No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 June 2009
The existing alliance between England and Portugal is usually said to date from the Treaty of Windsor of 9 May, 1386, celebrated between our Richard II and John I, or even from that of 16 June, 1373, between our Edward III and Ferdinand and to be the most enduring pact between two countries, but as it was in abeyance from 1580 to 1640, if not earlier, during the reign of Elizabeth and suffered a brief interruption in the time of Cromwell, the former statement seems to need qualification. Long before these conventions, however, perennial trading and intermittent political relations existed and they followed on a common brotherhood in arms arising out of an incident in the Crusades.
page 69 note 1 Baldreton, Osbernus de, De expugnatione Lixbonensi in Itinerarium peregrinorum et Gesta regis Ricardi, ed. Stubbs, , Rolls, Series, London, 1864, p. cxlivGoogle Scholaret seq.
page 70 note 1 Quadro Elementar, vol. XIV, p. ix.
page 70 note 2 Rymer, Foedera, ist ed., II, 609, and VIII, 727. Even as late as the reign of our James I the Channel was infested by pirates, some being Englishmen, others Turks from Algiers and Salle.
page 71 note 1 Rymer, II, 627, 632, 667, 758, and III, 12, 107.
page 71 note 2 Rymer, IV, 157, 201.
page 71 note 3 Rymer, V, 410.
page 72 note 1 Rymer, V, 482.
page 72 note 2 Rymer, V, 762.
page 72 note 3 Quadro Elementar, I, 67, and XIV, 50.
page 72 note 4 Ibid., I, 229.
page 73 note 1 Rymer, VII, 15.
page 73 note 2 Rymer, VII, 262.
page 73 note 3 Armitage Smith, John of Gaunt, cap. XII.
page 73 note 4 Rymer, VII, 361.
page 74 note 1 Rymer, VII, 436.
page 74 note 2 Rymer, VII, 450, 453, 455, 472.
page 75 note 1 Rymer, VII, 515 et seq.
page 75 note 2 Rymer, VII, 524.
page 75 note 3 Armitage Smith, op. cit., cap. XIII.
page 75 note 4 Rymer, VIII, 40.
page 76 note 1 Cotton MS., Nero B., I, ff. 32 et seq. British Museum.
page 76 note 2 Goes, Cronica do Principe D. João, cap. 20.
page 77 note 1 Rymer, XI, 762–9.
page 77 note 2 Resende, Cronica de D. João II, cap. 34. By medieval law the Pope had the right to dispose of newly found lands, especially in favour of those who would undertake to spread the Christian faith, and the grants to the Portuguese Kings were made on this condition.
page 77 note 3 Rymer, XII, 163.
page 77 note 4 Rymer, XII, 238.
page 77 note 5 Rymer, XII, 351.
page 77 note 6 Quadro Elementar, XV, 2.
page 77 note 7 Journal of Roger Machado in Life of Henry VII, by Andrea, B., ed. Gairdner, , London, 1858.Google Scholar
page 79 note 1 Lusiads, VII, 5.
page 79 note 2 Defended by Frei Serafim de Freitas with great learning in his De justo imperio Lusitanorum Asiatico, a reply to the Mare liberum of Grotius.
page 79 note 3 In those days discovery was generally regarded as conferring a good title (Hall, W. E., International Law, ed. 1924, p. 126Google Scholar, and Oppenheim, L., International Law, ed. 1928, vol. I, p. 451Google Scholar), but Dr. J. A. Williamson has pointed out that Henry VII, in his Letters Patent of 9 December, 1502, to Hugh Elyot and others to discover heathen countries and annex them, does not recognise mere discovery without actual possession, and he seems to ignore the papal bulls in favour of Portugal. These Letters Patent may possibly have been in the mind of Elizabeth's officials, but there is no evidence that they were known to the Portuguese government. The precedents cited in support of the English policy were foreign, the reply of Charles V in 1522 to a Portuguese ambassador and the practice of the French.—Nero, B, I, ff. 92vo, and 115.
page 80 note 1 British Museum, Harleian MS. 282 passim and 297, f. 54vo, and 523, f. 62. Cotton MS., Nero, B, I, f. 68; Galba, B, XII, ff. 42, 90.
page 80 note 2 Quadro Elementary XV, 79, 87.
page 81 note 1 Frei Luis de Sousa, Annaes de D. Jo˜o III, p. 447. Cotton MS., Nero, B, I, f. 75.
page 82 note 1 MS. Nero, B, I, ff. 78–82; Calendar of Stale Papers, Foreign, 1561–2, p. 78.
page 82 note 2 Nero, B, I, f. 83.
page 83 note 1 Carvalho, Gomes De, D. João III e os francezes, Lisbon, 1909, pp. 24, 83 and 90.Google Scholar The prohibition was, however, not obeyed.
page 83 note 2 Dantas, however, objected to the word as only used by common people.
page 84 note 1 For the correspondence between Dantas and the English Government, v. Nero, B, I, ff. 85–110. In 1564 a proclamation was issued forbidding Englishmen from trading to the lands under the dominion of the King of Portugal. Trans, of the R.H.S., 1902, p. 71.
page 85 note 1 For Wilson's negotiations, v. Nero, B, I, ff. 121—36.
page 85 note 2 For the mission of Alvares, v. Nero, B, I, ff. 116, 137—45.
page 85 note 3 v. Nero, B, I, ff. 149 and 162.
page 86 note 1 Nero, B, I, f. 161.
page 86 note 2 Nero, B, I, f. 162.
page 86 note 3 Nero, B, I, f. 157. The treaty is printed in Figaniere's Catalogo dos MSS. Portugueses no Museu Britanico, p. 84.
page 86 note 4 Harleian MS. 6991, f. 54.
page 87 note 1 Nero, B, I, f. 165; Add. MS. 34329, ff. 4, 6vo.
page 87 note 2 The original of this treaty signed by Giraldes and Walsingham is in the Record Office (S.P., 70, 140, No. 854), and a copy in Nero, B, I, f. 217, but the convention is not printed in Rymer or Dumont, and there seems to be no record of its having been ratified.
page 88 note 1 Harleian MS. 168, f. 69.
page 89 note 1 Their efforts to occupy the delta of the Amazon were frustrated by the Portuguese colonists from Pará.
page 91 note 1 “Portuguese trade was never half as large as now and will increase if the war continues…. Before the war the trade of Lisbon was all in English hands.” State Papers, Foreign, Portugal, vol. 17. Letter of 10–20 February, 1694.
page 91 note 2 They were criticised by Swift in his pamphlet, The Conduct of the Allies.
page 94 note 1 The subsidies granted by England to Portugal during the war amounted to a total of nine million pounds.
page 94 note 2 The Commercial treaty was very prejudicial to Portugal and successive Portuguese governments made attempts to have it cancelled, and finally succeeded.
page 95 note 1 v. Parliamentary Papers, Miscellaneous, No. 2 (1898), Treaties containing Guarantees or Engagements by Great Britain in regard to the Territory or Government of other Countries. The articles of the treaties from 1373 regarded as still in force are set out at pp. 67 et seq.
page 95 note 2 British Documents on the Origin of the War, 1898–1914, vol. 1, London, 1927, p. 51.
page 95 note 3 Ibid., p. 93.
page 97 note 1 At the battle of Cape St. Vincent, 5 July, 1833, between the Constitutional squadron under Napier and the Miguelite fleet, the officers and crews of the former were largely Britishers. During the siege of Oporto Peter's army included many foreign mercenaries, English and others, and after it was over Napier led the force which overran the province of Minho.
page 97 note 2 Palmerston claimed to have carried the measure through the Cabinet by a coup de main and believed that it would “settle Portugal.” He foresaw that Peter and his ministers would not like it and said: “they wish the Civil War to go on that they may continue to plunder and confiscate.” Bulwer, Life of Palmerston, II, 180.
page 97 note 3 The Portuguese case was ably presented by the Viscount da Carreira and the Baron de Sabrosa and the latter made some stinging countercharges. Biker, Collecção de Tratados, XXVIII, pp. 392 et seq. and 457 et seq.
page 98 note 1 Saint-Aymour, , Recueil des Instructions, etc., Portugal, Paris, 1886, p. 328.Google Scholar