It happened in 1832. Rio de Janeiro was a powder keg, a messy, humid, and politically fractured city where the air felt thick with more than just the tropical heat. People call it the Noite dos Caceteiros—the Night of the Clubs—or more broadly, the No Kings Day violence. It wasn't just a random street brawl. It was a chaotic, desperate push by a group known as the Restauradores who wanted their king back. Specifically, they wanted Dom Pedro I to return from Portugal and reclaim the throne he had abdicated just a year prior.
Imagine the scene.
Groups of men, armed mostly with heavy wooden clubs (hence the caceteiros name), swarming through the streets of the Brazilian capital. This wasn't a clean military coup. It was messy. It was loud. It was terrifying for the average resident who just wanted to sell their coffee or go about their day without getting caught in the crossfire of a regency crisis. When we talk about No Kings Day violence, we’re looking at a specific moment in April 1832 when the young Brazilian nation almost folded in on itself because nobody could agree on who should actually be in charge.
The Powder Keg: Why 1832 Was Different
Brazil was in a weird spot. Dom Pedro I had left his five-year-old son, Pedro II, behind. A regency was running things, but they were about as stable as a three-legged chair in a windstorm. The Restauradores were convinced that the only way to save Brazil from "anarchy" was to bring the old Emperor back. They were loud, they were organized, and in April 1832, they decided they were done talking.
The violence didn't just happen in a vacuum. It was fueled by the Caramuru party. These weren't just street thugs; they were influential elites, conservative merchants, and military officers who felt the new liberal reforms were stripping away the "order" of the old Empire. On April 14, 1832, the tension finally snapped.
The caceteiros took to the streets.
They weren't using high-end muskets for the most part. They used what was available: clubs, stones, and sheer numbers. They targeted liberals. They targeted the "Moderate" supporters of the regency. It was a localized civil war played out in the alleys and squares of Rio. The government, led largely by Father Diogo Antônio Feijó—a man who was as much a politician as he was a priest—had to scramble to keep the city from falling.
💡 You might also like: Air Pollution Index Delhi: What Most People Get Wrong
The Noite dos Caceteiros: Brutality in the Streets
The No Kings Day violence is often glossed over in standard textbooks, but the reality on the ground was brutal. Contemporary accounts from diplomats like the British chargé d'affaires described a city paralyzed. You couldn't walk down the Rua do Ouvidor without risking a cracked skull.
The Restauradores shouted "Long live the Emperor!" while the National Guard—a recently formed civilian militia—tried to beat them back. This wasn't a professional army vs. professional army fight. It was neighbor against neighbor. The National Guard was basically the liberal response to the threat of a returning monarchy, and they didn't hold back.
One of the most striking things about this specific wave of violence was how partisan it was. If you wore the wrong colors or didn't shout the right slogan, you were a target. There are records of homes being broken into and "suspected liberals" being dragged out. It was a purge attempt that failed because the regency, despite its internal bickering, managed to hold the military mostly together.
Why the "No Kings" label matters
Technically, Brazil had a king—or rather, an Emperor. But Pedro II was a child. For all intents and purposes, there was no king on the throne to actually rule. This vacuum is what created the No Kings Day violence. The absence of a central, paternal figure in Brazilian politics created a terrifying "anything goes" atmosphere.
Historians like Boris Fausto have pointed out that this period, the Regency, was actually more violent than the era of the Empire that followed. It was a decade of "experimental" government where the lack of a clear head of state led to localized explosions of anger. The 1832 riots were just the first major signal that the transition wasn't going to be peaceful.
The Aftermath and the Failure of the Restoration
By the time the dust settled in late April, the Restauradores had lost their momentum. The government moved quickly to arrest the ringleaders. José Bonifácio de Andrada e Silva, the "Patriarch of Independence" and tutor to the young Pedro II, was even accused of being behind the movement (though he was later acquitted).
📖 Related: Why Trump's West Point Speech Still Matters Years Later
The violence had a weird side effect: it actually strengthened the liberals for a short time. People were so sick of the street fighting and the threat of a Portuguese "re-colonization" that they rallied around the regency.
But the fear didn't go away.
The No Kings Day violence set a precedent. It showed that if the central government was weak, the streets would take over. This lesson wasn't lost on the elite. It’s actually one of the main reasons they eventually moved to declare Pedro II "of age" prematurely in 1840—they were terrified of the "No Kings" chaos returning.
Realities vs. Myths: What People Get Wrong
People often think these riots were about "freedom." Honestly? They weren't. Most of the people participating in the No Kings Day violence on the Restaurador side wanted less freedom. They wanted the old, autocratic rule of Pedro I. They thought the "people" couldn't handle democracy.
On the flip side, the National Guard wasn't exactly a group of peaceful protestors. They were often just as violent as the caceteiros. In the records of the Rio police from 1832, you see a mess of arrests where both sides are accused of the same things: assault, destruction of property, and "disturbing the imperial peace."
Another misconception is that this was a nationwide revolution. It wasn't. It was very much a Rio-centric event. While other provinces had their own revolts (like the Farroupilha or the Cabanagem), the 1832 club-fights were about the heart of the Empire. If Rio fell, the country fell.
👉 See also: Johnny Somali AI Deepfake: What Really Happened in South Korea
The Legacy of the Caceteiros
What do we take away from this today?
First, the No Kings Day violence reminds us that transitions of power are rarely smooth. When a leader leaves a vacuum, someone—usually someone with a club—will try to fill it.
Second, it highlights the deep-seated fear of "re-colonization" that existed in 19th-century Brazil. The reason the public eventually turned so sharply against the Restauradores was the fear that bringing back Pedro I meant becoming a puppet of Portugal again.
Third, it marked the rise of the "Moderate" party. They realized they had to balance between the "Exaltados" (who wanted a republic) and the "Restauradores" (who wanted the old King). This middle-ground politics defined Brazil for the next fifty years.
What You Should Do With This Information
If you're a history buff or just someone interested in how political instability leads to street-level conflict, the 1832 riots are a masterclass. You can’t understand modern Brazilian political tension without looking at these early fractures.
- Look into primary sources: If you can read Portuguese, the digitized archives of the Jornal do Commercio from 1832 offer a day-by-day look at the panic in Rio.
- Visit the sites: Many of the squares where these clashes happened, like the Praça XV in Rio, are still central hubs today. Walking through them with the knowledge of the caceteiros changes the vibe of the place.
- Study the Regency Period: Most people skip from Pedro I to Pedro II. Don't. The Regency (1831–1840) is where the "real" Brazil was forged through fire and club-fights.
The No Kings Day violence wasn't just a footnote. It was a warning. It showed that a country without a clear identity is a country that will eventually fight itself in the streets. The clubs are gone, but the ghost of that instability still hangs around whenever the "order" of the state starts to wobble.
To dive deeper, check out Thomas Skidmore's work on Brazilian history or the detailed accounts in Leslie Bethell’s The Cambridge History of Latin America. They provide the academic backbone to these gritty street stories. Knowing the history helps you spot the patterns before the clubs come out again.