Senior Researcher . Hired Researcher . CEEC
Contact
guidamarques23@gmail.comResearch Group
Social, Economic, and Political Dynamics
ORCID
Ciência ID
NOVA RESEARCH PORTAL
My PhD held at EHESS (Paris, 2009) focused on Portuguese America during the union of the Crowns of Portugal and Castile (1580-1640). It explored the multifaceted process of change in Brazil at that time and showed its institutionalization. I followed up the research prospects that it opened up, as an integrated researcher at CHAM as part of two post-doctoral contracts funded by the FCT. I was able to deepen my study of political communication within the Portuguese empire. I also studied different practices of written culture and examined some issues regarding frontier areas in Brazil. I thus developed a more social and cultural approach to political history, and addressed the relationship between local dynamics and global politics. I have gradually broadened my areas of interest to other regions of the Portuguese imperial space, while deepening my own reflection on the Portuguese colonial/imperial experience and the methodological tools to address its complexity. I thus proposed to consider the imperial government from a different point of view, by shifting attention from the metropolitan institutions to the local government. It also allowed me to advance from an approach hitherto centered on Portuguese America to a plural approach to the Portuguese empire. It leads me to examine in particular the intertwining between local and imperial dynamics, the transactions between norms and practices, and the different spatialization of the Portuguese domination. Now, my research (« The Local Making of the Portuguese Colonial Experience 16th- 18th c. », 2022.07838.CEECIND) aims to experiment spatially with a global microhistory. The goal is to produce a more in-depth understanding of local dynamics in different regions under Portuguese rule, while examining the internal complexity of the Portuguese imperial government.
The contents of this page are the responsibility of the researcher.
