↓ Skip to main content

As proposições de Antonio de Saldanha da Gama para a melhoria do tráfico de escravos, “por questões humanitárias e econômicas”, Rio de Janeiro, 1810

Overview of attention for article published in História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
As proposições de Antonio de Saldanha da Gama para a melhoria do tráfico de escravos, “por questões humanitárias e econômicas”, Rio de Janeiro, 1810
Published in
História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, December 2016
DOI 10.1590/s0104-59702016000400007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Carolina de Carvalho Viotti

Abstract

In 1808, Dom João VI issued an edict which regulated the shipping and treatment of slaves on the transatlantic crossing from Africa. Two years later, Antonio de Saldanha da Gama, a member of the Treasury Council, drafted a letter discussing some points of the resolution. This key figure in the Portuguese administration of Brazil argued that his respectful considerations concerning the determinations of His Royal Highness were designed to improve them "for humanitarian and economic reasons." Safeguarded in the archives of Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino, this letter is transcribed, annotated, and contextualized here, supplying an interesting perspective on the prevailing concerns and justifications about the trafficking of African slaves to Brazil.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Arts and Humanities 1 33%
Social Sciences 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2021.
All research outputs
#4,781,410
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#526
of 1,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,419
of 416,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos
#24
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.