, the demands of the "people" for greater political participation exceeded the conciliatory capacity of the elites, leading to significant episodes of a harsh and often cruel history. Even so, according to Rodrigues, there would never have been a victorious revolution in the history of Brazil. His vision of independence would illustrate this thesis well. In its five volumes dedicated to the subject (divided into: 1 - Political evolution; 2 - Economy and society; 3 - The armed forces; 4 - National leadership; and 5 - International politics), it constructs a supposedly "progressive" interpretation of history, seeing an initially popular Jacobin and nationalist movement, based on pre-existing Brazilian national sentiments, opposed to Portugal and supported by the armed forces, but soon suffocated by an elitist counter-revolution that, once victorious, would imply the triumph of conservation. In any case, leaning toward another interpretative extreme, independence was far from being an amicable separation, contrary to what historiography often asserts (and continues to do).

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | (Pdf)