Reis negros, cabanos, e a Guarda Negra: Reflexões sobre o monarquismo popular no Brasil oitocentista
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumo Analisando três casos de monarquismo popular no final da Colônia e no Império brasileiro, este artigo sustenta que o monarquismo popular constituía um elemento importante, embora nem sempre reconhecido, da política popular. O apoio popular à monarquia e os esforços dos integrantes das classes baixas para se associarem aos reis e aos imperadores eram, com frequência, vistos como ameaças radicais aos detentores do poder. Baseado nos trabalhos de estudiosos da cultura e da política popular brasileira, manuscritos, periódicos e observações de estrangeiros, este artigo focaliza no costume, do final da época colonial, das irmandades negras em eleger reis (e outros indícios de visões afro-brasileiras da monarquia), na Revolta dos Cabanos em Pernambuco (1832-1835), e na onda do apoio popular à monarquia que varreu o Brasil nos dezoito meses entre a Abolição da escravidão (13 de maio de 1888) e a proclamação da República (15 de novembro de 1889). Cada um desses episódios demonstra como a compreensão popular da monarquia com frequência estruturava demandas radicais.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".