Introduction

This article has as its theme the writing of the History of Education in Brazil, with an emphasis on the Historiography of Brazilian Education. We focus our attention on two works considered inaugural for the studies of the History of Brazilian Education (^{Saviani, 2009}). The first work is produced by José Ricardo Pires de Almeida, which was published in French in 1889, and entitled L'instruction publique au Brésil (1500-1889): histoire et legislation. The second concerns the book A Instrução e as Províncias - 1º Volume Das Amazonas às Alagoas (The Instruction and the Provinces - 1st Volume From Amazonas to Alagoas) by Primitivo ^{Moacyr, from 1939}.

We aim to carry out a comparative analysis of the two works, focusing on public education during the Empire period in the Province of Rio Grande do Norte, after the Additional Act of 1834¹¹. Michel de ^{Certeau's (1982}) conceptions constitute our theoretical contribution, from which we seek to explain the characteristics of the works and the theoretical and methodological choices of the authors in the writing of history.

In this perspective, the understanding of the social place, of practices and of writing allows “[...] to give precise outlines to the silent laws that organize the space produced as text” (^{Certeau, 1982}, p. 65). For the construction of this article, we also discuss with previous analysis carried out in the field of History of Education, such as those developed by ^{Nunes (1995}), ^{Gondra (1996}, 2000), ^{Vieira (2015}), among others.

Although the emphasis of our study is not the investigation of intellectuals, it is necessary to understand the itinerary and, above all, the social place in which these subjects make history, in order to understand their writing and their practice. Thus, this article was structured in three parts. Initially, we present the authors¹² based on their works, to then discuss the characteristics of writing and historiographical practice. In the third moment of the study, we discussed the relevance of these works for the constitution of the field of History of Education. Finally, we will make some considerations about the analysis performed.

Authors and their works

The first aspect that helps us to understand the construction of the works of the History of Brazilian Education, which we analyzed in this article, concerns the fact that they were produced by a doctor and a lawyer, who, through their works, legitimized their role as historians of education in the country.

José Ricardo Pires de Almeida was born in the city of Rio de Janeiro, in 1843. Son of Joaquim Pires Garcia de Almeida and Maria Luísa Pires, he graduated from the Faculty of Medicine of Rio de Janeiro and was an adjunct physician in the Inspectorate of Hygiene. Before graduating in medicine, he had studied law for three years in the city of São Paulo. Pires de Almeida was archivist for the City Council of Rio de Janeiro and participated as a doctor in the Paraguayan Campaign¹³.

According to ^{Nunes (1995}), Pires de Almeida showed interest in writing since he was thirteen years old and, throughout his life, he collaborated with several newspapers: Província de São Paulo, Correio Paulistano, O Futuro, O Diário do Rio de Janeiro, Gazeta de Notícias, Jornal do Comércio, among others. He also wrote numerous plays and other books, dying in 1913.

^{Nunes (1995}, p. 51) presents the work of Pires de Almeida as "[...] the first systematized history of Brazilian education". The book was created in order to promote an image of Brazilian education in international pedagogical congresses and, therefore, it was built not for educators in the country, but for European readers. This intention is made explicit by the choice of the author to write it in French, being translated only one hundred years after its publication¹⁴.

The work was organized seeking to present the time frame from 1500 to 1889, as presented in its title, and its structure comprises: the dedication 'Your Royal Highness Mr. Gastão d´Orleans, Count D´Eu'; the preface; the introduction - Public Education in Brazil after Independence -, divided into two parts; the first, 'From Independence to the Additional Act', and the second, 'From the Additional Act to today', in addition to the annexes. It is important to note that the initial period of the history of instruction in Brazil, which begins in 1549, is only included in the introduction of the work. Pires de Almeida dedicated almost entirely his book to the post-departure period of King D. João VI to Portugal in 1821.

Pires de Almeida's work stands out, above all, for the broad documentary corpus it presents, as emphasized by Antonio ^{Chizzotti (2000}, p. 5), responsible for the translation of the book, considering it as “[...] a rich repository of information [...] ” and which adds:

[...] the work is a valuable record of the ideas and problems that shook the school in the period. Researchers will be able to find a wide field of investigation of the educational issues of the time: the teaching method, the national school paradigm, the gratuity of teaching, coeducation, the creation of the university, the textbook, female education, teaching costs, teaching conditions, etc, a profusion of problems pointed out by the author, about which, in general, his conservatism appears (^{Chizzotti, 2000}, p. 5).

In addition to being conspicuously considered a conservative, Pires de Almeida is presented as a nationalist and monarchist. ^{Nunes (1995}), when explaining the author's image as a typical intellectual, defines it as follows:

[...] to be a typical intellectual, at the end of the 19th century, is to speak from a particular point of view: the white, proprietary and literate elite, with a characteristic intellectual, enlightened attitude. It is also to have a multipurpose performance that, in the case of Pires de Almeida, includes mainly journalism, theater, archival, library science and medicine. It means participating in a space of the elected, chosen based on their social relations who, without experiencing university debates - as the creation of a university in Brazil was still being discussed - were part of institutions created along the lines of European illustrated academies, or lived in the shade from them. Pires de Almeida was an honorary member of the Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro (Brazilian Historical and Geographic Institute) (IHGB) and a member of the Academia Nacional de Medicina (National Academy of Medicine) (^{Nunes, 1995}, p. 53).

This understanding provides us with elements that help the understanding of Pires de Almeida's writing, above all, by the fact that they make it possible to make visible the social place occupied by this author. This place, as ^{Certeau (1982}) points out, is social, political, economic and cultural, and has a particularity that is closely associated with both the subject that will be treated and the point of view, from which the analysis is produced.

This perspective also guides our investigation of the second author we analyzed in this study: Primitivo Moacyr. He was born in 1867 in Salvador, Bahia. According to ^{Carvalho and Machado (2016}), Primitivo Moacyr's first contact with public education was when he exercised the position of teacher of first letters in a city in the interior of the state. Then he worked at the Lyceum of Recife, in Pernambuco. In 1884, he graduated in Law from the Faculdade Livre do Rio de Janeiro.

Primitivo Moacyr worked as a writer and rapporteur in the Chamber of Deputies, where he remained from 1894 until 1933. Moacyr's positions allowed him wide access to official documentation. The work of collecting and organizing documents that resulted in the volume of the book analyzed here gained prominence in the newspapers of the time, such as the issue number 24700 of the Correio Paulistano of 1936, in which Rubens Pinheiro classifies his work as a “[.. .] of those that will always endure, such is the scope of his initiative” (^{Pinheiro, 1936}, p. 4). The documentation collected therefore promoted knowledge about the challenges faced by the school throughout Brazil's history.

The first book published by the author was ^{Public Education in the National Congress: brief news in 1916}, which brought together articles by the author in the Jornal do Comércio. Only from 1936, the lawyer-historian began to publish a vast work divided into fifteen volumes on the History of Brazilian Education, from the Empire and the Republic to the 1930s.

In addition to these books, it is also noteworthy that the author published The Common Teaching and the first attempts at nationalization in the province of São Pedro of Rio Grande do Sul (1835-1889) (^{Moacyr, 1940}) and The primary and secondary education in the Municipality of the Court in Regency and Adulthood (^{Moacyr, 1942a}) in congresses held by the IHGB. Primitivo Moacyr passed away in 1942.

Regarding his personal and professional trajectory, ^{Oliveira (2014}) highlights:

[...] little is known about the relationships that are most deeply rooted in his life and that can help to understand his postures and indicate his propositions on the subject of instruction. It is emblematic in its trajectory the fact that it is part of the saga of many Brazilians who, in unfavorable socioeconomic conditions, migrated to urban centers, notably, at that time, to the capitals, in search of better living conditions and the opportunity for a more promising future. [...] His history presented him with a peculiar condition for looking at the life of Brazilian society (^{Oliveira, 2014}, p. 24).

^{Oliveira (2014}) also points out that Moacyr was a young man with few resources, an orphan from an early age. When studying Law, he began to demonstrate an active and strongly engaged personality in legal and national issues and gradually gained space in the society of Rio de Janeiro. According to ^{Oliveira (2014}, p. 32), Primitivo Moacyr “[...] had his professional life tied to political associations, resulting from living with people in power and, consequently, from more affluent sectors of Rio de Janeiro society and their relations with Bahian politicians”. The author adds that his work at the Federal Chamber enabled him to get in touch with and enjoy the archives and build a relationship with the History of Education.

Among his works we can highlight: The instruction and the empire (^{Moacyr, 1936}, ¹⁹³⁷ and ¹⁹³⁸), composed of three volumes; Education and provinces (Moacyr, 1939 and 1940), composed of three volumes; Education and the republic (Moacyr, 1941), composed of seven volumes; and Public instruction in the state of São Paulo empire (^{Moacyr, 1942b}) composed of two volumes. The books on the Empire and education in the State of São Paulo were reproduced in the Coleção Brasiliana (Brasiliana Collection) of the Companhia Editora Nacional¹⁵. In turn, the volumes that discuss the republican period were published by the National Press, as an initiative of the Instituto Nacional de Estudos Pedagógicos (INEP) (National Institute of Pedagogical Studies).

The work we analyzed in this study concerns the first volume The Instruction and the Provinces - Subsidies for the History of Education in Brazil (1834 - 1889) - From Amazonas to Alagoas , published in 1939. This volume consists of a preliminary chapter, in which the author presents the state of instruction in 1823, the projects of 1826, the Law of 15th October 1827, the Lancaster system and the Additional Act of 1834; then, it presents data from the Provinces of Amazonas, Pará, Maranhão, Piauí, Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba, Pernambuco and Alagoas; soon after, the author presents the notes, bibliography and index (at the end of the book). This work consists of more than six hundred pages.

The work of Primitivo Moacyr stands out as a vast repository of information and source for the History of Education. This potential is explained by Afrânio ^{Peixoto (1936}, p. 7) in the preface to the initial volume of A Instruction and the Empire, when he stated that “[...] this is more than a good book: it will be the promoter of an extensive generation of more or less good books [...] ”and adds:

[...] Mr. Primitivo Moacyr did not want to do so, and, on national education, he investigated, in the archives, in the libraries, in the books, in the government reports and, of all things, he made an objective book, without comment, nor conclusions. therefore, a rare work that will produce generations of historians, who will not quote it ... what will it matter? what will it really matter to curse him after copying him? (^{Peixoto, 1936}, p. 7).

This brief presentation of the works emphasizes that, from the perspective of their authors, the history of public education in the Empire period, starting in 1834, is unveiled. We seek, in the continuity of this work, to contextualize the works in their relations with the writing of the History of Education and the constitution of such a field.

The writing of the history of education

At this point, we will dedicate ourselves to explain the theoretical and methodological conceptions that guided the construction of history writing by Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr, based on the chosen time frame. As pointed out by ^{Certeau (1982}), this writing is always linked to the social place in which the historiographic operation is developed, guided by the interests and objectives of the authors.

In the Preface to his work, Pires de ^{Almeida (2000}, p. 17) highlights his intention - an "[...] almost mission to reestablish the truth". This author refers to the need to present Brazil as a great Empire whose educational development would be far ahead of the Argentine Republic. In order to give his book this true status, Pires de Almeida used, above all, statistical data, official reports, official publications and legislation. In the author's conception, the official data objectively clarifies any doubts and gives his arguments the credibility he desires, making him bring them from the beginning of the book.

This author makes clear the relevance he gives to the procedures performed in his writing when he states that:

[...] we know nothing more instructive than a table, summarizing the facts of a period and presenting to the spirit the results obtained, without reading fatigue, in a synoptic form; above all, when the data in this synoptic table are as accurate as possible and that the sincerity of the coordinator has been ensured (^{Almeida, 2000}, p. 66).

In his book, Pires ^{Almeida (2000}) discusses not only public primary and secondary education, but mentions Higher Education, the different professionals trained in the country, the Military School and the Brazilian Navy, the Brazilian Academy of Fine Arts, the literary and scientific associations, among which stand out the Historical, Geographic and Ethnographic Institute, the National Library and other existing libraries, agricultural schools, children's shelters, among other themes, with the intention of emphasizing, once again, the Brazil alongside the most advanced nations. According to ^{Almeida (2000}), the data he mentions

[...] they are more than enough, we believe, to establish, in the eyes of any impartial reader [...] this undeniable truth: Brazil is not behind any South American nation, in matters of public education and, in many ways, it has nothing to envy other peoples (^{Almeida, 2000}, p. 22).

It is in this perspective that Pires de Almeida proposes to write the history of public education in the country.

Just as pointed out by ^{Certeau (1982}), the data from historical research are exposed following a chronology, which aims at coherence and order. In this sense, in the division of his work, after the Proclamation of Independence, Pires de Almeida discusses separately about primary and secondary education in the period before and after the Additional Act of 1834, dividing this section into two moments: from 1834 to 1856 and from 1857 to 1889. Although this author proposes to carry out a chronological sequence of history, at different points in his book, he goes back or forward in the years according to the theme he is addressing.

Pires de Almeida is not reduced to a merely descriptive narrative when presenting the data, as his text is permeated by adjectives, criticisms and value judgments. In this perspective, the thinking of ^{Gondra (2000}) corroborates our analysis, since the author emphasizes that:

[...] the narrative is being woven, bypassing and producing delicate tensions in which, at the same time, the defense of the men of the State and a set of criticisms of the public instruction policy put in place. With this procedure, Dr. Pires de Almeida, less than a warm and calm record of the history of public education in Brazil, promotes the emergence of an effective program to be adopted, if the Empire effectively wished to follow the paths that would lead it to the moralized, sanitized, educated and civilized world (^{Gondra, 2000}, p. 190).

This critical approach can be identified, for example, in the excerpt that we present below, in which Pires de Almeida, when referring to the diversity of laws and measures approved in the Provinces in view of the constitutional reforms of 1834, states:

[...] there was neither plan nor method: (there were models abroad, but there was no thought of going to get them). What there was were interference from groups, the satisfaction of some personalities or oratory disputes without a firm conviction of what the public good is, free from selfishness or with a real interest in the dissemination of instruction. It is not our plan to make here the history of the twenty different legislatures, where the ridiculous and the absurd are, at all times, alongside the best intentions in the world (^{Almeida, 2000}, p. 65).

Notably, his book is recognized for its laudatory and proud language, both to the Empire, above all, to the figure of D. João VI and D. Pedro II, as well as other political figures of the time, ministers and legislators. According to ^{Gondra (2000}), the original version of the work stamped the image of Emperor D. Pedro II, which gave the book an official character and made clear the author's political conceptions, which guided his already highlighted intentions and his writing.

However, as already exposed, despite clearly making an apology for the Monarchist Regime, Pires de Almeida does not exempt his work from aspects of scientificity. In this sense, ^{Vieira (2015}, p. 755), when discussing the political aspect that guides Pires de Almeida's work, highlights the existence of a conflict in the book between “[...] the politician and the scientist, between the monarchist militant and the historian who examines the data collected by documentary research”. It should also be noted that in edition number 236 of the Jornal de Recife of 1894, Pires de Almeida is mentioned as a “[...] notable Brazilian doctor [...]” and “[...] one of the most authorized men of science from Brazil ”(^{Braga, 1894}, p. 4).

The work of Pires de Almeida is permeated by references to European authors and journals and examples, especially French, when the author discusses subjects such as mandatory education, in addition to making reference to other nations to present the political, economic and social context in the interface with aspects related to instruction. Pires de Almeida demonstrates knowledge of the reality of countries like Holland, Russia, Germany, United States, England and Switzerland, among others. In addition, he integrates in his book the actions carried out by these countries, as examples to be followed by Brazil, in order to rise among these more advanced nations.

Throughout his work, Pires de Almeida highlights the importance of primary education. According to him, “[...] primary education should be the broad base on which the entire building of our national education will rest” (Almeida, 2000, p. 166). Primary education gains relevance in the History of Brazilian Education, in the author's view, when “D. Pedro II understands that more had been done for medium or secondary education than for primary education proper ”(Almeida, 2000, p. 82) adds that a new nation should organize the bases of education to ensure the indispensable knowledge for both the poor and the rich. Pires de Almeida's concern with primary education can also be related to his place of speech, with regard to his role as director of the Cooperativa do Ensino¹⁶.

In this sense, reforms were carried out in the capital of the Empire in 1854, which should inspire the other provinces, and a regulation was created that placed the country in the list of the most advanced nations in relation to primary education. Still referring to these reforms, Pires de Almeida mentions the teaching of history, in which he highlights the role that history attributes in the formation of the national subject:

[...] the reformers, or rather, the innovators of 1854, wanted the child, if he could not study universal history, not to remain ignorant of the lessons of history. It was hoped that, 'knowing your country better, you would learn to love it more and prepare yourself to serve it well': a place for history and geography was introduced in primary school (^{Almeida, 2000}, p. 85, emphasis added).

Specifically in relation to Rio Grande do Norte, the first mention of the Province refers to a table, in which it presents the progress of the creation of schools from Colony to the year 1840. In the table, it refers to only one Latin chair, in the city of Natal, with an 'old foundation', without specifying the date, although it reports that it occurred before 1832. Still according to this table, there were only primary schools in nineteen locations, sixteen founded in 1832, one in 1839 and two in 1840. According to the author, there was only one female primary school located in the city of Natal. Regarding these schools, Pires de Almeida also points out that “[...] the absence of founders/instigators made many school foundations useless; others were irregularly provided and all of them, until the time when we created this table, were not very popular ”(Almeida, 2000, p. 77).

Data related to the Province appear in a new table referring to the year 1865, in which Pires de Almeida presents, even in an incomplete form, the total number of primary and secondary education students, public and private, boys and girls. Again, it appears in a table, built from the Report of Counselor Paulino José, relating to data from 1870, the year in which the province would have fifty-six public primary schools, with 1,871 students, and forty-nine private primary schools with 2,807 students. Pires de Almeida also points out that the education legislation in the province had undergone a reform, although it does not present details.

In addition to presenting data related to the progression of schools, Pires de Almeida also points out budget data referring to public education. In this sense, he criticizes investments and the place occupied by public education in provincial expenses and states that:

[...] the provinces, as will be seen, are not doing the same in favor of public education; some are very generous, others, on the contrary, seem to help with weighing what is necessary for this important branch of public service. They are unaware of this fundamental truth of modern societies, namely, that education is the first of a nation's needs, [...] the first element of public order, the greatest of the productive forces and the most fruitful of all financial measures. (^{Almeida, 2000}, p. 155).

In another table referring to the budget for the year 1871, the author presents data from the provinces and the 1/5 percentage of Rio Grande do Norte's revenue destined to public education expenses. Other data about Rio Grande do Norte appear in a table from 1875, in which there are ninety-six public primary schools, forty-three private schools, four public Latin/French courses, eight private Latin/French courses, one lyceum¹⁷ and a Normal School.

In the final part of the work, Pires de Almeida exposes information related to the year 1889 by means of tables showing both primary and secondary and higher education. Data from Rio Grande do Norte, regarding primary education, highlight the existence of eighty-eight public schools, five private schools subsidized by the state and two night schools, with a total of 5,423 students.

It is observed that data in relation to Rio Grande do Norte appear sparingly in the work of Pires de Almeida, since the author chooses to present an overview of public education in Brazil, highlighting, above all, ministerial actions, citing laws and decrees and taking mainly data from the capital of the Empire and the neutral municipality¹⁸ to demonstrate what had been accomplished in this area in Brazil and which should inspire the other provinces.

A different path was taken by Primitivo Moacyr in his work. We emphasize that the book we analyzed in this article The Instruction and the Provinces Subsidies for the History of Education in Brazil (1834 - 1889) - From Amazonas to Alagoas is part of a larger set of the author's research on the History of Education in Brazil, as mentioned above.

In the preliminary chapter, Primitivo Moacyr places the years 1823, 1826, 1827 until the year 1834, when the Additional Act is enacted. The author devotes more space to present the Law of October 15th, 1827 and, specifically, the Lancaster method¹⁹ pointed out in this Law. It is observed that the author presents the discussions prior to the year 1827 about public education, highlighting, above all, the lack of schools, teachers and adequate remuneration. Since the beginning of his work, the methodological options adopted by Primitivo Moacyr are evidenced, especially the chronological division and the use of official documents, such as opinions and minutes of the Constituent Assembly and the Legislative Assembly, Speech of the Throne, reports of Provincial Presidents and legislation.

At the end of the work, the author presents the bibliography used: reports from the Presidents of Provinces; collection of provincial laws; reports from the general directors of public instruction; 'The Province' - Tavares Bastos; Trips to Brazil (1866/1867) - Agassiz and A Brazilian inventor (1934) - Ataliba Nogueira. Primitivo Moacyr uses in the book The Instruction and the Provinces - Subsidies for the History of Education in Brazil (1834 - 1889) - From Amazonas to Alagoas the official documentation and national authors, and the look of a foreign traveler in Brazil. He makes no reference to Pires de Almeida's book, however, in the first volume of Instruction and the empire (1936), he uses three quotes from Public instruction in Brazil (2000), when dealing with the beginning of the 19th century.

Primitivo Moacyr destined forty-one pages of his book to the Province of Rio Grande do Norte, beginning in the year 1835 until the year 1885. The author, when resorting to official sources, limits himself to mentioning laws and decrees and, often, transcribing almost entirely the speeches of the provincial presidents about the situation of primary and secondary education in the province, although it does not always specify the document from which it extracts the information it presents. The data refer to the progression of the creation of schools and enrollments, to the creation and extinction of chairs, to the debate about the need for the establishment of a Normal School in the capital for the preparation of teachers and their realization, the salary of teachers and data budgets.

From the information exposed by this author, it is possible to perceive the debates, difficulties, attempts, advances and setbacks that characterized the organization of different levels of education in the province during the imperial period, after the enactment of the General Law of 1827 and, specifically, after 1834. The sources listed highlight the emphasis that the educational issue acquires, even in the face of problems, as explained in the excerpt of the President of the Province in 1872:

[...] the public education that today is the constant concern of governments and that of the citizens who are most keenly interested in the development of their country is still in its infancy in this province. A considerable part of the revenue is spent annually on this branch of service; and yet 'no profit is reaped corresponding to the sacrifice that is made' (^{Moacyr, 1939}, p. 406-407, emphasis added).

The author's discreet, systematic and often absent stance stands out in the work, because Primitivo Moacyr seeks to highlight the information, not clearly presenting his objectives and exempting himself from presenting a critical position about what he writes. Given this absent posture, it is possible to ask ourselves how to identify the author and his conceptions in the work. We understand from ^{Certeau (1982}) that in the writing of history, the historian is shown both by the speeches and by the silences. There is the unsaid that refers to aspects outside the text itself. In this way, the choices that the author makes, for example, help us understand his writing.

Primitivo Moacyr uses a resource to highlight, in the information he presents, what he considers important and worthy of emphasis in the middle of the transcriptions: the italic resource in the source. An example of this use can be seen when the author, when discussing the year 1839, points out that “[...] the lack of suitability of the masters is pointed out in an official document and to cure the evil, the president reminds' sending boys to the Normal School of Rio de Janeiro '” (^{Moacyr, 1939}, p. 382-383, emphasis added).

Due to the limitation of this text, although it was our intention, it would not be possible to analyze the work of Primitivo Moacyr in its breadth. However, it is not possible to move the volume, to which we dedicate ourselves, from the general context of the author's production. In this way, it helps our analysis to understand the context of production of Primitivo Moacyr's work between the years 1936 to 1942, in which the author dedicates himself to “[...] raising and compiling laws, statutes and school regulations, memories, reports and opinions on public and private instruction in the various branches of education (primary, secondary, professional and higher) in Brazil”(^{Vidal & Faria Filho, 2003}, p. 43).

The functions that he performed during a great part of his life in the Chamber of Deputies certainly made possible his access to the diversity of documents that he used as sources in his writing. In the same way, it enabled Primitivo Moacyr to build relationships with other employees of the house, senators and deputies and, certainly, other educational intellectuals. The relevance attributed by this author to the Presidents of the Province and the Assemblies in the function of organizing public instruction is highlighted. Thus, the emphasis on legislation with projects and reforms and their relationship with the configuration of national education reveal, in ^{Oliveira's conception (2014}), the influences arising from Law in the writing of Primitivo Moacyr.

We agree with ^{Oliveira (2014}) when stating that the objective of Primitivo Moacyr was to organize information relevant to the History of Education. Such intention is explicit from the title, more precisely, from the subtitle, in which the author makes it clear that he presents 'subsidies for the History of Education in Brazil' and, thus, constitutes himself as a source. On the other hand, we emphasize its intention to list governmental actions in the organization of Brazilian education, whether in the Empire or in the Republic, in general, and specifically in the provinces or states. In this sense, the sources used by the author are justified.

^{Carvalho and Machado (2018}) situate the historiographical production of Primitivo Moacyr within the context of the Escola Nova movement in Brazil, for the defense of public education and State responsibility for the formation of the Brazilian people. In this perspective, knowledge about what had been done in favor of education in Brazil would serve as a basis for cultural advancement. In a previous study, ^{Carvalho and Machado (2016}, p. 360) point out that:

[...] at first sight, Primitivo Moacyr's conception of history is very close to a historicism linked to a conception of truth, or to an official history, profiled in the articles that compose the educational legislation and in the results, justifications and purposes components of the reports produced by the executive sphere.

The authors also highlight the visibility that Moacyr's work gave to educational legislation as a useful source for the History of Education. This official history guaranteed by the sources gives the work a credible status. According to ^{Certeau (1982}), the historical discourse is sustained by the credibility made possible by the language cited, by the discourse of the other, in this case, the sources.

This search for giving the works the status of authority and credibility is seen both in Pires de Almeida's writing and in Primitivo Moacyr. In the same way, both evidence the recognition of their productions in the Brazilian educational field and the role of historians of education assumed by the authors and officially legitimized. This character is evidenced, in the case of Primitivo Moacyr's books, by his insertion in the Coleção Brasiliana project, in addition to the other volumes published with the seal of INEP, with the support of education intellectuals such as Afrânio Peixoto, Anísio Teixeira and Fernando de Azevedo.

In this perspective, ^{Certeau's (1982}) thinking helps us in our analysis, by defining that:

[...] finally, what is a 'work of value' in history? One that is recognized as such by peers. The one that can be located in an operating room. The one that represents progress in relation to the current status of 'objects' and historical methods and, which, linked to the environment in which it is elaborated, makes new research possible (^{Certeau, 1982}, p. 71-72, emphasis added).

In this way, we understand the relevance of the works of Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr in the configuration of the field of History of Education in Brazil, taking them not only as repositories of sources, but as inaugural productions of historiographical writing. In the next point, we will discuss in more detail the relationship of these works with the configuration of this field.

Formation of the field of the history of education

The debates about the historical configuration of the field of History of Brazilian Education refer, in most cases, to a retreat in time in order to identify the first systematizations of educational history since the colonial period. This path was followed by some of the studies already listed in this article and by so many others that are dedicated to History and Historiography²⁰. The look at historical studies in education, in this perspective, seeks to identify and divide the trends and aspects that characterized the productions.

Notably, when seeking discussions about the constitution of this field, we come across references to the productions of Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr, placing them, above all, in articulation with the historiographical tradition of the IHGB. This aspect is, for example, evidenced by ^{Vieira (2015}):

[...] among Brazilian historians in that period, the IHGB represented the place, par excellence, for the practice of modern historical research. Strictly speaking, for many of them, and this seems to us the case of Pires de Almeida, this conception of history in which the document imposes itself as fact and truth was naturalized, that is, there was no need to problematize it, modify it or deny it (^{Vieira, 2015}, p. 766).

The historical publications and narratives endorsed by the IHGB denote an understanding, to a certain extent, of a historian's mission that the writing of history would enable Brazil to preserve its memory and insert it into a universal history. Regarding the methodology adopted, it is evident that the research practices disseminated by the IHGB referred mainly to the procedures for collecting and organizing the sources. In this perspective, we emphasize that the two works analyzed here stand out for the intention and effort of their authors in gathering and systematizing a large amount of data related to the History of Education in the country.

Another aspect highlighted in the works concerns the explicit intention of building a national history, in this case, with an emphasis on education. In this sense, ^{Guimarães (1988}) points out that this intentionality has been a hallmark of the IHGB since its creation and that it reverberates in the historiographical production of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Defining and highlighting the contours of the Brazilian nation and its identity are part of the historiography of the period.

In the perspective of ^{Kulhmann (1999}), when talking about publications that he considers the first initiatives to elaborate a History of Brazilian Education, among them that of Pires de Almeida:

[...] in the historiography of Brazilian education, the starting point is almost always the interior of the educational and school environment. Legislation and reports prepared by representatives of the executive, or parliamentary debates and statistical yearbooks are taken as the main sources of research. Configuring itself much more as an auxiliary science of education than as a thematic specialization of history, it is evident, in this type of approach, a concern to go back in time to find the origin of some educational problem of the present, without historicizing education (^{Kulhmann, 1999}, p. 170).

We understand that the works analyzed here were produced in a context of search for scientificism and document preservation, fostered by a positivist view of History, linked to the IHGB. It should be noted that, according to ^{Xavier (2011}), there are four interpretive matrixes of the History of Education. The first one refers to the production of political-institutional bias; the second, of sociological interpretation; the third matrix is ​​political-ideological; and, finally, the fourth, the historical-cultural matrix.

Although the author situates these matrices temporally, highlighting that the works affiliated to the first matrix were produced from the year 1920, it is noted that the works analyzed here can be listed in the first interpretative matrix. This understanding is guided both by the political performance of its authors, and by its institutional connection with the IHGB. In such a way, ^{Xavier (2011}) infers that this:

[...] is the moment in which men of action also play the role of men of ideas, forming in the mix between educators and intellectuals; policymakers and bureaucrats ready to record their ideas and achievements, whether in reports, or in speeches given on solemn occasions or in the journalistic press. At the confluence of their actions and theoretical propositions, they took care to make all the relevant records, either due to the need for disclosure, or because of the model perspective they wanted to impose, assuming the role of historians of their own performance (^{Xavier, 2011}, p. 21-22).

It is noted, therefore, that Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr are part of a group of intellectuals who, in producing their research work, contributed to the constitution of the field of History of Education. His works became a reference for several later works in the area, which reinforces their relevance, in addition to the great effort of documentary collection undertaken by such authors, serving as sources for historians of the most diverse later generations.

Final considerations

This article aimed to carry out an analysis of two works considered inaugural in the field of historiography of Brazilian education, seeking to make explicit their theoretical and methodological characteristics and conceptions. Fifty years separate Pires de Almeida's writings from the works of Primitivo Moacyr. However, in our analysis, several aspects bring these two works together.

We emphasize, initially, that the fact that a doctor and a lawyer consolidate themselves as historians of education reveals a characteristic of the intellectuals of the time. This aspect is explained by ^{Gondra (1996}, p. 172) when he clarifies this as a mark of the period “[...] in when the specialization was found not consolidated; a time when the title of doctor (doctor, engineer and lawyer) authorized its bearer to speak on a huge diversity of issues, as a multipurpose and multidisciplinary intellectual ”.

Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr legitimized themselves as historians of Brazilian education from the social place they occupied, related to the practice of archiving and the writing of history, which corresponded to the theoretical and methodological principles of the period in which they produced. There is a concern for both of them to give their works the status of authority and reliability, as well as the authority of writing that has been conferred on them, either by the choice of a language of knowledge of the intellectual elites, by the dedication or by the support and sponsorship received.

The choice and privilege conferred on official sources and the use of legislation as a source demonstrate the intention to also attribute to his books the condition of indisputable truth, a mark of documentary research that followed the historiographical tradition of the IHGB and corresponding to the political-institutional matrix of the written History of Education aimed at producing sources and records.

Following this matrix, we can see the centrality given to the State in educational issues in the writing of Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr, although the first clearly defends the Empire, and the second writes in the context of the New Republican State. The works are permeated by the attempt to make the History of Brazilian Education known and to praise national advances in this area. This is evident both in the preface to Pires de Almeida's book (and throughout the work) and in the production intention of the Coleção Brasiliana, which published several volumes produced by Primitivo, as pointed out by ^{Oliveira (2014}, p. 70), “[ ...] inherent in the publications and studies resulting from the collection, the collimated objective of which Brazilians discover what Brazil was, and in this way, learn to love it”. Likewise, ^{Pires de Almeida (2000}, p. 307) also asserts that his task was nourished "[...] by the love of his country".

Education is thus emphasized as essential for the country's cultural advancement, or as explained by Pires de Almeida, as a fundamental requirement to place the country alongside the most advanced societies. This perspective also denotes the understanding of history and the role of the historian in the construction of an educational memory of the country.

We observe, on the one hand, that the methodological rigor and the systematization of information are accentuated in the work of Primitivo Moacyr and, likewise, his effort to make himself absent from the work in an objective posture, presenting many data of a numerical character about the potiguar education. On the other hand, Pires de Almeida is not restricted to presenting the information, but takes a stand and issues value judgments, revealing the needs and problems of the educational scenario in Rio Grande do Norte.

Finally, we present a provocation by ^{Gondra (1996}) who, in demonstrating his position that Pires de Almeida's work is located in an area of ​​intersection between positivism and what the author defended, the Empire, affirms that this finding

[...] problematizes both the reading and the writing of history and imposes on us a fascinating task: to exercise with freedom and rigor the condition of readers and producers of history, which can lead us to overcome easy and reducing labels and clichés so frequently standardized (^{Gondra, 1996}, p. 188).

This point of view presents to the researcher of the history and historiography of education the need for a broadening of his view and understanding of the writing of history and corroborates our perception of the potential of the works analyzed here. The productions of Pires de Almeida and Primitivo Moacyr stand out for the investigative possibilities that arise from them, not only as sources, but as objects for research in the History of Education.