Monarchism in Maracatibe

 in Maracatibe  is a set of, currents and aimed at or aimed at restoring the monarchical regime in certain areas. Preceding such movements, Maracatibe had several monarchical experiences throughout the several millennia of its recorded history. During the ancient age until the Colonial Era, Maracatibe's monarchical regimes were little questioned, and remained as the predominant form of government.

In the colonial era, the former Maracatibean monarchies became anchor points for nationalist and anti-colonial sentiment, as they were seen as an important part of culture. In this way, several descendants of monarchs became leaders of anti-colonization movements, which aimed to restore the states led by their ancestors. Ordinary people saw in historical figures of the monarchy, ideals of revolution against colonization. Such movements were severely repressed by the colonial lords. On the other hand, whites from Jungastia were generally in favor of the Artemian monarchy.

After independence, there were discussions about the space of the monarchy. Many believed that Maracatibe should be a constitutional monarchy, with a king descending from native monarchies. It was even considered that noble Jungastian (deposed by the Republic of Jungastia in the late 1800s) exiled in Maracatibe could serve as head of state for the new country.

Ancient Age
One of the first monarchies in the world emerged in Maracatibe, having been introduced into the numerous Bangui clans, which spread across the current southeastern region of the country, around the third millennium BCE. Thereafter, monarchies would become the most common form of government among pre-colonial states, coexisting with directorate republics and other minority forms of government.

The monarchy in Maracatibe was not homogeneous, with several states adopting their own variations of the model, such as elective monarchies. The power of monarchs and their name also varied widely, even within the same culture, as in the case of the Bangui. Some cities, like Ekatari, had their monarchs as absolute lords, while in other cities, especially those of the ancient Kwaba, monarchs shared their power with a council of priests, military, other nobles or even with free citizens.

The nature of royal power had different interpretations, most of them religious, which also varied from state to state. Among the Machapi, a civilization that flourished in the southwest of Maracatibe, kings were seen as living gods, endowed with the power to influence the forces of nature, causing rain and floods, for example. Among the Austro-Ingonians, in the northwest, the "level of divinity" of kings varied according to their level. This society was somewhat more tolerant of the deposition of monarchs, because once social instability occurred, it was a sign that mana had already run out, and because it was responsible for the social bond between subjects, the system would fall. Among the Kwaba, and the Bangui in the southeast, kings had some divine properties, as an influence on nature and above-average wisdom. However, they were not gods, but something between gods and mere mortals. Some societies believed that the stage of divinity was reached after the death of the monarch so that, even dead, he could influence the direction of the nation. There were also simpler ties, which said that kings were men chosen by the gods, because they were superior, to rule a territory.

Outside of mythological origin, most historians believe that the monarchy arose through the rise of military leaders. With the growth of the villages, there was a need to choose military commanders to protect the economic assets and the integrity of the individuals in the community. Such commanders began to enjoy great social prestige, and little by little political, until they consolidated their influence, merging with the state and becoming rulers. Many Maracatibean monarchies have also risen through popular support. These were the Tyrants who managed to keep their family in power.

Fragmentation of power
After the expansions of the states, starting with the conquests of Ekatari, in the second millennium BCE, the kings lost the proximity with the community, once they started to govern great extensions of territory. In the meantime, they continued to enjoy absolute power and great prestige. The growth of the territory led to administrative reforms, especially the creation of provinces, generally governed by people trusted by the monarch.

In the case of fragmentation of kingdoms, provincial leaders often remained in power in their respective territories, proclaiming themselves monarchs. The divisions of administrative purpose also caused the power of the king to diminish, in certain occasions, because the local governments started to have great decisions. Such a division of power resulted in a feudal system, more observed in the northern region of the country, in which even though great monarchies continued to exist, kings did not have so much power, which was given to nobles and lords of small territories. Even so, before the arrival of Jungastia, there were still monarchical states with strong central power, such as the Maracatik Empire and Bangui Kingdom, which were absolute monarchies. Feudalism, however, has been in force in the northwest since the fall of the great Empire [] in [].

Therefore, it is noted that the monarchy was based on three pillars: Tradition (the monarchs had some legitimacy, as they descended from respected families, which in the past, helped the nation, either by unifying it, defending it from an external aggressor, or resolving a  crisis), Religion (the power of the kings was endowed with a divine nature, so that the royal blood did not match the blood of the subjects) and Philosophy (several philosophers, used by the monarchs themselves as a base, justified the monarchy's superiority for stability , and that power in the hands of many would cause conflict of personal interests and crises, while kings, prepared to take over the nation, would work for the well-being of the people; these authors believed that the establishment of the unlimited power of kings was derived from a contract  Social).

Opposition to monarchy
Anti-monarchism at that time was strongly influenced by primitive values, which arose in the old age, which aimed at the destruction of the entire post-city-state social organization. The primitive values ​​had some peaks that were distributed until the colonial era, and were characterized by small rebellions and some written productions. The primitivists were anti-hierarchy, defending the collectivism of the villages prior to the Ancient Age of Maracatibe. Therefore, his opposition also applied to republicanism, and later to capitalism (the values ​​of the former primitivist philosophers influenced, for example, Sebastião Rebelo de Melo, utopian socialist thinker).

In addition to the primitivists, the Republicans were also against this regime. They believed that the concentration of power, despite generating stability, can also bring crisis and tyranny. For this reason, they advocated for the systems of elected government, or even non-democratic, but also non-hereditary governments. They generally trusted a directory.

Post Independence
In 1907, Maracatibe became independent from Jungastia, which at that time was already a republic. After the end of colonialism in the country, it began to discuss what would be the form of government of the country, but although the republic was almost unanimous among the influential politicians of the time, the monarchical movement gained strength, and not only among the ethnic natives .

Sabugosa proposal ( Wise King )
Heleno de Sabugosa (1860-1942), a deputy from the first National Assembly, the one who drafted the country's first constitution, was the first to officially propose the adoption of the monarchical system. He considered that independence was motivated by the increased oppression of Jungastia over Maracatibe, which in turn was encouraged by the internal crisis in the country, which Sabugosa considered a consequence of the adoption of the republican system in the late 1800s.

Sabugosa proposed the adoption of an elective monarchy, in which a king would be elected for a period of two decades. He would be the head of state, but he could call new elections and remove the president (who, in the system idealized by the savage, would be a kind of prime minister). The difference between the system proposed by Sabugosa and the Parliamentary Republic is that the king would have more term in office (Sabugosa also considered a life term), would have to be chosen by technical criteria (the candidate for the king should be someone cultured, prove his aptitude for  the position before a council of technicians) and should be absent from the "common policy", that is, it should not be affiliated with any political party or movement, nor linked to it in any way.

Although he made a well-crafted thesis about the system and read it to all 401 deputies in the assembly, the text received only 13 votes. Sabugosa, however, kept this idea alive throughout the first legislature, failing again and again.

Jungastian Monarchy Proposal
With the fall of the monarchy in Jungastia, some members of the noble elite moved to Maracatibe. The Duke of Porto-Real's own family (colonial Viceroy of Maracatibe) remained in the former colony. For this reason, journalist Geraldo Fidalgo (1883-1937) launched the "Manifesto Pro Monarchy: The Maracatibenha Crown", a single edition magazine in 1908 designed to convey the monarchical proposal based on figures of Jungastia's royalty. Fidalgo was even temporarily arrested for his document, as it was linked to Colonial Restauracionismo.

Fidalgo believed that the monarchy was more stable than the republic, and that the republic would in fact be an oligarchy, controlled by a landowner (which in a way actually happened). So he saw King Jungastian as a counterweight. Fidalgo also believed that King Jungastian would be superior to a native king, as the Kwaba and Guaray would not accept to live under a Bangui king, and vice versa, therefore, this would bring instability and threaten the country's integrity. As Jungastia was the nation that kept Maracatibe for the longest time, influenced the country culturally, religiously and linguistically, Fidalgo believed that a Jungastian king was the closest to a Maracatibean king. His ideas were even exposed in the Constituent Assembly, but they were never discussed or voted on.

Federal Native Monarchy State
Along with the idea of ​​Heleno de Sabugosa, the proposal for a Decentralized Monarchy, or Monarchical Federal State, or even the Royal Confederation of Maracatibe, was the strongest and has remained for much longer (until today). This idea, supported by countless thinkers and politicians, such as Heitor Gonzaga (1870-1937), Witika Witi (1862-1918), Moacir Jê (1867-1929), Tarcício de Oliveira Freitas (1882-1963) and Jânio Feitosa (1888-  1977).

This idea consists of dividing Maracatibe into a series of kingdoms and principalities, the number varies from 11 to 81, according to the proposal, and many of the kingdoms would also have subdivisions headed by monarchs, which would total more than one hundred monarchies in the country. These kingdoms and principalities would be governed by descendants closer to the old Maracatibean monarchies. The king of central Abatuba, for example, would be Moacir Jê, a descendant of the imperial family of the Jê Empire and the Maracatic Empire. Witika Wiki would rule the State of Finauru, a monarchy in the region where Santerre is today, because he descended from the royal home of that extinct monarchy.

In this proposal, it was foreseen greater autonomy to the federative units for the writing of laws and constitution, which would even cause different levels of power of the regional monarchs, with some regions being able to have the most influential monarchs, and others, more ceremonial ones. Proponents of this proposal argued that it was a way of restoring Maracatibean culture and avoiding power struggles and ethnic tensions, as well as ensuring greater stability.

At the national level, Maracatibe would have an elected king (many defended a fixed mandate, others, a lifetime), who technically would not be elected, since the "election" would only be the definition of the order of succession of the monarchies. Regional kings, therefore, would take turns in power. There would also be with the National Council, which served as upper chamber, and would have representatives appointed by the kings. Some currents of this proposal argue that there is no national king, and that the head of state is divided among the members of the National Council. Or even, some believed that, due to the high level of autonomy to the subdivisions, the monarchies were restricted to them, and the head of state and national government was democratically elected.

Critics, on the other hand, said that if this system were adopted, exacerbated regionalism would lead to the fragmentation of Maracatibe into several states.