This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 11 October 2014, At: 01:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The International Journal of theHistory of SportPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fhsp20

French Gymnastics in Brazil:Dissemination, Diffusion andRelocalizationThierry Terret a & Leomar Tesche ba University of Lyon ,b Unijui-Campus Santa Rosa ,Published online: 01 Oct 2009.

To cite this article: Thierry Terret & Leomar Tesche (2009) French Gymnastics in Brazil:Dissemination, Diffusion and Relocalization, The International Journal of the History of Sport,26:13, 1983-1998, DOI: 10.1080/09523360903148820

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523360903148820

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

French Gymnastics in Brazil:Dissemination, Diffusion andRelocalizationThierry Terret and Leomar Tesche

France’s long tradition of gymnastics is largely due to the weight of the Army in the

country and the role that physical education played in the preparation of soldiers andworkers. Against the background of growing nationalism which characterized thebeginning of the twentieth century and, in particular, the 1920s, the search for a national

method of physical education and military training became more central andsubsequently led to the formalization of a so-called ‘French method of physical

education’. Attempts were made to disseminate this model in parts of the world wherethe influence of France was more likely to counterbalance American influence. This was

the case for Brazil. Although the active propaganda of French officers sent by the militaryschool of Joinville to Brazil resulted in the official recognition of the French method of PE,

the real dissemination of the concept remained limited and was mainly perceived asbeing inappropriate for Brazilians.

The Army in France has an old and strong tradition of using gymnastics and physicaleducation to train its troops for military purposes. However, officers who formalizedmethods of rational body improvement for soldiers were often tempted to diffuse

their concepts beyond military circles. The diffusion of military training methodsamong civilians through commercial and nationalistic clubs, as well as through

schools, progressively strengthened the weight of the Army in the legitimate defini-tion of gymnastics. [1] Such conditions, combined with the danger of France being

attacked by Prussia, led gymnastics to play an important part in the construction of aFrench national identity, which resulted, in particular, in the search for a specific

‘French method’, as distinct from both the German and Swedish models. After 1918,however, the geopolitical transformations, which occurred at an international level,

together with institutional and pedagogical changes taking place in France, caused

Thierry Terret, University of Lyon; Leomar Tesche, Unijui-Campus Santa Rosa.Correspondence to: terret@univ-lyon1.fr

The International Journal of the History of SportVol. 26, No. 13, October 2009, 1983–1998

ISSN 0952-3367 (print)/ISSN 1743-9035 (online) � 2009 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/09523360903148820

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

this method to become one of many elements making up the strategy that Franceimplemented to exert her cultural influence in areas conducive to it. This was the case

in Brazil where the place awarded to the French PE method, and its function,illustrated clearly the diffusion process of diffusion and localization of gymnastics

from one side of the Atlantic to the other. [2]

The Army, the Military School of Joinville and the Tradition of Gymnastics inFrance

In France, the will to diffuse military gymnastics within civilian society first becameevident with the founding, in 1820, of a ‘normal, civilian and military gymnasium’ by

Francisco Amoros, a colonel in the Napoleonic Army. Ten years later, he publishedthe main points of his method of physical education, which went on to experience

great success both within the Army and private clubs. [3] Amoros also considereddeveloping various applications of his proposals for work and medical sectors. [4]

However, the action of disseminating his ideas was limited by the conditionsthey were dependent upon. Indeed, in addition to numerous analytical and utilitarian

exercises of walking, running, springing, throwing and fighting with or withoutsticks (often with songs), the method required complex apparatus made of rope

scales, beams and masts, intended to place individuals in more or less perilouspredicaments. Yet as rational and scientific as it was, the method was far from themuch more defined and methodical models that were developed, at the same time, by

Ling in Sweden and Jahn in Prussia. [5]In spite of these limits, however, the influence of Amoros remained considerable

within military establishments and schools, as can be seen by the determining role itplayed in the drafting of a document which defined, over a long period of time, the

official bases of gymnastics in France. [6] Four years after his death, two of his formermilitary students, Commandant D’Argy and Napoleon Laisne, opened the Military

School of Joinville-le-Pont on 2 July 1852. Following 1869 and the early 1930s, thisschool became the main location in France for the training of gymnastics mastersfor schools or civilian and military sectors. It also became the place where the main

elements of a so-called ‘French method of physical education’ were defined,published and imposed on the basis of Amoros’s previous works. [7]

This method underwent a series of minor changes in 1881, 1893, 1902 and 1910.[8] It also incorporated an increasing number of characteristics of Swedish gymna-

stics, which saw its legitimacy reach high levels in early twentieth-century France. [9]The method was equally deeply influenced by Georges Demeny who taught in

Joinville between 1902 and 1906 and used eclectics as a doctrine for physicaleducation. [10] However, the main changes occurred at the end of the First World

War, as a result of two determining factors.First, following the excessive militarization of France in 1914, the very status of the

military school in Joinville was modified after 1918 when the French Army

experienced a gradual loss of visibility and legitimacy. The fear of a further war led toa temporary rejection of anything military. Joinville was even closed at the beginning

1984 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

of the war, but was allowed to reopen its doors in 1916 as a Centre for PhysicalInstruction dedicated to re-education for wounded soldiers. [11]

Second, gymnastics and physical education were slightly revived immediately afterthe war, placing Joinville’s pedagogical proposals more in concurrence with other

growing models. According to Marcel Spivak, who had already long identified themain pedagogical trends struggling to develop at this time, [12] the legitimacy of

Joinville was challenged by three forces, new and old. One of these forces was whathe called the ‘traditionalists’, whose references were mainly taken from Swedish

gymnastics with its self-proclaimed scientific and hygienic foundations. Attacks weremade, in particular, by Dr Philippe Tissie, a French instructor who created the pro-Swedish Ligue Girondine d’Education Physique with the clear aim of counterbalancing

Pierre de Coubertin’s Comite de Propagation des Exercices Physiques dans l’Education,and with great support from the medical profession. [13] Further criticism came from

the ‘modernists’ who were involved in the sports movement at a time when, withPierre de Coubertin, the idea of a sports pedagogy began to gain ground in France.

[14] Finally, the strongest attack came from a former marine officer, Georges Hebertwho, before the war, developed a so-called ‘natural method’ of physical education,

based on outdoor activities and whose foundations recalled, without any doubt, theprinciples of Amoros. [15] It was clear that Hebert showed overconfidence in nature

and considered that the best way for individuals to develop was through contact withthe outdoors. However, when confronted with life in civilized societies, which, as hesaid, restricted the activity of individuals, he proposed rational training of what he

called the ‘useful’ gestures that he divided into eight groups (walking, running,jumping, throwing, climbing, rising, defence and swimming). He later added two

more sets of exercises to these groups, including walking on all fours and balance. [16]Immediately prior to the war, sports circles were powerless to question the political

and educational dominion that the School of Joinville was imposing on the countryvia the only two institutions which were mandatory for the whole of the French

male population: schools and the Army. However, military domination in schoolswas increasingly less supported by the defenders of a more medical and scientificorientation for physical education, as well as by those who found the elements of

modernity they were looking for in the natural method. This complication of the fieldof physical education eventually pushed aside the hegemony of Joinville, particularly

since the leaders of the opposition models, Hebert and Tissie, were quick to criticizeopenly the educational choices of the military school. [17] The war would

temporarily redistribute the cards, giving Joinville the opportunity to reaffirm itsposition in the field of physical education.

The Invention of the ‘French Method’

At the end of 1918, when the war had barely finished, the High Commissioner duringthe war charged Joinville with the task of writing a new program of physical

education, even more ambitious than that of 1910. It was indeed intended ‘toestablish a general method of physical educational applicable to all the French people

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1985

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

without distinction of age nor sex and adapted to the national temperament’. [18]This Projet de reglement de la methode francaise was drafted by several people,

servicemen of Joinville obviously, but also civilian gymnastics instructors anddoctors. The first of the seven parts which made up the publication concerned

children from four to 14 years old and appeared in 1919, the subsequent parts beingpublished over the following three years. These texts were revised several times with

the final text being drafted in 1925. Its publication in three volumes took three years,from 1927 to 1930, on account of Colonel Bonvalot’s replacement as Head of the

Military School by Colonel Arnoult during the same period.The French method was warmly acknowledged by political authorities from the

beginning. Thus, when in 1923 directives reformed the elementary school system in

France and strongly modified educational methods and curricula, they stipulated thatprimary school teachers should refer to the Projet de reglement de la methode francaise

for physical education. [19] Also, in 1925, the first volume of the French method wasimmediately approved by the Ministry of War.

In its most successful version, the French method included three parts. The firstpart presented its scientific and educational foundations, together with the charac-

teristics of the method for people under 18. The second focused on ‘higher’ physicaleducation, i.e. on introduction to sport for older children. The third and final part,

with its last section on re-education being deleted for unknown reasons, [20]concerned military physical education and included a series of appendices on the roleof doctors and instructors.

The general aim of the French method was explicitly to raise the ‘French race’ bydeveloping both physical qualities and certain wide consensual objectives for the

post-war period, including health, strength, resistance, skill, will and aesthetics. Asfor the means to be used during the 1920s, the authors chose to combine most of

the available concepts of physical education of the moment, by organizing theminto a hierarchy according to age: games, warm ups, ‘educational exercises’ (taken

from Swedish gymnastics), ‘applied exercises’, individual and team sports. For theyoungest ages, the method limited itself to games of national heritage and ‘appliedexercises’ which came, in reality, from most of the large groups upheld by Georges

Hebert in his natural method, i.e. walking, climbing, jumping, rising, carrying,running, throwing, attack-defence and swimming. The ‘educational exercises’, exer-

cises of coordination and warm ups, were taken, for their part, from Swedishgymnastics.

Beyond the age of 18 (therefore no longer part of the school system), individualscould continue to benefit from an introduction program to sport. This proposal was

all the more astonishing given the Army’s stand against sport and the fact thatindividual sports were presented as simple ‘ancient applied gymnastics’. Their new

position can be analyzed as a direct consequence of the Inter-Allied Games organizedin Paris in June 1919, following the initiative of the YMCA and the AmericanExpeditionary Forces. Indeed, on this occasion, the School of Joinville was given the

responsibility of preparing a French team, particularly in athletics, for the first time in

1986 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

its history. [21] This new mission, which coincided with the nomination ofLieutenant-Colonel See, Colonel Bonvalot’s predecessor, as Manager of the School,

continued in spite of the Joinvillais’ lack of experience. The Military School waspartly converted into a centre for Olympic preparation for the Olympic Games of

1920 and, more widely, for international sports competitions. The stakes becameeven higher in 1921 when the International Olympic Committee chose Paris as host

for the Olympic Games of 1924. [22] Within the context of growing nationalism, theprestige of France decreed henceforth that Joinville include sports in its method,

although in a chapter which did not directly concern physical education at school.Thus, a whole volume of the French method was dedicated to sports, the Frenchmilitary authors being assisted here by American trainers who stayed on after the

Inter-Allied Games, such as Louis Schroeder, an athletics specialist who was himselfeducated at the international YMCA school of Springfield. [23]

In fact, the French ‘specificity’ of the ‘French method’ was scarcely to be found inone or other of the three volumes. It has been already valuably demonstrated that the

method was extensively influenced by various German, English, Belgian and Swedishmodels and that, by comparison, it presented a strong resemblance to the educational

models of physical education developed, for example, in Italy before 1925. [24] ButFrance was looking for national models of all kinds in physical activities and sports,

as exemplified by the national method for teaching swimming, defined by the Frenchfederation of swimming in 1922. [25] In the case of the French PE method, thepossible originality of this eclectic system was found in its general principles of

organization and in the links which existed between some of its elements and the ageof the individuals, with distinctions being made between elementary physical

education from four to 13 years old, secondary physical education from 13 to 18years old and higher physical education for individuals above 18. It was also more

utilitarian than hygienic-based, thus recalling Amoros’s tradition. Finally, the Frenchmethod was based on the physiological knowledge of the time and promoted a white

male ideal. And it did not escape the sexual stereotypes or racial foundations ofFrench society. Thus, it was stated that:

Girls will not look for exercises which require a certain development of strength;indeed, their muscular power, measured with the lumbar dynamometer, representsonly approximately two thirds that of men. We shall thus not aim at developing themuscles of women and we shall be careful not to apply to them, withoutprecaution, the forms of physical education reserved for young people. At the timeof puberty, whereas boys look instinctively for occasions to produce extensivemuscular efforts, girls become, on the contrary, more quiet and more reserved.Their physical education must be essentially hygienic . . . The special physiologicalfunctions which they have to fulfil and undergo are incompatible with intenseheavy labour . . . Women are not built to fight but to procreate. It is advisable that,for them, exercises contribute to the normal development of the pelvis. [26]

The diffusion of this ideal could easily have remained centred within France, but the

context of the early 1920s caused it, on the contrary, to extend beyond its borders.

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1987

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

The Diffusion of the French Method: a Political and Cultural Imperative

Much literature currently exists on the way gymnastics were imposed in France as amodel of bodily excellence and an exemplary contribution to the building of national

sentiment from the middle of the nineteenth century onwards. Used equally at schooland in the Army, gymnastics participated in the dissemination of values recognized

by the Republic, such as discipline, morality, respect of hierarchy and laws,abnegation and solidarity. [27] As highlighted by French sociologist and historian

Jean-Paul Callede, the gymnastic model is characterized by a well-structuredorganization which embodies social solidarity and exaltation of patriotic sentiment.[28] Until 1914, the main goal of gymnastics was to prepare for revenge against

Germany and build national identity. Following 1918, while continuing to be a toolused for service to the nation, [29] its aims evolved when the international post-war

situation and the new world order resulting from the Peace Conference caused Franceto develop a more influential foreign policy. Thus, the country launched an offensive

of several economic projects intended to increase its power within Europe. [30] Thisquest for economic imperialism was rapidly expanded to include a policy for cultural

influence, which was well illustrated by the setting up of a Service des ŒuvresFrancaises a l’Etranger (Service of French Works in Foreign Countries) within the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1920. Sports made a successful come-back as a result ofthis strategy. [31] The impact on gymnastics and physical education was evenstronger given the national tradition on which they were based. Therefore, the School

of Joinville became a propaganda institution aiming to disseminate French cultureand values in physical activities, in spite of the material difficulties it had to over-

come. [32] Consequently, between 1921 and 1931, the delegations of about 30countries gathered in Joinville, upon official invitation or on their own initiative.

There, they watched demonstrations of the French method of PE.Exporting the concept was also considered when the method became the object

of stronger proselystism throughout the French Empire. On 2 September 1924 aministerial circular relative to physical instruction and military training made itapplicable in all colonial territories. In 1930, a specific guide for physical education in

the colonies was published by the School of Joinville [33] and was followed by thedissemination of the French method in French Western Africa, as well as in the West

Indian colonies of Martinique and Guadeloupe. [34] However, in contrast with thecolonies, the question of influencing other nations had to be considered in a different

light on account of the competitive and dominant cultural imperialism of the UnitedKingdom, the United States and, to a certain extent, Germany. [35] The geopolitical

and colonial situation resulted in an implicit sharing of the regions, thus maintaininga certain balance on a continental scale. In the case of the South American continent,

for example, Franco-German economic and cultural rivalry urged Germany to investin Chile and Venezuela before the First World War, whereas France was moreconcerned with Colombia and Brazil where her influence in various domains was

already important and had even extended beyond the social elites of the country sinceits independence. [36]

1988 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Before and after the First World War, Brazil was favoured, moreover, as the seconddestination of French immigrants to Latin America, after Argentina. [37] The

presence of a French community was able to contribute to a certain ‘reserve offavourable feelings to France’. [38] Yet, it was just another element to add to the

wider cultural policy developed by France towards Brazil from the 1920s onwards.[39] Historian Hugo Rogelio Suppo has considered this policy an excellent example

of the cultural imperialism developed by France. [40] He argues that they notablyleaned on the convergence of artistic, literary and institutional influences through the

‘Alliances francaises’, the network of French universities and high schools in LatinAmerica, the French-Brazilian Institute and the French-Brazilian secondary school,etc. In 1930, the School of Joinville were told that their method had just been

officially accepted in Brazil, after Luxemburg and Portugal. [41] This success causedthe French method to be considered as a piece of the puzzle which constituted new

French cultural imperialism.

How the French Method of PE was Received in Brazil

The methods used in Brazilian physical education have followed a certain sequencewithin a changing political-ideological context since the beginning of the last century.

The changes and options made in favour of one or other method have alwaystaken place as the result of long discussions and the various interests expressed byintellectuals from education and government. Yet one should remember that these

methods have not been uniform throughout Brazil. In the South, and more parti-cularly in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, options were completely different from

those of other states owing to the heavy influence exerted by the German ethnicalgroup, as discussed elsewhere. [42]

At the beginning of the twentieth century Brazil was in search of its nationalidentity in all domains. The quest included physical education, which became a

means of building ‘Brazilness’. As recently argued by Rocha-Ferreira, nationaliststried unsuccessfully to influence the government decision to choose the Capoeiramethod as the national method. However, the choice was made, as mentioned earlier,

by intellectuals, and the government was to look towards Europe, and more especiallyGermany, because the South was more sympathetic to her. [43] Yet, from 1907 on,

many teaching establishments started slowly to give up the German Turnen. [44]Several authorities in the teaching field, such as Jorge de Moraes (1905, 1927),

Antonio Monteiro de Souza (1906), Manoel Bonfim (1915, 1920) and Fernando deAzevedo (1915, 1920) were opposed to Jahn’s German gymnastics. They often

defended Ling’s Swedish gymnastics and advised that they be applied in schoolphysical education classes. According to the Brazilian historian Cantarino Filho,

they believed that the German exercises were responsible for exaggerated musculardevelopment, and also created great muscular strength. [45] This negative perceptionwas counterbalanced when the above-mentioned authorities chose the French

method. Indeed, according to Goellner, [46] the method of the Military School ofJoinville-le-Pont began officially in Brazil in 1907 with the hiring of the French

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1989

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

military mission to take command of the military instruction of the Public Force ofthe state of Sao Paulo (Military Police).

Using Inezil P. Marinho’s data, historian Goellner states that the government hireda military French mission to give military instruction to the Public Force of the state

of Sao Paulo, founding there a Hall of Arms which, years afterwards, would be turnedinto the School of Physical Education of the State of Sao Paulo. [47] However,

Ferreira Neto argues that the French were the founders of the Military Center of theSao Paulo Public Force (Centro Militar da Forca Publica de Sao Paulo). [48] Indeed,

the Revista de Educacao Fısica (Journal of Physical Education) published in 1936attributed its creation to the officers Balancie and Lemtrie, both members of theFrench Military Mission hired by the state of Sao Paulo in 1906. However, the impact

of the officers’ presence on gymnastics in Brazil was not felt before the end of the FirstWorld War with, more particularly, the arrival of the French Military Mission to

support the Brazilian Army in 1919. Two years later, a new era began for the BrasilRepublica – Brazil as a Republic – with many changes in the social and economic

spheres of the nation. [49]At the military level, as stated by Cantarino Filho, the Army also underwent several

reformulations in its regulations. [50] In 1921, the Regulamento de Instrucao FısicaMilitar – the Military Physical Instruction Regulation – was approved by a

presidential decree (no. 14.784). This Military Physical Instruction Regulation no.7{Regulamento de Instrucao Fısica Militar – n8 7) was perceived as important enoughto be signed by both the President of the Republic Epitacio Pessoa and his Minister of

War Joao Pandia Calogeras. The text, designated for the Armed Forces, replaced theGerman method with the French line of Georges Hebert’s natural gymnastics,

adapted according to the principles of the School of Joinville:

The President of the Republic of the United States of Brazil, using the attributesconferred to him by Clause 48, no. 1, of the Constitution, decides to approvethe Military Physical Instruction Regulation – Regulamento de Instrucao FısicaMilitar – designated for all Forces, first part, by this means enacted and signed byDr. Joao Pandia Calogeras, State Minister of War.

Rio de Janeiro, April 27, 1921, 100 years of Independence and 33 of the Republic.Epitacio Pessoa, Joao Pandia Calogeras

The method was put into effect one year later. According to Ferreira Neto, it wasalso in 1922 that the campaign for physical education in the Army really started. In

January 1922, for instance, the Minister of War set down an ordinance creatingthe Military Center of Physical Education – Centro Militar de Educacao Fısica

(CMEF) – in the Military District of Military Villa. [51] This Center, which laterbecame the Army’s School of Physical Education, [52] was active in the Companhia

de Carros de Combate (the Company of War Vehicles), although it was only atransitory phase since it failed to conclude the instruction of its first class ofinstructors, as a result of the 1922 revolution. Thus, physical education was

restricted to the Corpos de Tropa – Troop Corps – and the Military School.

1990 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

In 1928, however, Joinville became more active in its attempt to diffuse its valuesand method. One of its officers, Major Pierre Segur, who was sent to Brazil as a

member of the French Military Mission, ministered a training course on the Frenchmethod of physical education to his assistants, based on the Regulation no. 7. [53] He

was in charge of the directions taken in physical education and was influentialenough to ensure the expansion of the method. As a consequence, General Nestor

Pessoas presented a bill establishing the following in 1929:

Clause 1 – Physical Education shall be exercised by all residing in Brazil. It iscompulsory in all federal, municipal and private teaching establishments from sixyears of age on for both sexes.

Clause 41 – As long as the ‘Metodo Nacional de Educacao Fısica’ – the NationalMethod of Physical Education – has not been created, the so-called French Methodis adopted for all the Brazilian territory, under the title of ‘Regulamento Geral deEducacao Fısica’ – General Regulation of Physical Education.

Thus, the Military Physical Instruction Regulation based on the French methodbecame the official method for all armed forces. Although it was not compulsory for

the Armed Forces until 1929, the French method was implemented in civilianphysical education classes and became the rule for all teaching institutions.

The great promoter of the propagation of the French method in Brazil was thePresident of the Republic himself, Washington Luıs, a representative of the socialelites who had been influenced by French culture, mostly through literature. By

means of speeches and messages sent to Congress, the President advocated opting forand adopting the method in both civilian teaching establishments and the Army,

which would make physical education uniform and thus assist towards the unity ofthe Brazilian people, as underlined by Goellner. [54] The initiative was supported by

certain gymnastics enthusiasts, such as Dr Fernando de Azevedo, the Director of Rio’sPublic Instruction, whose action was very positively described in the Revista de

Educacao Fısica in 1933:

Dr Fernando de Azevedo, the then Director of Rio’s Public Instruction, with hisbroad vision as a pedagogue and with his high patriotic spirit, was the mainsupporter in civilian society to achieve the perfect crowning of the work started.The method which he saw applied was eminently scientific. Based upon thepedagogic, anatomical-physiological and psychological reasoning of this method,which is the method used by the French School of Joinville-le-Pont, this uniquemaster drew his unperishable plan for a Teaching Reform, in regard to schoolphysical education. [55]

When the new President Getulio Vargas took over Brazil in 1930 with the support

of the Armed Forces, many economic as well as social changes took place in thecountry. Born from this, according to Goellner, [56] was a strong state with acentralized and interventionist policy, and in which the idea of national collaboration

in favour of the development of the nation was predominant. Getulio Vargas sought

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1991

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

this unity, approving a strategy that incorporated a need for a ‘Brazilian man’,belonging to a Brazilian, homogeneous, productive and obedient race who would

follow the dictates of a strong elite. The eclecticism of the French method of PE wasperceived as particularly well appropriated to build national identity whatever the

nation. Why the Vargas government accepted the French method thus became clear.In addition, Vargas was supported by the Armed Forces, which also found the French

method to be adequate on account of its capacity to improve nationalist character.

Limits and Relocalization

Yet Cantarino Filho made it clear that the French method did not enjoy unanimous

agreement. [57] There were disagreements, voiced especially by the BrazilianAssociation of Education, whose President, Heitor Lyra da Silva, promoted

educational campaigns, conferences and festivities presenting proposals for regene-rating reforms for the Brazilian population. The association understood that the

French method presented excessively military features, and that the theme of hygienewas overly important.

Perhaps the most important fact to be pointed out is that the Escola de Pedro II(School of Pedro II-l State secondary school) did not use the French method,

according to data from the work of Vechia and Lorenz, [58] which deals with theProgram for Brazilian Secondary School Teaching. In this analysis, covering theperiod from 1850 to 1951, the authors argue that the Brazilian state schools did not

use the French method, but rather the Swedish method of PE (see Figure 1).Therefore, one is entitled to have doubts as to whether or not there was unanimity in

Figure 1 Methods adopted by secondary education school institutionsSource: Taken from MARINHO, Inezil Penna. Historia da Educacao Fısica no Brasil. SaoPaulo: Cia. Brasil, 1980: 59, quoted in Martinez. [60]

1992 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

the use, and compulsory use according to law, of the French method. This conclusionis confirmed by the chart below taken from Inezil Penna Marinho, [59] which

represents the methods adopted in the Brazilian schools between 1938 and 1939.The influence of the French method of PE finally ceased in Brazil, with the so-

called Capanema Reform of 1946. [61] With this reform, PE was no longer seen as aform of ‘military instruction’; it was presented with lesser authoritarian dimensions,

and became more sports-oriented at a time when the place of sports within theFrench method was still reserved for adults and not children. [62]

Conclusion

Built on ancient inheritance, the French method of physical education combinednumerous educational, cultural and scientific influences from several countries. It

was, nevertheless, defined as a national model, conveying as such certain conceptionsof men and women, the body, learning processes and discipline, all of which

contributed to defining society. In peacetime, it became one of the means adopted bythe French Army to diffuse a ‘French’ ideology. Brazil became one of the targets of

this cultural transfer at the beginning of the twentieth century, increasingly soafter 1907 and even more noticeably so at the end of the 1920s. This process is

undoubtedly linked to the place of the United States in Franco-Brazilian relation-ships. Indeed, while French opinion was still relatively indifferent or even con-descending towards Americans at the beginning of the twentieth century, the attitude

changed on the eve of the First World War. The French people henceforth consideredthat Americans ought to be taken more seriously in both economic and political

domains. [63] This image was strengthened when the Americans entered the war in1917, resulting in the military victory of the Allies the following year. Yet the

profound discords that existed over the financial and political consequences of thewar between presidents Clemenceau and Woodrow Wilson mirrored the radically

different conceptions both countries had of society in the economic, social, politicaland religious domains. After 1920, the United States entered ‘a phase of imperialismcharacterized by the use of financial and commercial weapons’ [64] and became a

serious competitor for France. [65] At the same time, Brazil developed a privilegedpartnership with the United States, a relationship that was supported by the political

thought of Brazilian Foreign Secretary Baron de Rio Branco. It is precisely within thiscontext that the Military School of Joinville took on its mission to diffuse the French

method in Brazil. One can, therefore, think that France, while chasing the UnitedStates in the race for leadership in the aftermath of the First World War, although no

longer able to fight economically, was attracted to the idea of developing alternativecultural models in education, with the aim of counterbalancing American influence

in those geopolitical areas that were likely to be influenced by one or the other.Indeed, France and Brazil had already developed numerous cultural exchanges whichallowed one to think that further cultural transfer had some chance of succeeding.

However, in spite of the interest which the Brazilian political authorities showed in

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1993

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

the virtues of nationalism and hygiene, the dissemination of the French method wasin reality a failure. If one considers cultural transfer as a process of acculturation, [66]

such a process, aimed at Brazilian youth, did not take place given that the militaryconnotation associated with the French method of physical education was gradually

perceived as inappropriate with regard to Brazilian needs.

Notes

[1] Defrance, L’excellence corporelle.[2] The analyses of sports relations between Europe and Latin America are relatively unexplored

and favoured mainly the cultural transfers from the UK. See for instance Mangan andDaCosta, ‘Sport in Latin American Society’; Kennedy, ‘Sporting Tradition’.

[3] Amoros, Memoire pour le Gymnase Normal, Militaire et Civil; Amoros, Manuel d’educationphysique, gymnastique et morale.

[4] Spivak, ‘Francisco Amoros y Ondeano’.[5] On Amoros’s work, see Spivak, ‘Les origines militaires’. For a reflection on the scientific,

political and philosophical influences on Amoros’s action, see Arnal, ‘La revolution desmouvements’.

[6] Ministere de la Guerre, Instruction pour l’enseignement de la gymnastique. This manual wasadopted for primary schools by the Minister of Public Instruction.

[7] Spivak, ‘L’Ecole de Joinville’. On the history of the military School of Joinville-le-Pont, seeSimonet, L’INSEP; Simonet and Veray, L’empreinte de Joinville.

[8] D’Argy, Instruction pour l’Enseignement de la gymnastique; Reglement d’Education physique;Loudcher and Vivier, ‘Les manuels’.

[9] Thibault, Sport et education physique.[10] Bui-Xuan and Gleyse, L’Emergence de l’Education physique.[11] Ministere de la Defense, Une histoire culturelle du sport.[12] Spivak, ‘Education, Sport et nationalisme en France’.[13] On Tissie, see especially Thibault, ‘Philippe Tissie’; Saint-Martin, ‘L’education physique du

berceau a la tranchee’; Bazoge, ‘Les femmes’.[14] De Coubertin, Pedagogie sportive.[15] Hebert, L’Education physique raisonnee; Hebert, Le Guide pratique d’Education physique;

Hebert, Le Code de la Force. Various parts of the ‘natural method’ were relatively close toscoutism.

[16] Hebert, L’Education physique virile et morale.[17] On the opposition between Hebert and Joinville, see Delaplace, Georges Hebert; Defrance, ‘La

signification culturelle de l’hebertisme’. On Joinville and Tissie, see Saint-Martin, L’educationphysique a l’epreuve de la Nation.

[18] Ministere de la Guerre, Reglement general d’education physique. First part, 5.[19] ‘Instructions du 20 juin 1923 relatives au nouveau plan d’etudes des ecoles primaires

elementaires’. The recognition of the French method in schools did not officially disappearbefore the late 1960s.

[20] The whole part on re-education, which was published in the earlier project of 1919, wasdeleted in the last version.

[21] Terret, Les Jeux interallies de 1919.[22] Terret, Les Paris des Jeux de 1924.[23] Terret, ‘Les YMCA’.[24] Saint-Martin, ‘L’exemplarite des educations physiques etrangeres en France’; Terret and

Vescovi, ‘L’education physique a l’ecole primaire’.

1994 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

[25] Terret, L’institution et le nageur.[26] Ministere de la Guerre, Reglement general d’education physique. First part, 16. On a gendered

analysis of French gymnastics between the two world wars, see Arnaud and Terret, Histoire dusport feminin.

[27] Arnaud, Le militaire, l’ecolier, le gymnaste; Arnaud, Les athletes de la Republique; Defrance,L’excellence corporelle.

[28] Callede, L’esprit sportif.[29] Saint-Martin, L’education physique a l’epreuve de la Nation.[30] Becker and Berstein, Victoire et frustrations, 222–223.[31] Arnaud and Riordan, Sport et relations internationales.[32] Saint-Martin, ‘L’Ecole de Joinville’.[33] Sous-secretariat de l’Education physique, L’Education physique aux colonies.[34] Deville-Danthu, Le sport en noir et blanc, 34; Dumont, ‘Joinville aux Antilles’, 71.[35] Gems, The Athletic Crusade; Mangan, The Games Ethic and Imperialism; Guttmann, Games

and Empire.[36] Guerra, ‘La lumiere et ses reflets’; Pfister, Sport, Politics and German Imperialism.[37] The data on the France-Brazil migrations stated a flux of 14,000 French people in 1911. The

same result was reached in 1931. See Zeldin, Histoire des passions francaises, vol. 2, 103.[38] Expression frequently used by the Department of Foreign Policy in France, as remarked by

Torres, ‘Les enjeux diplomatiques’.[39] Carelli, Cultures Croisees.[40] Suppo, ‘La politique culturelle francaise’.[41] Labrosse, Notice, 39.[42] Tesche and Rambo, ‘Reconstructing the Fatherland’.[43] Rocha-Ferreira et al., ‘Physical Education’.[44] Tesche and Rambo, ‘Reconstructing the Fatherland’.[45] Cantarino Filho, ‘A Educacao Fısica no Brasil’, 898.[46] Goellner, ‘O Metodo Frances e Militarizacao’.[47] Marinho, Historia da Educacao Fısica no Brasil.[48] Ferreira Neto, A Pedagogia no Exercito e na Escola, 45.[49] Bradford Burns, A History of Brazil.[50] Cantarino Filho, ‘A Educacao Fısica no Brasil’, 901.[51] Ferreira Neto, A Pedagogia no Exercito e na Escola, 46.[52] http://www.cev.org.br/grcev/kiko/capitulo1.htm, 6 (consulted 2 May 2008).[53] Cantarino Filho, ‘A Educacao Fısica no Brasil’, 901.[54] Goellner, ‘O Metodo Frances e Militarizacao’, 134.[55] Revista de Educaca. Fisica, 1933.[56] Ibid., 135.[57] Cantarino Filho, ‘A Educacao Fısica no Brasil’, 901.[58] Vechia and Lorenz, Programa de Ensino.[59] Marinho, Historia da Educacao Fısica no Brasil.[60] Martinez, ‘Auguste Roger Listello: Uma contribuicao para a Educacao Fısica Brasileira’.[61] Gustavo Capanema Filho-Ministro da Educacao e Saude Publica (Minister of Education and

Public Health.[62] Goellner, ‘O Metodo Frances e Militarizacao’, 125.[63] Melandri and Ricard, Les relations franco-americaines.[64] Nouschi, Le XXeme siecle, 93. Sport participated in this strategy, as demonstrated by Gems,

The Athletic Crusade.[65] Milza, Les relations internationales; Renouvin, ‘Les crises du XXeme siecle’.[66] Tremblay, ‘Le Transfert culturel’.

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1995

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

References

Amoros, F. Memoire pour le Gymnase Normal, Militaire et Civil fonde et dirige a Paris par M. lecolonel Amoros. Paris: Renouard, 1824.

Amoros, F. Manuel d’education physique, gymnastique et morale. Paris: Roret, 1830.Arnal, T. ‘La revolution des mouvements. Gymnastique, morale et democratie au temps d’Amoros

(1815–1848)’. PhD diss., University of Paris V, 2007.Arnaud, P. Les athletes de la Republique. Toulouse: Privat, 1987.Arnaud, P. Le militaire, l’ecolier, le gymnaste. Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1991.Arnaud, P. and J. Riordan. Sport et relations internationales. Les democraties face aux regimes

autoritaires. Paris: L’Harmattan, 1998.Arnaud, P. and T. Terret. Histoire du sport feminin. Paris: L’Harmattan, 1996.Bazoge, N. ‘Les femmes et la Ligue Girondine d’Education physique’. Ph.D. Diss., Universite of

Lyon 1, 2008.Becker, J.-J. and S. Berstein. Victoire et frustrations. 1914–1929. Paris: Seuil, 1990.Bradford Burns, E. A History of Brazil. New York & London: Columbia University Press, 1993.Bui-Xuan, G. and J. Gleyse. L’Emergence de l’Education physique: Georges Demeny et Georges Hebert.

Paris: Hatier, 2001.Callede, J.P. L’esprit sportif, Bordeaux. Bordeaux: Presses universitaires de Bordeaux, 1987.Cantarino Filho, M.R. ‘A Educacao Fısica no Brasil’. In Geschichte der Leibesubungen, edited by H.

Ueberhorst. Berlin: Verlag Bartels & Wernitz GmbH, 1989.Carelli, M. Cultures croisees: Histoire des echanges culturels entre la France et le Bresil de la Decouverte

aux temps modernes. Paris: Nathan, 1993.D’Argy, Instruction pour l’Enseignement de la gymnastique. Paris: Dumaine, 1850, 1855, 1865 &

1872.De Coubertin, P. Pedagogie sportive [1919]. Paris: Vrin, 1982.Defrance, J. L’excellence corporelle. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes et ed. AFRAPS, 1987.Defrance, J. ‘La signification culturelle de l’hebertisme’. STAPS 31 (May 1993): 47–64.Delaplace, J.-M. Georges Hebert, sculpteur de corps. Paris: Vuibert, 2005.Deville-Danthu, E. Le sport en noir et blanc: Du sport colonial au sport africain. Paris: L’Harmattan,

1997.Dumont, J. ‘Joinville aux Antilles, d’une guerre a l’autre. Les enjeux d’une formation coloniale’. In

L’empreinte de Joinville. 150 ans de sport, edited by P. Simonet and L. Verary. Paris: INSEP,2003.

Ferreira Neto, A. A Pedagogia no Exercito e na Escola. A Educacao Fısica brasileira (1880–1950),Aracruz, Facha, 1999.

Gems G. The Athletic Crusade. Sport and American Cultural Imperialism. University of Lincoln, NE:Nebraska University Press, 2006.

Goellner, S.V. ‘O Metodo Frances e Militarizacao da Educacao Fısica na Escola Brasiliera’. InPesquisa Historica na Educacao Fısica Brasileira, edited by N. Amarılio Ferreira, N. Vitoria:CEFD-UFES, 1996: 123–143.

Guerra, F.-X. ‘La lumiere et ses reflets: Paris et la politique latino-americaine’. In Le Paris desetrangers depuis un siecle, edited by A. Kaspi and A. Mares. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale,1989: 171–182.

Guttmann, A. Games and Empire: Modern Sports and Cultural Imperialism. New York: ColumbiaUniversity Press, 1994.

Hebert, G. L’Education physique raisonnee. Paris: Vuibert, 1907.Hebert, G. Le Guide pratique d’Education physique. Paris: Vuibert, 1909.Hebert, G. Le Code de la Force. Paris: Vuibert, 1910.Hebert, G. L’education physique virile et morale par la Methode Naturelle. Expose doctrinal et

principes directeurs de travail. Paris: Vuibert, 1936.

1996 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Instructions du zo juin 1923 relatives au nouveau plan d’etudes des ecoles primaires elementaires.Bulletin Administratif du Ministere de l’Instruction Publique, ler aout (1923).

Kennedy, J., ed. ‘Sporting Tradition in Ireland and Latin America’. Irish Migration Studies in LatinAmerica 6, no. 1, (special issue) (March 2008).

Labrosse (Commandant). Notice sur l’Ecole Superieure de Joinville-Le-Pont. Joinville: Impr. del’Ecole, 1930.

Loudcher, J.F. and C. Vivier. ‘Les manuels de gymnastique et d’education physique officiels etofficialises (1869–1931)’. In L’identite de l’EP scolaire au XXe siecle, edited by J.-P. Clementand M. Herr. Clermont-Ferrand: ed. AFRAPS, 1993: 327–348.

Mangan J. A. The Games Ethic and Imperialism. Aspects of the Diffusion of an Ideal. London: FrankCass, 1986.

Mangan J.A. and L.P. DaCosta, eds. ‘Sport in Latin American Society Past and Present’. TheInternational Journal of the History of Sport 18, no. 3, (Sept 2001).

Marinho, I. P. Historia da Educacao Fısica no Brasil. Sao Paulo: Companhia Brasil Editora, 1980.Martinez, C.H.M. ‘Uma contribuicao para a Educacao Fisica Brasileira’. Available at: http://

www.cev.org.br/grcev/kiko/capitulo1.htm, 2 May 2008.Melandri, P. and S. Ricard. Les relations franco-americaines au XXe siecle. Paris: L’Harmattan,

2003.Milza, P. Les relations internationales de 1918 a 1939. Paris: Armand Colin, 1995.Ministere de la Defense, Etat-major des armees. Une histoire culturelle du sport. De Joinville a

l’Olympisme. Paris: Ed. Revue EP.S., 1996.Ministere de la Guerre. Instruction pour l’enseignement de la gymnastique dans les corps de troupe et

les etablissements militaires. Paris: 1846.Ministere de la Guerre. Reglement general d’education physique. Methode francaise. Paris: Charles-

Lavauzelle, 1927–30.Nouschi, M. Le XXeme siecle. Paris: Armand Colin, 1995.Pfister, G. Sport, Politics and German Imperialism. NASSH Proceedings, 2004: 86.Renouvin, P. ‘Les crises du XXeme siecle’. In Histoire des relations internationales. Paris: Hachette,

vol. 7, 1957.Rocha-Ferreira, M., M. Vinha and J. Fassheber. ‘Physical Education and Sport Science: a Brief

Social Historical Overview’. Unpublished poster presented at the International Conventionon Science, Education and Medicine in Sport (ICSEMIS), Guangzhou, China, 1–4 August2008.

Saint-Martin, J. ‘L’exemplarite des educations physiques etrangeres en France’. PhD diss.,University of Lyon I, 1997.

Saint-Martin, J. ‘L’Ecole de Joinville: Une piece maıtresse dans le rayonnement geopolitique de l’EPfrancaise entre les deux guerres mondiales?’ In L’empreinte de Joinville, 150 ans de sport,edited by P. Simonet and L. Veray, (pp.). Paris: INSEP, 2003: 47–64.

Saint-Martin, J. ‘L’education physique du berceau a la tranchee . . . ou les enjeux ideologiques d’uneeducation physique suediste a la francaise (1898–1935).’ In Sport et Ideologie, edited by J.F.Loudcher, C. Vivier, and al. Besancon: CESH, 2004, vol. 3: 187–197.

Saint-Martin, J. L’education physique a l’epreuve de la Nation (1918–1939). Paris: Vuibert, 2005.Simonet, P. L’INSEP. De la gymnastique joinvillaise aux sports contemporains. Paris: G. Klopp, 1998.Simonet, P. and L. Veray, eds. L’empreinte de Joinville, 150 ans de sport. Paris: INSEP, 2003.Sous-secretariat de l’Education physique. L’Education physique aux colonies. Joinville-le-Pont: Impr.

de l’Ecole, 1930.Spivak, M. ‘Les origines militaires de l’education physique francaise, 1774–1848’. PhD diss.,

University of Montpellier III, 1975.Spivak, M. ‘Francisco Amoros y Ondeano, precurseur et fondateur de l’education physique en

France’. In Le corps en mouvement, edited by P. Arnaud. Toulouse: Privat, 1981.

French Gymnastics in Brazil 1997

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Spivak, M. ‘L’Ecole de Joinville’. In Le corps en mouvement, edited by P. Arnaud. Toulouse: Privat,1981.

Spivak, M. ‘Education, Sport et nationalisme en France du Second Empire au Front populaire: unaspect original de la defense nationale’. State Thesis, University of Paris 1 Sorbonne, 1983.

Suppo, H.R. ‘La politique culturelle francaise au Bresil entre les annees 1920–1950’. PhD diss.,University of Paris, 1999.

Terret, T. L’institution et le nageur. Histoire de la Federation Francaise de Natation. Lyon: Pressesuniversitaires de Lyon, 1998.

Terret, T. and R. Vescovi. ‘L’education physique a l’ecole primaire pendant l’entre-deux-guerres.Une comparaison des systemes francais et italiens’. In The History of Educational Institutions,Physical Education and Sport, edited by E. Trangbaeck and A. Kruger. Copenhagen: CESH,1999: 269–283.

Terret, T. Les Jeux interallies de 1919. Sport, guerre et relations internationales. Paris: L’Harmattan,2002.

Terret, T. Les Paris des Jeux de 1924. Biarritz: Atlantica, 2008.Terret, T. ‘Les YMCA, la propagande americaine et la reconstruction sportive de la France des

annees 1920’. In Etats-Unis-France: Postures americaines, receptions francaises, edited by F.Cochet. Verdun, 14–18 Meuse, in press.

Tesche, L. and A.B. Rambo. ‘Reconstructing the Fatherland: German Turnen in Southern Brazil’.European Sports History Review, vol. 3, 2001: 5–22.

Thibault, J. Sports et education physique, 1870–1970. Paris: Vrin, 1972.Thibault, J. ‘Philippe Tissie.’ In Le corps en mouvement, edited by Pierre Arnaud. Toulouse: Privat,

1981: 223–246.Torres, C. ‘Les enjeux diplomatiques de l’enseignement de la langue francaise au Bresil’. In Bulletin

de l’Institut Pierre Renouvin (1948–61), Winter 2003.Tremblay, M-A. ‘Le Transfert culturel: fondement et extension dans le processus d’acculturation’.

Anthropologica 4, no. 2, (1962): 293–320.Vechia, A. and K.M. Lorenz. Programa de Ensino da Escola Secundaria Brasileira: 1850–1951.

Curitiba: Ed.do Autor, 1998.Zeldin, T. Histoire des passions francaises. 1848–1945. Paris: Seuil, 1978.

1998 T. Terret and L. Tesche

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

1:49

11

Oct

ober

201

4