Nope, "the old alliance" was done in the 1300s, Portugal was a super-power around the 1500s, England only had the "upper hand" probably around 1700s with their maritime expansions after overpassing one of their main enemies. I'd say it's tied, around 300 years of upper-hand to each party, wouldn't you say?
Not really at all, I'd say. The treaty looks from my point of view as an attempt by Portugal to co-opt a dangerous rival to its tenuous colonial holdings or, harking back to older times, looking to gain the backing of a potent regional power against its perennial antagonists. I really look in vain for a Portuguese Wellington, or a English John I Master of the Order of Aviz. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own interpretation especially with a treaty that is, in all reality, a dozen treaties with numerous manifestations and eras of irrelevant dormancy. There is probably no room for blanket statements. Perhaps we can just settle that both sides thought they had more to gain from being friends than being enemies, regardless of their relative dispositions of power?
Today is April 30th, today's maps is an interactive one of the North African
campaign of WWII.
