Your search

This document is a formal dispatch from the Portuguese Consulate in Canton, dated 1895, classified under Series A. It reports on a reported uprising against Europeans occurring within China’s interior, specifically in the province of Le-Chonou (modern-day Liao Ning). The writer, acting as Consul, informs his superior that European missionaries—English and American—in the region are seeking refuge in Yamen, under the protection of various Mandarins. European ministers stationed in Peking have already formally protested, though further evidence remains lacking. The dispatch notes that while there is no confirmed current outbreak of revolt, the situation remains unsettled and potentially volatile. The author cautions that the gravity of the event may yet be underestimated, and expresses willingness to provide updated information if developments warrant. Signed by the Consul and Secretary of the Foreign Department, the communication reflects diplomatic reporting conventions of the period, focusing on factual observation, official correspondence, and cautious assessment of emerging geopolitical tensions. This record offers insight into late Qing-era perceptions of internal unrest and foreign diplomatic responses.

This 1893 official correspondence comprises a Vatican diplomatic document originating from the offices of the Holy See, dated 20 October, and numbered 14752. It is addressed to the Ambassador of Portugal to the Holy See by Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, then Cardinal Secretary of State. The document acknowledges receipt of a formal note from the Portuguese Ambassador transmitting a petition from the Bishop of Macao concerning two ecclesiastical matters: the approval of the liturgical calendar for the Diocese of Macao and the authorisation of a proper Mass and office in honour of the feast commemorating the translation of the body of Saint Francis Xavier. The text records that these requests were submitted to Pope Leo XIII, who referred them to the Sacred Congregation of Rites—specifically noted as having been previously examined by the Congregation for the Sacraments—for review and deliberation. The endorsement confirms diplomatic protocol through its formal address to the Portuguese Ambassador and concludes with a reaffirmation of papal esteem. The document forms part of a broader administrative and ecclesiastical exchange between the Holy See and Portuguese colonial ecclesiastical authorities in Macau, reflecting the intersection of colonial religious administration and centralised Vatican authority in late nineteenth-century Catholicism. It provides primary evidence of liturgical governance and diplomatic channels within the Roman Curia during the pontificate of Leo XIII.

Official correspondence from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, General Directorate of Political and Diplomatic Affairs, First Division, dated 24 August 1903, transmitted in Lisbon and addressed to General Carneiro. The document, authored by Miguel Martins d’Almeida, forwards a petition submitted by the Superior of the College of Overseas Missions, which had already been reviewed by the Apostolic Nunciature regarding matters within its ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The letter requests that General Carneiro intercede to secure approval from the Holy See on those aspects of the petition falling under papal authority. Endorsed with administrative annotations indicating internal processing and final approval on 5 October 1903, the file includes partially illegible, damaged, and uncertain sections, reflecting limitations in textual preservation. This primary source offers insight into early 20th-century ecclesiastico-diplomatic relations between Portugal and the Vatican, particularly concerning the administration of overseas missionary activities within the context of colonial religious institutions. The document serves as evidence of formal state mediation in ecclesiastical affairs and highlights bureaucratic procedures in the governance of Catholic missions under Portuguese influence. Researchers will find this material relevant for studies on church-state relations, colonial religious policy, and diplomatic history in the late Portuguese Empire.

Official dispatch from the Portuguese Consulate in Canton, dated 24 May 1892, addressed to Dr. Demétrio Cinatti and copied to Mr. Ct. Atyras de Gonçalves All. and an unnamed British official. The document analyses three parliamentary proposals concerning a proposed 50% customs duty reduction on goods originating from Macau, intended to stimulate its economy. The first proposal, by Deputy Mota e Costa, advocates a 50% rebate on shared duties for industrially produced Macanese goods shipped directly to Portugal. The second, Bill No. 84, limits the benefit to goods transported on Portuguese vessels, effective from 1 July 1892, while the third, by Peer Coude de Castro, extends the reduction to all Macau-origin goods cleared at Canton and adjacent islands. The author critically evaluates each, warning that the third is overly liberal and risks benefiting foreign enterprises more than Portuguese interests. Emphasising Macau’s entrepôt function and limited industrial capacity, the consul argues that previous incentives, such as the 1889 25% tea bonus, yielded no tangible results. He highlights severe fiscal implications: potential annual revenue losses exceeding 1,600 contos de réis due to displaced domestic production and expanded colonial competition, particularly disadvantaging African territories. Noting that Macau’s trade is largely controlled by Chinese and foreign actors, he cautions against measures enriching foreign capital at the metropole’s expense. Instead, he proposes a moderate 10–15% tariff reduction combined with a 36 contos subsidy to secure regular shipping services, ensuring economic stimulus without disproportionate cost or loss of state revenue.

This 1891 diplomatic despatch, authored by Demetrio Cinatti, Consul of Portugal in Canton, constitutes a formal protest addressed to Sir Ly, Viceroy of the Two Guangs under the Qing Dynasty, concerning the destruction of Portuguese missionary properties in Hainan during civil disturbances in 1884. The document details the legal and historical grounds upon which the Portuguese mission’s claim for restitution is based, refuting Chinese provincial authorities’ assertions that the destroyed chapels were locally owned Christian structures dating from the Ming dynasty. Drawing on ecclesiastical law, treaty obligations, and empirical evidence—including financial records, prior compensation precedents, and official correspondence—the consul demonstrates that the chapels in Giang-tó (Siang-tô) and Wang-fo were constructed in 1795 by Portuguese missionaries on legally acquired land, maintained through foreign ecclesiastical funding, and remained under the exclusive ownership of the Catholic Church. The text further establishes that local officials were fully aware of these institutions, citing administrative actions from 1854 and 1880 as proof of official recognition. It condemns the Hainan authorities’ failure to protect the properties despite treaty guarantees, their fabrication of local consent, and their contradictory claims regarding the events. The despatch also invokes Portugal’s strict neutrality during the Sino-French War (1883–1885), contrasting it with the targeting of its missionaries, and appeals to the Viceroy’s sense of justice and diplomatic reciprocity in demanding full reparations.

This is a formal ecclesiastical dispatch dated 1 June 1891, issued by António, Bishop of Macau, to the Governor of Macau and Timor, in response to an official inquiry concerning the destruction of Catholic chapels in Hainan during the 1884 persecution. The document details the historical presence of Portuguese missionaries in Hainan since their initial establishment in 1630 by Father Bento de Mattos, including the founding of chapels in Kim-tchau-fu and interior settlements. It outlines the expulsion of Jesuits in 1769, the re-establishment of the mission in 1795, and subsequent French involvement until their withdrawal in 1876, after which Portuguese missionaries resumed control. The Bishop refutes claims that Chinese Christians owned or destroyed the chapels, asserting that all properties were constructed and maintained with mission funds—totaling nearly 3,000 taels by 1890—and thus belonged exclusively to the Catholic Church under canonical and treaty-based rights. He rejects the validity of forced apostasy declarations and denounces the Viceroy of the Two Quangs’ evasive responses to diplomatic inquiries, drawing parallels with prior cases involving French, British, and Spanish claims. The text includes detailed expenditures, administrative correspondence, and arguments for indemnity, emphasizing that just reparation is essential for the resumption of missionary activity. Attached documents substantiate financial outlays and diplomatic efforts, positioning the dispute within broader Sino-foreign treaty relations and colonial religious policy in late 19th-century South China.

On November 17, 1884, during the seventh year of Pope Leo XIII's pontificate, Dom Antonio Joaquim de Medeiros, formerly the titular Bishop of Thermopylae, was appointed Bishop of Macau. This appointment was facilitated by King Luís I of Portugal, who presented Medeiros for the position. The Diocese of Macau, under the patronage of the Portuguese king, became vacant upon the transfer of Bishop Emmanuel Bernard de Souza Ennes to the Diocese of Bragança. Financial records from November 14, 1884, detail the expenses related to Medeiros's appointment, totaling 757.57 and 959.53 florins in two separate computations. Papal bulls issued on November 13, 1884, officially document Medeiros's appointment, his absolution from prior vows, and his transfer to Macau. These documents also address the jurisdiction of the Macau Diocese, including territories under Portuguese rule and those overseen by the previous bishop. Further instructions outline Medeiros's responsibilities, including appointing a theologian and penitentiary, overseeing palace repairs, and establishing a mount of piety in Macau. The papal bulls also call upon the Chapter, clergy, people, and vassals of the Macau Diocese to show obedience and reverence to their new bishop.

This 1882 diplomatic correspondence from the Portuguese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, transmitted from Lisbon on 29 July, concerns ecclesiastical appointments within the Portuguese colonial context in Asia. The document comprises three interrelated texts: an official dispatch transmitting ecclesiastical materials to a government minister; a royal charter dated 30 December 1881 (with year partially redacted) issued under the authority of the King of Portugal; and a formal petition addressed to the Pope regarding the appointment of António Joaquim de Alpedrinha as coadjutor to the Archbishop of Goa and Superior of the Missions of Timor. Key figures include Dom Luís, styled as ruler of multiple territories including India, the priest António Joaquim de Alpedrinha, Father Espírito da Caparinha, and Medeiros, the Vicar General of Goa. The primary subject matter involves the nomination of Alpedrinha to assist in the spiritual governance of a vast and administratively challenging diocese encompassing Timor, with explicit reference to canonical procedures, the preservation of the Padroado Real (Royal Patronage), and the need for papal confirmation through Apostolic Letters. A stipend (congrua) is requested for the appointee’s sustenance. The documents reflect the intersection of state authority, colonial administration, and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the late nineteenth-century Portuguese Empire, offering critical insights into church-state relations and the governance of overseas missions during the period.

Contains transcription of the Papal Bull of Gregory XIII establishing the Catholic Diocese of Macau in 1576

This 1860 diplomatic correspondence, comprising three despatches dated 25 and 26 June and 25 July, originates from the Portuguese Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lynard, to António José d'Ávila J., Viscount of Mite, Minister of Her Majesty’s Government in Rome. The documents confirm receipt of multiple confidential communications from the Legation in Naples (Nos. 19, 21) and the extended series (Nos. 39, 40), along with a reserved despatch (No. 15), all concerning political developments on the Italian Peninsula during a period of significant upheaval. Central to the correspondence is the appointment of Count Alessandro Gallo as Vice-Consul of Portugal in Ancona, with instructions for the Minister to ensure the Count petitions the Ministry for the issuance of his Diplomatic Commission. Additionally, the Secretary of State transmits information relayed by Father Barroso regarding the frontier of Saint Joseph in Papo, forwarding a confidential extract to the Minister of Public Works. The despatches further request urgent clarification on colonial provisions necessary for the proposed renewal of a Commercial Treaty with Naples. These documents offer primary insight into Portugal’s diplomatic protocols, consular administration, and foreign policy considerations in mid-19th century Europe, particularly in relation to the shifting political landscape of the Italian states and colonial trade negotiations.

Official dispatch from the State Secretariat dated 18 September 1842, addressed to the Sir Minister of the Navy, concerning ecclesiastical jurisdictional reorganisation and administrative protocol. The document references paragraphs 3 and 4 of a prior memorandum regarding the subordination of the Bishopric of Malacca to Macau and of St. Thomas and Prince’s Island to Angola, requesting ministerial consideration and endorsement. It affirms approval of the Minister’s response to the Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs and Justice, particularly the directive to refrain from using flying seals (sello volante) in official correspondence, and stresses compliance while ensuring the State Secretariat is informed of significant developments to maintain oversight. The dispatch also includes instructions to gather intelligence on potential insurgent activities anticipated in Bologna, with a request for detailed reporting on outcomes and consequences. Additionally, it directs the forwarding of a copy of an official communication to Demetter, alongside the dispatch to the Secretary of Justice dated 1 October (porta three). Signed by Deus G. de W.S. Paço de Cintra at the Paço de Cintra, the document bears annotations referencing João Pedro Migueis de Carvalho. The marginal note records the name Lee, Anielle, a 15-year-old girl of diminutive build with possibly altered physical measurements, originating from the District of Our Lady of Macairi, though her connection to the main text remains unclear. This primary source offers insight into mid-19th-century Portuguese colonial ecclesiastical administration, bureaucratic procedure, and possible surveillance practices.

This 1843 ecclesiastical document, originating from the Archdiocese of São Paulo and dated 23 March at Lee (Crispiet), records administrative and canonical proceedings related to clerical appointments and transfers within Portuguese colonial territories. The text, registered on 15 June by J. P. Felício, documents a transfer effected on 18 July 1823 from the 24th vacancy of the Bull of the Archdiocese of São Paulo to the 24th of Minas. It comprises two principal components: first, a tomb and brief concerning the twentieth part of revenues due to D. Lz., attached to an ecclesiastical office; second, a papal bull addressing the jurisdictional authority of the Tribunals of Goa, the Prince of the East, Rio de Janeiro, and Sua de Marcos. The document further notes the removal of 14 vicars—designated as advanced and secondary—who were deemed competent in matters pertaining to Urqui. These individuals, along with the predecessor Bravo, were expelled from the Faculty and the preceding Office on 8 March of the same year. The notation “Baj. A. D. S.” appears at the conclusion, likely indicating archival endorsement or authentication. This record offers critical insight into the hierarchical governance, financial obligations, and institutional conflicts within the Catholic Church’s colonial administration in Brazil and Portuguese Asia during the early 19th century. It serves as a primary source for researchers examining ecclesiastical bureaucracy, clerical succession, and the interplay between local and transnational church authorities in the Lusophone world.

Official correspondence from the Portuguese State Secretariat for Foreign Affairs, dated 24 December 1842, transmitting documentation regarding ecclesiastical jurisdictional disputes in Hong Kong following its cession to British control. The document comprises a formal report addressed to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, António José Maria Campelo, by António Joaquim Gomes d’Oliveira, concerning the transfer of religious authority on the island of Hong Kong from the Diocese of Macau—under the Padroado Real privileges of the Portuguese Crown—to the Congregation for Propaganda Fide. It references a dispatch from the Governor, dated 22 April 1841, confirming Rome’s authorisation of this ecclesiastical shift, interpreted as an act of usurpation by Lisbon. A subsequent report from the Vicar Capitular of Macau, dated 9 March 1842, protests the establishment of a new mission under Propaganda Fide jurisdiction, asserting it violates longstanding royal patronage rights. The correspondence highlights diplomatic and canonical tensions between the Holy See, the Portuguese state, and colonial authorities in Macau and Hong Kong. Damaged sections obscure minor textual details, but the core argument centres on Portugal’s efforts to defend its traditional ecclesiastical prerogatives in the region through intervention at the Papal Court. This document is essential for researchers examining 19th-century colonial ecclesiastical politics, Sino-Portuguese relations, and the decline of the Padroado system in East Asia.

This 1842 official correspondence, originating from Macau and addressed to the Portuguese Minister and Secretary of State for Naval and Overseas Affairs, documents a dispute concerning ecclesiastical jurisdiction and colonial authority in the context of Portuguese Catholic administration in East Asia. The letter, signed by Father Conceição Franco and countersigned by Pedro de Carvalho, references the presence of Rigua, a Procurator of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, who resided in Macau under orders from the Apostolic Prefecture of Hong Kong—dependent on the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith—and allegedly operated beyond his authorised mandate. The text asserts that Rigua’s activities contravened prior reports submitted to the Holy See and conflicted with the papal Bull *Sub Romana Militantis Ecclesia* (interpreted as issued by Pope Gregory XIII in 1586), which defined ecclesiastical boundaries and jurisdictions. In response, the author claims to have expelled the Procurator and his associates from the establishment within three days to protect the rights of the Vice-Prefecture. The document further expresses reluctance to engage the British Governor of Hong Kong, then serving as Plenipotentiary, due to lack of governmental authorisation. It also alludes to an unauthorised decree of 22 April 1851 (anachronistic within the 1842 dating) obtained under false pretences, suggesting later interpolation or transcription error. The communication underscores tensions between local ecclesiastical powers, colonial governance, and Roman centralisation efforts in mid-19th century Portuguese Asia.

Petition letter dated 26 February 1820, addressed to Count Pedro de Mello, Plenipotentiary Minister and Envoy of the Portuguese Crown at the Holy See, from Don Filippo Colonna, Rector of the Pious House of the Catechumens in Rome. The document concerns two individuals undergoing religious instruction: Bakxù, a 14-year-old Muslim youth of Macao, China—located within the Portuguese-administered territory under the Province of Guangdong, District of Quanzhou—who seeks baptism and relief from destitution while residing at the institution; and an unnamed 19-year-old Jewish catechumen described as nearly destitute. Colonna requests alms on behalf of both, specifically appealing for clothing previously donated to another convert, referred to as Moro, a Turkish catechumen. The petition underscores the material hardship endured by these converts, particularly Bakxù, who is described as poorly clothed and in fragile health, dependent on minimal sustenance provided by his guardian. The text reflects institutional practices of conversion and charitable support within the Roman Catholic Church during the early 19th century, highlighting transnational religious migration and the role of diplomatic patronage in ecclesiastical welfare. This primary source offers insight into colonial subjecthood, religious conversion, and the socio-economic conditions of foreign converts in papal Rome, as mediated through ecclesiastical authority and diplomatic channels.

This 1819 diplomatic correspondence, dated 21 October and originating from the Rooms of the Quirinal, constitutes an official communication from the Marshal Secretary of State to His Excellency Commissario Mello Dreynen, Plenipotentiary Minister of His Most Faithful Majesty. The document records the formal presentation to the Pope of royal appointments for the Bishoprics of Cochin and Tranganore, made under the authority of the Portuguese Crown. It confirms the transmission of appointment letters and credentials to Monsignor Würtner, representative of the Holy See, in compliance with papal instructions received by the Secretary of State. The letter serves as an acknowledgment of procedural adherence in ecclesiastical nominations within the context of the Portuguese colonial ecclesiastical administration in India. Reference is also made to Crescêncio, Bishop of Crivella, and the summoning of young women presented by the bishops of Coelhão and Cunhagador, indicating supplementary pastoral or administrative proceedings linked to episcopal oversight. As a primary source, this document reflects the intersection of colonial ecclesiastical governance, royal patronage (Padroado Real), and Vatican diplomacy during the early nineteenth century. It offers scholars insight into the bureaucratic mechanisms governing bishopric appointments in Portuguese-held territories and the role of diplomatic intermediaries in Holy See–Crown relations. The text is preserved in formal diplomatic register, characteristic of state-ecclesiastical correspondence of the period.

This document comprises a series of translated ecclesiastical letters and administrative texts, primarily dating from the late 18th century, with supplementary material likely transcribed from earlier periods. Central to the collection is a 1799 letter from Pope Pius VI addressed to Friar Manuel de Santa Catarina, Archbishop of Goa, concerning jurisdictional disputes over the Island of Bombay. The text details the Holy See’s decision to grant temporary spiritual authority to Apostolic Vicars of the Mughal Empire following the expulsion of Portuguese ecclesiastical personnel by English authorities beginning in 1718. It affirms that the Archbishop of Goa retains full jurisdiction over Bombay in principle, but its exercise was suspended due to political impediments. The Pope justifies the delegation of pastoral care to vicars as a necessity for the spiritual survival of Catholics under non-Catholic rule, citing apostolic duty over institutional rivalry. The document further includes a corrupted or abbreviated transcription—possibly from a damaged colonial-era manuscript—referencing ecclesiastical appointments, synodal authority, fiscal obligations, and jurisdictional claims within a Portuguese colonial context. Names such as Gudricus Vovatus, Danceranus, and Athabasy appear in unclear administrative or hierarchical roles, while terms like “arm of the Conclave” and “fisc” suggest institutional governance. A translator’s note indicates significant linguistic irregularities, potentially arising from scribal abbreviation, hybrid Latin-Iberian legal forms, or textual corruption. This compilation offers critical insight into colonial ecclesiastical politics, papal diplomacy, and the interplay between imperial authority and Church jurisdiction in the Portuguese empire.

This document is a copy of a letter dated 14 February 1746, originating from Rome and addressed to King João V of Portugal and the Algarves. The original correspondence, dated 16 January in the sixth year of the pontificate of an unnamed Pope, conveys formal ecclesiastical gratitude for the acquisition made by His Majesty (S. M.) benefiting the clergy. The Pope expresses appreciation for the monarch’s support of the Church, acknowledging his pious conduct and reaffirming ongoing spiritual intercessions on behalf of the Portuguese crown. Emphasising the Pope’s apostolic blessing bestowed upon King João V and his entire royal family, the letter underscores the close relationship between the Holy See and the Portuguese monarchy during the mid-18th century. Written in Latin with a postscript notation in Portuguese indicating the date and recipient, the document serves as a diplomatic and religious communication reflecting the ceremonial and devotional practices of the period. It highlights the role of the Catholic Church in affirming monarchical authority through spiritual endorsement and reveals the mechanisms of reciprocal recognition between secular rulers and papal authority in early modern Europe. This transcription provides scholars with primary source material pertinent to the study of Iberian- Vatican relations, religious patronage, and the intersection of monarchy and ecclesiastical power in the 18th century.

This is a papal letter, dated 16 January 1746, issued by Pope Benedict XIV from Saint Mary Major during the sixth year of his pontificate, and addressed to John, King of Portugal and the Algarves. The document, transmitted via the Archbishop of Lodi, expresses the Pope’s formal gratitude to the Portuguese monarch for his support in restoring ecclesiastical order within the archdiocese following a prolonged vacancy marked by administrative disorder and entrenched abuses. The Pope commends the King’s decisive interventions, particularly through the Marquis of Castelnuovo, his Secretary, who executed royal directives with precision and dedication. Highlighting the progress achieved under divine grace, the letter underscores the monarch’s pious governance and active role in upholding the Church’s spiritual mission. The Pope affirms that such benefactions warrant enduring recognition both in secular annals and ecclesiastical records, placing the King among the most distinguished Christian rulers of history. Central to the letter is the theme of cooperation between secular authority and religious office in maintaining clerical discipline and effective pastoral care. The document concludes with the Pope’s assurance of continued prayers for the King and his Royal Family, accompanied by the Apostolic Blessing. This letter constitutes a significant record of Church-state relations in mid-eighteenth-century Catholic Europe, reflecting the diplomatic and spiritual priorities of the Holy See.

This 18th-century manuscript, compiled in Macau between 1742 and 1745, comprises transcribed administrative and ecclesiastical records concerning the dispute over Ilha Verde (Green Island) between the Jesuit Company of Jesus, Macanese municipal authorities, and Chinese mandarins from 1622 to 1745. Based exclusively on original documents preserved in the Secretariat of the Jesuit Province of Japan at the College of Madre de Deus in Macau and the Procuratorate of the Province of India in Lisbon, the text details the historical claims, financial expenditures, and legal arguments surrounding the Jesuits’ occupation and development of Ilha Verde. It includes formal declarations, protest letters, financial accounts up to 1745, and references to earlier events beginning in 1622, when the Jesuit Visitor Alexandre Valignano initiated the use of the island for convalescence and agricultural purposes. The document outlines the Jesuits’ acquisition of burial rights from local Chinese landowners, their construction activities, and subsequent conflicts with Cantonese mandarins who ordered the demolition of buildings, citing concerns over fortification. It further records interventions by high-ranking Chinese officials such as Haitao Si and Haitao Lo, municipal responses from the Macau Senate, and correspondence involving Jesuit figures including Gabriel de Mattos, Nicolau Longobardo, and António Leite. The compilation also contains notarial certifications, legal justifications grounded in Chinese land customs, and assertions of Portuguese sovereignty in Macau, supported by historical treaties, tribute payments, and mutual commercial agreements. Financial summaries detail expenditures exceeding 17 million taéis on fortifications, housing, and maintenance of the island up to 1745. As a composite historical record, this manuscript provides critical primary evidence on colonial-administrative dynamics, Sino-Portuguese relations, and the role of religious orders in early modern maritime Asia.