In 1929, a Spanish translation of the History of Portugal was published by Labor Publishing in Barcelona. Its text had already been translated into English in 1928 (Sérgio, Sketches ), but the Portuguese original would not be printed until 1972 (Sérgio, Breve ). This would mark the endpoint of those early years of ongoing work towards reform s in Portugal. Here , history occupied a central role as an intellectual tool for action upon society. However, for Sérgio, it was history without archival research—mere reflection on matters that were left to investigative history, which he often disparaged as purely archival erudition. On the contrary, what Sérgio proposed, as Jaime Cortesão would say thirty years later, was "a critical assessment of the past, a moral rule for the future." (Sérgio, Combates , vol. II, p. 281). And this, after all, would be the ultimate utility—and necessity—that the seareiros attributed to the History of Portugal: to serve as a showcase for a critical vision of the past and to establish a regulatory norm for the moral behavio u rs of society in the future.

The journeys and destinations of each of the two central authors are established in 1929/1930, in the Historia de Portugal by António Sérgio and Os Factores Democráticos na Formação de Portugal by Jaime Cortesão—a title that is a whole program me and not coinciden tally explained in the História do Regímen Republicano em Portugal [ History of the Republican Regime in Portuga l] . A necessary concept to ground the political proposals defended by the group, this search into the past aimed to build a solid foundation for a desired future. These endpoints were, at the same time, meant to be starting points. Both Sérgio and Cortesão saw history as a means of applying their ideas to the interpretation of the country's social reality and as a way of thinking to ground the reformist action of Portugal in their time. However, while Sérgio sought levers for indispensable national reform, starting with the production and distribution of wealth, Cortesão primarily sought the foundations of popular sovereignty and its manifestations in the past. Two different approaches with the same goal: to promote the emergence of a new mentality . For Sérgio, it was primarily about finding an elite to lead the reforms, while for Cortesão, it was about understanding the mechanisms that led to popular demonstrations and democratic achievements that sustained the Nation’s expression and its expansion throughout the world. Two positions that were not initially divergent, but exile would bring them even closer together. Though Cortesão came from republican militancy and Sérgio from monarchical liberalism, they had converged early on in defence of the democratic regime. Seara Nova , in which a degree of aristocratism of well-thinking people was evident, fell within the current that sought to develop a rational critique of what exists, a rationality that should prevail even in politics. In fact, the aim of the seareiro s was to create i ntellectual elites to serve as vehicles to transform mentalities (and thus improv e governance). Nemo nos conducit (no one leads us) was the excuse for everything to function poorly . Sérgio countered that with profound reforms in all aspects (not just in education), whenever the negative could be transformed into a positive : Ducit (leads). (Sérgio, Essays , II). This was the intention propagandised by Seara Nova so that Portugal could advance on a new path. Finding and preparing competent helmsmen. And in this, Sérgio the essayist and Cortesão the historian were aligned. Through the effort of sustained intellectual work, they sought to transform the country, ensuring that its inhabitants enjoyed another abundance, one generated by work that produced wealth and was rooted in freedom.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | (Pdf)