“De militar só tinha o nome e seu comandante”: cotidiano, trabalho, terra e resistência dos colonos paisanos na Colônia Militar do Jataí – Província do Paraná (1840-1897)

Abstract

This thesis aims to investigate and problematize the daily life, work, the struggle for land and the forms of resistance of the Paisano settlers in the Jataí Military Colony, established in the north of the Province of Paraná in the second half of the 19th century. The nucleus was part of a broad policy of military colonization implemented during the Second Reign, with the founding of more than twenty military colonies in bordering and interior areas of the national territory, aiming, in short, at the formation of new settlement zones, the protection of borders, policing the forests, combating revolts, supporting intercommunication between cities, agricultural development, the expansion of commerce and control over socially marginalized groups. In terms of this action, these colonies should be made up of military personnel, who would be in charge of their organization, construction, administration and maintenance. For many authorities, the soldier was seen as the ideal colonist due to his “love of country”, “spirit of obedience”, “habits of camaraderie” and “propensity for morality and virtue”. Submitted and “accustomed” to military hierarchy and discipline, they were considered essential to the “success” of this enterprise. However, regional circumstances and peculiarities meant that the Military Colony of Jataí was formed and inhabited essentially by “paisanos”, civilians, free and poor nationals, mostly farmers, also called “agricultural workers”. Attracted mostly with their families by the “advantages” and promises of housing, work, salary, access and ownership of land, they faced the difficulties inherent to an inhospitable and isolated environment in the Tibagi hinterland, aggravated by the lack and/or delay in the sending of resources by the government, which represented by the directors, promoted various strategies of coercion and control of the actions and activities of these subjects through laws, decrees and military regulations. It was identified that many settlers did not remain passive in the face of this situation and within their interests, possibilities and reach, they either gave up and left with their loved ones for other places or remained with their families and promoted diverse tactics of resistance against the determinations and guidelines they considered incompatible with their intentions, possibilities or needs, sometimes subverting or readapting the imposed order, in favor of their survival, better living conditions and access to land. In their trajectories of successes and failures, of withdrawals and stays, they acted according to their desires, in conflicts or negotiations, in starting from the core or staying and facing adversities, which together with other factors, led some administrators to question the “military” character of the colony, recognizing that the rigidly stipulated norms did not adapt to the realities of that population, and that the agricultural and commercial development generated by the effort and work of the civilians were limited and far from their expectations, not because of “ineptitude” and their “indolence”, since they produced for themselves and for the nucleus, keeping it in activity for more than four decades, but due to the lack of greater interests and investments from the State itself.