No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Manuel Nunes Viana: Paragon or Parasite of Empire?*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
Extract
“Let pass Manuel Nunes Viana, a man of medium build, round of face, with brown eyes and black hair”. Made by the official at the register on the Rio Grande in the interior of Brazil on May 14, 1717, this is the only physical description of a charismatic figure whose word was law in the backlands of Brazil in the first quarter of the eighteenth century. A native of Viana do Castelo in northern Portugal, Nunes Viana migrated to Brazil around the 1680's. Salvador was his point of entry but, after killing an assailant he lay low until pardoned by the governor; subsequently, he left for the sertão where he was to establish residence for some 40 years near to the bar of the Rio das Velhas. He sired at least six daughters and four sons. During his lifetime he returned to Portugal on two occasions, and was a minor literary Maecenas although in 1717 his signature is that of a barely literate man. He was financially successful as a result of ventures in cattle ranching, commerce in foodstuffs to the developing mining areas, and investments in alluvial mining. Alone, and in league with his cousin Manuel Rodrigues Soares, he ruled the sertão of the captaincies of Bahia, Minas Gerais, and Pernambuco for two decades, before dying in the mid-1730's. He cocked a snook at governors and viceroys, although his loyalty to the crown was never called into question. If one viceroy in 1715 could report to the crown that Nunes Viana was not only the “most capable” of the inhabitants of the sertão and the best suited to carry out the royal will, the following year the Overseas Council in Lisbon was to refer to him as “guilty of many crimes.” Not surprisingly the king was at a loss to know whether he had a saint or a sinner on his hands. Governors ran the full gamut from regarding him as the only possible instrument to maintain a royal presence in the Brazilian west to considering him a cancer to be eliminated before infecting the loyalty and wellbeing of the colonial flock. To some settlers, he may have been a Robin Hood of the backlands, but for others he was a cruel and despotic figure who meted out arbitrary justice with excessive cruelty. Whatever the divergence of views, one fact was certain: Manuel Nunes Viana was not a man to whom anybody could remain indifferent.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 1981
Footnotes
*
This article is based on materials consulted in the following Brazilian archives: Public Archives of the State of Bahia, Collection of Royal Orders (hereinafter abbreviated as APBOR); Public Archives of the State of Minas Gerais, registers of the Delegacia Fiscal (APMDF), and registers of the Secretaria do Governo (APMSG); Archives of the Casa da Moeda, Lisbon.
References
1 “Passa Manoel Nunes Viana homem de mediana estatura, cara redonda, olhos pardos, cabello pretto, com sua carregação q’consta de vinte e tres cargas de molhado, Rio grde 14 de Mayo de 1717” APMDF, voi. 17, fol. 47v.
2 “Colesam das noticias dos primeiros descobrimentos das Minas na America, que fez o Dr. Caetano da Costa Matoco, sendo Ouvidor Geral das do ouro preto de que tomou pose em Fevro de 1749”, fol. 101. Hereafter cited as Costa Matoso, this valuable codex is housed in the Biblioteca Municipal de São Paulo (MS D/ l/a/43). In 1727 the king referred to a recent petition from Nunes Viana in which the serlanista claimed residence of 40 years in the valley of the Rio São Francisco, APBOR, vol. 96, doc. 34.
3 His first return was after the Guerra dos Emboabas (Costa Matoso, fol. 101); Boxer, C. R., The Golden Age of Brazil, 1695–1750 (The University of California Press, 1969) pp. 364–65Google Scholar raises a doubt as to whether he did avail himself of the royal permission to travel to Portugal in 1725, but a later petition by one of his daughters refers to his departure from Portugal “auzentando-se o seu pay pa os Estados da Bahia”, APBOR, vol. 54, fol. 226. On his role as literary sponsor, see Boxer, , Golden Age, p. 365.Google Scholar
4 Golgher, Isaias [Guerra dos Emboabas (Belo Horizonte, 1956), p. 251]Google Scholar places his death as being on 28 January 1738, but the absence of his name in a 1736 report of the three largest slave owners between São Miguel and the bar of the Rio das Velhas and which names his partner Manuel Rodrigues Soares may suggest his death in late 1735 or early 1736, APMSG, vol. 55, fols. 100 v-101 v.
5 Marquis of Angeja to king, July 1,1715 (APBOR, vol. 8, doc. 90a; Secretary of State to Angeja, April 1, 1716 referring the Nunes Viana as “reo de muitos crimes” (APBOR, vol. 10, doc. 32c).
6 An interesting study of the internal dynamics of social and institutional change in a Portuguese overseas territory is Isaacman, Allen F., Mozambique. The Africanization of a European Institution. The Zambezi Prazos, 1750–1902 (The University of Wisconsin Press, 1972).Google Scholar
7 Collis, Maurice, The Grand Peregrination. Being the Life and Adventures of Fernão Mendes Pinto (London, 1949)Google Scholar provides a useful introduction; the only biographical note in English on Nunes Viana is in Boxer, , The Golden Age, pp. 364–365.Google Scholar
8 APMSG, vol. II, fols. 89v-91r
9 “q’ qualquer passo que da este homem, parece hum castello de vento, a hũa fantasma muí grande”, APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 8v-9v
10 The bar was 400 leagues upstream from Penedo, 2 months journey from Salvador, and lOdays from Sabará (APBOR, vol. 8, doc. 90; APMSG, vol. 44, fol. 112). Appropriately enough, Assumar referred to it as the “balliza racional” of Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 136.)
11 Much ink has been expended on his role in the Guerra dos Emboabas; vide Boxer, C. R., The Golden Age, pp. 64–77 Google Scholar; Isaias Golgher, Guerra dos Emboabas; da Silveira Cardozo, Manoel, “The Guerra dos Emboabas, Civil War in Minas Gerais, 1708–1709”, Hispanic American Historical Review, vol. 22, no. 3 (August 1942), pp. 470–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Albuquerque carried royal orders to take office as governor in Rio de Janeiro even if his predecessor had not yet returned from Minas Gerais; should Dom Fernando Martins Mascarenhas de Lencastre fail in Minas, Albuquerque was to proceed directly to the mining areas. He left Rio in July 1709 (APBOR, vol. 7, doc. 744).
13 There was serious disagreement between Nunes Viana and the Banian Sebastião Pereira de Aguilar ( Boxer, , The Golden Age, pp. 76–77)Google Scholar; the revolt against Nunes Viana’s pretensions was led by a Padre Campos (Costa Matoso, fol. 37); the pardon was described in a letter from the king to the governor-general Luis Cesar de Menezes, August 22, 1709 (APBOR, vol. 7, doc. 744).
14 Summaries of the charges against Nunes Viana are in APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 21Sr-218r; vol. 11, fols. 94–99v. The charge of seizure of power by force was made by the count of Assumar to the crown judge of the comarca of Rio das Velhas (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 58v-61) in a letter dated October 10, 1718. The argument for the legitimacy of his popular election is in Costa Matoso, fol. 48.
15 In his Suplica of June 28, 1725, Nuno Marques Pereira was at pains to emphasize the valuable contribution of his literary sponsor in subduing the Paulistas, referring to Nunes Viana as a “loyal subject of the king” whose courage and prudence made him most worthy of royal favours; Compendio Narrativo do Peregrino da America (Lisbon, 1728). In 1719 Nunes Viana still believed that he had performed a valuable service to the king (Assumar to the king, January 8,1719, APMSG, vol. 4, fol. 215.
16 Boxer, , The Golden Age, p. 80 Google Scholar; Cardoso, , “The Guerra dos Emboabas”, p. 481.Google Scholar
17 APMSG, vol. 65, fols. 119v–120v.
18 Costa Matoso, fol. 48
19 Although conceding that Nunes Viana’s actions had not secured the prior approval of the king, Angeja recognized his stabilizing role and recommended royal favours (Angeja to king, July 1,1715, APBOR, vol. 8, doc. 90a). Recommended in part for his calming of hostilities, in 1718 Manuel Rodrigues Soares was granted letters patent by the count of Assumar placing him in charge of the governanca of Vila Nova da Rainha de Caethé (APMSG, vol. 12, fol. 28). Assumar was to charge that Nunes Viana abused the authority vested in him (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 55–56; vol. 4, fols. 215–218) and recommended to the incoming governor-general the count of Vimeiro that he be stripped of his powers (Assumar to Vimeiro, October 16, 1718, APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 61v–62r.
20 This was apparently only a gubernatorial pardon, APBOR, vol. 10, doc. 32a.
21 “e he certo, q’od° Manuel Nunes Viana não so he o homem mais capaz q’ tern aquelles distritos, tanto pa fazer o cabal informe q’ selhe manda, e executar as ordens de VMagde fazendoas observare respeitar como devem ser; mas he o unico q’ actualmte da comprimto às q’ selhe mandão, e faz ter em socergo e respto o district o, q’ selhe tem asignado como sua capitanía mor, socegandoa, e alimpandoa dos ladroens todas as vezes, q’ aparessem algüs por aquelles districtos, por cujos serviços se faz merecedor de q’ VMagde o attenda …”, Angeja to king, July 1, 1715 in response to the king’s of November 17, 1714 (APBOR, vol. 8, docs. 90,90a). Cf his of June 26,1716 to the secretary of state in an equally laudatory vein (APBOR, vol. 10, doc. 32a).
22 “Manuel Nunes Viana está na minha opinião confirmado regullo”, Sabugosa to king, March 6, 1721 (APBOR, vol. 13, doc. 188a; Cf his letter of May 12, 1730 (APBOR, vol. 26, doc. 87.)
23 APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 223v–224r.
24 APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 71.
25 During Albuquerque’s governorship Nunes Viana had already been placing restraints on the free flow of cattle to Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 55–56).
26 Câmara to king, July 28, 1716(APBOR, vol. 11, doc. 21); Nunes Viana held the contract for the triennium 1715–1718.
27 This disturbance focussed on Vila Real and Vila Nova da Rainha, and was of such severity that the governor was forced to retain the quota system (APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 34v, 194; APMSG, vol. 5, fols. 41v-42r. That unrest was in the air, and that Manuel Nunes Viana and his cohorts were involved, was expressed in two letters of 27 December 1715 from Dom Bras Balthazar de Silveira (governor of Minas Gerais, 1713-1717) to the viceroy and to the king (APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 194v-197r). A valuable survey of the problems attendant upon the collection of the fifths is da Silveira Cardoso, Manuel, “The Collection of the Fifth in Brazil, 1695–1709”, Hispanic American Historical Review, vol. 20, no. 3 (August, 1940), pp. 359–379.Google Scholar
28 Nunes Viana threatened those who dallied too long, or were recalcitrant, that their severed heads would be sent to the region of the São Francisco river. Assumar dispatched the negotiating team of the former secretary of the government Manuel da Fonseca and the Mestre do Campo Joseph Rebello Perdigão to cool passions and demarcate lands (APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 215–218; vol. 11, fols. 43v, 61V–62.).
29 On the Tabuá allegations, see APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 215-218; vol. 11, fol. 128. Other abuses are chronicled in Boxer, , The Golden Age, p. 365 Google Scholar; APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 55–56, 89v–91.
30 The proceeds of sales of all such “bens do vento”, viz possessions without an owner and which were primarily cattle and slaves, were ordered by the king to be applied to redemption of captives. The absence of such a mamposteiro dos cativos had led the Provedor dos defuntos e auzentes in 1715 to gain Bras de Silveira’s approval to make such sales and place the proceeds in his custody, but Assumar rejected this proposal (APMSG, vol. 59, fols. 145v-149v).
31 On Maria Guedes de Brito, see Russell-Wood, A.J. R., “Female and Family in the Economy and Society of Colonial Brazil”, in Lavrin, Asunción, editor, Latin American Women. Historical Perspectives (Greenwood Press; Westport, 1978), pp. 88–89.Google Scholar Nunes Viana’s abuses are chronicled in APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 37,52v–53; vol. 5, fols. 69, 84v–85; vol. 11, fols. 55–56. Nunes Viana–s claim was based on the phrase “Pais do S. Francisco ate as vertentes do Rio das Velhas”, which he interpreted to mean that her territory extended to the headwaters of the Rio das Velhas in the heart of Minas Gerais, whereas the original intention (to be upheld later) was up to the confluence (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 61V–62, 277–278.)
32 APBOR, vol. 20, doc. la.
33 Manuel Carvalho Maya, a miner of Rio das Contas, had charged Nunes Viana with stealing a slave and gold. The case went to the Relação of Salvador: the decision was split, 3 to 2 in favor of Carvalho; Nunes Viana’s presence in Salvador, and possibly other favours, led one Desembargador to switch his vote when the decision was appealed, thereby acquitting Nunes Viana (APBOR, vol. 18, doc. 7). On Nunes Viana’s cosy relationship with Luis Botelho de Queiroz, crown judge of Rio das Velhas, see APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 130–133. Queiroz died on November 4, 1716 (Costa Matoso, fol. 42).
34 Prior to bidding, Nunes Viana had forbidden all fishing on the Rio São Francisco, or transportation offish to Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 11,fols. 6 lv-62), with the purpose of lowering revenues and thereby discrediting the contract. His reaction to losing was to order nobody at the bar of the Rio das Velhas to receive cattle on their lands for fattening up prior to sale in Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 215-218; vol. 11, fol. 71).
35 Later Assumar confessed in a letter to the king (January 8,1719) that he had been forced to this subterfuge by three considerations: the “muita arrogancia” of Nunes Viana; lack of means to repress him; popular revolt if there were to be a shortage of meat. (APMSG, vol. 4, fols. 215–218).
36 APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 223v–224; vol. 4, fol. 211.
37 Even before his arrival in Minas Gerais (November 15, 1717) Assumar faced the widespread rumour, openly denied by Nunes Viana, that the sertanista had advised the governor that it was not convenient for him to enter Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 8v–9v; Assumar to Angeja, December 30, 1717). More serious was the 1718 rumour that the newly drawn up list for payments of the fifths, would include a further tax of 10 per cent on each slave (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 70v–71r). When the crown judge arrived at Papagaio in 1718 to establish a town on Assumar's orders, the populace — fanned by rumours of a 10 per cent tax on all imported commodities if they acknow-ledged their being part of Minas Gerais rather than Bahia — refused to permit the creation of a town and threatened revolt. Nunes Viana had canvassed support from all the neighboring ranches (vol. 11, fols. 89v–91r) and himself dispatched 40 men from his ranch at Jaquitahi (2 days from Papagaio) to swell the opposition.
38 King to Dom Lourenço de Almeida, July 12, 1723 (APMSG, vol. 5, fols. 88v-90r; see alsofols. 65, 68.
39 The mining crisis in Catas Altas was defused by the threatened arrest of Manuel Rodrigues Soares’ nephew (APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 66–67) in 1718; Rodrigues Soares was ordered not to subvert the course of justice by intimidating witnesses for the devassa, and both he and Nunes Viana were threatened with arrest if they failed to keep the peace. In 1719 Assumar chose Faustino Rebello Barbosa and João Ferreira dos Santos, close supporters of Nunes Viana, to soften up opposition to the establishment of a town, the auctioning off of the river passage, and inclusion of that region in Minas Gerais (APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 135).
40 APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 120v–121r. Two close friends of Rodrigues Soares, Frutuoso Nunes and João Barreiros, sold up their possessions and intended to return to Portugal on the fleet of 1719.
41 In a letter of September 27, 1718 Assumar noted this change, increasing hatred for Nunes Viana, refusal to abide by his policies, and that Nunes Viana would also lose from any siege (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 55–56.)
42 Thus ended a long campaign, involving viceroys, governors-general, the king, the Overseas Council, and the count of Assumar. In 1717 viceroy Angeja was reprimanded for having failed to send requested information on Nunes Viana; he was informed that the Overseas Council thought Nunes Viana should be sent to Lisbon (Secretary of State to Angeja, April 14, 1717, APBOR, vol. 11, doc. 57). Assumar recommended the same treatment (letter to count of Vimeiro, November 8,1718, APMSG, vol. 11, fol. 71), and ordered the judge of Rio das Velhas to draw up a report summarizing testimony to send to Lisbon (January 21, 1719 idem, fols. 103v–105v). In January 1719 Assumar’s devassas were taking effect but Nunes Viana and Rodigues Soares were spreading dissent prompting the governor to make the cryptic comment “não he novo haver mtos paos de dois bicos q’ levão e trazem de ambas as ptes pa pescarem melhor nas aguas turbas” (APMSG, vol. 11, fols. l00v–101). Assumar received official recognition for his efforts, although abortive, to arrest the pair (APMSG, vol. 16, fol. 80). Sabugosa reported his action to the king by a letter on the fleet leaving Salvador in December 1723 (APBOR, vol. 18, doc. 6); should he leave within 5 months he would forfeit 6,000 cruzados to the Ribeira das Naus (APBOR, vol. 19, doc. 109). On the legal maneuvering, see APBOR, vol. 18, doc. 6; 96, doc. 34. The king granted Nunes Viana permission to come to Portugal (Secretary of State to Sabugosa, February 10, 1725) and Sabugosa granted this (Sabugosa to Secretary of State, July 11,1725; APBOR, vol. 19,docs. 159, 159a). The royal letter of November 14, 1727 took the side of Nunes Viana, ordering Sabugosa to suspend the devassa (APBOR, vol. 96, doc. 34).
43 Boxer, , The Golden Age, p. 365 Google Scholar; Golgher, , Guerra dos Emboabas, p. 247,Google Scholar and, for the scribal post the following references: Costa Matoso, fol. 101; APMSG, vol. 30, fol. 39v.
44 APMSG, vol. 11, fols. 8v–9v.
45 APBOR, vol. 13, doc. 188a. Manifests housed in the mint of Lisbon and recording remittances of bullion, coin, or precious stones from Brazil to Portugal contain but 6 references to Manuel Nunes Viana, and these are for modest sums, namely: 948$800 in 1731 and 1200$000 in 1735 (Archives of the Casa da Moeda, Lisbon, vol. 1999, nos. 69, 70,71, 72, and vol. 2051, no. 230; vol. 2062, no. 121.). All such remittances were made to Francisco Fernandes Amorim and/ or João Rodrigues Bandeira.
46 The admission fees alone were 16,000 cruzados. Placed in the convent of São Domingos das Donas of Santarém, the six daughters were later to take legal action against their brother for failing to maintain them (APBOR, vol. 54, fols. 225-232; vol. 19, doc. 159; vol. 75, f. 188). The son Miguel graduated from Coimbra in 1737 ( Moráis, Francisco, Estudantes da Universidade de Coimbra nascidos no Brasil) [Brasilia, suplemento ao volume 4; (Coimbra, 1949), no. 858.]Google Scholar
47 Hobsbawm, E. J., Primitive Rebels (New York, 1959), chaps. 1–2Google Scholar; Bandits (New York, 1969). See also Lewin, Linda, “The Oligarchical Limitations of Social Banditry in Brazil”, Past and Present no. 82 (February 1979), pp. 116–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar