This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't this page say some thing like the discovery of Brazil by Europiens (That's probably mispelled and I apologize), as opposed to just "the discovery of Brazil"? After all, It's not like no one lived their beforehand.
Do we really need the pretenders section of the article? It's supposed to be about actual ruling monarchs not claimants. Spongie555 ( talk) 06:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to List of monarchs of Brazil Mike Cline ( talk) 02:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
List of Brazilian monarchs →
List of monarchs of Brazil – The title: List of Brazilian monarchs gives a false conatation that these monarchs are in fact all Brazilian, as in being from Brazil. Monarchs of Brazil would be a better choice because it doesnt allow confusion whether, lets say, King
Manuel I of Portugal was Brazilian or Portuguese
Cristiano Tomás (
talk) 00:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
King John VI is currently included among the monarchs of the Empire of Brazil because the Treaty of Rio de Janeiro, on the recognition of the independence of Brazil, signed on 29 August 1825, granted him the Titular rank of Emperor of Brazil. I however submit that John VI should not be included in the list of monarchs of the Empire of Brazil, for the following reason: as Titular Emperor, John VI was not monarch of the Empire. In fact, the monarch at the time was Emperor Pedro I, that reigned from 12 October 1822 until 7 April 1831, including the whole period of 1825-1826 when John VI was Titular Emperor under the Rio de Janeiro treaty. This is a list of monarchs, not a list of those who held the imperial title. Thus, only the Sovereigns should be listed. For example, Queens consort and Empresses Consort are not listed. And John VI's role as Titular Emperor of Brazil cannot even be compared to the Portuguese tradition of Kings-consort. During the joint reign of a Portuguese Queen and her King-consort, documents of state were issued on behalf of the reigning couple. But during King John VI's titular emperorship of Brazil, all acts of state in Brazil were issued only in the name of Emperor Pedro I, the actual monarch. Historians concurr on this point: all history books mention a "first Reign", of Pedro I, and a "Second Reign", of Pedro II; there is no "reign" of the titular Emperor, precisely because John VI was not a sovereign, and not even a joint sovereign, of the Brazilian Empire; he merely held a courtsey title of Emperor, just like Empresses and Queens consort hold coutsey imperial and royal titles. So, the titular emperor, not being a monarch of the Empire of Brazil, should be excluded from the list. King John VI must continue to be listed as King of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves, of course. A final point: even if John VI were to continue being listed as one of the Emperors of the Empire of Brazil, his "reign" should be counted not from the date of the signature of the Rio de Janeiro treaty, but from the date of the treaty's ratification, 15 November 1825, when it entered into force. For the above reasons, I propose that John VI be excluded from the "Empire of Brazil" section of monarchs of Brazil, and, failing that, I propose that the date of the start of his "reign" as Emperor be changed as described above.-- 189.25.34.157 ( talk) 17:39, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Can we get the name consistant here? I see Portuguese and English all over the place.-- The Emperor's New Spy ( talk) 10:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to to work on this list and improve it. My goal is to make it a Featured List. Please wait until I'm done. -- Lecen ( talk) 22:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I suggest removing the Portuguese monarchs who ruled the colony from this list. They weren't Kings of Brazil any more than King James II was King of New Jersey or Joe Biden is President of California. — GoldRingChip 17:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)