Americus is the pseudonym of Miguel Calmon du Pin e Almeida (Marquis of Abrantes) in "Political Letters of Americus", published in London, where he went after the assembly to draw up the Constitution of Brazil was dissolved by Emperor Pedro I in 1823. Feeling that his political education was deficient, he made a journey of observation and study in Europe (Calmon, 1933, p. 67). Also, José Joaquim Ferreira de Moura, a Portuguese liberal, was exiled in England in 1823-1826, these letters were attributed to him, he clarified this in 1826 (pp. VI-VII) writing: "The author of the Cartas d' Americus, published in London last year, is also in some things incorrect, and in general very diminutive." Later, Monarcha (2019, p. 29) caused confusion writing: "for Sacramento Blake, it was Miguel Calmon du Pin e Almeida, then living in Switzerland, the future Marquis of Abrantes, a key politician in the conservative games of the monarchy; for Lourenço Filho (1944), it was Martim Francisco Ribeiro de Andrada, another mistake". But Pedro Calmon had already explained everything in 1933 (p. 74). We then know that Miguel Calmon went against the Holy Alliance's desire to colonise Brazil, arguing for good management of Brazil's public finances. We analysed these letters, where 12th deals with education, dreaming a utopian society in Brazil based on the Enlightenment and economic science, where improving education, the economy would be prosperous, and justice would be fairer by applying the jury. In LETTER I, he talks about the Emperor, Pedro I, and in LETTER II he lists the Holy Alliance's means for recolonising Brazil, noting that they are disproportionated to those of the Brazilian Empire. In III he analyses the various forms of government in the draft Brazilian Constitution and in IV he explains the English Constitution. In V, he analyses Freedom of the Press and the means for guaranteeing and preventing abuses with the Freedom of the Press Act. In VI he deals with Religion and linking it to the Politics of Tolerance. In VII he discusses Criminal Laws Reform, emphasising the importance of the Jury, the qualifications and choice of jurors, and in VIII he talks about the difficulty of establishing it and practical ideas for setting up this "salutary institution" and in IX about the prison discipline reform. In X, he deals with Political Economy, emphasising Adam Smith, John Locke, Malthus, Ricardo, and Mill. In XI, he states that the immediate abolition of the slave trade and its gradual emancipation as necessary for civilisation. In LETTER XII, he discusses National Education, considering that it should make everyone the instrument of self-happiness, but as an aristocrat, he restricts education to the lower classes, and unlike Foucault, he does not analyse the school as a disciplining pedagogics. As Monarcha (2019, p. 103) only refers letters of the first volume, he does not see Rousseau's schooling refutation and the reasons for school savings and opting for Lancaster model, not showing the need to include here the Decoloniality study.

Americus é o pseudónimo de Miguel Calmon du Pin e Almeida (Marquês de Abrantes) em “Cartas políticas de Americus, publicadas em Londres, para onde foi após a assembleia para elaborar a Constituição do Brasil ter sido dissolvida pelo Imperador Pedro I em 1823. Como sentiu deficiente a sua educação política partiu para uma viagem de observação e estudo na Europa (Calmon, 1933, p. 67). Como José Joaquim Ferreira de Moura, um liberal português, vivia então exilado em 1823-1826 em Inglaterra, foram-lhe atribuídas, que esclareceu tudo em 1826 (pp. VI-VII) escrevendo: “O autor das Cartas d’ Americus, publicadas em Londres no ano passado, é também nalgumas cousas incorreto, e no geral mui diminuto”. Mais tarde, Monarcha (2019, p. 29), causou confusão ao escrever “para Sacramento Blake, tratava-se de Miguel Calmon du Pin e Almeida, então vivente na Suíça, o futuro marquês de Abrantes, político-chave nos jogos conservadores da monarquia; para Lourenço Filho (1944), era Martim Francisco Ribeiro de Andrada, outro engano”. Mas, Pedro Calmon já tinha explicado tudo em 1933 (p. 74). Verificámos depois que Miguel Calmon contrariou a vontade da Santa Aliança de colonizar o Brasil, pugnando depois por uma boa gestão das finanças públicas brasileiras. Analisámos estas cartas políticas, em que na 12ª trata da educação pensava uma sociedade utópica no Brasil baseada no iluminismo e na ciência económica, onde com a melhoria da Educação, a economia seria próspera e a justiça mais justa ao aplicar o júri. Na CARTA I, fala do Imperador, Pedro I, inventariando na II os meios da Santa Aliança para recolonizar o Brasil, verificando não serem proporcionais às do Império Brasileiro. Na III analisa as diversas formas de Governo do projeto da Constituição do Brasil e na IV explica a Constituição inglesa. Na V analisa a Liberdade de Imprensa e os meios de a assegurar e prevenir abusos com a Lei desta. Na VI trata da Religião como conexa com a Política da Tolerância. Na VII fala da Reforma das Leis Criminais, sublinhando a importância do Júri, das qualificações dos jurados e a sua escolha e na VIII fala da dificuldade do seu estabelecimento e das ideias práticas para instalar esta “salutar instituição” e na IX da reforma da disciplina das cadeias. Na X, trata da Economia Política, valorizando as ideias de Adam Smith, John Locke, Malthus, Ricardo e Mill. Na XI afirma que a imediata abolição do Comércio dos escravos e a sua Gradual Emancipação são necessárias à Civilização. Na CARTA XII disserta sobre a Educação Nacional considerando que deve fazer de cada individuo o instrumento da sua felicidade, mas como aristocrata restringe a educação das classes populares, e ao contrário de Foucault não há nele uma análise da escola como elemento disciplinador. Como Monarcha (2019, p. 103) só refere o voluma primeiro das Cartas, não viu a contestação de Rousseau e as razões de poupança na escolarização que o levam a optar pelo modelo lancasteriano, não mostrando a necessidade de incluir esta Cartas no estudo da Decolonialidade.

The First Government Junta, led by Mateo de Toro y Zambrano on September 18, 1810, arose from "the usurpation of the Spanish crown and the imprisonment of King Ferdinand VII by Napoleon Bonaparte" (Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional s/a: s/p); however, it was agreed to form a National Congress, which took shape on July 4, 1811. In this context, Juan Egaña, an elected deputy, proposed in Congress that same year that there should be a national institution that had plans and programs as the best system that should be given to Chile's youth (Huidobro, 2022); This fact plus the intervention of other people such as Manuel de Salas, led the Supreme Director José Miguel Carrera to found the National Institute (1813) -an organization that still exists today-, leaving aside the educational institutions that existed during the colony. When Independence was finally achieved in 1818, the Supreme Director Bernardo O'Higgins decreed that schools be opened in the parishes and convents in the name of the new state and subsidized by it to provide education to Creole children and young people; he also tried to apply the Lancastrian system to train teachers, a situation that did not prosper (Caiceo 2010). However, this situation was reversed in the government of Manuel Bulnes (1841-1851), who, thanks to his Minister of Justice, Worship and Public Instruction Manuel Montt, managed to be found three important institutions that revealed the definitive decolonization of the colonial educational system, imposed by the Spanish Crown. They are the University of Chile (1842), whose first Rector was the Venezuelan resident in the country Andrés Bello), the First School of Preceptors (1842), with its first Director being the Argentine Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, exiled in Chile because he was persecuted by Rosas in his homeland and the School of Arts and Crafts (1849), also directed by a foreigner. the Frenchman Julio Jaezar. At that historical moment, Chile showed a lot of political stability, unlike other Latin American nations where there was a lot of caudillismo and coups d'état; Here there was enough room for intellectuals who came to the country in large numbers. However, a similar institution was needed to prepare women as teachers; in this way, the state requested support from the Catholic Church, the sisters of the Sacred Heart arrived in Chile and the First School of Preceptors was founded in 1854 (Caiceo, 2010). Finally, Manuel Montt as President (1851-1861) consolidated Chilean education with the enactment of the Primary Education Law in 1860, which established a public, secular and free education, giving rise to the so-called teaching state (Núñez, 2010).

La Primera Junta de Gobierno, dirigida por Mateo de Toro y Zambrano el 18 de septiembre de 1810, surgió por “la usurpación de la corona española y el apresamiento del rey Fernando VII por Napoleón Bonaparte” (Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional s/a: s/p); sin embargo, se acuerda formar un Congreso Nacional, el cual se concreta el 4 de julio de 1811. En ese contexto Juan Egaña, diputado electo, planteó en el Congreso ese mismo año que debía haber una institución nacional que tuviera planes y programas como el mejor sistema que debe darse a la juventud de Chile (Huidobro, 2022); este hecho más, la intervención de otros personeros como Manuel de Salas, conducen al Director Supremo José Miguel Carrera a fundar el Instituto Nacional (1813) -organismo que aún hoy existe-, dejando de lado las instituciones educacionales que existían durante la colonia. Cuando, finalmente se logra la Independencia en 1818, el Director Supremo Bernardo O’Higgins decreta que en las parroquias y conventos se abran escuelas a nombre del nuevo estado y subvencionados por él para entregar educación a los niños, niñas y jóvenes criollos; además intentó aplicar el sistema Lancasteriano para formar profesores, situación que no prosperó (Caiceo 2010). Sin embargo, esta situación se revirtió en el gobierno de Manuel Bulnes (1841-1851), quien, gracias a su Ministro de Justicia, Culto e Instrucción Pública Manuel Montt, logra fundar tres importantes instituciones que revelan la descolonización definitiva del sistema educativo colonial, impuesto por la Corona Española. Ellas son la Universidad de Chile (1842), cuyo primer Rector fue el venezolano avecindado en el país Andrés Bello, la Primera Escuela de Preceptores (1842), siendo su primer Director el argentino Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, exiliado en Chile porque era perseguido por Rosas en su patria y la Escuela de Artes y Oficios (1849), también dirigida por un extranjero, el francés Julio Jaezar. En ese momento histórico Chile mostraba mucha estabilidad política, a diferencia de otras naciones latinoamericanas en que había mucho caudillismo y golpes de estado; aquí había espacio suficiente para intelectuales que llegaron al país en gran número. Pero, se necesitaba una institución similar para preparar mujeres como maestras; de esta forma, el estado solicitó apoyo a la Iglesia Católica, llegando a Chile las religiosas del Sagrado Corazón y se fundó en 1854 la Primera Escuela de Preceptoras (Caiceo, 2010). Finalmente, Manuel Montt como Presidente (1851-1861) consolida la educación chilena con la dictación de la Ley de Instrucción Primaria en 1860, la cual establece una educación pública, laica y gratuita, surgiendo el denominado ‘estado docente’ (Núñez, 2010).

Since the end of the 19th century in different parts of the world there were experiences of education or re-education for children and youth, which during the 20s and 30s of the 20th Century took on new vigor with the intention of promoting more democratic, self-managed and co-educational forms of coexistence in colonies, boarding schools and psychiatric hospitals. During the Spanish Civil War and the Second World War, psychology, social work, art, and communist and anarchist political ideas converged towards the consolidation of the social and political construction of childhood as an object of protection and therefore of assistance from Nation States and international organizations during the Second World War (Mülberger, 2014; Keren, 2014; Bragster and Pozo, 2015). The objective of my presentation is to approach this construction of childhood and trace the different networks and sources that support it from the field of science, especially Psychology, Pedagogy and Social Work, arts and their intersections with the politic disputes and war. To do so, I will begin by going hand in hand with Regina Lago, a Spaniard who trained in Developmental Psychology and links with international communism, analyzed experiences of youth republics, had an important role in the children´s evacuation during the civil war, and was a pioneer in the analysis of children's drawing and its use for therapeutic purposes. This is an analysis of the formation of networks (Latour, 2008), of a connected history of formulation, appropriation and institutionalization of educational and assistance experiences (Bagchi and Fuchs and Rousmeniere, 2013; Civera, 2011), which, based on the case of a particular person and their experiences in practice, seeks to break the disciplinary barriers that have prevented us from looking at the confluence between Arts, sciences and politics from its performative nature. More than conclusions, my presentation aims to raise new questions about the relationship between education, protection and assistance of children in the context of the Second World War and the massification of education. The analysis was carried out from several publications by Regina Lago (especially 1929, 1931, 1933 and 1940) and documentation that accounts for her professional and political career, as well as her networks, especially during the evacuation of girls and boys outside of Spain. in dialogue with the historiography on the subject. With this objective I have consulted different collections, especially the General Administration Archive, the Archive of the Spanish Communist Party (Complutense University of Madrid), the Archive of the Pablo Iglesias Foundation, the Archive of the Institute of Social Research of Amsterdam, the Historical Archive of the National Autonomous University of Mexico and the National Library of Spain.

Edward Said, in “Orientalism”, argued against ideology and metanarrative of Orientalism, which gave impetus to postcolonial studies. Orientalism defines “East” as a foil to the superiority of “West”, proposing that the East consists of undeveloped and underdeveloped cultures, despotic or degenerate, and expresses what Europe is not. However, at the dawn of European civilization there was a time when everything was not so Eurocentric. Following the core-periphery model, Greece in archaic and classical times was a minor partner of the more advanced economies of the Near East. The dominance of the Achaemenid Empire in the Mediterranean was confirmed by numerous Greek embassies to the court of the Persian king in the fifth and fourth centuries BC. They aimed at attracting material resources and the favor of the king to the Greek poleis, who sought a certain status or hegemony in Greece. The achievement of these goals was facilitated by ambassadors, bearers of particular paideia, who wanted to win the East for their own polis. Our paper is devoted to the study of an embassy (367 BC), on which Theban ambassador Pelopidas managed to enlist support of the Persian king for the Theban policy in the mainland Greece. His educational background obtained in Thebes appeared to be quite helpful as well as his negotiating strategy, considering cultural, historical and educational diversity between East and West. Mytho-historical past distinguished Pelopidas favorably from other ambassadors, and his noble status imposed on him responsibility for achieving high goals, facilitated by the local Theban paideia for aristocrats. Pausanias emphasizes that the Thebans had special system of “local teachings” (ἐπιχώρια διδάγματα) (Paus. 9.13.1). Given the success of Pelopidas in the negotiation in Susa under the Persian king Artaxerxes, this training system seemed to include oratory and persuading skills. In addition, the Theban paideia must have included both mythological history associated with Thebes and actual historical realities, since Pelopidas, according to Xenophon, lists specific events in which the Thebans sided with the Persians or did not participate in actions against them (Xen. Hell. 7.1.34-6). Plutarch conveys stylistic peculiarities of Pelopidas’ speech, saying that his words were more reliable than the Attic ones, but simpler than the Lacedaemonian ones (Plut. Pel. 30.3). Sources also note Pelopidas’ talent for instructing not only individual people (for example, he “taught” (ἐδίδαξε) the wife of the tyrant Alexander of Thera not to be afraid of tyranny, Plut. Pel. 35.3), but also all the Thebans, who called him “the teacher of the greatest and most beautiful blessings” (διδάσκαλον τῶν μεγίστων καὶ καλλίστων ἀγαθῶν) (Plut. Pel. 33.1). Pelopidas used those aspects of Theban paideia that culturally and historically connected Thebes with the East, including the study of the history of the Persian wars and events where the interests of the Thebans coincided with the interests of the Persians. The approach to decolonizing the past allows us to show an educational strategy of Thebes that takes into account cultural differences, but leads to mutual understanding between actors on the geopolitical chessboard of the Eastern Mediterranean.