Este trabalho tem como principal objetivo fazer uma reflexão sobre três revoltas dos rendeiros na ilha de Santiago em Cabo Verde, entre os anos de 1822 a 1910. Propõe mostrar a especificidade das revoltas dos Engenhos (1822), de Achada Falcão (1841) e de Ribeirão Manuel (1910), compreendendo além do panorama cultural, a importância das confrontações políticas, como elementos condicionadores dessas revoltas. Por outro lado, propõe demonstrar que além das causas econômicas e culturais apontadas pela historiografia, as revoltas foram buscar sua inspiração nas disputas políticas. Propõe ainda demonstrar como as elites políticas locais apropriaram das festas religiosas para mobilizar os rendeiros do interior da ilha de Santiago. Além disso, analisa como as revoltas dos rendeiros devem ser compreendidas a partir das reivindicações pelo livre acesso às terras cultivadas. / This work has as objective principal to do a reflection on three tenant farmers revolts in Santiago\'s island in Cape Verde, among the years from 1822 to 1910. He/she/you intends to show the specificity of the revolts of Engenhos (1822), of Achada Falcão (1841) and of Ribeirão Manuel (1910), understanding besides the cultural panorama, the importance of the political confrontations, as conditioning elements of those riots. On the other hand, he intends to demonstrate that, besides the economical and cultural causes pointed for the historiography, the revolts went to look for your inspiration in the political disputes, for occasion of the elections for positions inside of the clienteles. He intends to demonstrate as the politics local elites they still adapted of the religious parties to mobilize the tenant farmers of the interior of Santiago\'s island. Besides, it analyzes as the revolts of the tenant farmers understood starting from starting the revindications for the free access to the cultivated lands.

Este trabalho tem como principal objetivo fazer uma reflexão sobre três revoltas dos rendeiros na ilha de Santiago em Cabo Verde, entre os anos de 1822 a 1910. Propõe mostrar a especificidade das revoltas dos Engenhos (1822), de Achada Falcão (1841) e de Ribeirão Manuel (1910), compreendendo além do panorama cultural, a importância das confrontações políticas, como elementos condicionadores dessas revoltas. Por outro lado, propõe demonstrar que além das causas econômicas e culturais apontadas pela historiografia, as revoltas foram buscar sua inspiração nas disputas políticas. Propõe ainda demonstrar como as elites políticas locais apropriaram das festas religiosas para mobilizar os rendeiros do interior da ilha de Santiago. Além disso, analisa como as revoltas dos rendeiros devem ser compreendidas a partir das reivindicações pelo livre acesso às terras cultivadas. / This work has as objective principal to do a reflection on three tenant farmers revolts in Santiago\'s island in Cape Verde, among the years from 1822 to 1910. He/she/you intends to show the specificity of the revolts of Engenhos (1822), of Achada Falcão (1841) and of Ribeirão Manuel (1910), understanding besides the cultural panorama, the importance of the political confrontations, as conditioning elements of those riots. On the other hand, he intends to demonstrate that, besides the economical and cultural causes pointed for the historiography, the revolts went to look for your inspiration in the political disputes, for occasion of the elections for positions inside of the clienteles. He intends to demonstrate as the politics local elites they still adapted of the religious parties to mobilize the tenant farmers of the interior of Santiago\'s island. Besides, it analyzes as the revolts of the tenant farmers understood starting from starting the revindications for the free access to the cultivated lands.

Alors que la reconstruction matérielle du pays s’achevait au milieu des années Vingt, il en allait de même pour le champ politique français. A partir de 1924, le retour à une nette bipolarisation entre gauche et droite eut un effet structurant sur le champ politique français, qui n’avait plus connu une telle configuration depuis le début du XXe siècle. Les élections de 1924, marquées par la victoire du Cartel des gauches face au Bloc national, apparaissent comme une césure politique, largement négligée par l’historiographie de l’entre-deux-guerres depuis les travaux de Jean-Noël Jeanneney sur le Cartel des gauches dans les années 1970. De leur passage dans l’opposition en 1924-1926, les droites françaises tirèrent un certain nombre de leçons. La principale était que le verdict des urnes pouvait être renversé en cours de législature : en juillet 1926, la majorité cartelliste, affaiblie par les contradictions entre socialistes et radicaux face à une crise financière et monétaire qui s’aggravait, laissa définitivement place à une majorité d’union nationale, réunie sous l’autorité du principal adversaire des gauches lors de la campagne de 1924, Raymond Poincaré. Pour les droites de nouveau vaincues en 1932 et en 1936, c’était un précédent à retenir. Autre leçon, les mobilisations anticartellistes, dans leur diversité, au sein du champ politique ou du champ social, avaient contribué à affaiblir la majorité radicale et socialiste : l’action militante, politique et sociale, avait une capacité d’influence non négligeable au sein du régime parlementaire de la Troisième République. De 1924 à 1926, les organisations anticartellistes politiques ou associatives, à l’instar de celles entendant représenter les intérêts des catholiques ou des commerçants et artisans, développèrent une culture et des pratiques politiques d’opposition, qu’elles firent rejouer tout au long de l’entre-deux-guerres. Cette expérience démontra également la persistance, dans l’opposition, des divisions structurelles du champ politique des droites, en raison du maintien de clivages tant doctrinaux (sur la laïcité, la politique étrangère ou le parlementarisme), que stratégiques (attitude d’intransigeance ou de conciliation vis-à-vis des radicaux). Dans leur ensemble, ces divisions, mais aussi les débats et les pratiques politiques qui s’épanouirent pendant ces deux années, perdurèrent jusqu’au milieu des années Trente. / In the mid-twenties, France was achieving its reconstruction, both economical and political. In 1924, and for the first time since the beginning of the century, the general election took place in a context of a clear bipolarization between left and right, which had a structuring effect on French political field. The victory of the Cartel des gauches at this election appears as a political break-point, that the historiography about political life during interwar years has rather neglected since Jean-Noël Jeanneney’s studies upon Cartel des gauches in the seventies. The organizations of the right-wing learnt a few important lessons from this period when they were in the parliamentary opposition. The most important one was that the political majority coming out democratic election could be changed in the middle of the parliamentary legislature. Indeed, in July 1926, weakened by the growing divisions between radicals and socialists incapable of giving an answer to the increasing financial and monetary crisis, the cartellist majority fell definitely. Raymond Poincaré, the main opponent of the left in 1924, came back to the Council presidency, leading a new parliamentary majority of national union. When the right had been defeated again in 1932 and 1936, it remembered this precedent. Another lesson was that the various social and political mobilizations against the Cartel des gauches had played a significant role to weaken the socialist and radical majority. The community movements, such as catholic or professional ones, and the political organizations mobilized in this period, built a culture and abilities of being in political opposition, that they have reactivated later during the interwar years. This episode proved also the persistence, in political opposition, of structural divisions of the political field of the French right-wing, due to the permanence of doctrinal and strategic splits (the first ones about questions of secularism, foreign policy or parliamentary nature of institutions; the second ones about the political attitude toward the radicals, between uncompromising attitude and conciliation). These divisions, but also the nature of the political debates and the political practices which were developed during these two years, had lasted until the mid-thirties.