1 Introduction
The pinewood of Leiria is by far the most emblematic Portuguese woodland. It is not only the pride of Portuguese foresters, it has also been regarded as part of Portuguese national identity.1 The National Woodland of Leiria (Mata Nacional de Leiria) is in the municipality of Marinha Grande, and is currently recovering from a huge fire that destroyed 86% of its forest cover in October 2017. It encompasses over 11,027 hectares, stretching along the coast of the Atlantic Ocean, and pinheiro-bravo (Pinus pinaster) is the predominant tree species.2
Although some research has been conducted on the history of this pinewood,3 Portuguese nationalism has led historians to produce biased accounts or overlook the subject of forestry practices in Leiria during the Habsburg dynasty because up to only a few decades ago this period had been considered a time of Spanish oppression.4 In the past few decades, some scholars have provided new information on the history of the pinewood of Leiria during the late medieval and Early Modern ages.5 Special mention should be made of
However, what is missing is a contribution that addresses in depth the history of the pinewood of Leiria during the Habsburg dynasty (1580â1640). This essay aims to demonstrate that this historical period was of great significance to the history of the pinewood. A natural hazard, the fire of 1613, not only gave rise to major inquiries from the Crown, but also had a long-lasting impact on the management and administration of the pinewood. The inquiries conducted by the monarchy left an archival corpus that has hitherto remained unknown and is the main documentary source used to unravel the dynamics of the royal pinewood during these decades.9
The first part of this contribution provides an overview of the royal pinewood of Leiria prior to 1580, paying special attention to the first ordinances issued by the Crown in 1524 to regulate the office of the main guard (guarda-mor) of the pinewood of Leiria, as well as the creation and evolution of the legally established royal forest in the physical pinewood (woodland) and the administrative staff recruited by the Portuguese Crown to enforce the legislation on the ground. The second part constitutes the backbone of this essay, as it addresses three different aspects of the history of the pinewood of Leiria from 1580 to 1640: 1) the conservation, forestry policies and material uses to which the pinewood was put from 1580 to 1612; 2) the fire of 1613, examined in a brief but separate section; and 3) the inquiries conducted after the huge fire and the alternatives sought by the Portuguese crown to supply the necessary
2 The Pinewood of Leiria Prior to 1580
Scholarsâ studies have largely revolved around the origins of the pinewood of Leiria. Earlier nationalistic literature linked the creation of the pinewood of Leiria to King Dinis I (1279â1325) and his wife Queen Isabella of Portugal (1282â1325), who is thought to have introduced Pinus pinea seeds from the south of France. The planting of the pinewood was mainly conducted to stop sands from advancing inland.10 That the origins of the pinewood are truly related to this romantic narrative is doubtful; it is more likely that the roots of the so-called âKingâs Pinewoodâ (Pinhal do rei) lie in the administrative establishment of the pinewood of Leiria. In other words, during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the Crown acted upon an existing ecosystem.11
At this point, it is important to stress the difference between the âwoodlandâ (pinewood) and the notion of âroyal forestâ derived from the concept of forest. It is nothing new to state that during the Early Modern Age the term âforestâ referred to a legal concept: an area where the king and noblemen exercised their hunting rights.12 A forest could encompass a much larger array of ecosystems than woodlands: from agricultural lands to wood-pasture, or mixed woodlands, and, to lesser extent, monoculture woodlands with agricultural and/or pasture lands. It could also include different types of land tenure, for whose administration the Crown could either rely on the local inhabitants, overseen by a royal minister, or directly manage those territories through royal officers who, at least for the pinewood of Leiria, were recruited from among the local inhabitants.13
In the case of Portugal, the term âcoutadaâ referred to a legal âforestâ and this category included several ecological or physical realities besides the woodlands.14 As with England, it is not known when the Portuguese monarchy established the legal forest (âroyal pinewoodâ as âcoutadaâ) in the physical pinewood of Leiria. The account provided in this section is reconstructed from the
The Portuguese Crown had been harvesting timber for shipbuilding since at least the fourteenth century, if not earlier.17 Information about a permanent administrative staff for the protection (rather than management) of the pinewood dates back at least to early fifteenth century.18 From the very beginning, the Crown relied on local inhabitants to transport timber from the pinewood. In this connection, King Fernando I (1367â1383) granted privileges to the villagers of Pederneira in exchange for transporting timber from the pinewood.19 Although we should not find this information surprising, it is important to emphasize the long-standing and strong connections between the Crown and the local inhabitants when it came not only to conserving and managing the pinewood, but also to harvesting and transporting its commodities. Sometimes this led to grievances from other authorities, such as the representatives of the city of Leiria at the Portuguese Cortes of 1455, who complained that the inhabitants of the municipality of Leiria were neglecting agriculture because it was more profitable to work on harvesting, sawing and transporting timber from the pinewood of Leiria to Lisbon, Santarém, Montemor-o-Velho and other parts of Portugal.20
According to Devy-Vareta, the pinewoods located in Leiria, Pederneira and Ribatejo were diminished by overcutting and fires.21 The regulations governing the post of guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria, adopted in 1524, provide new insights on the history of the pinewood, as this document was hitherto unknown.22 The Crown stated in these regulations that the pinewood had been managed according to the tradition or custom upheld and handed down by the junior wardens (guardas pequenos), as well as through a number of royal orders, as there was no legislative act regulating the duties and privileges of the office. This legislation did not deal with the management of the
Likewise, the Portuguese Crown regarded forest regulations as one of the key strategies for ensuring the enforcement of its interests on the ground, namely the protection of the woodlands for material purposes. It is worth noting that the regulations of 1524 did not make any mention of the destruction of the pinewood. The administrative staff specified in the regulations were, therefore, viewed as another means of preserving the pinewood by enforcing the regulations issued by the Crown. This might explain why the scope of these regulations was restricted to the main guard of the pinewood and not extended to managing the pines and the pinewood themselves. The main guard of the pinewood was the head of the administrative staff, who were the kingâs eyes and hands on the ground. Although the regulations do not provide any insights on this matter, other historical sources suggest that the administrative chief would have hailed from a well-known and highly regarded family:25 someone respected and even feared by the lower echelons of society and of sufficient social status not to be ignored by the upper echelons.26 By 1524, the main guard of the pinewood was Jorge da Costa,27 who would have belonged to the nobility as he was referred to by King João III (r. 1521â57) as âmy beloved and dear [esteemed] cousin.â28
The first clause of the 1524 regulations clearly shows their intentions.30 Nobody was permitted either to cut or to collect âpãoâ within the boundaries established by the outer firebreaks. âPão,â meaning âstickâ or âtree,â refers in this case to pines31 that were tall and straight enough to be used to construct important ship components. It is therefore very likely they were left to grow for decades to ensure they met the future needs for imperial shipbuilding timber. Pinheiro-bravo is a fast-growing species,32 taking around 70 to 80 years to produce sturdy timber for shipbuilding, after which point it begins to rot.33 The second clause prohibited hunting game within the limits of the pinewood. This measure did not result from the perception of a conflict between hunting and shipbuilding. Hunters were blamed for starting fires that could trigger a wildfire with unpredictable consequences for the pinewood. This was especially true in the months from June to September, when rainfall decreases and the temperature rises, making it easier for fire to spread.34 Moreover, the biology of the pinewood was an additional factor that contributed to the rapid spread of fire: Pinus pinaster and its management result in highly dense pinewoods, as can be seen in Figure 5.1.
Estrada da Vieira: Pinhal das Areias (Pinhal de Leiria)
SOURCE: ANTT, ANTERO DE SEABRA, BOX 21, N. 1389. DOCUMENT PROVIDED BY THE ANTT
The regulations confirmed a long-standing tradition on making pitch (pez) from the pinewoods (clause 4). The Crown had granted an unknown marquis economic rights over the production of pitch. The bailiff (almoxarife) of the pinewood was the official entrusted with issuing the documents specifying the quantities of pitch that the grantee would be allowed to make. He was to forward these documents to the main guard of the pinewood to sign them. For the sake of the conservation of the pinewood the junior wardens of the pinewood could neither make pitch themselves nor hire contractors for this purpose.
Although we have not located the original contract between the Crown and the marquis, the regulations stated (clause 5) that its purpose was to conserve the pinewood. The contract specified the people who were permitted to cut trees, so neither the bailiff (almoxarife) nor the marquis were allowed to issue permits to cut wood. This shows that the Crown perceived the pinewood as a place that provided wood and timber resources: its economic or material uses were therefore the key reason for its conservation. The main strategy for its conservation relied on severely restricting the use of and access to the pinewood. This recalls the negative prohibitions established by Venetian forestry legislation, which did not introduce positive practices (such as afforestation) until 1531.35
The regulations of 152436 addressed the technique of making firebreaks for the conservation of the pinewood. Every year after Easter the main guard would give orders for the outer firebreaks (aceiros) of the pinewood to be broken up and cleared, as had been traditional practice. The main guard was allowed to change the location of the outer firebreak as long as he requested permission to do so from the Crown (clause 6). The outer firebreak was intended to prevent fires from spreading inside the pinewood. Some archival references confirm that the administrative staff of the pinewood had been putting firebreaks in place since the mid-1400s at least.37 It is very likely that this practice can be traced back to the beginning of the century (and perhaps even earlier) and
It might come as a surprise to learn that this forest code had not addressed the planting of pinheiro-bravo in the pinewood of Leiria. Such shortcomings might be explained by the biological characteristics of Pinus pinaster. This tree species has a significant capacity for natural regeneration,38 and it is very likely that the Portuguese officers were aware of this fact. In addition, the Crown regarded restrictive legislation and the administrative staff for its enforcement as the two key strategies for the conservation of the pinewood.
In this connection, the main guard was empowered to appoint up to 16 junior wardens (guardas). They would not receive a salary for their job; instead, they would be granted certain privileges and tax exemptions and 100 reis for each dayâs work when cutting wood for private individuals (chapter or clause 8). The main guard was to be paid in kind, as he would receive all the ends (pontas) of the trees cut both for private individuals and for the Crown, as well as dry and fallen wood (madeira seca e derribada) and the sum of 20 reis for each licence (alvará) to produce pitch (pez) (clause 9).
Consequently, the regulations were quite short, as they only contained information about the duties and privileges of the administrative staff (especially the main guard) entrusted with the conservation of the pinewood. There is no doubt, however, that the Crownâs true motive for conserving the pinewood was to ensure it continued to be a source of material commodities. The industrial uses of the pinewood of Leiria (shipbuilding and, and to lesser extent, the production of pitch) had been the underlying main reason for its conservation throughout the historical period addressed here. Although such a concern is far removed from ecological awareness, it is possible to argue that the Crown achieved its main purpose of conserving the pinewood to produce material commodities, especially timber components for the royal fleets. Negative legislation and some positive measures (mainly the creation and clearing of firebreaks) were regarded as two of the main strategies for ensuring the present and future existence of the pinewood for industrial uses.
Thus, in the ensuing year (1525) King João III adopted a highly contradictory measure when he gave orders at the Cortes of 1525 (held in Torres Novas) for the royal pinewood (coutada) to be dismantled in response to the petition made by the representatives of Leiria. In the eyes of the administrative staff of the pinewood, this measure was a step backwards for the conservation of the
In 1530, Jorge da Costa, the main guard of the pinewood of Leiria, claimed that the number of 16 junior wardens (couteiros) was insufficient to ensure the effective conservation of the pinewood, as it stretched for 24 kilometres (4 Portuguese leagues or léguas) along the coast and 6 kilometres (in Portuguese léguas) inland.40 This made it impossible to keep the firebreaks clear. The Crown increased the number of junior wardens to 20 due to the material uses to which the pinewood was constantly put. The new guards would be exempted from paying some taxes on bread and wine (âoitavo e jugada de pão e vinhoâ41), as well as from involvement in transporting the timber harvested from the pinewood. The main guard would appoint the new guards from among the local inhabitants, excluding farmers from the choice as King Don Manuel I had ordered.42 The underlying reasons for this restriction are unclear, as it greatly reduced the Crownâs options.
During the 1530s, the Crown reinforced the interconnections between the administration of the pinewood and the shipbuilding industry. In 1534, it confirmed the privileges granted to the 20 junior wardens of the pinewood of Leiria due to the ever substantial need for timber for the royal fleets and the much work that needed to be done on policing tasks as well as on maintaining and clearing the firebreaks.43 In the same year, the Crown reinstated the royal forest (royal pinewood) in Leiria, after years of complaints from the main guard of the pinewood. The penalties specified in the regulations of 1524 were also brought back.44 Probably as a result of restoring the royal pinewood, in 1535 the Crown confirmed the privilege granted to the local inhabitants of Pataias (located southeast of the pinewood) to hunt rabbits all year round, as the inhabitants of Pederneira had to deal with the damage they caused to their crops.45 It is very likely this was due to an overabundance of rabbits.46
Secondly, this contradiction had even more serious consequences for the Crownâs harvesting of timber commodities for shipbuilding. As the Crown did not have a permanent administrative staff for harvesting timber, it needed to rely on the local inhabitants for felling, sawing and transporting the timber from the pinewood to the ports from where it was taken to Lisbon and other shipyards. Thirdly, as the Crown barred local farmers from acting as junior wardens, these positions would have been filled by the local elites who had no interest in them except for the tax exemptions they entailed. As it is very likely that they consumed more wood than the poor farmers, they may have neglected their policing duties. In addition, they might have been the only inhabitants of the surroundings with the economic and logistical means to ensure the felling and transportation of timber for trade. It should be borne in mind that the guards (and their property, chiefly carts and oxen) were exempted from taking part in the harvesting and transportation of timber.
During the ensuing decades, the Crown continued appointing officers for the preservation of the pinewood. To mention but a few, in 1567 João Rodrigues Barba was chosen as guarda-mor of the pinewood after wedding Helena da Costa, the daughter of the former guarda-mor Jorge da Costa.49 In 1577, the office passed to Helenaâs nephew Jorge da Silva.50 Jorge da Silva Costa held the
3 The Pinewood of Leiria during the Habsburg Dynasty (1580â1640)
In terms of forestry, scholars have regarded this period as one of administrative innovation. Some of the laws passed from the 1580s to 1600 formed the backbone of Portuguese forestry legislation until the second half of the 1700s, including the 1597 and 1598 regulations concerning the pinewood of Leiria and the 1605 regulations on the Monteiro-mor, in which the pinewood of Leiria was described.53 This section will address the history of the pinewood of Leiria by paying special attention to a report written in 1614 by Doctor Gonçalo Sousa after the fires of 1613. This hitherto unknown document provides new insights into the protection, management and material uses of the pinewood, as well as the relations between the local inhabitants and the Crown. As this contribution argues that the fire of 1613 marked a turning point in the history of the pinewood, it is arranged into three chronological sections: 1) conservation, forestry policies and material uses to which the pinewood was put from 1580 to 1612; 2) the fire of 1613, in a brief but separate section; and 3) the inquiries conducted after the huge fire, and the alternative sources sought by the Portuguese Crown for supplying the required timber components of Pinheiro-bravo due to the impossibility of continuing to rely solely on the pinewood of Leiria.
3.1
In 1596, don Pedro de Castilho, then bishop of Leiria, proposed that King Philip II conduct plantings of pines near the church of Nossa Senhora da Nazaré in Pederneira because of the great shortages of timber for the royal fleets.54 Similarly, the governors of Portugal wrote to the monarch pointing out the appropriateness of performing plantings in a stretch of barren land (âcharnecaâ) situated between the south border of the pinewood of Leiria and the territories of the monastery of Alcobaça (see Figure 5.2).55 Scholars who have studied the monastery of Alcobaça have pointed out that the religious house had a very well thought-out policy for strengthening its boundaries that was in place as early as the fourteenth century.56 In other words, the limits of the monastery had been established and marked for at least a century, and extended well into the north, encompassing the âlake of Pataiasâ (lake of Pataias).57
The limits of the royal pinewood in the south, bordering on the territories of the monastery of Alcobaça
SOURCE: DGT, IGP, CA-112, THE ROYAL PINEWOOD OF LEIRIA IN 1769
From the perspective of the Crown, new plantings made it necessary to appoint new guards not only to protect the seedlings, but also to oversee the harvesting of timber for shipbuilding. On 20 September 1597, King Philip II accordingly increased the number of junior or lesser wardens (couteiros) of the pinewood of Leiria by eight because he had recently given orders for pines to be planted from the beginning of the old pinewood to the church of Nossa Senhora de Nazaré. These guards were granted the same privileges â in the form of tax and service exemptions â that those of the pinewood had enjoyed, and they replaced eight carters (carreteiros) of the works of the monastery of Batalha.58
In the same year, Philip II decreed not only the limits of the pinewood of Leiria but also its enlargement to ensure the future abundance of suitable timber for shipbuilding.59 Although the ministers had warned the king of the importance of dealing with the monastery of Alcobaça,60 the Crown did not pay heed, and this triggered major issues with the monastery. In 1598 and during the first years of Philip IIIâs reign, large-scale plantings of pines were attempted at least twice, but failed because the wrong pine seeds had
Consequently, the dispute that had arisen between the Crown and the monastery during the reign of Philip III still lingered on in 1769. The comendatário of Alcobaça reported having visited the abbeyâs territories around 1608, where a significant number of inhabitants of Pederneira and Pataias complained about the enlargement of the forest (coutada), and also about the behaviour of the main guard of the pinewood of Leiria with respect to the conservation of the recently planted pines. The local farmers, who were responsible for transporting timber for His Majesty, had not only lost their hives and vineyards but, worse still, they had been deprived of the lands where they used to graze their cattle. Moreover, due to the guarda-morâs overzealous performance of his duties, the underwood (mato) had grown, leading to an increase in the population of wolves.62 This was also a risk if a fire broke out, as it facilitated its spread.
This document shows three highly interesting and interconnected realities. Firstly, the Crown perceived the presence of the local inhabitants as detrimental to the growth of young pinewoods. It is true that some cattle could have entered the woods and endangered the growth of the very young pines during the first years, but they would not have posed a threat to older pines. Secondly, the effectiveness of the regulations depended on how zealously they were enforced by the administrative staff. According to the comendatário of the abbey of Alcobaça, the guarda-mor of the pinewood had implemented them very strictly. However, there are three objections to this argument. The first is that it is highly doubtful whether the guarda-mor had a constant presence in this area as he was entrusted with the conservation of the whole woodland, which spanned more than 20 kilometres along the coast. Secondly, the guarda-mor was probably based in the city of Leiria, more than 20 kilometres away from Pataias â a considerable distance to cover without an overnight stay. Lastly, it is very likely that timber harvesting was carried out in the north of the pinewood, meaning that the guarda-mor would have been far away from the new royal pinewood.
There are fewer doubts about the Crownâs interest in conserving the pinewood for the sake of the royal navy. From the perspective of the Crown, the material uses to which the pinewood was put were the driving force behind its conservation. And this is the key point to be addressed: the necessary work involved not only in conserving the pinewood, but also in cutting, sawing, and carting the timber to the seaports from where it was transported to Lisbon. Although the historical sources do not go into much detail63 about the timber harvested in the pinewood of Leiria for the royal fleets from 1580 to 1612, they do provide some insights that are worth highlighting.
In March 1607, the Board of the Portuguese Treasury64 (Junta da Fazenda de Portugal) met to establish the needs of the Portuguese Carreira da Ãndia of 1608. King Philip III had ordered the construction of three ocean-going ships of large dimensions (naus) and the repair of another two. The cutting and sawing of the timber had been underway since at least early January.65 On 23 March 1607, a board made up of Vasco Fernándes Cesar, then the purveyor of the kingâs warehouse (Provedor-mor dos armazéns), and another unidentified minister (see the right-hand signature in Figure 5.3) issued in Lisbon a report on the Quercus suber, Pinus pinea and Pinus pinaster timber that private individuals had been enlisted to supply for the royal fleet, as well the contract price and the money the Crown owed the contractors.66
The signature of the ministers who wrote the report on timber supplied in 1607
SOURCE: AGS, SSP, LIB. 1466, FOL. 154V
Pine timbers of from Pederneira supplied by Diogo Lobo and Pero Fernandes Lobo
| Type of timber | Price (in reis) | Total price |
|---|---|---|
| 200 dozen âtaboado de costadoâ (lateral planks) | 9,900 | 1,980,000 |
| 100 dozen âdal Caixaâ (hull planking between the wales) | 5,500 | 550,000 |
| 300 dozen âforroâ (ceiling planks) | 2,420 | 726,000 |
| 15 âpaos de lemesâ (trees or sticks to make rudders) | 16,666 | 250,000 |
| 3,506,000 |
SOURCE: COMPILED BY THE AUTHOR FROM AGS, SSP, LIB. 1466, FOL. 152V
The Crown hired Duarte de Araujo, then feitor of the pinewood of Leiria, to supply timber components most likely produced by the pinewood of Leiria (see Table 5.2).
Timbers supplied by Duarte de Araujo in 1607
| Type of timber | Price per unit (in reis) | Total price |
|---|---|---|
| 1,900 âlatasâ (deck beams) | 330 | 627,000 |
| 600 dozen âtaboado de cubertaâ (deck planking) | 2,310 | 61,306,000a |
| 24 âmesas de guarniçãoâ (channels) | 1,320 | 31,680 |
| 16 âapostizasâ | 1,320 | 21,120 |
| 10 âbombasâ (pumps) | 715 | 7,150 |
| 8 âpaos bravosâ (sticks or trees) for âlemesâ (rudders) | 2,750 | 22,000 |
| 2,095,300 |
The document merely mentions 600 dozen âtaboado de cubertaâ (deck planking) and the overall price of 61,306,000. Therefore, the calculation of the price per unit (10,217) is mine. It is more likely the total price would have been 6,130,600
SOURCE: COMPILED BY THE AUTHOR FROM AGS, SSP, LIB. 1466, F. 152V
Timbers of pinho-manso of Pederneira supplied by António de Freitas Lobo in 1607
| Type of timber | Price per unit (in reis) | Total price |
|---|---|---|
| 21 dozen âtaboado de costadoâ (lateral planks) | 9,900 | 207,900 |
| 35 dozen âtaboado dal Caixaâ (hull planking between the wales) | 5,500 | 192,500 |
| 400,400 |
SOURCE: AGS, SSP, LIB. 1466, FOL. 153R
The area that supplied pine timber was extended to the south of Lisbon, especially the pinewoods located in the municipality of Alcácer do Sal for which the Crown signed different agreements with private individuals.68
Proposal of Martin Luis to supply timber components in 1608
| Type of timber | Final price in 1607 (in reis) | Price of Martin Luis (in reis) | Reduction of the price |
|---|---|---|---|
| âMadeira de costadoâ (lateral plank, or hull plank) from stone pine (pinho-manso) | 9,000 per dozen | 7,000 per dozen | 22.2% |
| âMadeira dal caixaâ (hull planking between the wales) from stone pine (pinho-manso) | 5,000 per dozen | 4,000 per dozen | 20% |
| âMadeira de forroâ (ceiling plank) to cut in the pinewoods of Batalha from maritime pine (pinho-bravo) | 2,200 | 2,000 | 10% |
SOURCE: COMPILED BY THE AUTHOR FROM AGS, SSP, LIB. 1472, FOLS. 248Râ249R
In January 1608, Jorge da Silva submitted a bid for supplying timbers for lateral planks (madeira de costado), hull planking between the wales (madeira dal caixa), and ceiling planks (madeira de forro). His prices, summarized in Table 5.5, are significantly lower than those of Martin Luis. Later on, Jorge da Silva, guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria, undertook to deliver deck beams (latas) and deck planking (taboado de coberta) at the prices detailed in the table. The proposal entailed a significant reduction in the prices paid by the Crown, ranging from 12.5% to 25%.
Timbers supplied by Jorge da Silva da Costa in 1608
| Type of timber | Prices proposed by Martin Luis in 1608 (in reis) | Prices proposed by Jorge da Silva Costa in 1608 (in reis) |
|---|---|---|
| âMadeira de costadoâ (lateral plank, or hull plank?) | 7,000 per dozen | 5,500 per dozen |
| âMadeira dal caxaâ | 4,000 | 3,500 per dozen |
| âMadeira forroâ (ceiling plank) | 2,000 | 1,500 per dozen |
| âLatasâ (deck beams) | 260 each | |
| âTaboado de cubertaâ (deck planking) | 1,600 per dozen |
SOURCE: COMPILED BY THE AUTHOR FROM AGS, SSP, LIB. 1472, FOLS. 246Râ247R
In January 1609, Jorge da Silva reported that he had been forced to supply the Pinheiro-manso and Pinheiro-bravo timbers with the same conditions and prices that Pedro Fernandes Lobo and his partners had agreed for the construction of three new ships. Jorge da Silva agreed to deliver the timbers to the port of Pederneira, from where the Crown would be responsible for transporting them to Lisbonâs shipyards. The Treasury Council (Conselho da Fazenda) voted to accept the contract on condition that Jorge da Silva committed to
Timbers supplied by Jorge da Silva Costa in early 1609
| Shipâs component | Price (in reis) |
|---|---|
| âMadeira de costadoâ (lateral planking) from stone pine (Pinheiro-manso) | 5,500 per dozen |
| âMadeira dal Caixaâ very likely from stone pine (Pinheiro-manso) | 3,500 per dozen |
| âMadeira de forroâ (ceiling plank) from maritime pine (Pinho-bravo) | 1,500 per dozen |
| âMadeira de cubertaâ (deck planking) from maritime pine (Pinho-bravo) | 1,900 per dozen |
| âLatasâ (deck beams) | 260 each |
SOURCE: COMPILED BY THE AUTHOR FROM AGS, SSP, LIB. 1.472, FOL. 243RâV
Although the economic history of the supply of timber will be addressed elsewhere, it is important to stress the significant reduction in the prices agreed for the supply of pine timber components from 1607 to 1608, and again
However, the fires of 1613 not only compromised the Crownâs capacity to ensure the supply of the timber from the pinewood of Leiria, but also led it to carry out significant inquiries, which had a lasting impact on the administration of the pinewood of Leiria.
3.2 The Fires of 1613 and the First Inquiries
In September 1613, two fires largely destroyed the pinewood of Leiria. The following lines are based on a report produced by Manuel Veloso Cabral, who held the position of judge of the city of Leiria when the fire broke out.71 According to his testimony, he was in Matoeira with his notary (tabalião) when a junior or lesser warden (couteiro, although he called him mateiro) of the pinewood of Leiria came to report on a fire. The judge ordered the couteiro to go and see the corregedor of Leiria and have him gather as many people as possible to set to work on extinguishing the fire that was then ravaging the north of the pinewood, the area from which most of the shipbuilding timbers were harvested. The junior warden was also entrusted with informing the judge of vintenas â settlements of at least 20 houses â in an attempt to enlist as many people as possible to attend to the pinewood.72
Meanwhile, Veloso and his notary departed with the local inhabitants of Matoeira. The judge stated that the pair of them worked very hard throughout the night to create a firebreak (aceiro) above âLago Limpaâ (see Figure 5.4) in a place called âCarreira dos Sellosâ (perhaps he was referring to âCaminho das Sellasâ) (see Figure 5.4), which stretched for more than one league and half (9 kilometres73)
The places âLago Limpaâ and âCaminho das Sellasâ where a 9-km-long firebreak reaching as far as the sea was constructed
SOURCE: DGT, IGP, CA-112. THE PINEWOOD OF LEIRIA IN 1769
Once judge Veloso finished making the firebreak, the bishop of Leiria and the corregedor informed him that another large fire had broken out in São Pedro de Moel and was destroying most of the pinewood. Judge Veloso marched with his entourage to São Pedro de Moel, where he found that people were not doing anything because they were afraid of the fire. He worked very hard at building another firebreak with the purpose of encouraging the others. When the firebreak was completed, he went to the north of the pinewood to ensure that the first fire would not cause any further damage.74 A report of 1634 noted that the fire (very likely referring to the combination of both) had spread from the mouth of the Lis River to São Pedro de Muel.75
By 30 September 1613 the fires were under control, and judge Veloso went to the epicentre of the fire that had broken out inside the royal pinewood, in Coucinheira. He found evidence of arson, and began the first inquiries soon afterwards. However, the Crown took this task very seriously and headed the inquiries, which had a long-lasting impact on the administration of the pinewood.
What happened after the fires of 1613 is known because of the protests made by the administrative staff of the pinewood of Leiria, who during the 1630s bitterly complained that the Crown had not fulfilled the promises it had made in 1615. The desembargador (judge) doctor Gonçalo de Sousa was appointed to conduct the inquiries into the fires. The junior wardens or guards (couteiros) of the pinewood of Leiria were detained on charges of not having firebreaks in place. However, Sousa left and by 1615 had been replaced by doctor Jerónimo de Souto, who also held the position of desembargador of Casa de Suplicação. The Crown appointed him to make firebreaks stretching from the mouth of the Lis River up to the Ermida de São Pedro all around the pinewood, in a circle encompassing around 24 kilometres. The firebreaks were eventually built in two parts: 1) from the mouth of the Lis to a place called Lagoa Limpa; and 2) from the Ermida of São Pedro to âLagoa Sa Pinha.â Figures 5.5 and 5.6 show the approximate areas where these two firebreaks were created.
The firebreak stretching from the Lis River to Lagoa Limpa
SOURCE: DGT, IGP, CA-112, THE PINEWOOD OF LEIRIA IN 1769
The firebreak extending from the Ermida of São Pedro de Muel (by the sea) to Lagoa Sa Pinha
SOURCE: DGT, IGP, CA-113, CARTA TOPOGRAFICA DO PINHAL DE LEIRIA IN 1807
In this connection, the following pages deal with a report written by Gonçalo de Sousa in 1614 on the conservation of the pinewood of Leiria. It is very likely that the Crown had not only enlisted him to begin the inquiries but had also entrusted him with drafting a set of regulations for the conservation of the pinewood and the harvesting of shipbuilding timber. On 9 September 1614, King Philip III wrote a letter to the viceroy of Portugal acknowledging that he had seen the request from the Portuguese Treasury Council (Conselho da Fazenda) concerning the mission entrusted to doctor Gonçalo de Sousa regarding shipbuilding timber from Leiria. The king encouraged the Conselho da Fazenda to protect the royal forest and to perform plantings in the âfaldasâ (foothills?) of the pinewood, which needed to be free of underbrush to avoid starting fires that could harm the pinewoods.79
Doctor Gonçalo de Sousa worked on these tasks for several weeks. The next mention is dated early January 1615, when the Conselho da Fazenda ordered an unknown minister (perhaps the desembargador Jerónomo de Souto) to examine the reports penned by Sousa in order to draft the regulations for the protection of the pinewood of Leiria and the harvesting of timbers because Sousa was transferred to the Island of Madeira.80
It is important to clarify that Sousa had not belonged to the administrative staff of the pinewood of Leiria, and that his proposals largely criticised the management of the pinewood conducted by the guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria and the administrative staff under his control. This document is of great importance for unravelling: 1) the Crownâs perception of the pinewood of Leiria; 2) the policies it devised and implemented to ensure the conservation of the pinewood; and 3) the relations between the Crown and the local inhabitants not only in connection with the protection of the pinewood but, more importantly, the dynamics and interaction between the local inhabitants and the Crown when it came to harvesting and transporting shipbuilding timber.81
3.3 Gonçalo Sousaâs Draft of 1614 and the Aftermath Up to the Advent of the Braganza Dynasty
Doctor Gonçalo de Sousa regarded the pinewood of Leiria as a strategic woodland for supplying pines for the royal navy. As it extended from north to south for 3 leguas (18 kilometres) along the coast,83 it was large enough to meet all the needs of pinho-bravo (Pinus pinaster) for shipbuilding, as long as the Crown did not sell the timber and the pinewood was appropriately managed through aceiros (firebreaks).
Sousa had no qualms about blaming the Crown for the recent fires. He noted that the pinewood had been destroyed by the plantings and the enlargement of the royal pinewood carried out during the last years of Philip IIâs reign and the early years of Philip IIIâs. It was important not only to restore the pinewood in order to supply timber for shipbuilding, but also to use the woodlands of Brazil and India as sources for constructing vessels in those territories, as this would give a respite to the pinewood of Leiria and the cork oaks, of which the kingdom of Portugal was running out.84 This shows that, from the perspective of shipbuilding for the royal fleets, doctor Gonçalo de Sousa conceived the different regions or geographies of the empire as interconnected spaces.85
Moreover, the kingâs officers had not been supervising timber logging on private properties. They would instruct the owners of the pinewoods to return to their properties to await the arrival of the contractor and the officers, who, they were told, would come and check in person the quality of the pines and establish a reasonable price if they were of good quality. Owners had been known to have waited up to three months but nobody had shown up. Contractors entered private property to log the timber at any time and without notice. On plenty of occasions, the owners had not found out until the wood was in the port of Pederneira.87
In view of this systematic abuse, owners had decided to change the land use of their properties by transforming woodlands into areas of olive groves, vineyards or agricultural land, despite the fact that the soil of Leiria was not always appropriate for such economic activities. Rather, it was suitable for the natural growth of Pinus pinaster trees, which did not need a large administrative staff to carry out plantings and monitor their conservation and growth. It therefore made no sense to permit private contractors to break into private properties and cut their pines, as all this led local inhabitants to put their pinewoods to other uses, despite the low quality of the soil. Sousa asserted that no law would prevent private owners from destroying their pinewoods if the contractors and the kingâs officers continued with these illegal (and immoral) practices.88
Contractorsâ greed had diminished the canopy of pinheiros-mansos, especially the top-priority trees (the so-called âpaos reaisâ) that produced highly important timber components such as lemes (rudders) and doublings (calceces). As contractors had no interest in the pinewoods beyond the duration of their contracts, they did not hesitate to cut the best trees to produce ship components of lesser quality such as deck beams (latas) and planks (taboados), even though the Crown could have used these timbers for lemes (rudders) if the trees had been given a few more years of growth. Furthermore, the poor condition of Leiria and other pinewoods was due to the mismanagement of the wardens (couteiros) of the pinewood. The main guard (guarda-mor), factors (feitores) and the almoxarife of the pinewood were supposed to go with the contractors to indicate the place where harvesting should be performed. This lack of control had resulted in reckless harvesting, and had led to seasoned and unseasoned timber being left in the woodlands with the subsequent waste of both funds and manpower.90
A large part of the document deals with the conservation of the pinewood. In this connection, the outer firebreaks (aceiros) were regarded as the chief means of ensuring its conservation. The firebreak was to stretch from the Lis River mouth all around the outer limits of the old pinewood as far as the beach located in São Pedro de Muel (see Figure 5.6). It was to be straight, with no bends (curves, cotovelos) â a firebreak with bends did not provide protection against external fires â in order to include all the pines and its clearing could be performed by burning vegetation.91 The establishment of an administrative staff was intertwined with the creation and clearing of this firebreak, as the main duty of the 30 junior wardens (mateiros) was to clear and maintain this firebreak by burning. The firebreak was cleared on a yearly basis under the supervision of the guarda-mor and the almoxarife of the pinewood. To increase the effectiveness of these tasks, Sousa recommended entrusting the corregedor
Sousa pointed out the absurdity of Philip IIâs decision to establish the new pinewood in Camarção, which had eventually affected the conservation of the pinewood. This area was not only ill-suited to the growth of pines, but could have ensured the protection of the old pinewood, if controlled burning had been constantly practiced in this new area to prevent the growth of wood and underbrush that could easily spread fires. Moreover, the local inhabitants would have benefited from the absence of wolves and the abundance of grassland for their cattle.93
Sousa then listed in detail the activities that had had a direct impact on the conservation of the pinewood. Firstly, the Crown should grant permission to all hunters to enter the pinewoods to kill the deer (veados) now that the forest cover had been reduced. That way, there would be no further deer and hunters would not need to return to the pinewood, reducing the risks of fires.94
Contrary to the forestry legislation, Sousa regarded using the pinewood for shipbuilding timber as compatible with grazing, as âexperience shows that it [grazing] does not cause any damage, rather it is beneficial because oxen, goats, and sheep do not put pine in their mouths, and they [the pines] grow so close together that they resemble flax plants that eat each other.â95 It was recommendable to allow cattle to enter as they helped the seeds spread naturally, and pine saplings were not harmed even when oxen trampled on them. This was particularly clear in the pinewoods owned by private individuals where cattle used to enter: the pines were so thickly spaced that private agents cut the small ones for firewood to permit the correct growth of the others.96
Sousa furthermore reported that cattle had usually grazed at the outer limits of the pinewood of Leiria without being penalized, but since the creation of the new royal forest the guards had extended their jurisdiction to raise more money through fines.97 In contrast, Sousa was in favour of preventing farmers from allowing their herds of pigs to enter the pinewood, because they ate the pine seeds and got lost inside it, becoming wild.98
Sousa went one step beyond the usual understanding (and possibly the practice) of the management of the royal pinewoods in Portugal, as he supported letting farmers enter the pinewood to cut all the wood they required for their farm implements (abegoaria), as long as it was not from old pines (pinho mor). He suggested that farmers be allowed to use fallen pines that belonged to the guarda-mor, who could be compensated with something else. Permitting people to enter was beneficial and improved the condition of the pinewood, as it meant that they would turn up to help extinguish unexpected fires caused by lightning.100
Thus, Sousa not only supported letting cattle enter His Majestyâs pinewood but held that the pinewood could be a space in which the gathering of firewood, cattle grazing, and the production of timber for shipbuilding were intertwined activities.
The third section of Sousaâs report revolves around the administrative staff and is headed âOfficialsâ (âOfficiaisâ).101 By far the most extensive, it includes a large array of elements that go beyond the category of the administrative staff, though conservation, administrative staff and shipbuilding were often interdependent realities. This makes senses if we take into account that the Portuguese Crown perceived restrictive legislation and the administrative staff entrusted with its enforcement as two key strategies for the conservation of the pinewood.
Sousa stated that the administrative staff entrusted with protecting the pinewood was made up of the main guard (guarda-mor), a clerk (escrivão), a bailiff (meirinho), and more than 30 wardens (guardas). The guarda mor was mainly responsible for ensuring that no fires were started in the pinewood, as well as for preventing people from stealing wood. The creation and clearing of the outer firebreak were regarded as the principal management techniques for avoiding wildfires. The guarda-mor was also responsible for indicating the places where wood should be cut. In this connection, Sousa claimed that there
After providing some general outlines on the administrative staff, Sousa went into detail about their posts, beginning with the head of the administration: the guarda-mor. The main guard had been responsible for appointing the junior guards. He stated that this had resulted in mismanagement because the main guard had chosen wealthy elderly people who lived far away from the pinewood. This had precluded a sound management of the pinewood as the guards were unable to come on time to perform their duties, as had been evident from the previous yearâs fire (1613). The Crown had enlisted guards who were blind and more than 80 years old, and others who lived too far away to carry out firefighting tasks. The wealthy inhabitants coveted these positions because of the privileges they entailed: not having their oxen seized by the Crown to transport timber (jugada).103 This was a matter of great importance both for the Crown and for the local inhabitants. The former required human and animal workforces to harvest and to carry the wood from the pinewoods to the watercourses. For the latter, oxen were a crucial working tool on which they depended for their livelihoods.
The junior wardens (couteiros) were afraid of going against the main guard, as he was responsible for hiring and firing them. Therefore, Sousa believed that the Crown should delegate the function of hiring the main guards to the Treasury Council (Conselho da Fazenda) with the approval of the purveyor of Leiria (provedor da Camara). He also provided insights on the qualities and skills that the junior wardens should have. They should be men aged from 25 to 60 and dwelling solely in the houses of Torneiro and Mouta; the inhabitants of Marinha Grande, Graçia, Coucinheira, Vieira, Passagem, Ganderas, Carvide, and Monreal could also be included because the pinewood was visible from there. This would not only enable them to spot fires easily, but also to set about firefighting quickly as well to rapidly inform other dwellers if wildfires broke out.104
Sousa furthermore recalled the importance of removing the main guardâs capacity to grant permits to private individuals to make pitch from the pines of His Majestyâs pinewood because it was a fire hazard. The main guard was not justified in complaining about this, as the Crown had just acknowledged his right to take 5% of the pitch made under each licence, and there were only three or four ovens (fornos) for making pitch in the area.
However, Sousa was aware that the combination of these measures (not being entitled to use fallen pines, not granting licences to make pitch, allowing poor farmers to gather firewood without cutting pines) were reason enough for the guarda-mor to complain. To avoid this, the author proposed giving him a small salary, as all the rights and payments in kind were not large, and nor were the duties of the guarda-mor substantial if the contracts were taken away.106 It is very unlikely that the guarda-mor would have agreed with these observations due to the abundance of resources in the pinewood.
The need to regulate the office of the guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria was therefore clear. To ensure the conservation of the pinewood, to avoid the oppression of the poor local inhabitants, and to prevent mismanagement, it was important that the person entrusted with drafting the regulations should visit the whole pinewood in person to gather first-hand information.107 The main guard should write down on paper all the regulations, royal orders, and dispatches he possessed in order for them to be included in the new regulations.108
After dealing with the main guard, Sousa mainly focused on the clerk (escrivão) of the pinewood to whom the Crown paid an income to prevent him from causing harm to the parties, to the timber contracts and the farmers. Sousa recalled that the current holder of the position had paid 10,000 reis to
At this point, Sousa questioned how it was possible that the local inhabitants had agreed to engage in cutting and transporting timber when the penalties for failing to fulfil their obligations were very small (1 tostão was to equivalent to 10 reis), yet they had lately been reluctant to perform these activities even though the penalties for not doing so were much higher, in some cases up to 2,000 reis. It is very likely that Sousa had exaggerated the situation. He did not blame the Crown and the local inhabitants for these issues, as the former paid for the work conducted by the local inhabitants, who were poor and, therefore, eager to earn money from these jobs. As usual, Sousa noted the two main reasons that explained the situation, both of which were related to the mismanagement of the officials of the pinewood, as well as to the transportation of timber.111
Firstly, officialsâ mismanagement affected the natural cycle of harvesting, sawing, and transportation of timber, causing major economic damage to the Crown and the local dwellers. Not only did it force the Crown to invest more funds but, at best, delays in the supply of timber hindered shipbuilding activity and, at worst, could either affect the quality of the construction or completely compromise the sailing of ships from Lisbon to India.
According to Sousa, the stages of working the timber should be as follows. The pines should be cut at the end of December and during January. Stripping off (descascar) the bark to prevent rotting and sawing work (aserrar) should be completed by March. Transportation of the timber should begin during this month, as it was the time when the grass grew and ensured that the oxen had
Secondly, officialsâ greed had led them to establish extremely harsh legal proceedings and convictions because they received a percentage from each. Their avarice also influenced the allocation of timber-related jobs among the local population. As the staff of the pinewood aimed to make money, the guarda-mor and the clerk sold the wealthiest inhabitants of the area the privilege of not being included on the list of people to be assigned tasks of cutting, sawing, and transporting timber using their own animals. In addition, the main guard and the clerk established larger quantities of timber than were actually required, leading the poorest inhabitants to end up also working for the wealthiest inhabitants, who had previously paid the staff of the pinewood to be exempted from these obligations.113
Therefore, all the tasks required by the Crown â cutting, sawing, and transporting the timber â were allocated to widows and the poorest inhabitants. As a result, the work ran behind schedule, as the latter owned neither oxen nor carts, the essential tools for transporting the timber. In fact, they preferred to be imprisoned rather than attempt to meet the Crownâs timber needs.114
The solutions to these issues lay in prohibiting the bailiff (meirinho) of the pinewood from filing complaints and initiating proceedings, as well as taking away his permission to arrest wives while their husbands were away working on timber transportation. Instead, offenders should be verbally cautioned and made to pay a maximum of one tostão as had traditionally been done. If legal proceedings and convictions were discontinued, the officers of His Majestyâs pinewood would make sure that the processes of cutting, stripping the bark, sawing, and transporting timber were performed on time without clashing with the residentsâ agricultural duties.115 On top of this, the pinewood officialsâ lists should reflect the Crownâs real timber needs when it came to allocating the jobs to the vintenas to avoid overwhelming the local inhabitants.116
Sousa noted that the allocations of tasks were especially detrimental to the residents of the municipality of Leiria.119 This was because of the criteria used by the officers to distribute the timber duties. Instead of establishing the municipality as a management unit, Sousa proposed taking the pinewood as the reference point for assigning the work. That way the areas of Coutos de Alcobaça (which belonged to the monastery of Alcobaça) and the municipalities of Porto de Mos and Pombal located nearer the pinewood would be included. Besides, the Crown should remove the privileges given to the inhabitants of Leiria of not having to transport timber from the pinewood to the port of Pederneira, as the residents of this area were not only plentiful but were also among the wealthiest in the area and owned means of transportation (oxen and carts).120 Furthermore, the residents of Leiria had fulfilled their timber obligations by resorting to third parties who lived nearer the pinewood.121
According to Sousa, transportation issues continued up to the port of shipment. The Crown needed to ban the clerk of the pinewood from being present at the reception of timber in Pederneira.122 In the event the Crown found itself running out of time to transport the timber, it was furthermore advisable to appoint a third person rather than relying on the clerk of the pinewood.123 In
It is very likely that the transportation of timber from the Leiria pinewood to Pederneira was hindered by the low density of road networks in the north part of the estate of the monastery of Alcobaça; the road that connected Pederneira with Pataias on the way to Leiria and perhaps two other minor roads are known. The first connected the city of Pederneira with the âcasaisâ (houses) of D. Bras. The second route ran from Pataias to Cós, and possibly from Paredes to Cos first by land and afterwards by water.125 However, it is doubtful whether they were of any use for transporting timber from the pinewood to Pederneira. The route from the pinewood of Pederneira to the cityâs seaport remains unclear. Thus, it is not surprising that Sousa proposed checking whether the port of Paredes was suitable for transporting timber to Lisbon, as it was two leagues closer to the pinewood than the city of Pederneira. It would enable the Crown to save thousands of cruzados every year and the people would suffer less oppression from the authorities.126
From time to time the minister in charge of running the woods should either go in person or enlist someone to visit Pederneira to crosscheck the receipts for timber deliveries in Pederneira with the receipts for the timber transported by the carters from the pinewood, to avoid payments being made to people who had not actually transported the timber.127 The timber clerk of Pederneira should be given the option to choose between performing all his duties appropriately or giving up the post, as he currently only worked when it suited him.128
During the Early Modern Age, one of the main disputes between the Crown and local inhabitants arose over appraisals of the price the Crown paid for the transportation of timber for shipbuilding.131 The writer pointed out that abusive practices took place when either the Crown or a contractor oversaw the transportation. In the latter case, contractors agreed with the appraisers to inflate the prices with the goal of sharing the profits between them, to the detriment of the local inhabitants.132
However, Sousa did not go into much detail about the malpractices and shortcomings when the Crown was in charge of transporting timber from the pinewood to Pederneira. Judging by similar cases in other geographical areas, it is very likely that the Crown not only intended to pay a lower price, but also fell behind on the payments.133 He proposed taking the distance between the loading site and the place of delivery as the reference elements. The timbers would be marked, with each mark corresponding to the place of origin of the wood, which would be identified in Pederneira so that payment would be made according to the distance covered by the carter.134 To avoid having to bring in assessors, the regulations would establish the locations of the pinewood and the surrounding areas from which timber was taken, as well as the
When harvesting was managed directly, not enough timber was produced from each tree. The solution lay in establishing fixed payments for the following elements: a dayâs work, cutting a tree, stripping bark from a tree, and sawing a lata (beck deam) and taboa (plank). That way, the workers would exert themselves more as their wages would depend on the amount of work they did, rather than on the number of days they worked.136 Sousa did not realize that this method might lead to the production of low-quality timber components and a resulting decline in the quality of the ships, which might have detrimental effects in the long run.
Clearly, Sousa equated the pinewood of Leiria with the production of sturdy timber for the Lisbon shipyards. As a result, his recommendations were aimed at providing better-quality timber for the royal navy. As the Crown did not state the measurements (vitolas), that is, the length and width, of each of the timber components, contractors often supplied timbers that did not meet shipyardsâ requirements. This not only compromised the quality of the ships, but also harmed the carters as contractors sought to swindle them by lowering the value of the timbers. The contractors kept the best timbers for themselves either to sell them, or to construct ships.137
Sousa provided solutions to the different processes that led both to the loss of timber for shipbuilding and to the reduction of timber quality. He recommended that the regulations governing the duties of the people entrusted with transporting timber should include a clause requiring them to visit the pinewoods where the timber was to be harvested. If timber was left behind, they would be responsible for bringing it to Pederneira to prevent losses due to two causes. Firstly, the growth of the underwood (mato) covered timber. Secondly, rainfall rotted it. Special attention need to be paid to the âpaosâ (sticks) and to waste timber called âpuntas.â138
Moreover, he cited incorrect stockpiling as one of the reasons that contributed to the rotting of timber. Once the timber arrived at the port of Pederneira, it was left on the beach (praia) without any supervision. The waves wetted the timber, and the sun caused it to rot. Leaving timber unprotected on the beach for even a whole year led to a significant reduction both in the amount of timber suitable for shipbuilding, and in the quality of that still regarded as usable.
Some of the observations he made went beyond the Crownâs pinewoods and included policies encompassing plantings in different land tenures. Sousa proposed on several occasions that plantings be conducted in the municipality and region (comarca) of Leiria, for which the Crown should acquire territories in the municipality of Leiria that were well suited to pinhoes-mansos.140 The corregedor of Leiria could oversee these plantings in all the sesmarias (contracts made between the Crown and private individuals to work the land) by including a special article in the regulations governing this position. In general, throughout Portugal the corregedores were careless in their duty of conserving the âmattas, e arvoredosâ (woodlands and trees) and thoroughly negligent about conducting plantings. The seacoast of Leiria was filled with charnecas (moorlands), where pine trees could be planted.141
While with these draft regulations the Crown aimed to avoid another fire that could reduce the cover of the pines that provided timber components for shipbuilding, from 1614 to 1640 ships continued to be built in Lisbon and Oporto and the Crown constantly relied on the pinewoods of Leiria and Pederneira as a source of timber.142 Yet it is very likely that the Crown had not implemented any of the measures proposed by Gonçalo de Sousa.
The documents generated by the royal administration mainly relate to issues that arose over the supply of timber for shipbuilding. In November 1616, the farmers of the city of Leiria and Coutos of Alcobaça submitted some notes (memoranda, or apontamentos) via their attorney, Manuel Esteves Serrão, concerning the pinewoods and the harvesting of timber for the royal fleets.143 On 7 June 1618, the king asked Jorge da Silva, guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria, to report on the petitions the inhabitants of Leiria had made in 1616.144
As stated above, the Crown regarded the regulations as one of the main instruments for enforcing its objectives on the ground. There are a few mentions of how, in the end, it did not issue the regulations drafted by Gonçalo de Sousa. In November 1622, King Philip IV (1621â40) delivered to the viceroy of Portugal a copy of the regulations drawn up for the pinewoods and timber of Leiria and the Coutos of Alcobaça.147 On 25 July 1625, a board was working on a set of regulations for the pinewood of Leiria, which had at least 83 articles.148
The following year, the king again issued regulations governing the pinewood of Leiria and Coutos of Alcobaça, which were to be used to draft regulations on the harvesting of timber in the Ribatejo area.149 In November 1626, the Court of Madrid sent further regulations on the pinewood of Leiria and its timber, which were to be held in the Crown Archive situated in Lisbon (Torre de Tombo).150
In addition, the Crown had not raised the number of couteiros (junior wardens) to ensure the proper conservation of the pinewood. In 1636 and 1639, the couteiros belonging to the administrative staff of the pinewood of Leiria requested the Crown to increase the number of guards from 33 to 40, as had been promised in 1615. It is very likely that the Braganza dynasty had been on the throne when the Crown had agreed to this request on 23 March 1641.151
Finally, nor had the Crown invested in the construction of facilities (warehouses) to store the timbers that spent the winter on the beaches of Pederneira before embarkment. In March 1634, Alvaro Dias, an inhabitant of Pederneira, calculated that in the past two years alone not only had the Crown lost 6,000 cruzados worth of pine timber left in Pederneira during the winter, but that this timber would have been enough to meet the Crownâs needs in 1634.152
4
By the early seventeenth century, the pinewood of Leiria spanned more than 24 kilometres along the coast, with pinheiro-bravo (Pinus pinaster) as the predominant species. This species adapts perfectly to poor soils, and it easily regenerates naturally with no need for human-conducted plantings.
Overall, during the period analysed here, the Portuguese Crown used a double interconnected strategy to ensure its material objectives for the pinewood of Leiria. Firstly, it passed restrictive legislation aimed at limiting the use of and accesses to the pinewood of Leiria. Secondly, it put in place an administrative staff to enforce the legislation. The pinewood of Leiria had a permanent administration for its conservation and management from the early fifteenth century. The main guard (guarda-mor) was the head of an administrative staff with two intertwined obligations. Firstly, he was responsible for policing tasks with the purpose of conserving the pinewood of Leiria to provide goods and commodities, especially related to the shipbuilding industry. Secondly, he was responsible for clearing the firebreaks to prevent the spread of fires, as they were viewed as the main natural hazard that endangered the conservation of the pinewood.
As for forestry legislation, the regulations governing the post of the guarda-mor of the pinewood of Leiria, issued in 1524, were somewhat short to be regarded as a thorough instrument for guaranteeing the sound management of the pinewood. There is no doubt that in the eyes of the Crown fires were the main risk to the conservation of the pinewood. Two out of the nine articles of those 1524 regulations directly dealt with prohibitions (huntersâ access to the pinewood) and management techniques (firebreaks) to avert wildfires. The remaining clauses were more related to regulating certain uses of the pinewood, the duties and wages of the guarda-mor, and the systems of permits for using the pinewood. The Crown did not pass any further regulations on the conservation of the pinewood of Leiria during the remainder of the period addressed here. It was not until 1751 that the well-known regulations on the pinewood of Leiria were issued.153
Regarding the administrative staff, the 1524 regulations mentioned 16 junior wardens, a number which had been progressively raised to 33 by the end of the sixteenth century. The underlying reason was always the same: the number of guards was insufficient to ensure the conservation of such a large pinewood. The enlargement of the royal pinewood in 1597 and 1598 was a consequence of
Sometimes the administrative staff of the pinewood of Leiria, in particular the main guard, were also entrusted with supplying timber for royal shipbuilding. During the first decades of the seventeenth century, the Crown often turned to private contractors to meet the demand for timber for the construction of the ocean-going ships that connected Lisbon to India. The contracts entered into from 1601 to 1612 show a significant reduction in the prices paid by the Crown for specific pine timber commodities. It is very likely this indicates an abundance of these resources; otherwise, the Crown might have not been able to secure such a reduction.
The fire of 1613 marked a turning point in the history of the pinewood and its administration. In late September, two fires razed much of the pinewood, ushering in a disruptive period for Leiria. Although these were not the only fires in the history of the pinewood, they had far-reaching consequences. Soon after the fires, the Crown appointed doctor Gonçalo de Sousa to conduct an inquiry. His assignment was taken over in 1615 and finished by doctor Jerónimo Souto. The very extensive report written by Gonçalo de Sousa in 1614 was hitherto unknown.
At this point it is crucial to stress that fire was a key player in forest management in this Portuguese woodland, characterised by inflammable species that enabled fires to spread easily. Although Rego and Arala have noted the importance of fires in the management of the pinewood of Leiria, their history has been thoroughly disregarded.154 This is clearly a topic that deserves a new historical approach.
From the very beginning of the report, there is no doubt that the Portuguese Crown regarded the pinewood of Leiria as a strategic resource for supplying timber for the royal fleets. In this connection, Sousa stated the pinewood was capable of largely meeting the royal fleetsâ demands for pinheiro-bravo. In addition, the report provides new insights into: 1) the administrative staff of the pinewood; 2) the relations between the Crown and the local inhabitants; and 3) the natural and human constraints that might have hindered the harvesting of timber.
Regarding the administrative staff, Gonçalo de Sousa was more concerned with the performance of the guards than with their number. The guarda-mor of the pinewood had been responsible for appointing the junior guards (couteiros), who were the Crownâs eyes and hands on the ground. Their main duty was
It is important to bear in mind that the first point (administrative staff) is related to the second, an attempt to unravel the dynamics between the Crown and the local inhabitants both in the conservation of the pinewood and in the harvesting of timber. The junior wardens were appointed from among the local inhabitants surrounding the pinewood. As they did not receive a wage for their job, the Crown facilitated their livelihood by allowing them to use the forestry resources offered by the pinewood such as firewood, raw materials for construction, and the right to graze their cattle there. In addition, they were exempted from harvesting and transporting timber, the latter task being the one that triggered the most issues. The mismanagement of the guarda-mor over the choice of the junior guards meant that the burden of the timber transportation work was primarily borne by the poorest inhabitants, who did not own the required oxen.
As a result of all these factors, together with certain natural and social constraints, the tight timetable for the harvesting of timber was not met. Doctor Gonçalo de Sousa paid more attention to the social constraints, notable among which was the lack of warehouses to store the timber in Pederneira. The natural events were listed (rain, heat, sea tides) because they negatively affected the timber components that were left outdoors.
Gonçalo de Sousaâs long, detailed, and impressive report therefore focuses more on the regulations and the administrative staff of the pinewood. This is not surprising considering that these were two of the main strategies used by the Crown to achieve its objectives. In this respect, Sousaâs report resembles a draft for a set of regulations that the Crown did not finally issue during the Habsburg dynasty despite the constant references to it. In 1615, doctor Jerónimo de Souto took over from Gonçalo de Sousa and created two very large firebreaks all around the outer perimeter of the pinewood. The administrative staff of the pinewood of Leiria were offered to be reinstated to their positions if they agreed to take responsibility for clearing the firebreaks. As this entailed a huge amount of work, most of the guards resigned. The Crown offered those who stayed on to increase the number of guards from 33 to 40 to facilitate the correct management of the pinewood.
Abbreviations
AGS: Archivo General de Simancas
SSP: SecretarÃas Provinciales
AHU: Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino
CU: Conselho Ultramarino
ANTT: Arquivo Nacional Torre de Tombo
Ms. Livraria: Manuscritos da Livraria
BAHMOP: Biblioteca e Arquivo Histórico do Ministerio de Obras Púbricas
MMR: Montaria-mor do reino
BA: Biblioteca de Ajuda
BFDUL: Biblioteca da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa
DGT: Direcção-Geral do Territorio
IGP: Instituto Geográfico Português
CA: Cartografia Antiga
Acknowledgements
This contribution has benefited from the research project âProtection, production and environmental change: the roots of Modern Environmentalism in the Iberian Peninsula (XVIâXVIIIth centuries)â of Gerda Henkel Stiftüng (project reference AZ 60/V/19)â.
I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Cristina Joanaz de Melo for reviewing this essay in depth and providing ideas and references for its improvement.
Bibliography
Appuhn, Karl. âForests, Forestry, and State Power in Renaissance Venice.â The Journal of Modern History 72, nº 4 (2000): 861â89. https://doi.org/10.1086/318548.
Aragón Ruano, Ãlvaro. âMar de árboles, vorágines de jurisdicciones. La complicada relación entre la Real Armada española y los bosques del Pirineo Occidental peninsular en el siglo XVIII.â In Ãrvores, barcos e homens na PenÃnsula Ibérica (séculos XVIâXVIII), coordinated by Rosa Varela Gomes and Koldo Trapaga-Monchet, 41â54. Zaragoza: Pórtico Librerias, 2017.
Baeta Neves, Carlos. História Florestal, aquÃcola e cinegética. Colectânea de documentos existentes no Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (Lisbon: Ministerio de Agricultura e Pescas, Instituto Florestal, 1980â1993), 6 vols.
Barbosa, Pedro. Povoamento e estructura agrÃcola na Estremadura Central: Séc. XII a 1325. Lisbon: Instituto Nacional de Investigação CientÃfica, 1992.
Bluteau. Rafael. Diccionario da Lingua Portugueza. Lisbon: Officina de Thaddeo Ferreira, 1789, 2 vols.
Castro, Filipe Vieira de. The Pepper Wreck. A Portuguese Indiaman at the Mouth of the Tagus River. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2005.
Cortesão, Jaime. Influencia dos Descobrimentos Portugueses na História da Civilização. Lisbon: Casa da Moeda, 1993.
Devy-Vareta, Nicole, and António Monteiro Alves. âOs avanços e os recuos da floresta em Portugal â da Idade Média ao Liberalismo.â In Floresta e sociedade. Uma história em comum, coordinated by JoaquÃm Sandes Silva, 55â76. Lisbon: Fundação Luso-Americana para o Desenvolvimento, 2007.
Devy-Vareta, Nicole. âPara uma geografia histórica da Floresta portuguesa. As matas medievais e a «Coutada velha» do Rei.â Revista da Faculdade de Letras â Geografia 1 (1985): 47â67.
Devy-Vareta, Nicole. âPara uma geografia histórica da floresta portuguesa. Do DeclÃnio das matas medievais à polÃtica florestal do Renascimento (séc. XV e XVI).â Revista da Faculdade de Letras â Geografia 1 (1986): 5â37.
Fernow, Bernhard E. History of forestry in Europe, the United States and other countries (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1911).
Freire Costa, Leonor. Naus e galeões na ribeira da Lisboa. A construção naval no século XVI para a Rota do Cabo. Cascais: Patrimònia, 1997.
Gonçalves, Iria. O Património do Mosteiro de Alcobaça nos séculos XIV e XV. Lisbon: Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 1989.
Grossi, Paolo. El orden jurÃdico medieval. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 1992.
Grossi, Paolo. MitologÃa jurÃdica de la Modernidad. Madrid: Trotta, 2003.
Hespanha, António Manuel. As vésperas do Leviathan. Instituições e poder polÃtico. Portugal (séc. XVII). Lisbon: Pedro Ferreira, 1987, 2 vols.
Labrador Arroyo, Félix. La Casa Real en Portugal (1580â1621). Madrid: Polifemo, 2009.
Leite, Carlos. âOs trabalhos de Reinaldo Oudinot em Leiria nos finais do século XVIII: um plano global de ordenamento hidráulico, agrÃcola e florestal.â Master Thesis: University of Coimbra, 2016.
Luxán Meléndez, Santiago. âEl control de la hacienda portuguesa desde el poder central: la Junta de Hacienda de Portugal (1602â1608).â In PolÃtica y Hacienda en el Antiguo Régimen, edited by José Ignacio Fortea Pérez and Carmen Mª Cremades Griñán, 377â88. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 1993, vol. 1.
Maria Silva, Francisco, and Caetano Maria Batalha. Memoria sobre o Pinhal Nacional de Leiria. Suas madeiras e productos rezinosos. Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional, 1859.
MartÃnez Gutiérrez, Diego J. La Junta de Hacienda de Portugal. Pamplona: Newbook Ediciones, 1996.
Melo, Cristina Joanaz de. âGuerra, impérios e Corte Joanina nas Coutadas de Caça: Alavancas de Regeneração Florestal em Portugal, em meados do século XVIII.â Manuscrits. Revista dâHistòria Moderna 42 (2020): 199â220. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/manuscrits.296.
Melo, Cristina Joanaz de. âMenos coutadas melhores pinhais: imperio, inundações, fisiocracia, guerra e especialização das matas reais em Portugal (1777â1824).â Tiempos Modernos. Revista Electrónica de Historia Moderna 9 nº 39 (2019): 456â87.
Melo, Cristina Joanaz de. âFloresta em movimiento: usar, regenerar, cuidar (séculos XIVâXIX).â In Como a Fénix Renascida â Matas, bosques e arvoredos (séculos XVIâXX): representações, Gestão, fruição, coordinated by Cristina Joanaz de Melo, 79â130. Lisbon_ ColibrÃ, 2020.
Melo, Cristina Joanaz de, Catarina Madureira Villamariz, Tânia Manuel Casimiro, Pedro Urbano. âFlorestas de encanto.â In Como a Fénix Renascida â Matas, bosques e arvoredos (Séculos XVIâXIX). Representações, Gestão, Fruição, coordinated by Cristina Joanaz de Melo, 7â17. Lisbon: ColibrÃ, 2020.
Observatorio Técnico Independiente. Recuperação da Mata Nacional de Leiria após os incêndios de outubro de 2017. Lisbon: Assambleia da República, 2020.
Rakcham, Oliver. Woodlands. United Kingdom: Harper Collins, 2006.
Pinto, António Arala. O Pinhal do Rei â SubsÃdios. Alcobaça: Oficina de Oliveira Junior, 1938, 2 vols.
Rego, Francisco. Florestas públicas. Lisbon: Direcção Geral das Florestas, 2000.
Rivero RodrÃguez, Manuel. La edad de oro de los virreyes. El virreinato en la MonarquÃa Hispánica durante los siglos XVI y XVII. Madrid: Akal, 2011.
Silva, José Justino. Colecção chronologica da legislação portuguesa compilada e anotada (1603â1612). Lisbon: Imprensa de J. J. A. Silva, 1854.
Trapaga Monchet, Koldo. âNo es madera de vasallos, sino del rey. Las polÃticas forestales de los Habsburgo en Portugal (1609â1640).â Obradoiro de Historia Moderna 28 (2019): 105â34. http://doi.org/10.15304/ohm.28.5915.
Trápaga Monchet, Koldo. âSupplying Timber for his Majestyâs Fleets: Forest Resources and Maritime Struggle in Portugal (1621â1634).â In Maritime History and Archaeology of the Global Iberian World (15thâ18th centuries), edited by Ana Crespo Solana, Filipe Castro and Nigel Nayling, 215â48. Cham: Springer Nature, 2022.
Trapaga-Monchet, Koldo, and Romero-Calcerrada, Raúl. âForest policies, administration, and management of the Leiria pinewood in Portugal (13thâ18th centuries).â Management & Organizational History 17, nº 3â4 (2022): 138â65; https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2022.2153142.
Trapaga-Monchet, Koldo. âA destruction that preservesâ: Maritime warfare, empirical forestry and sustainability in Portugal (13thâ17th centuries).â In Roots of Sustainaibility in the Iberian Empires: shipbuilding and forestry, 14th-19th centuries, edited by Koldo Trapaga-Monchet, Ãlvaro Aragón-Ruano and Cristina Joanaz de Melo, 183â208. United Kingdom: Routledge, 2023.
Varnhagen, Friderico. Manual de instrucções praticas sobre a Sementeira, cultura e corte dos pinheiros. Lisbon: Typografia da Academia, 1836.
Vaz Correia, Alexander, Ãngelo Carvalho Oliveira and António Fabião, âBiologia e ecologia do pinheiro-bravo.â In Pinhais e eucaliptais. A floresta cultivada, edited by Joaquim Sande Silva, 17â34. Lisbon: Fundação Luso-American para o Desenvolvimento, 2007.
Warde, Paul. âFear of Wood Shortage and the Reality of the Woodland in Europe, c. 1450â1850.â History Workshop Journal 62 (2006): 28â57. https://doi.org/10.1093/hwj/dbl009.
António Arala Pinto, O Pinhal do Rei â SubsÃdios (Alcobaça: Oficina de Oliveira Junior, 1938), vol. 1, 13; Bernhard E. Fernow, History of forestry in Europe, the United States and other countries (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1911), 360â63.
Observatorio Técnico Independiente, Recuperação da Mata Nacional de Leiria após os incêndios de outubro de 2017 (Lisbon: Assambleia da República, 2020).
António Arala Pintoâs book is still the most thorough research on the history of the pinewoods of Leiria, Pinto, O Pinhal, 2 vols. For a brief state of the art see Koldo Trapaga-Monchet & Raúl Romero-Calcerrada, âForest policies, administration, and management of the Leiria pinewood in Portugal (13thâ18th centuries),â Management & Organizational History 17, no. 3â4 (2022): 138â40.
This narrative is very clear in Pintoâs O Pinhal, 2 vols.
Nicole Devy-Vareta, âPara uma geografia histórica da Floresta portuguesa. As matas medievais e a «Coutada velha» do Rei,â Revista da Faculdade de Letras â Geografia 1 (1985): 54, 60 and 68; Nicole Devy-Vareta, âPara uma geografia histórica da floresta portuguesa. Do DeclÃnio das matas medievais à polÃtica florestal do Renascimento (séc. XV e XVI),â Revista da Faculdade de Letras â Geografia 1 (1986): 20, 24â25, 27 and 33; Carlos Leite, âOs trabalhos de Reinaldo Oudinot em Leiria nos finais do século XVIII: um plano global de ordenamento hidráulico, agrÃcola e florestalâ (Masters Thesis: University of Coimbra, 2016).
Cristina Joanaz de Melo, âMenos coutadas melhores pinhais: imperio, inundações, fisiocracia, guerra e especialização das matas reais em Portugal (1777â1824),â Tiempos Modernos. Revista Electrónica de Historia Moderna 9, no. 39 (2019): 456â87; Cristina Joanaz de Melo, âGuerra, impérios e Corte Joanina nas Coutadas de Caça: Alavancas de Regeneração Florestal em Portugal, em meados do século XVIII,â Manuscrits. Revista dâHistòria Moderna 42 (2020): 199â218.
Trapaga-Monchet & Romero-Calcerrada, âForest policies,â 138â61.
Francisco Rego, Florestas públicas (Lisbon: Direcção Geral das Florestas, 2000), 38â42.
Arquivo Nacional de Torre Tombo (ANTT), Manuscritos da Livraria, 1113, doc. 16, fols. 198râ206r.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 57â69, and vol. 2, 414â15.
For a short state of the art on the administrative foundation and evolution of the pinewood of Leiria see Trapaga-Monchet and Romero-Calcerrada, âForest policies,â 146â48.
Paul Warde, âFear of Wood Shortage and the Reality of the Woodland in Europe, c. 1450â1850,â History Workshop Journal 62 (2006): 34.
Oliver Rakcham, Woodlands (United Kingdom: Harper Collins, 2006), 141â42.
Devy-Vareta, âPara uma geografia,â 1985, 60.
Carlos Baeta Neves, História Florestal, aquÃcola e cinegética. Colectânea de documentos existentes no Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo (Lisbon: Ministerio de Agricultura e Pesca, 1980â1982), vols. 1 to 4.
Biblioteca da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de Lisboa (BFDUL), Ms. 2â12â6. I am grateful to prof. Isabel Graes for providing me with this document.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 129â36, and vol. 2, 439.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 115â16, 211â12; Neves, História florestal, vol. 2, 45â6.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 113.
Devy-Vareta, âPara uma geografia,â 1986, 20.
Devy-Vareta, âPara uma geografia,â 1986, 24.
BFDUL, Ms. 2â12â6.
Karl Appuhn, âForests, Forestry, and State Power in Renaissance Venice,â The Journal of Modern History 72, nº 4 (2000): 871â73.
On this matter, see Paolo Grossi, MitologÃa jurÃdica de la Modernidad (Madrid: Trotta, 2003); Paolo Grossi, El orden jurÃdico medieval (Madrid: Marcial Pons, 1992); António Manuel Hespanha, As vésperas do Leviathan. Instituições e poder polÃtico. Portugal (séc. XVII) (Lisbon: Pedro Ferreira, 1987), vol. 1.
In 1617, the Portuguese Crown founded the legal forest in the pinewood of Cabeção (Moura, Portugal). To ensure its protection the Crown proposed as main guard a local inhabitant that everybody in the surroundings of the pinewood feared. Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino (AHU), Conselho Ultramarino (CU), Reino, box 2, folder 16.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 2, folder 16.
He took up the position in August 1523 after replacing Gonçalo Rodriguez, his father-in-law, Neves, História florestal, vol. 5/1, 69â70.
âmeu muito amado e presado primoâ, BFDUL, Ms. 2â12â6.
Manuel Rivero RodrÃguez, La edad de oro de los virreyes. El virreinato en la MonarquÃa Hispánica durante los siglos XVI y XVII (Madrid: Akal, 2011), 135â38.
BFDUL, Ms. 2â12â6. The following lines are based on ibid.
The pinheiro-bravo (Pinus pinaster) was, and still, it is, the predominant tree species in Leiria pinewood.
Alenxadre Vaz Correia, Ãngelo Carvalho Oliveira and António Fabião, âBiologia e ecologia do pinheiro-bravo,â in Pinhais e eucaliptais. A floresta cultivada, ed. Joaquim Sande Silva (Lisbon: Fundação Luso-American para o Desenvolvimento, 2007), 18.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 2, 259â61 and 267â69. Still in 1843, Francisco Maria Pereira da Silva and Caetano Batalha considered that the pines were reserved for civil and naval constructions of the highest quality: Francisco Maria Silva and Caetano Maria Batalha, Memoria sobre o Pinhal Nacional de Leiria. Suas madeiras e productos rezinosos (Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional, 1859), 16â8. The first edition came out in 1843.
Friderico Varnhagen identified the fire as one of the main enemies of the pinewood of Leiria and considered it important to control the underwood (âmatoâ), especially after the warmest months of the year, Friderico Varnhagen, Manual de instrucções praticas sobre a Sementeira, cultura e corte dos pinheiros (Lisbon: Typografia da Academia, 1836), 50â2. António Arala Pinto also devoted several pages to the management and improvement of the pinewood to avoid fires, Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 2, 272â309.
Appuhn, âForests,â 139â40.
BFDUL, Ms. 2â12â6.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 2, pp. 45â6.
Correia, Oliveira and Fabião, âBiologia,â 18.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 5/2, 120â21.
Leonor Freire Costa, Naus e galeões na ribeira da Lisboa. A construção naval no século XVI para a Rota do Cabo (Cascais: Patrimònia, 1997), 320â35; Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 138â45.
The âoitavoâ was a proportional tribute that entailed paying an eighth of something, and âjugadaâ refers to a royal tribute of payment in kind (in this case it might have been wheat).
Neves, História florestal, vol. 5/2, 74â5.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 5/2, 117â19.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 5/2, 120â21.
Neves, História Florestal, vol. 5/2, 126.
I am grateful to Cristina Joanaz de Melo for pointing out this idea.
ANTT, Manuscritos da Livraria (Ms. Livraria), 1113, doc. 16.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 222.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 6, 55â6.
Neves, História florestal, vol. 6, 101â2.
Archivo General de Simancas (AGS), SecretarÃas Provinciales (SSP), lib. 1472, fols. 246râ247r).
Félix Labrador Arroyo, La Casa Real en Portugal (Madrid: Polifemo, 2009), 42â55, 237â38.
Nicole Devy-Vareta and António Monteiro Alves, âOs avanços e os recuos da floresta em Portugal â da Idade Média ao Liberalismo,â in Floresta e sociedade. Uma história em comum, coord. JoaquÃm Sandes Silva (Lisbon: Fundação Luso-Americana para o Desenvolvimento, 2007), 64â5. For an updated study on the forestry policies of this period see Koldo Trapaga-Monchet, âA destruction that preservesâ: Maritime warfare, empirical forestry and sustainability in Portugal (13thâ17th centuries),â in Roots of Sustainability in the Iberian Empires: Shipbuilding and Forestry, 14thâ19th Centuries, eds. Koldo Trapaga-Monchet, Ãlvaro Aragón-Ruano and Cristina Joanaz de Melo (United Kingdom: Routledge, 2023), 187â203.
ANTT, Colecção de Cartas, Núcleo Antigo 878, doc. 10.
ANTT, Núcleo Antigo, 877, no. 292.
Iria Gonçalves, O Património do Mosteiro de Alcobaça nos séculos XIV e XV (Lisbon: Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 1989), 19â23, 46 and 351â56.
Pedro Barbosa, Povoamento e estructura agrÃcola na Estremadura Central: Séc. XII a 1325 (Lisbon: Instituto Nacional de Investigação CientÃfica, 1992), 113â17.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 6, folder 34.
Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 1, 159â62.
ANTT, Núcleo Antigo, 877, nº 292, AHU, CU, Reino, box 1, folder 62.
José Justino Silva, Colecção chronologica da legislação portuguesa compilada e anotada (1603â1612) (Lisbon: Imprensa de J. J. A. Silva, 1854), 120â21; AHU, CU, Reino, box 1, folder 62.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 1, folder 62. The following lines are based on this document.
From 1580 to 1640 there is not a single reference to harvesting timber in the pinewood of Leiria in the archive of the Monteiro-mor, Biblioteca e Arquivo Histórico do Ministerio de Obras Púbricas (BAHMOP), Montaria-mor do Reino (MMR), núcleo 9.
For this Junta, see Santiago Luxán Meléndez, âEl control de la hacienda portuguesa desde el poder central: la Junta de Hacienda de Portugal (1602â1608),â in PolÃtica y Hacienda en el Antiguo Régimen, eds. José Ignacio Fortea Pérez and Carmen Mª Cremades Griñán (Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, 1993), vol. 1, 377â88; Diego J. MartÃnez Gutiérrez, La Junta de Hacienda de Portugal (Pamplona: Newbook Ediciones, 1996).
AGS, SSP, lib. 1466, fols. 149râ151v.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1466, fols. 152râ154v.
I am thankful to Prof. Dr. Filipe Castro for his help with translating this terminology into English. All the mistakes are mine.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1466, fols. 153vâ154r.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1472, fols. 243râ244r.
Biblioteca de Ajuda (BA), Ms. 51-VI-28, f. 45v.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 1a, folder 19, report of 1 October 1613.
Rafael Bluteau, Diccionario da Lingua Portugueza (Lisbon: Officina de Simão Thaddeo Ferreira, 1789), vol. 2, 527â8.
A Portuguese league was equivalent to 6 kilometres, Jaime Cortesão, Influencia dos Descobrimentos Portugueses na História da Civilização (Lisbon: Casa da Moeda, 1993), 70â1.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 1a, folder 19.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 6, folder 34. The following lines are based on this document.
According to Filipe Vieira de Castro, 1 palmo de vara was equivalent to 22 centimetres, Filipe Castro, The Pepper Wreck. A Portuguese Indiaman at the Mouth of the Tagus River (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2005), 191.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 6, folder 34.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 6, folder 34.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1510, fol. 74râv.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1512, fol. 6r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, doc. 16, fols. 198râ206r. The following lines are based on ibid.
For example, the regulations of 1524 (BFDUL, Ms. 2â12â6) or 1751 (Melo, âGuerra, Imperiosâ, 213â14).
According to the regulation of 1605, it stretched for 4 leagues, Silva, Collecção Chronologica, 120â21.
âque neste Rejno está acabadaâ, ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198r.
This argument has been posited for the 18th century as well, Cristina Joanaz de Melo, Catarina Madureira Villamariz, Tânia Manuel Casimiro and Pedro Urbano, âFloresta de encanto,â in Como a Fénix Renascida â Matas, bosques e arvoredos (séculos XVIâXX): representações, Gestão, Fruição, coord. by Cristina Joanaz de Melo (Lisbon: Colibri, 2020), 16. For the interconnected forest policies for Portugal and Brazil see Cristina Joanaz de Melo, âFloresta em movimiento: usar, regenerar, cuidar (séculos XIVâXIX),â in Como a Fénix Renascida â Matas, bosques e arvoredos (séculos XVIâXX): representações, Gestão, Fruição, coord. by Cristina Joanaz de Melo (Lisbon: Colibri, 2020), 99.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 198v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199v: âa experiencia ensina que nenhum damno lhe faz antes proueito, porque o boj, cabra, e ouelha não toma na boca pinho e elles nascem tam iuntos que pareçem linho sameado e se comem huns a outros.â
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 199vâ200r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200r.
Gonçalves, O Património, 473â74.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 200râ209r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200v. Sousa also mentioned that wealthy local inhabitants paid the Master of Works of the monastery of Alcobaça to be given posts in the monastery because these entailed exemptions on having to lend their oxen for the transportation of timber, ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 203r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 201r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 201r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 200v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 201r.
âdeu dez mil reis a çerto criado de hum Ministroâ, ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 201v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 201râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 201vâ202r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 201vâ202r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 202râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 202râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 202v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 202vâ203r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 205v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 203râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 202r and 206r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 202â203r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 203râv.
Gonçalves, O Património, 380â86.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 205vâ206r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 203vâ204r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204r.
Ãlvaro Aragón Ruano, âMar de árboles, vorágines de jurisdicciones. La complicada relación entre la Real Armada española y los bosques del Pirineo Occidental peninsular en el siglo XVIII,â in Ãrvores, barcos e homens na PenÃnsula Ibérica (séculos XVIâXVIII), coord. Rosa Varela Gomes and Koldo Trapaga-Monchet (Zaragoza: Pórtico Librerias, 2017), 47â8.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204v.
Aragón Ruano, âMar de árboles,â 45â8.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 204v.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fols. 204vâ205r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 205r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 205r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 205râv.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199r.
ANTT, Ms. Livraria, 1113, fol. 199r.
Koldo Trápaga-Monchet, âSupplying Timber for his Majestyâs Fleets: Forest Resources and Maritime Struggle in Portugal (1621â1634),â in Maritime History and Archaeology of the Global Iberian World (15thâ18th centuries), ed. Ana Crespo Solana, Filipe Castro and Nigel Nayling (Cham: Springer Nature, 2022), 215â48; Koldo Trapaga-Monchet, âNo es madera de vasallos, sino del rey. Las polÃticas forestales de los Habsburgo en Portugal (1609â1640),â Obradoiro de Historia Moderna 28 (2019): 116â28.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1513, n.p. 16 November 1513.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1516, fol. 70râv.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1513, n.p., 30 November 1513.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 4, folder 26.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 3, folder 90.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1519, fol. 66r.
AHU, CU, Consultas do serviço real, códice 35, f. 236r, December 1623.
AGS, SSP, lib. 1520, fol. 125râv.
BA, Ms. 51-VI-21, fols. 197vâ201.
AHU, CU, Reino, box 6, folder 33.
For its study see, Melo, âGuerra,â 199â220.
Rego, Florestas públicas, 42; Pinto, O Pinhal, vol. 2, 272â310.