THE REFORM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA: AN ANALYSIS OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE FINANCIAL SOURCES (1773-‍1777)

INTRODUCTION[Up]

The eighteenth century was a period of significant transformation for European universities^[1]. However, despite the changes faced, these institutions maintained their central roles, specifically developing knowledge, drawing up social, moral, and religious codes of conduct, and training students to take over high-ranking positions and professions linked to the State and Church. With an increasingly complex bureaucratic network required by an expanding State and a greater need to control national finances and public balance, the various reformers came to see educational institutions as sources of the skilled labour they required to meet their changing needs. In Portugal^[2], which followed many trends seen in the third wave of university reforms^[3], the reform sought to make profound changes to respond to the country’s underdeveloped economy^[4]. At this time, a sizeable investment was made into the University of Coimbra, seeking to optimise the institution’s studies and curricula, management system, administrative capacity, and finances.

The subject of finance is not popular among historians who study universities, although significant contributions have been made to the subject area in the last thirty years. These have focused on analysing universities’ assets, the constitution of their income, and the funds allocated to various expenses. As a general rule, university incomes were sourced from ecclesiastic rents, with the most significant slice of their revenue then being spent on salaries paid to professors and other officials, as well as works undertaken on university buildings. The chronic lack of financial resources in European universities and the fact that universities were dependent on central and local authorities constituted two major obstacles to managing the estates in question. In times of crisis, the solution found to growing negative balances was to cut down operational expenditure, and little effort was made to find new sources of income. No fundamental changes were made to the basic financial structure of universities between 1500 and 1800^[5].

Studies on universities in Portugal have addressed teaching and knowledge production above all else. The subjects of estate management and finance have proven out of favour among historians. The early modern University registered different types of incomes, the most notable of which was rents, the primary source of revenue^[6]. However, the University of Coimbra also reported other types of income, such as interest and tuition fees, as well as lateral accounting, which was carried out by the Arca dos Médicos e Boticários (Doctors’ and Apothecaries’ Vault). In the seventeenth century, wages corresponded to about 68 % of expenses, whereas they made up about 60 % in the eighteenth century. Until the nineteenth century, the revenue model stayed constant, with rents making up about 80 % of the institution’s revenue. Costs incurred from building contracts varied according to the availability of money and necessity of works. In the late seventeenth century, the University saw several difficulties and recurrent negative balances. In the eighteenth century, circumstances changed. On the one hand, there was an increase in the price of cereals, which allowed the value of rents (and consequently revenues) to rise. On the other hand, the election of the rector Carneiro de Figueiroa, who was an administrator who achieved better control of the accounts and positive balances until 1750. The University’s economic relief was evident in the amount of money lent at interest: on 1 January 1773, the institution had lent 143 000 000 réis^[7]. Improved financial stability resulted in a substantial 33.3% increase in salaries in 1754, a positive outcome largely attributable to a surge in student enrollment and, as a direct consequence, higher tuition fees.

There are various types of sources with information about accounting, finances, and assets of universities. Many studies have chosen to use both qualitative and quantitative sources, but the latter are usually not analysed from a serial perspective^[8]. San Pedro-Bezares’ studies are one of the few examples of the serial use of qualitative sources, in particular the revenue and expenditure books, but also sources related to the collection of rents and salary payments^[9].

As far as the finances of the University of Coimbra in the eighteenth century are concerned, there are two main sources for analysis: the finances as recorded by Dom Francisco de Lemos (rector between 1770-‍1779 and 1799-‍1821) in his bookkeeping —Relação Geral do Estado da Universidade which provides a summary of the early years of the University reform, namely between 1773 and 1776— and the accounts contained within the University’s revenue and expenditure. The books of revenue and expenditure only exist from 1563 onwards. This explains why studies on the finances of the University of Coimbra in the Middle Ages are scarce and based on qualitative sources^[10]. On the other hand, the Relação of Dom Franciso de Lemos relates to a specific period in the history of the University, which also justifies its limited use.

Some studies used the sources analysed in this article. As a general rule, qualitative sources were preferred to quantitative ones. António Madahil, published the book Livro da Fazenda e Rendas da Universidade de Coimbra em 1570 and analysed the finances of the University at the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century. In his exam the author used several sources, including the revenue and expenditure books. However, these were not serially examined, only for some periods that the author considered relevant^[11].

Ana Bandeira, in her study on the assets of the University of Coimbra, used the Relação of Dom Francisco to analyse the maintenance of the churches of the University’s patronage. This source was cross-referenced with other sources of a qualitative nature, such as memoirs, the University statutes, among other sources^[12].

Fernando Taveira da Fonseca stands out as the author who extensively relied on the revenue and expenditure books in his research. These were used to examine the totals of income, expenditure, and balances between 1700 and 1771. The analysis of the revenue and expenditure components was carried out from the same sources, but not serially. A few years were chosen to serve as samples for the chronology (1721-‍22 to 1727-‍28 and 1761 to 1764)^[13].

More recently, Liliana Ferreira’s study on the accounting of the University of Coimbra used the same sources found at the previous works (among others) to conduct an analysis from a different perspective. The author aimed to examine the University’s accounting practices and procedures between 1750 and 1800, placing some emphasis on the changes introduced by the by the Pombaline reform. The revenue and expenditure books were analysed from this perspective, examining the evolution of their bookkeeping. The work of Dom Francisco de Lemos was not chosen, due to its extra-organisational nature^[14].

The use of sources is intrinsically linked to the type of research that is intended to be carried out. For this reason, the discussion between the sources presented in this article also concerns the choice between the use of a qualitative or quantitative methodology but does not exclude a mixed approach.

In Shareia's work (2016: 3839), a summary of key concepts in the literature regarding the primary distinctions between qualitative and quantitative research methodologies was presented. Regarding qualitative methodology: it is closer to the relationship between researcher and subject; more subjective and related to reality has an image of social and where the relationship between theory, concepts and research is emergent^[15]. This type of research generates findings that are not obtained through statistical procedures.^[16].

As far as quantitative methodology is concerned, it is more distant in regard to the relationship between the researcher and the object of study; it has a more objective and singular perception of reality; the image of social reality is static and external to the actor; and the relationship between theory, concepts and research is based on the confirmation of hypotheses. It is also important to emphasise that, broadly speaking, theory is the starting point for quantitative research, whereas qualitative methodology aims to develop or refine theories^[17]. The quantitative approach can be based, for example, on the frequency of occurrence of a phenomenon^[18].

The type of sources used in the different methodologies is also different. Quantitative research is structured from sample collections and data collection instruments that enable research. Whereas qualitative research designs the object as the study evolves – it is particularly useful when analysing fields where subjectivity is greater. In turn, quantitative research requires large amounts of data, much of it serial^[19].

Some authors claimed that the combination of qualitative combined with some quantitative data can contribute to a better understanding of different aspects of the same phenomenon^[20]. Although this article is more concerned with the comparison between the two sources, this does not imply that the two cannot be used simultaneously.

Financial studies, in general, use either a qualitative or quantitative research design. There appears to be a lack of research undertaking a mixed-method approach. As a consequence of the multifaceted nature of the research in economy, the use of mixed methods of research seems appropriate because they combine elements, such as the use of the qualitative and quantitative approaches, data collection, analysis, and inference techniques^[21]. Most studies in accounting use quantitative methodologies and this type of research is customarily connected with sampling problems as well as with questions pertaining to modelling qualitative variables^[22].

In short, both qualitative and quantitative historical sources can be used in the study of university finances. This article shall analyse the University of Coimbra’s finances between 1773 and 1776 by comparing two types of sources: the University finances as recorded by Dom Francisco de Lemos in his bookkeeping —Relação Geral do Estado da Universidade— and the accounts contained within the University’s income and expenditure books for the period between 1773 and 1776^[23]. This investigation shall seek to ascertain the similarities and differences between these two historical sources, as one has qualitative characteristics and the other quantitative. It was applied the methodology for categorising revenue and expenditure used by Barbosa (2020 and 2021) to the case of the University. The central question to be answered is: what are the main differences in the use of two sources of different typologies? Other questions arise that deserve to be answered: what kind of information do they offer? Under what conditions were the sources produced? How can these sources be analysed?

THE POMBALINE REFORM IN THE CONTEXT OF UNIVERSITY REFORMS IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY[Up]

The 1772 Reform of the University of Coimbra was part of the third wave of university reforms in the second half of the eighteenth century^[24]. These reforms had motivations and results that were widely shared by various monarchs, ministers, and even university representatives throughout Europe. Its starting point was the expulsion of the Jesuits, which allowed the central authorities to remove all obstacles to a more effective control of these institutions. However, in the Portuguese case, this expulsion caused a «void» that was difficult to fill^[25], and that may even have limited the scope of this reform.

The first motivation for these reforms was the need to respond to an increasingly complex bureaucracy^[26]. The introduction of a more intense specialization component was intended to create a «loyal class of bureaucratic servants». And perhaps most clearly in Southern Europe, these reforms were justified by the needs of the state as a source of education^[27].

In the case of the University of Coimbra, this was an important aspect. For students in law schools, it was the rector himself, Francisco de Lemos, who, after the Reform, stated that these faculties trained students in sufficient numbers to meet the needs that the Portuguese Crown had^[28]. Another interesting example was the creation of the new philosophy faculty and its new courses^[29]. The introduction of subjects such as natural history, zoology or agriculture, had the objective of training specialists in the efficient exploitation of the natural resources of the Portuguese Empire. This reform also shows an evident concern with public health on the part of the state, evident in the reform of the medicine course^[30]. The aim was to train physicians who could meet the real needs of the population. Thus, the reform of the University of Coimbra sought to respond to the needs and objectives outlined by the Minister and the Monarch, in what was a clear attempt at national modernization. Equally significant is the establishment of the Faculty of Mathematics in 1772, which exemplifies this idea. The national authorities understood that a solid knowledge in mathematics, «help, promote, and advantageously perfect a great number of Arts useful, and necessary to the State.»^[31].

Given the economically nature of these university reforms, as evident in the case of the University of Coimbra, one can concur with Anderson's assertion that these reforms went further in less economically developed contexts. The centralized, utilitarian, and state-run University —a hallmark of the Enlightenment and maintained until the nineteenth century— was also motivated by stimulating industry, agriculture, and public health. In his analysis of the thought of Rector Francisco de Lemos, Costa concludes that:

The introduction of the subject of natural history in 1772 represents the culmination of this new kind of understanding, «the challenges opened by the exploration of the colonies (...) the need for a strong administration and a properly qualified technical body (...) have (...) contributed to the political decision to introduce profound reforms in education»^[33]. As we can see, the 1772 reform of the Portuguese University shared and even accentuated this economistic vision.

The modernization of the University, in its curricular and even scientific aspects, was evident. In this sense, this reform is inseparable from the effort of the central power to reform its fiscal and military system, introducing new disciplines. The control of curricula, teacher appointments and the introduction of more practical subjects were all characteristics of this wave of reforms, to which Coimbra was no exception. As was the case at the University of Turin, the reform in Coimbra sought to follow ideas put forwards by the central authorities. One of the main changes registered was the University being regarded as part of the broader education system, which included other levels of education^[34]. This reform was also characterised by a significant increase in courses taught, with new faculties created, including philosophy and mathematics, and a thorough overhaul of the existing syllabus. These curricular changes were also reinforced with the construction of several scientific facilities, such as a botanical garden, fundamental for integrating more practical teaching based on observation and experimentation.

Another significant outcome of this reform was the shift in the mindset of academics and scientists,also noticeable in Coimbra, where the importance of professors such as Domingos Vandelli, for example, stands out^[35]. Francisco de Lemos made a point of recalling that for the faculties of philosophy and mathematics, the professors —as the Statutes of 1772 already mentioned— should be masters and inventors^[36].

The reform of the Portuguese University also demonstrates a new functionality of the rising states, the need to ensure some kind of education to their citizens. In the case of the University of Coimbra, it has followed the French model of the Age of Enlightenment. This reform sought to overcome circumstances considered unprogressive by the Portuguese authorities^[37]. As Anderson stated^[38], the reform carried out by the Marquis of Pombal and his associates «showed how genuine intellectual reform could be combined with a complete lack of political freedom, and with the enforcement of the state’s version of Catholic orthodoxy», to become «one of the most far-reaching and ruthlessly authoritarian reforms». At the same time, a progressive decline in the importance of theology and theologians to the detriment of new knowledge, such as philosophy or mathematics, was evident in several European universities, including Coimbra; and the introduction of new ideas and new books and authors marked the evolution seen in the institution until the early nineteenth century.

The Pombaline Reform shared many characteristics with this wave of reforms, although one notable difference was an attempt to break with the past. As Pimentel understood it, «The drastic intervention was intended to build, over the old corporate mesh of immemorial immunities and privileges, a modern and enlightened educational institution, immediately but above all administratively and pedagogically submissive to a superiorly determined State strategy. A Royal University, in the aptly named and opportunely formulated term. The work thus outlined had, therefore, also an appropriate name: New Foundation.»^[39].

The Reform was also felt in the administration of the University. The previous administrative body, the Mesa da Fazenda was abolished, and the Junta da Fazenda was created in its place. The composition of the Junta da Fazenda was different from its predecessor – for instance, was presided over by the rector^[40]. The Mesa was composed of the most qualified deputies, that is, four professors from the four faculties. The Pombaline reform removed the professors from the management of economic life. The structure of the Junta had a president (the Rector of the University), three deputies, a procurator of the treasury, a fiscal officer, a general treasurer, and a clerk. The deputies were professors of the Colleges of S. Pedro and S. Paulo and of the Military Orders, being proposed to the Rector by the respective Colleges, to serve for three years^[41].

As we will see, the sources of revenue for the University were varied. The most important ones came from its estate. The estate of the University of Coimbra had a manorial structure, based on agricultural rents (such as tithes and emphyteutic rights). The rents had burdens such as the payment of the priests’ salaries, vestments, and church maintenance work. In the localities where the University collected the tithes, it had the right to present the local parish priests. For this reason, the University’s estate was dependent on the ecclesiastical structure of the country for the collection of the tithe. They were also important elements in the communication between the University and the people, as well as in providing the University with important information about incomes^[42].

Due to the vastness of the University’s assets, it used a method of indirect rent collection. That is, it hired private individuals (contractors/rent farmers) to collect the revenues on its behalf. These were selected through an auction process. They would undertake to pay the University an annual fixed amount, profiting from whatever they collected above that amount. Rents were the main source of revenue for the University but were almost entirely collected by individuals external to the institution^[43].

THE RECTORSHIP OF FRANCISCO DE LEMOS[Up]

This profound reform of the University of Coimbra was only made possible with the help of several collaborators, among them Francisco de Lemos, rector between 1770 and 1779 and then again between 1799 and 1820.

Born in Rio de Janeiro in 1735, he graduated in canon law at the University of Coimbra —with a doctorate in 1754— at the age of 19. It was after completing his studies at the University that he embarked on his social and political ascent^[44]. After several difficulties in pursuing a teaching career at the institution, Francisco de Lemos was eventually appointed to another position, Rector of the College of the Military Orders at the University. Subsequently, there ensued almost a decade during which he held various positions linked to ecclesiastical, public administration, and the Inquisition.. However, he returned to the University of Coimbra in 1770, after being appointed by the Marquis of Pombal. His proximity to the Minister of the Kingdom, the Marquis of Pombal, allowed him to become somewhat of an executor of the minister’s ideas. The reform of education in Portugal was a broad project, and in this sense the Marquis of Pombal needed to surround himself with people he could trust.

The rector was, as one would expect in a Catholic country, «an illuminist. But his enlightenment is not that of the French ‘lights’ (...). It is the Catholic enlightenment (...) the faculty of thinking is free, but this freedom has two limits: reason and religion, not the rational religion, that of the deists, but the supernatural and revealed religion.»^[45] And the choice for Francisco de Lemos was not only justified by his leadership ability and his knowledge of the University itself, but also by the sharing of ideas with the Marquis of Pombal regarding the importance of the University and its reform:

In the case of the University of Coimbra and its reform, the rector supervised all the new introductions. He closely followed the restructuring of the medical school and the construction of new faculties of philosophy and mathematics. Simultaneously, he accompanied the construction of several scientific facilities such as the Astronomical Observatory (for math), the Natural History Office, the Botanical Garden, the Chemical Laboratory, the Experimental Physics Office (for philosophy), the Teaching Hospital, the Pharmaceutical Dispensary, and the Anatomical Theater, for medicine. But this period was in fact intense in changes, and the rector’s work also extended to the supervision of the interventions in the school buildings, in the College of Arts, and in the creation of the university press. As Francisco de Lemos himself indicates, he carefully and closely followed the new statutes delivered to the University in 1772^[47]. Thus, we can also conclude that this proximity and supervision of the various constructions, allowed the rector to have a better idea of the expenditures.

In addition to the construction and remodelling of teaching spaces, another considerable expense was the purchase of textbooks. This need was constant, from 1772 until the 19th century, but the initial years were mainly hectic. In order to be able to control the heavy expense of building the university press and purchasing new books, the rector sought to secure a monopoly on printing and sales of all books used at the university – forbidding the purchase of books outside the institution^[48].

The new statutes of 1772 were meagre in many respects and were unable to prevent several situations. The administrative aspects were one of these cases. The hiring of new teachers was in charge of Francisco de Lemos. The 13 dispensations of professors —later confirmed by decree— were the responsibility of the rector^[49]. However, some of these faculty members kept their salaries so as not to present major resistance. At the same time, it was Francisco de Lemos who handled the new hires. In this sense, with the vacancies resulting from retirements and the needs for more teachers due to the creation of new subjects, there was a total of 33 professors and 20 substitute professors. Especially if we take into account that the number of teachers has increased compared to the previous period. Moreover, from 1772 on, in addition to the professors, we also see other positions connected to the teaching profession. In addition to substitute, there was a interim substitute, the extraordinary substitute and also the demonstrator – for practical classes conducted in the laboratory. Obviously, these changes in the teaching staff brought a greater burden.

But the hiring didn’t stop there. Expenses have also increased with the arrival of new administrative staff. As the Marquis of Pombal indicates to the Rector himself, «it is served that thus be put into Execution: Naming now Your Excellency the capable subjects: And putting the competent, to be filled»^[50].

In conclusion, the rector was a central player in this period of the University of Coimbra’s history, closely followed the construction of various scientific facilities, the appointments and dismissals of professors, the choice of new books, and even the drafting of new statutes, his actions and testimony therefore able to provide relevant information about our subject^[51].

SOURCES AND METHOD OF ANALYSIS[Up]

As mentioned previously, this article analyses two sources, one quantitative and the other qualitative. The quantitative source corresponds to the revenue and expenditure books of the Tesouraria Geral da Junta da Fazenda (Coimbra University Archive [Arquivo da Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra, from now on AUC])^[52]. With the Pombaline Reform, a new organisation responsible for the administration of the University was created: the Junta da Fazenda. With its creation, there was a directive to adopt the model established for the Royal Treasury, which implied the creation of an accounting model based on double-entry bookkeeping. These would serve to record the accounts for greater control and also to hold those responsible for the University’s finances accountable^[53].

These books were put together by the Contador^[54], under the treasurer’s supervision^[55]. These professionals would have been charged with recording and organising the University’s income and expenses, that is, all cash inflows and outflows, as well as overseeing University officials’ management of the institution’s assets and ensuring the safekeeping of the vault. The system applied to these books was double-entry bookkeeping^[56], introduced following an imposition by the Marquis of Pombal himself, leading to the creation of a management department within the University, the Junta da Fazenda. This new institution was to be organised similarly to the royal exchequer^[57].

The introduction of double-entry bookkeeping led to the adoption of other types of auxiliary books, such as the livro borrador (draft book), livro diário (diary book), and livro mestre (master book). These were used to complement the income and expense books. However, unlike these, they do not form complete series as they were not always used^[58]. Therefore, the income and expense books have been favoured as a source for comparison to the accounts presented by Francisco de Lemos.

In this way, the Reform of 1772 brought about a new administrative structure, which was to use a double-entry accounting system, which allowed greater control of the University’s accounts by the state. On the other hand, it allowed for greater internal organisation, ending some of the disorders that existed in the accounts. Still, the impact of these changes should not be exaggerated, as it was common for non-profit institutions not to fully master the double-entry system^[59]. Many practices and procedures have remained the same despite the changes, such as revenue collection mechanisms^[60].

The revenue records provide helpful information, such as the type of income, payer’s name, provenance of income, amount, and date of payment. The expenditure model is not much different. It indicates the payee’s name, the local of the expense, the amount and the date of payment. Sometimes additional data was provided, such as the name of any partners and information on bankruptcies. Such information has been entered into a database and catalogued, allowing for a more detailed analysis to be carried out.

The qualitative source corresponds to a record, produced in 1777 by Francisco de Lemos, entitled Relação Geral do Estado da Universidade (henceforth Relação)^[61]. The context in which this work was written is somewhat complex. Following the death of King José I, his minister, the Marquis of Pombal, was dismissed and many of his associates persecuted. Fearing the retrogression of measures introduced by the reform at the University, Francisco de Lemos wrote the Relação as a way to protect the advances made as part of the reform. He was replaced two years later (1779), but his report played an important role in defending the ideas brought about by the reform. Given this context, it must be noted that this work may have exaggerated or omitted certain, less successful, events between 1772 and 1777^[62].

The accounting data provided by Francisco de Lemos was analysed and categorised in a database, allowing for a comparison to be made between the two existing sources. As Francisco de Lemos’s book offers an estimate for the period between 1773 and 1776, income and expenses registered in the revenue and expenditure books for the same period were averaged, rather than a specific year chosen for analysis, to make the comparison more accurate.

As stated, we implement Barbosa’s methodology^[63] to this study, regarding the definition of the categories of analysis, particularly for revenue and expenditure. This methodology consists of identifying general categories of income and expense that can be applied to different institutions in the Early Modern period. A second, more specific level of categorisation aims to include the subgroups that constitute the larger categories. The analysis of this lower level is what enables a clearer glimpse of the object of study.

The creation of a categorisation model considered three main factors: the understanding and inclusion of concepts used at the time and recorded in the sources; the representativeness of the records; the inclusion and standardisation of concepts used in the literature. Firstly, it is considered necessary to understand and include the concepts used at the time and recorded in the sources. The designations used by scribes and treasurers were neither random nor arbitrary, corresponding to a typology that derived from the normative support that attributed legitimacy to the transaction (legislation issued by central or local authorities that took the form of a contract, laws, postures, orders). These documents contain a set of information and clauses that delimit the action (who did it, when and how it was done, what amount) and help define it, differentiating it from others.

A second aspect to consider is the «representativeness» factor. Some items, particularly expenses, were rare or unique cases. In other cases, their monetary value is not very significant. Representativeness is relevant, in the sense that even if a set of items fulfils the previous requirement, the creation of too many categories may cause excessive fragmentation, making the historian’s task more difficult. The solution to this problem is categorisation on two (or more) levels, which consists in transforming these groups into subcategories, as subdivisions of the main categories.

The third factor is the inclusion and standardisation of the concepts used in the literature. Despite the differences found in the typologies used in the various studies of finances, it is possible to find some points of contact. This aspect derives from the fact that historians base their studies on primary sources that, regardless of the different geographies and typologies, present a certain regularity in terms of concepts^[64].

With this methodology we intend to facilitate the comparison of the two sources under analysis, in order to make their similarities and differences more evident. The information for both sources was inserted into a database and the same categorisation methodology was applied. Then, the sums of income and expenditure, as well as for the different categories that make them up, were calculated.

DATA COMPARISON[Up]

To understand the comparison drawn between the two sources under analysis, the composition of the income and expense structure that allowed the University to operate must be understood. The University of Coimbra’s estate was essentially based on crown’s property, donated by successive Portuguese monarchs over time^[65]. Most European universities also followed this model. These assets included, farms, estates, houses and shops, making up the core of the institution’s income^[66]. In 1772, these assets made up more than 80 % of the University’s revenue^[67]. A generous 1774 donation, known as the new estate (Novo Património), did not significantly change the constitution of the University’s estate. In essence, it was a strengthening of assets at the expense of the properties expropriated from the Jesuits, as well as the incorporation into the University of the hospitals existing in the city of Coimbra, along with their possessions^[68].

As will be seen, where expenditure is concerned, no significant differences were found between this University and others within the European panorama. Most of the revenue was used to pay the salaries and pensions of teachers and officials, carry out construction work, purchase books and other materials, and cover administrative expenses^[69].

CONCLUSION[Up]

This work aimed to compare two sources of different typologies, one qualitative and the other quantitative in nature. The Relação, written by the rector Dom Francisco de Lemos, sought to defend the work done by himself and the Marquis of Pombal during the university reform. The books of revenue and expenditure were instruments of control, drawn up to organise the institution’s finances, holding the officials responsible, and keeping information for posterity.

At first sight, the two sources present a similar revenue and expenditure structure. This can be explained by the fact that the Rector was the president of the body that administered the University’s finances, the Junta da Fazenda, and, for that reason, to have kept the existing designations and structure (as it also had no reason to present something totally new). However, a closer look also allows us to find some important divergences in the sources.

The donation of 1774 entailed a strengthening of the institution's existing assets rather than diversifying them. The predominant source of regular income remained rents, with land tenures and tithes being particularly prominent in this category. In both primary sources, tuition fees and contributions made up a relatively smaller portion of the income.

It is essential to highlight the difference between balances in both accounts. The absence of a reference to loans granted to the University suggests that the rector sought to omit the fact in an attempt not to demonstrate the institution’s inability to fund its reform on the one hand, and to hide the level of indebtedness granted by order of the Marquis of Pombal on the other.

In terms of expenditure, the most significant differences were in salaries, which were registered as being higher in the Relação as a result of Francisco de Lemos including extra items in his report. The most significant difference is his failure to include works in the remaining expenses. This influenced the final balance, therefore allowing it to be registered as positive. The reasons that can justify this non-inclusion have been stated – an attempt to hide the debt faced due to the works. The final balances are differentiated by loans and salaries variance and the works’ non-inclusion in the total expenditure. It is also in the details that the revenue and expenditure books stand out. They make it possible to know the delays in the realisation of income and expenditure because they indicate the dates on which such payments were made. The Relação, on the other hand, is a description of a financial structure, but not of its concrete operation.

The nature of the sources and the circumstances under which they were created also play a significant role in shaping the availability of certain information and the absence of other. The books of revenue and expenditure served to hold the bodies and officers in charge of the administration of the University accountable, as well as allowing for better internal organisation. The Relação served to protect the image and work of the rector Francisco de Lemos and the Marquis of Pombal. This helps to explain some of the divergences between the sources.

In a general assessment, it can be affirmed that the revenue and expenditure books are the most reliable sources for conducting a financial analysis of the institution. This is primarily because the data recorded in these accounting books closely aligns with actual financial transactions. This level of accuracy can be attributed to the rigorous oversight maintained by officials over financial flows, which stands in contrast to the comparatively less stringent control exercised by Francisco de Lemos when composing his work. That said, Relação goes into further detail about the origin of the rents. As Moskovicz (2009) stated, for this case under analysis the use of sources of different typologies is the most advantageous solution since it allows to cross-reference the data and obtain a clearer view of the object of study.

We believe that this article has contributed to the understanding of the nature of universities’ financial and accounting sources and their methodological value.