Capoeira: Origins, Development and Global Diffusion 1/3

(First posted in 31/07/10) Following last post’s line of thought, here it goes another piece of my PhD confirmation paper. It’s basically my take on the history of Capoeira. It’s not a novelty around here, rather it is simply my interpretation based on Brazilian scholars’ and Mestres’ publications and/or discussions about the origins and development of the art. Although they might adopt different terminologies, all of them seem to agree on two important issues regarding the art’s link to social development endevours: the intercultural origin of Capoeira and its purpose as a movement of resistance. Here it follows my interpretation of their work.

Note (06/06/2011): Currently I’m working to publish 4CapoeiraThoughts as a book. For this reason I’m re-arranging categories and posts. I’m keeping all post as they were, but will be grouping the sequential ones in one post only to help build up a manuscript. This paper was first written with an introduction posted over 4CT as ‘Why bother studying Capoeira and social inclusion’, so here I’m grouping all the 4 parts – the rationale of my study in the introduction and a historical account in the following ones.

______________________________________________________________________

Why Capoeira and Social Inclusion? An Introduction

Capoeira is a syncretic cultural system(1) forged by the interplay of diverse ethnicities in Brazil. Throughout centuries the practice served as weapon of resistance to enslaved Africans, Amerindians, mestizos, and exiled Europeans. Given its intercultural origins Capoeira evolved as an interdisciplinary manifestation simultaneously encompassing martial-art, dance, ritual, musical performance and theatre; causing non-initiated people some difficulty in understanding it. Such complexities indicates that one must dedicate a considerable amount of time in practice (or studying it) to grasp its peculiarities, and most importantly its cultural and philosophical importance to practitioners around the world.

What draws practitioners to the art and later drives their cultural engagement can differ regardless of their nationality, however, somehow Capoeira seems to cater for a range of motivations and orientations. The many different takes on the art by diverse groups and the large number of multi-ethnic practitioners engaged in a variety of these training centres is striking.

Moreover, diverse discourses and attitudes are pervasive in an environment in which philosophical empathies and disagreements are made even more evident through bodily interactions. At the core of Capoeira is the interaction/game between two players in which elements of competition and cooperation are always present respectively through the martial-art and the dance feature. The embodied nature of the practice occasionally reveals incongruences between the groups’ adopted discourses and their praxis while often making more evident the bridging and bonding potential of Capoeira within and across the same groups.

Despite its rampant increase in popularity and its multinational acceptance since the 1970s, explorations of Capoeira within the area of Community Development are far more recent. In Australia, for instance, in 2004 the Office of Crime Prevention of Western Australia granted $17,000 in funds “to boost self-steem among young people in Perth’s northern suburbs.” By then, the Community Safety Minister Michelle Roberts stated that “this outstanding program will help to foster racial harmony, reinforce family and community values and reduce incidence of crime and anti-social behaviour in the community.(2)”

In 2008, the ABC Far North Queensland website posted an article with the subheading “The Brazilian martial-art of Capoeira combines strategic self-defence with music, dance and acrobatic. It’s playing a unique role in the Far North, helping young people who’ve been on the wrong side of the law to develop better lives.” James Biviano, who runs the programmes at the Cairns Police Citizens Youth Club, says that “[t]here’s an extra level of diversity in Capoeira, that other martial arts have never really needed to tap into … They walk through our door, straight from Juvenile Detention,” says James. “When they come to Capoeira, they’re able to tap into a new source of self-confidence. They’re able to take this [self-confidence] into social situations. Also the ability to do acrobatics … it’s a very empowering feeling for these people to have.(3)”

This study is concerned with these new explorations, more specifically with the potential enhancement of social inclusive processes by the practice of Capoeira in non-Brazilian contexts. It is also interested in investigating the assumption that Capoeira can serve as a platform bridging cultural gulfs and enhancing tolerance of diversity, promoting social inclusion, and cultural empowerment among practitioners.

Such assumption among practitioners is generally based upon practical experience and the knowledge of concepts widely accepted as the ‘art’s principles’. This assumption is commonly underpinned by the following arguments: a) that Capoeira provides an intriguing activity to be shared among people from different cultural backgrounds creating a common interest; b) that given the art’s focus on both playfulness and fair-play within a context in which games can happen between people from ages, sex, and different levels of expertise, the practice equips its practitioners with interpersonal skills allowing them to acknowledge and see through the eyes of “the other”; and c) that functioning as a practical philosophy underpinned by a cultural system, the lessons learnt within the art’s micro-cosmos easily transcends into one’s ‘normal’ life (macro-cosmos).

For the purpose of this investigation, given the interdisciplinary character of the subject matter and the complexity of the social interactions within the field, this project will apply a combination of sociological areas of study (Cultural Sociology, Sociology of Sport, and Sociology of the Body) as a theoretical framework. Seeking to test the above mentioned suppositions and contribute to the current debate about Capoeira and social inclusion, the present study aims to:

• Discuss the intercultural origins of Capoeira in relation to the current debates, usually polarised between a ‘nationalist’ and an ‘Afro-centric’ view;
• Contribute to the current debate concerning the effectiveness of Capoeira as a tool towards social inclusion and intercultural learning, discussing both its potentialities and shortcomings;
• Discuss the applicability of Capoeira within community development oriented programs; and; investigate and unveil underlying socio-cultural tensions within the practice in regards to such applications and matters of authenticity in a global context.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Capoeira: Origins, Development and Global Diffusion

Introduction
This essay documents the development of Capoeira – a Brazilian art-form – as part of the country’s history and cultural identity, considering the intercultural milieu of its origins, and its diverse forms of manifestation. It examines the historical origins of Capoeira as a movement of resistance against slavery; its development into a syncretic manifestation simultaneously encompassing interdisciplinary features (martial-art, dance, game, live music, theatre, oral poetry); and its global dispersal as a cultural practice as the historical moments chosen to accomplish such approach.

This paper calls attention to the birth of Capoeira as a response to a peculiar context in Brazil, when a multi-ethnic interplay of minorities antagonised oppressive and acculturative forces. In this sense, it understands the birth of Capoeira as an outcome of ‘hybridisation processes’(4). A “socio-cultural process”, as explained by Canclini “in which discrete structures or practices, that pre-existed apart, combine themselves to generate new structures, objects and practices” (Canclini; 2008: XIX).

It is worthy to note that in exploring the cross-cultural origins of Capoeira, the present study does not intend to diminish the rich and predominant contribution of different African nations. Rather, it assumes that such intercultural contributions began precisely with these nations’ struggle to cooperate amongst themselves, as well as with and amongst indigenous peoples, in order to survive the deadly circumstances of slavery. Hence, the intention here is to corroborate with investigations on how these specific socio-historical circumstances enabled the birth of a syncretic “cultural system”(5) from a peculiar interplay of diverse ethnicities in Brazil.

This paper is grounded chiefly in historical and anthropological theories concerning the foundation of the Brazilian people and of Capoeira as part of its cultural legacy. A brief etymological investigation concerning the origins of the term ‘capoeira’ also reinforces the art’s history and purpose as one intertwined with socio-cultural, geographical and anthropological aspects of Brazilian history. The epistemological drive and mapping of sources, however, often precedes this study and are also grounded in years of practical experience in the field.

The Individuals Capoeiras as the First Brazilian Party: History and Early Resistance

“Capoeira – as an authentic installation of resistance – was the first Brazilian political party”
(Jairo Bamberg, Mestre(6) Angoleiro – in personal communication)

Capoeira, like the Brazilian people, was born from the interplay of three major ethnic matrices: the African, the Amerindian, and the European and the dialectic relationship between the institution of slavery and those opposing it strengthened, to a great extent, this amalgam of the Brazilian ethnicity. Thrown into captivity, exploited until death and stripped of their humanity, Amerindians, Blacks, and Mestizos constituted the majority of the population and saw each other as equals fighting the same oppressive forces. Consciously opposing the establishment, “the ‘Capoeira Party’ had an undeniable socio-cultural and ethnic character; drawing most of its transcendence, cultural strength, and philosophical purposes from centuries of intercultural resistance by minorities against slavery and a euro-centric project of acculturation.

In terms of the population numbers of those ethnic groups it has been estimated that there were approximately 1 million Amerindians, chiefly from Tupi tribes, spread along the Brazilian coast only (Ribeiro; 1995: 31) and over 6 million Africans were forcedly brought to Brazil between 1540 and 1860. The majority of the enslaved African population were Yorubá, Dahomey, and Fanti-Ashanti nations, from the Sudanese region; Peuhl, Mandinga, and Haussa from the Islamic nations in the north of Nigeria; and the Bantu tribes from Congo-Angolan origins (Ribeiro; 1995: 113-4; 161-2). These ancestor ethnic groups are central influences in the formation of the country, contributing together to the nation’s intercultural legacy.

This paper highlights historical facts contributing to the understanding of the foundation of Brazil as an intercultural procedure. These concepts are tributary to the cultural construction of the narrative linking the socio-cultural and political expression of enslaved minorities (in different marginalised geographical installations and periods of time) to the Capoeira phenomenon. Rather than engaging with the discussion of the origins of Capoeira from today’s binary standpoint – a nationalist versus an Afro-centric perspective – this paper aims to provide evidence of the ‘hybridisation processes’ that gave birth to Capoeira as an intercultural and interdisciplinary art-form in Brazil.

The intercultural influences in the formation of Brazil sometimes precede its birth as a nation. Costa and Lacerda (2007) note the Portuguese predisposition to ethnic mixing due to centuries of previous occupation and miscegenation of the Iberian Peninsula by Nordics and, chiefly, Arabians. Outnumbered by the Amerindians, the Lusitanian colonisers were obliged to find alternative solutions. Thus, the early period of the colonisation of Brazil was characterised by the exploitation of resources via cunhadismo – “an old Amerindian way of incorporating strangers to their community”. The practice of cunhadismo consisted in offering an Amerindian Bride to the European explorer. “… [E]ach European placed along the coast could accomplish many of these marriages” as explained by Ribeiro (1995). “[T]he institution [of cunhadismo] worked as a broad and efficient form of labour recruitment to the heavy tasks of cutting, transporting and loading ships with pau-brazil as well as taming parrots and small monkeys (Ribeiro; 1995: 81-2).”

In Ribeiro’s words, “without the practice of cunhadismo the creation of Brazil would not be feasible… [as] … the function of cunhadismo within its new civilising insertion was to produce the rising of a numerous layer of mixed people, that effectively occupied Brazil” (Ribeiro. 1995: 81-9).

The absence of ‘female’ slaves imported during the first century of colonisation, and its scarcity within following periods, also fostered intercultural procedures and hybridism amongst African and European men, and Amerindian women. Fausto (1995: 51) notes that in 1855, approximately 30 years before abolition, Brazil was still importing 4 million African slaves, and that the great majority of them were men. Queiroz (2003) within the chapter “Capoeira as a symbolic key expression of Brazilian-ness” of his PhD thesis, calls attention to this as another important socio-historical factor contributing to miscegenation in Brazil. After crossing a few capital references he unveils the concomitance, complementarity, and intricacies of African and Amerindian slavery during the period of 250 years.

The settlement of quilombos(7) in the hinterland areas as “expressions of continuous resistance” (Fausto; 1995: 51-52) against slavery and a euro-centric acculturation enterprise also sums up to the ethnic-mixed legacy. These installations embodied the early Brazilian ‘cross-bred’ ethos encompassing influences of different African and Amerindian nations, and to a minor extent Europeans. Finally, the later marginal urban ethos common to excluded minorities from all descents (mainly Brazilian Blacks, Caboclos(8) and Negríndios(9), reinforced further urban developments of hybrid procedures.

From quilombos Africans and Amerindians installed within negríndios and caboclos an ‘animist alliance’ (Queiroz; 2003). The “expression of continuous resistance”, installed from the hinterlands a dialectical conflict with the colonial enterprise. This became the foundation of the Brazilian ethnicity, and to a great extent of Capoeira.

The first historical records of Capoeira are controversial and produce difficulties for etymological studies attempting to account for the origin of the term. Concluding a study over the word’s origins, Rego (1968) noted that, in regards to the etymology of the term, most Brazilian scholars specialising in Tupi language agreed that the word capoeira derived from the etymon caa plus the preterit puêra, suggesting an indigenous origin of the term. Such an assumption finds support in a 1595 study of the Brazilian native languages by the cleric scholar Father José de Anchieta. His grammar indicated the term ‘mijucápoéra’ accounting for “o fugidor canhẽbóra” – the canhembora fugitive (1595: p:19). Canhembora and quilombola are, respectively, Tupi and African terms accounting for the inhabitants of quilombos (maroons). These terms were frequently used as well for runway slaves in an association to their destination in escape attempts.

Araújo (1997: 59-60; citing Rego, 1968) points to a 1626 reference of the term ‘capoeira’ as possibly the oldest one. This document was organised by a police force in Rio de Janeiro and applied the term as an adjective to individuals involved in public turmoil. The author explains, however, that it would be impossible to determine whether these individuals were Black or Amerindian due to the conceptual definition of Capoeira and the common early generalisation of ethnicities, through which Guinean Blacks – Africans, and Native Blacks – Amerindian, were simply and generically called ‘Blacks’.

These references are significant, as they reveal Amerindian and African people via attitudes of resistance against slavery to the practice of Capoeira. A ‘practice’, not as one might imagine when considering Capoeira’s present form, but as a rebellious practice and a fight for survival.

Assunção (2005), notes, however, that despite the fact that most practitioners claim that Capoeira was invented by quilombolas(10), and that “[a]lmost every book on capoeira history contains an initial chapter on slave resistance where the heroic quilombos … are always singled out for their fierce opposition to slave society”, such claims find no factual support (Assunção. 2005: 6-7).

Araújo, on the other hand, without directly arguing for such claim, provides an account of the term capoeira linking individuals with practices of resistance and empowerment in the hinterlands forests in a way that underpins the construction of the cultural narrative of Capoeira as a rebel practice. Araújo, explains his interpretation as it follows:

“In doing a more detailed analyses of dictionaries elaborated until the end of the 19th century, no reference of the vocable capoeira is found designating the fugitive individual who lives hidden in the bush-woods, or to designate specific individual or group actions attempting against the ruling social order. However, the existent documentation in the early historical periods of Brazil is replete of examples regarding this popular use of the term” (Araújo; 1997: 64).

Having noted such nuances of historical interpretations, what is pertinent to this study is the rebellious attitude contrary to slavery; the association of the term ‘capoeira’ with cultural expressions of resistance throughout history (generally understood as crimes) preceding its use denoting a game; and the sense of alterity fostering the intercultural social architecture inherent in the quilombos.

Vagrant Resistance: Syncretism and Rebellion
The first definition of Capoeira as fight/game appears in the first decade of the 19th century. The term continued, however, to indicate a broad spectrum of activities acting against public security and/or private property; including escape attempts as a crime against ownership of slaves. In this way, not all criminal individuals were capoeiras (practitioners) in the sense of a fight/game, as Araújo emphasises, but all practitioners were outlaws (Araújo; 1997: 63).

Thereby, after the early 19th century, the term that initially indicated the “continuous resistance” in canhembos and quilombos, also pointed to the marginal groups residing in the urban centres. This viewpoint strengthens the cultural construction of Capoeira’s narrative as an instrument of rebellion, as well as the argument that the term ‘capoeira’ acts as an intercultural insignia binding together diverse ethnic minorities. Such a perspective also finds support in Araújo’s study, as the author notes that:

“From these identities based upon attitudes and actions it is possible to attribute the first conceptual definition of the term, that initially described fugitives who hid themselves in the bush-woods, called capoeiras, near the urban net, and that afterwards were extended not only to these [runaway slaves called Capoeira Blacks], but also to other marginal groups … now residing in the urban centres.” (Araújo; 1997: 64-5)

In the early 19th century the “Prince Dom João VI of Portugal, along with his entire court and 15,000 others, fled to Brazil, escorted by British ships” escaping Napoleon’s army. The British Empire “enjoying an industrial revolution that had been significantly financed by Brazilian gold, was becoming a world power and Portugal’s main ally against Napoleon” (Taylor; 2005: 275). Such support was not unpretentious and Britain started to lobby against the Portuguese slave trade.

Adding to these tensions within the international scenario, the arrival of the Portuguese Royal family into Brazil coincided with a growing perception of the numerous mass of Blacks, Negríndios and Caboclos as a threat to the establishment, as well as with a strengthened Brazilian abolitionist movement. This menace was intensified by the ruling classes’ awareness of the St. Domingue Revolution and resulted in policies being written and police forces assembled in an explicit attempt to extirpate what was seen as insubordinate behaviour of these masses from Brazilian society.

Against that social/political backdrop the 19th century also unveiled the terms capoeiragem and vadiação(11). The first was coined in a police report in 1872 and did not add much to the previous description of the capoeira individual, accept for the reinforcement of its illegal character (Araújo; 1997: 63). Conversely, the 1890 Brazilian Penal Code, despite singling out the practice as a crime, also enhanced the understanding of the term capoeiragem as a fight/game. Whilst, the term vadiação, regarded as a synonym for capoeiragem in the states of Bahia and Pernambuco, was coined by practitioners reinforcing the playfulness of the practice (Caneiro, as cited in Araújo; 1997: 68).

Regardless of its first etymological appearances as a fight/game, in the 19th century, Capoeira remained a powerful tool in the hands of the excluded. Only this time the landscape was urban, and the threats were more bluntly put against the establishment, once the Crown was living in Rio de Janeiro.

The troublesome years of transition from an Empire to a Republic exposed Capoeira as deeply problematic act and philosophy affecting relations between the disadvantaged population and the ruling class as the ability to control this bellicose ethnic-mixed crowd and their weapon and means of expression was a crucial factor in effective rule. The Republican Party movement and its intellectuals were severe critics of the Empire’s incompetence in extinguishing social problems related to capoeira; and the usually public turmoil caused by its practitioners. Conversely, the Monarchists had not only gained the capoeira outfit’s support by abolishing slavery in 1888, they had also assembled the first capoeira military unit – A Guarda Negra [The Black Guard] (Soares; Texts from Brazil, n.14; pp. 45-52).

When the Republic was established in 1899 the connection of Capoeira with the previous establishment as well as with a large number of vagrant Blacks, Negríndios and Caboclos threatened the Republican powers. For these reasons Capoeira was criminalised in the 1890 Brazilian Penal Code which specifically addressed the capoeira individuals and their practices. Subsequently, the practice of Capoeira was persecuted and repressed until its extinction, chiefly in Rio de Janeiro and Pernambuco; states where Capoeira was deeply grounded in mobs, outfits and territorial disputes amongst Blacks and mixed race minorities. The only Capoeira that survived this period of persecution and repression was the one practised in Bahia, a region in the north-east of Brazil, which is the ancestral form of all Capoeira today, and displayed even then its interdisciplinary and playful features.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

The birth of an interdisciplinary art-form

“… Historically speaking , however, the capoeiras in Bahia made a surprise move by working directly for the preservation and continued existance of Capoeira as a form of enjoyment, artistic practice, as leisure and entertainment (harmless fun and games) without, however, doing away with its potential as self-defence.”
(Abreu; Texts from Brazil, n.14; pp. 35-42))

Only a few decades after its criminalisation, the art was being practised in Bahia largely by the poor and darker classes in secluded neighbourhoods. To counter this, and cleverly avoiding the use of the term ‘capoeira’ in his centre, Mestre Bimba(11) managed to formulate and practice an acceptable form of capoeira even before the legalisation of the practice. His teaching took place at his centre, or academia de Capoeira in the Portuguese language, which was called the Bahian(12) Regional Centre of Physical Culture and despite its illegality Bimba was able to spend decades (often quite overtly) promoting the practice of Capoeira. “In 1953”, during a period influenced by fascist values (the Estado Novo or The New State) “after witnessing a demonstration by Mestre Bimba’s academy, the president of Brazil, Getúlio Vargas, declared that capoeira was ‘the only truly national sport’” (Almeida; 1982: 18 as cited in Lewis; 1991: 60). A pivotal episode in its eventual legalisation of the practice.

With Mestre Bimba’s teaching there was a method for the first time and this factor also contributed in the diffusion of Capoeira to other Brazilian states. Yet, other factors also contributed significantly to such a phenomenon. In particular the migratory flux of people leaving the north-east regions of Brazil and heading south-east (chiefly to São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro) seeking jobs and better living standards, also came into play, as these interstate migrants brought with them their own cultural practices, including Capoeira.

Folkloric groups could then perform more overtly and many Mestres began holding regular performances in the tourist spots of Salvador and other cities within Bahia de Todos os Santos (The Bay of All Saints). These folkloric troupes would give birth to Capoeira schools and vice versa, influencing the beginnings of groups and lineages of teachers as they are known today.

Largely encompassed by the nationalist ethos of the epoch the Regional style increased rapidly in popularity. Recognition and legalisation came to Capoeira as a whole, but also at the expense of conformation to eugenicist policies (Araújo; 1997: 223-4). Resisting such imposition the majority of the practitioners and teachers from other styles started to claim authenticity over Mestre Bimba’s ‘nationalised cultural practice’. Traditionalists began underpinning their practice with an Afro-centric discourse of authenticity. Thus the evolution of the name Capoeira de Angola (Capoeira from Angola) marked the traditional style; also known as Capeira Angola. Mestre Pastinha (Vicente Ferreira Pastinha / 1889-1981), son of a Spaniard and a black Brazilian woman, recognised by his artistic and philosophical approach to the art personified this style.

This tension between Angola and Regional accompanied the expansion of Capoeira and remains until today. Moreover, the birth of Capoeira Contemporânea (contemporary Capoeira), a ‘holistic’ approach to the art in which practitioners claimed to practice both styles, added even more heat to the discussions of authenticity. Different versions of the same cultural practice began to be understood as antagonistic. Since the division of Capoeira into two styles in the 1930s and the emergence of Capoeira Contemporânea in the 1980s, a few groups and counterparts have always argued for Capoeira as being only one practice, encompassing different rhythms and forms of play.

Usually today, these practitioners are dismissed as illegitimate by those descending from lineages that can be traced back to the origin of today’s groups within the folkloric troupes of the past. This condemnation of hybrid approaches is even more frequent among some descendants of Mestres Bimba’s and Pastinha’s lineages; lineages more often engaged in the strongest rhetoric of authenticity.

The interplay of pedagogic, socio-demographic, and cultural factors propelled the initial expansion of Capoeira throughout Brazil. Despite having different pedagogic lines or cultural approaches, most groups would interact and eventually play together in interstate encounters, public performances, and casual manifestations. Although they had their differences, and their unique characteristics regarding their music, their movements, and techniques, the majority of them would still recognise each other as practitioners of the same art. In fact, Lewis, mentioning his field research in Bahia asserts that the two main styles would eventually merge (1992: 61-3).

The decades in which the major diffusion of Capoeira occurred within Brazil, also overlapped with its first appearances on the international scene. As the 1960s and 1970s saw a large flux of interstate migrants helping to spread Capoeira from Bahia to other Brazilian states, concomitantly, international excursions featuring the first folkloric troupes began in the late 1950s, and escalated significantly in the 1970s in numbers and range of countries visited. (Almeida, 1986; Biancardi, 2006).

It was during the 1970’s, with Professor Emilia Biancardi’s folkloric group Viva Bahia, performing in Europe, Asia, Africa and EUA that the number of ‘capoeira settlers’ increased rapidly and more of these capoeiras remained within the visited countries (Biancardi; 2006). By the late 1980s and early 1990s the art had definitely achieved an international status and by. Not only the art was established in different Brazilian states, as Brazilian groups had established their branches in various countries.

Suffering from the severe socio-economic situation in Brazil, these first settlers decided to stay in developed countries in search of recognition and a fair living as artists. Their success in establishing schools; thriving as artists; and recruiting a large sum of students worldwide would soon influence the practice in Brazil.

The global diffusion of Capoeira, as a historical and geographical standpoint, marks the rampant intensification of the art’s recognition intertwined with its commercialisation processes. The transnational scenario of Capoeira, established next, brought an intricate institutional, cultural, and economic interplay amongst practitioners the world over. Schools first established from folkloric groups, mainly in Bahia and Rio de Janeiro, had now evolved into global instituitions.

As a transnational culture with its historical and cultural epicentre in Brazil, Capoeira seems to still carry with it a lot of its early principles of inclusiveness and freedom, however not without also causing some divides. Its global diffusion and acceptance fostered its local recognition, but paradoxically, it also brought a diversity of takes on the art with some conflictive orientations among its practitioners.

The following chapters will investigate how Capoeira is affecting people’s lives globally. It will analyse the global and local contexts of the practice. It will also study the different orientations of practitioners as potential cause for the current divides. Moreover, it will investigate the potentialities and shortcomings of Capoeira as a social tool in regards to social inclusion and intercultural learning.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Notes

1 – In A Capoeira Como Expressão – Chave – Simbólica de Brasilidade [The Capoeira as a Symbolic - Key - Expression of Brazilianity], Queiroz (2003) argues that the inseparability and simultaneity of the features forging Capoeira, its interdisciplinary and intercultural characteristics, places the art as a cultural system in the ‘territory of the between’, in the sense given by Buber (1974, as quoted in Queiroz; 2003). Lewis (1991), citing Geertz (1983), classifies Capoeira as a blurred genre, again considering the intricacies and inseparability of its forging elements, and Almeida (1986) defines Capoeira as a Brazilian art-form. Based on these scholars definitions of Capoeira and discussions around its classifications, I believe Queiroz’ assertion of the art as a cultural system is the most adequate

2 – Sourced from: http://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/ArchivedStatements/Pages/GallopLaborGovernmentSearch.aspx?ItemId=114999&minister=Roberts&admin=Gallop on the 29th of April, of 2010.

3 – Sourced from: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2008/04/20/2221963.htm on the 29th of April, of 2010.

4 – Canclini (2008: XIX) understands hybridisation as “socio-cultural processes in which discrete structures or practices, that pre-existed apart, combine themselves to generate new structures, objects and practices”.

5 – In A Capoeira Como Expressão – Chave – Simbólica de Brasilidade [The Capoeira as a Symbolic - Key - Expression of Brazilianity], Queiroz (2003) argues that the inseparability and simultaneity of the features forging Capoeira, its interdisciplinary and intercultural characteristics, places the art as a cultural system in the ‘territory of the between’, in the sense given by Buber (1974, as quoted in Queiroz; 2003). Lewis (1991), citing Geertz (1983), classifies Capoeira as a blurred genre, again considering the intricacies and inseparability of its forging elements, and Almeida (1986) defines Capoeira as a Brazilian art-form. Based on these scholars definitions of Capoeira and discussions around its classifications, I believe Queiroz’ assertion of the art as a cultural system is the most adequate.

6 – Master, senior Capoeira teacher.

7 – Respectively Tupi and Bantu terms for Maroons. Alternative and self-ruling communities settled within the country-side and inland forests by runaway slaves.

8 – Caboclo (or caboco, from the Tupi kaa’boc, ‘who came from the forest’) is a term used in Brazil describing a person of mixed Brazilian Amerindian and European descent.

9 – Negríndio is a term used in Brazil describing a person of mixed Brazilian Amerindian and African descent.

10 – Inhabitants of quilombos.

11 – Manoel dos Reis Machado (1900-1974) created the first method to teach Capoeira and adopted it in his own centre in the late 1920s. His approach to the art developed into one of its dichotomising styles named Capoeira Regional. Usually practitioners today grasp the art as split into opposed (not different) styles, positing Capoeira Angola as the opposing practice. Whilst, some argue that Mestre Bimba’s intentions were to make a living out of this own take of the art only, as genial as his take was; others considered him an accomplished practitioner of the ‘traditional’ style, accused him of betraying the Black Capoeira community and promoting the ‘ whitening’ of the art. Such division of the art, almost into opposed styles, has grown stronger since the diffusion of Capoeira to other countries, and subsequent westernisation. Back in the 1950s when the practice was still practically grounded in the Bahian cultural ethos only, all practitioners, regardless of styles, benefited from the legalisation of the art, achieved partially due to Mestre Bimba’s leading role with Capoeira. His take of the art-form led him to an invitation, by the governor Juracy Magalhães to perform a Capoeira exhibition in the Governor’s Palace to the President Getúlio Vargas. The President, heavily influenced by fascism, declared then that “Capoeira was the only truly national sport”; after which the legalisation of the practice was proclaimed. For more details on Mestre Bimba’s role on the legalisation and diffusion of the art, see, for instance, Almeida (1986); Araújo (1997); Decânio (1997); Lewis (1991); Moura (1993).

12 – Belonging to the state of Bahia, in the north-east coast of Brazil.