women suffered from male capoeiras and any other aspect that questions the ‘resistance’ aspect of the art
are not problematized. Positive contributions by middle-class practitioners to rescue the art are equally
dismissed.
The fundamental differences between these master narratives can explain heated controversies over
issues that might seem of secondary importance to outsiders. The origin of the term capoeira, for instance, gave
rise to lengthy polemics since the 1920s, with scholars and practitioners defending alternatively a Tupi
(native Brazilian), Portuguese or African origin of the term.^98 I believe that only by placing these never
ending debates into that broader context of competing master narratives does the rationale of these struggles
become clear.
As we have seen, each master narrative makes extensive use of myths and, eventually, even of fakes.
This does not mean that their overall objective is not legitimate to some degree. Creation or ‘foundational
‘myths seem central to the forging of identities of all kinds of organizations. Essentialism of one kind or the
other seems to be inherent to all emerging social or national movements. To aggregate as large as possible
an audience, demands are organized around an a-historical essence that needs to be ‘restored’. In a second
moment, however, essentialist claims which gloss over contradictions are reconsidered as these become,
through the very dynamic of the movement, more apparent. The deconstruction of ‘essences’ thus
constitutes a necessary supplement to essentialism with which it entertains a dialectic relationship.^99 ‘In
identifying mythical elements in our own cultural or professional assumptions, we threaten our ethnocentric
self-confidence’.^100 The critique of essentialism is furthermore crucial in the struggle against
fundamentalism of all sorts, be it ethnical absolutism, national narrowness or neo-liberal commodification.
That is why I believe it is important to show that capoeira is a prime example of a ‘counterculture of
modernity’, a ‘transcultural, international formation’ of the Black Atlantic rather than only African or
Brazilian.^101
The challenge is how to integrate these different perspectives into a more encompassing one, which does
justice do the legitimate aspirations of each master narrative—the affirmation of Brazilian or diasporic
African identity or the struggle against social exclusion in a world dominated by cultural imperialism and
corporate interests. As a historian, I believe that the critique of sources is valid across cultural differences
and constitutes therefore a common ground on which to build such an interpretation.^102 In other words, despite
different working hypotheses of each individual scholar, solid evidence tested by historical methods should
provide the means to advance in our search to understand better the development of capoeira. This
obviously excludes faking sources and facts, but means to be able to revise our assumptions should new
evidence require us to do so.
Fortunately, the dialogue between capoeira mestres, scholars, practitioners and the wider public is already
happening. Around the world, the history of capoeira is being debated in journals, seminars and capoeira
encounters. The growing importance of ‘virtual rodas’ on the internet also reflects the intensity of actual
discussions.^103 Positions are often less rigid and subtle than the essentialist narratives I have presented here.
Almost every month new research enriches our understanding of capoeira history. It is from this ever
growing mass of information that I have tried to summarize the history that follows.
COMPETING MASTER NARRATIVES 29