Devon Bennett

The War of Canudos

Zero Draft

            The basis and purpose for the existence of community is the survival of the members thereof. This statement can be analyzed and adapted as deeply as one wishes. The fundamental truth upon which these discussions are rooted, however, is that of continued existence of man and the benefit that communal society brings to this existence. People join together as a front to attain some common goal. That objective will inevitably drive the participants to a greater chance of living, or better the quality of life in some way. Religious, political, geographical, economical and even social communities strive towards the betterment of some aspect of life. The dogma held by all is that the contributions of each and every member will combine to achieve an end result with greater impact than any one participant could have had by themselves. Communities deteriorate when this benefit to existence ceases to be attainable, or when it costs the individual more to sustain the community than he receives through his affiliation with it. The War of Canudos explains both politically and religiously, the causes that led to the destruction of a community of over 35,000 men and women.

            Like many cases both before and after, the altercations at Canudos stemmed from a relatively minor issue that grew out of hand into a war. The extermination of a people does not occur without the intervention of natural causes, and the happenings in Northeastern Brazil are illustrations of the gradual demise caused by the negligence of human constituents. That is to say a natural disaster is capable of annihilating an entire civilization, whereas human beings require assistance of luck and numbers to systematically exterminate one another. The term ‘natural’ can only be utilized as applicable to the War of Canudos as the natural selection that determined who should win in the battle between governmental superpower and backlands religious extremists. It is never clear in a battle who will emerge the victor, no matter how off balanced the sides may be. The colonial army of the United States was successful in the expulsion of the British forces oppressing their country. The underdog patriots fought off well-trained, war-hardened military troops, guaranteeing American Independence. This victory has been attributed to Divine assistance, a religious topic to be discussed later in this work. The Iraqi government outnumbered and overwhelmed the smaller Kuwaiti defense when they invaded that country in the late Twentieth Century. These forces were only ousted by the intervention of United States and United Nations peace keeping forces which were much larger in number and support. These cases depict the uncertainty in war, and denounce that Brazilian government could have, or should have won out based on shear size and strength. No, there are more to communal conflicts than winner and loser. And the reason Canudos fell does not lie in the fighting itself, but in those events that caused a disparity between those settlers and the surrounding communities both local and national.

            If religion is not the strongest unifying force in a community, it is certainly among the top few. And it stands as reasonable as we discuss community as a tool for survival. A belief in the after life, as well as that of a supreme Protector is present in a majority of communities. It drives its followers towards a goal larger than themselves. These believers often enjoy a time-sensitive faith in that the things they do now in this life will affect the caliber of their life in the future, even after death. This may be the strongest tie to community, as it can drive citizens to die for those beliefs, considering the possibility of subsequent recompense for their actions. This is a perfect example of social reciprocity. The so-called ‘blessings’ of religion are those gifts bestowed upon man for his diligence to the mortal rites of his religion. These are not necessarily expected nor are they directly related to the actions that warrant them. Much the same occurs in a community, as each member contributes to the greater good of the society, they can expect to benefit in some way from the success of that community. They may or may not know in what way they will be rewarded, but it is inherent that for what is given, a benefit is received. That is the balance of communities.

            There is a two-fold reason for the settlers of Canudos having grown so close knit as a community. Through rigorous inclusion anyone could be a part of the community. There were no social or monetary prerequisites. In fact a majority of the inhabitants of Antonio Conselheiro’s compound were backlanders with no land or inheritance of any kind. In 1888, Princess Isabella, the Daughter of the last Brazilian Emperor, signed a decree abolishing slavery throughout the soon-to-be republic. This left thousands of former slaves and indentured servants as freemen, with no land, no possessions, and no purpose of any kind but to survive. And their material emptiness was filled through a religious abundance. What defined the citizen of Canudos was their meticulous detail to rite and ritual. Rules were invented far stricter than those of the Catholic Church many settlers had come from. Vigilance was expected and supreme punishment was exacted in the name of Deity for those found lacking in any area of their spiritual progression.

            It is this excess that excluded the Canudenses from the rest of the region. Their religion, while based on the Christian faith, was so much more than the Catholic dogma that it stemmed from. It was not more in numbers, but in creed and in the execution thereof. Catholicism was then, as it is today, the largest religion in both Brazil and throughout South America . It has become a colloquial fact that if one has no religion, they are referred to (and often refer to themselves) as catholic. An amazing number of citizens baptize their children more for tradition than for belief.

            It is this majority that the people of Canudos were pitting themselves against. Hundreds of years of tradition, and a religion that exists if not officially than at least as the unspoken and accepted religion of state, was not to be mocked. The arch-bishop requested that Antonio Conselheiro be banned from preaching throughout the region, and that his followers be expelled from the church. This seems somewhat like a person opting to quit their job instead of being fired. The citizens of Canudos had nothing and wanted nothing to do with the Catholic Church by that time. They had excluded themselves as a demonstration of superiority. They acted more righteous, and held themselves to a higher, almost fanatic standard.

            Paradoxically, the conflict between Canudos and the federal government of Brazil was not that of a longstanding institution versus those in rebellion against it. In this political realm, the Canudenses were the conservatives and the newly founded United States of Brazil was the liberal force pushing for change and improvement throughout the republic. For every law passed in congress, Antonio Conselheiro and his followers concocted a reasoning as to its injustice to the Brazilian people and their longstanding rights. But it is normal for these citizens to fear even change itself, no matter in what form it shows itself. Especially in the isolated regions of Northeastern Brazil , where these families and communities became so dependant on consistency and tradition, that to introduce any variable caused an upset in the balance they worked so hard to sustain. So as new bills were passed and new laws were initiated, the people of Canudos felt compelled to illustrate just how far Brazil ’s governing powers had strayed from its origins.

            The most famous act of protest came in a rally against proposed taxation. Conselheiro publicly burned notices of additional taxes, and his compatriots refused to pay any tax further than those already collected. This could have been construed in any number of non-offensive, non-violent ways. But the country was new. The Brazilians as a whole were tasting a freedom not felt under the rule of the Emperor, and any force contrary to the republic or the ideal of democracy was seen as a threat to Brazil as a people. National pride was soaring, and this was the only kind of successful government in their eyes.

            When it came to accusing Canudenses of treason, some used communism to describe their transgressions. Antonio Conselheiro required equal labor from all of his disciples. He also mandated a 5% charity to be collected from each man’s yearly income, whatever that may be. The citizens of Canudos pooled the resources of their meager farms and livestock, and no one went without. Others used an analogy that hit closer to home. Conselheiro was often accused of reinstating the recently abandoned monarchy, and was compared to the Emperors who had oppressed the nation for so long.

            Both religiously and politically, Canudos was a community facing more prosperity than any other in the region, and perhaps even the entire country. They were successful, and published their success as a means of differentiation and condescendence over the rest of the country. It was the pride of the majority that led to the first acts of violence. The country could not oppose the fact that Canudos was growing tremendously, and sustaining its inhabitants in a better way of life. Pride led to envy, and the disparity between Canudos and the rest of the world had to disappear for the animosity to subside. Instead of accepting their inferiority and learning from the organizational skills of the settlement in Canudos, the settlement was destroyed in hopes that its system would be forgotten and no one would again oppose the national union.

            It was this pride that drove the national forces to more and more violence. The people cried for revenge after the first military expedition was defeated. This was repeated twice more before the city was burnt to the ground and its inhabitants killed. But it became no longer an effort to squash a rebellion. It became a matter of saving face. To prove that the Republic was a lasting solution, it could not allow a backwater group of isolationists to contradict its every action. And the solution was read loud and clear throughout the country.

            The ideal that the contributions of a community are lasting beyond this mortal life is not entirely religious, nor does it require pure faith to see its effects. The entire population of Canudos was exterminated and the city flooded over to forget the atrocities that took place there. However there is still evidence of Conselheiro’s dogma existent throughout modern-day Brazil . An entire political movement bases itself on the premise of the wrongful acquisition of lands by the federal government. The Patrtida Sem Terra (Party Without Land) is an ever-growing population of former plantation and ranch owners who have been denied their lands for various reasons.

            It is interesting then to wonder if those of Canudos were not on the right track, and that theirs may have been the voice of a larger minority. Perhaps the government is at fault even today for crimes they have committed for over a century.

            It is obvious that both the Brazilian military and the community of Canudos committed grave ethical errors in their quest for existence. It must be said however, that both parties did all in their power to protect their definition of community. The Canudenses were not wrong that their community was providing a better way of life than those people were capable of achieving on their own. Nor were the Brazilian politicians erring in their desire to quash a rebellion that may or may not caused the populous to question the competence of their new system of government. The former defended a local community in which it believed, and defended to the death. The latter was no less determined, and many would also die in defense of that national institution. Not only in Canudos, but abroad across the globe are citizens sacrificing their lives to uphold the system of balance they enjoy at home.

            The questions of right and wrong were once solved with power. He who had the power made the rules, and whether that was right or wrong was not relevant. It is perceived to be the case in Canudos. Both could be right, both could be wrong, and the only difference, or the deciding factor, is one’s point of view. It is perception that determines the guilty party. And oddly enough, it is perception that gives power. In our current model, perception can be the key to anyone’s involvement with the war.

            Those from Canudos perceived their community as the top priority. Antonio Conselheiro had power, because they gave it to him. They obeyed his commands and teachings, and he had power over them. This perceived power came from a perceived mandate from on High. Antonio Conselheiro was a prophet to those people, and any man of God should by right outweigh any earthly government. Conversely, the Brazilian government had power because a majority of its citizens upheld it and its statutes. They supported its rulings, and depended on its support. The mayor of Juazeiro communicated to the Governor of the state of Bahia that he feared an attack by Antonio Conselheiro’s men and requested defense from the national level. The final battles against Canudos consisted of armies from 17 of the 26 Brazilian states.

            In studying the outcome of the conflict between federal troops and Canudense citizens, it stands to reason that the community did not actually fall apart. In many ways, Canudos, or the theory thereof continued even though the last inhabitants of the city were massacred. If community is the force that brings individuals together for a common objective, then Antonio Conselheiro achieved his every responsibility as a leader. Not one of these men women and children gave up on the community. They did not waver in the sight of the Brazilian military. They held to the conviction that what they were doing was correct. Maybe it was not correct to the world, but they were thinking bigger, and Canudenses doctrine was the epitome of eternal plan as far as they were concerned.

            It is a valid argument then to illustrate the non-communal actions of both Brazil as a republic, and Canudos a part of that national community. Think of Canudos as if it were an individual in a society. The individual must compromise with the whole in order for them to work together. As addressed earlier, if someone gets something for nothing, than someone, somewhere else, got nothing for something. The continuance of this leads up and contributes to the falling of community. If one is selfish, it requires another to be selfless in order to maintain balance. When too many citizens become selfish, they cannot function as a working part of the whole community. The isolation of Canudos was the selfish act of Antonio Conselheiro and his followers to get what they thought was best for them at that moment in time. The pride of the national government caused them to attack, and subsequently retaliate multiple times against Canudos. Neither of these two forces was selfless in anyway except internally. They both took what they wanted from the community, and failed to compromise or sacrifice anything to deserve the benefits of the community.

            But it was neither religious, nor political reasons that resulted in armed resolution. In fact it was economics that sparked the first altercation. This economic model also roots itself in pride, stubbornness, and selfish tendencies. When Conselheiro was constructing a new church for the ever-growing population in Canudos, he placed an order for wood planks to be delivered from Juazeiro. Probably the closest town, and on the river, Juazeiro was an excellent port to acquire goods. However, Canudos never received the wood, and when they were informed it was due to short staff accommodations, Conselheiro sent a team of men retrieve the wood he had already paid for. The mayor of Juazeiro feared an attack, and inquired into the status of the federal military. They sent an expedition, and the rest is history.

            The contributing pieces to the puzzle of Canudos’ demise were both religious and political. The citizens excluded themselves from these two mother powers both geographically and doctrinally. They created a schism that neither force was willing to put forth the effort to close. It was also somewhat economical. Major land owners were losing there workforce to the village in Canudos as it quickly became the second largest city in Bahia next to the capitol of Salvador . The incident of the lumber yard is a perfect example of this economical disproportion that was rising in the region as a result of their occupation. The fall of Canudos is also a social collapse. These citizens simply did not want any affiliation with the rest of the nation. They were very secluded, and as stated before had a superiority complex about their eternal status. The way of life they chose was in a way nearly socialist, and in that they differed dramatically from the rest of the area. And yet in all of these, it is a paradoxical fall of community as I come to think many are. It is a question of 20/20 hindsight where one can analyze the ‘would haves’ and the ‘should haves’. Why didn’t the government peaceably resolve this contention? Why did the Canudenses feel they had to strike first?

            What leads a community to violence? In many instances it is sheer simplicity. It is easier to destroy than to resolve. Wiping out the village of Canudos , Brazil no longer had the need to deal with this menace at all. It was easier for the Nazis to kill people of Jewish descendance than to learn about them and coexist alongside them. It was easier for the Hutus to hate the Tutsis and seek their destruction rather than integrate them into the government as equals. The United States is one of the few countries so densely populated with ethnic groups from all over the world. Perhaps it would be easier to deal with civil rights issues and minority recognition were this not the case. But one can ask himself, what makes some countries resort to violence and others not? The fall of community cannot be contributed to any one factor only. But every community that has fallen has lost its purpose; that balance between give and take, selfishness and selflessness. The social capital gained by ones participation in the community becomes a social deficit and whether citizens recognize this or not, they either abandon the community in search of a better solution, or fall with the populous.

            The only twists in this are those with religious ties to their community. As with those inhabiting Canudos in 1893, their social capital was not only the food and shelter they received as a collective. In addition it was a non-temporal investment, and to ‘fall’ as a community in mortality, in their mind only ushered in a better type of existence. The benefits of eternal life and exaltation outweigh those they may have enjoyed by denouncing their fait and composing themselves as model citizens of the new republic.

HOME