Talk:List of monarchs of Brazil

List of Brazilian monarchs
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.
 * I, for one, share your sentiment. It now talks about the arrival of the Portugese. Colonel Tom 03:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Pretenders?
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)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

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)


 * Support: Less ambiguous and more accurate title. Shrigley (talk) 03:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support this would remove people originating from the region now known as Brazil who were not monarchs a territory known as "Brazil". (such as tribal chieftains) 76.65.128.198 (talk) 10:53, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. --Lecen (talk) 19:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

John VI among the monarchs of the Empire of Brazil
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)
 * For the reason stated in detail above, I today removed John VI from the "Empire of Brazil" section of Brazilian monarchs, as indeed his titular emperorship was just a coutsey stile and did not make him the Empire's monarch. A final note: months ago, John VI was not listed as a monarch of the Empire of Brazil. Then, he was suddenly included as a monarch of the Empire, without discussion in the talk page. Given that his was just a titular emperorship, his inclusion among the monarchs of the Empire should not have been made in the first place without prior discussion of the question. --Antonio Basto (talk) 11:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Name consistancy
Can we get the name consistant here? I see Portuguese and English all over the place.--The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 10:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You should blame Wikipedia's policy. It allows this "Fruit salad" of names written in different languages. People in here prefer John VI of Portugal, John II of France, John II of Castile, instead of "João VI of Portugal", "Jean II of France" and "Juan II of Castile". It gets worse when we place those monarchs amidst people of their countries. It's weird to see a bunch of Portuguese and then a Portuguese king with an English name. But that's how things are. --Lecen (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Important notice
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)

Colonial rulers
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)
 * Seeing no objection in several weeks, I've removed the section. —GoldRingChip 16:48, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @GoldRingChip, Brazil ended colonial status on December 16 1815 and became a consituent kingdom within the United kingdom of portugal brazil and the algarves legally having the same status as the Kingdom of portugal UnsungHistory (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * https://dbpedia.org/page/United_Kingdom_of_Portugal,_Brazil_and_the_Algarves as my source UnsungHistory (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Lack of citations
the sections of Kingdom of Brazil (1815–1822) and Empire of Brazil (1822–1889) does not cite any sources UnsungHistory (talk) 20:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)