Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert: the debates in France and their representation in the Brazilian press (1913-1949)Abstract
This article analyses the disputes between Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert in France and the representations of this controversy in Brazilian Physical Education in the early twentieth century. Brazilian periodical press sources and historical documents from the French Military Mission in Brazil are used as sources. The findings lead to the following conclusions: (1) the recognition of Hébert’s Natural Method as an autonomous method; (2) the correlation between the Natural Method and the French Method of Joinville-le-Pont as harmonious and complementary perspectives; and (3) the denial of Hébert as a strategy for legitimising the French Method.
Keywords:
disputes; press; Physical Education; Brazil
Resumo
O artigo analisa os enfrentamentos entre Joinville-le-Pont e Georges Hébert na França e as representações dessa disputa na Educação Física brasileira, no início do século XX. Utilizam-se como fontes a imprensa periódica brasileira e os documentos históricos da Missão Militar Francesa no Brasil. As observações levam às seguintes conclusões: (1) o reconhecimento do Método Natural de Hébert como um método próprio; (2) a correlação entre o Método Natural e o Método Francês de Joinville-le-Pont como perspectivas harmônicas e complementares; e (3) a negação a Hébert como estratégia de legitimidade do Método Francês.
Palavras-chave:
enfrentamentos; imprensa; Educação Física; Brasil
Resumen
El artículo analiza los enfrentamientos entre Joinville-le-Pont y Georges Hébert en Francia y las representaciones de esta disputa en la Educación Física brasileña a comienzos del siglo XX. Se utilizan como fuentes la prensa periódica brasileña y los documentos históricos de la Misión Militar Francesa en Brasil. Las observaciones conducen a las siguientes conclusiones: (1) el reconocimiento del Método Natural de Hébert como un método propio; (2) la correlación entre el Método Natural y el Método Francés de Joinville-le-Pont como perspectivas armónicas y complementarias; y (3) la negación de Hébert como estrategia de legitimación del Método Francés.
Palabras clave:
enfrentamientos; prensa; Educación Física; Brasil
Introduction
Late 19th and early 20th century France experienced the emergence of various proposals for Physical Education. Instead of seeking uniformity among themselves to structure a national method, as occurred with neighboring countries such as Sweden and Germany, the prevailing ideals began to compete with each other, leading to confrontations. In the climate experienced in the country, permeated by the attempt to define an identity for Physical Education, this episode became known among French researchers as the "war of methods" (Saint-Martin, 2005).
In this context, two figures stand out. The first is the École de Joinville-le-Pont, an institution linked to the French Army, founded in Paris on June 15, 1852, by the Minister of War, Marshal Soult, which became a reference in matters of the field and in the training of instructors, but at the beginning of the 20th century its prestige in the area was threatened due to the emergence of various gymnastic methods in Europe, especially in France (Terret & Saint-Martin, 2015). On the other hand, we have the French Navy officer Georges Hébert (1875-1957), who held the position of technical director of physical exercise instruction at the École de Gymnastique de la Marine in Lorient, a military command attached to Joinville-le-Pont. Hébert, in creating the Natural Method, gained increasing prominence and recognition in France, obtaining support from the Navy to the Press (Delaplace, 2000).
The individual and the institution began to accuse each other of having their ideas stolen and appropriated by one another. This allows us to perceive the peculiarities that marked the French context, in a scenario where the aim was to end the war of methods and where there was also a search to legitimize a nationally recognized model of Physical Education.
European proposals for Physical Education arrived in Brazil between the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Researchers have been interested in analyzing the presence of these ideas, methods, subjects, manuals, and institutions in the country. Both the Natural Method of Georges Hébert (Soares, 2003, 2015; Gleyse et al., 2014; Jubé, 2017; Jubé & Dalben, 2018; Coco et al., 2024) and the École de Joinville-le-Pont and his French Method (Goellner, 1992; Queiroz & Cancella, 2018; Cassani, 2018; Bruschi, 2019) have become objects of interest.
However, the disagreements between the two figures and the implications of this dispute in the pursuit of representation had not yet been problematized in the Brazilian context. Therefore, this work aims to analyze the dispute between Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert in their quest for recognition in France, identifying the interface of this relationship, especially through the press in Brazil. The main question raised is: how were the disagreements between institution and subject in France perceived and received in Brazil in a context where the field was being scientifically constituted?
Sources and procedures
To bring this narrative to light, we turned to historical sources. The first set of documents refers to the Brazilian periodical press, of two types. The first concerns newspapers and magazines, which we commonly call the variety press, since it disseminated diverse news, with Physical Education being one of the themes. Consultation of these sources was carried out in the electronic database of the Newspaper Archive of the National Digital Library of Brazil.
Subsequently, we consulted two specialized journals in the field of Physical Education: the Revista de Educação Física (1932-1960) (REF) and the journal Educação Physica (1932-1945) (REPHy), both found in the Library of the Faculty of Physical Education at the State University of Campinas (Unicamp), in Special Collections. The specialized press was consulted because it constituted a space that disseminated knowledge intended to provide the basis for professionals working in the field (Ferreira Neto, 2005). We started from the information provided by Cassani (2018), who, when conducting a quantitative survey of referenced authors, observed that Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert stood out as the most referenced by columnists in the publications seeking scientific and pedagogical support for the field.
Our collection of sources includes historical documents from the French Military Mission (FMF) in Brazil (1919-1939), given the presence of officers who graduated in Joinville-le-Pont and were active in the country, responsible for providing training and updating knowledge about physical training in the Brazilian Army. Parts of this information were published in the magazine A Defesa Nacional, and some other documents were located in the Army Historical Archive.
It is possible to find mentions of Joinville-le-Pont in the press since the 1880s, remaining high in number, especially in the 1920s and 1930s. In addition to topics related to the systematization of Physical Education, there are also those focused on the participation of athletes in the Olympics, even reaching administrative matters related to the MPEF (Municipal Physical Education Federation). Regarding Hébert, citations began in 1913, a year in which both figures crossed paths in the press, and which we consider the starting point of our investigation. Let's look at the recurrence of their names in Table 1.
Frequency of mentions of Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert in the press between the 1910s and 1940s
A decrease in mentions of both characters is observed from the 1940s onwards. Specialized literature has indicated this decade as a delicate moment for European gymnastic methods, as there is the beginning of a decline in publications on this topic and the rise of representations of sports from 1950 onwards, achieving a prominent place in methodological references for the area (Cunha, 2017). For this reason, it was decided to limit the research to the year 1949.
This study takes as its reference the theoretical and methodological assumptions of Cultural History (Chartier, 1991; Certeau, 1994; Bloch, 2001). Thus, the sources were interrogated, taking care not to simply record the words of our witnesses, but rather encouraging them to speak, since they tell the story from the perspectives and intentions of authors and social groups who aim to establish themselves as authorities, elaborating representations of a given reality. To study the disputes between Joinville-le-Pont and Hébert in France and their interfaces in the Brazilian scenario, we specifically borrow Chartier's (1991) considerations on struggles of representation, which warn us that there is competition among different groups for the construction of the social world, manifested by the way individuals enunciate their representations in terms of power and domination.
In search of authority: the disputes between Joinville-le-Pont and Hébert in France
Between the late 19th and early 20th centuries, different gymnastic proposals and methods emerged, competing with each other in France. Among the main ones were: (1) the Swedish Method, which gained great admiration among the French, especially from Philippe Tissié; (2) the work of Georges Demenÿ; (3) the Natural Method of Georges Hébert; and (4) the English sports initiation. Initially, the military school of Joinville-le-Pont sometimes approached and sometimes distanced itself from these systematizations, organizing its own model in the 1920s, called the French Method. Certain differences between these systems referred to the organizing principle according to which physical exercise would be offered. The creators of the methods formulated theories, explaining the reasons for the execution of each movement.
This was the climate experienced in France in the attempt to define an identity for national Physical Education. Among the main confrontations, the clashes between Joinville-le-Pont and Hébert are well known in French historiography (Bui-Xuân & Gleyse, 2001; Defrance, 2014; Delaplace, 2000, 2003, 2005; Froissart & Saint-Martin, 2014; Philippe- Meden, 2012, 2017; Pociello, 1998; Saint-Martin, 2000, 2005; Sarremejane, 2007; Simonet, 1998; Terret & Saint-Martin, 2015; Villaret, 2005). The studies present some events that marked the disagreements between the two figures.
In a context permeated by competition for the legitimacy to speak about Physical Education, Hébert and certain leaders of Joinville-le-Pont adopted strategies aimed at their own protagonism. With the beginning of the systematization of his method, Hébert found a favorable environment, from 1903 onwards, for its application at the École de Gymnastique de la Marine in Lorient. This institution was unhappy with using a gymnastics regulation from the Army, which was not adapted to maritime needs. Given the interesting work he was doing and after publishing the Manuel de Gymnastique de la marine in 1905, Hébert received important support that led him, in 1909, to the position of Technical Director in Lorient (Philippe-Meden, 2017).
The relationship with Joinville-le-Pont was beginning to sour, as the institution's reputation became intertwined with that of the then-aspirant Hébert. Three main reasons led to the direct confrontation between them: a) the threat posed by Hébert to Joinville-le-Pont regarding Physical Education issues; b) the name of the method developed in Lorient becoming known as the "Natural Method of Georges Hébert," being an individual and not an institutional method (Defrance, 2014); c) and finally, in the first two decades of the 20th century, Joinville-le-Pont ardently defended the Swedish Method, supported by the institution's leader, Commander Emille Coste (1902-1906) (Delaplace, 2003).
Another event that highlighted the discord between the two figures occurred when Hébert, at the invitation of journalist Theodore Vienne, gave a demonstration to the press in Paris, in May 1909, in the Jardins de la Grande Roue. Vienne, a supporter of Hébert, stated that men trained using the Natural Method would be the most ingenious, agile, and resilient of all soldiers in the world. In response to this demonstration, the Joinville School, through the Ministry of War, prohibited the teaching of the Natural Method to the 62nd Infantry Regiment of Lorient, justifying this by claiming it was contrary to the regular teaching established by Joinville-le-Pont (Delaplace, 2003). This was a strategy to try and nullify Hébert's progress, leading him to relinquish his own officer's rank in order to dedicate himself to systematizing his method (Froissart & Saint-Martin, 2014).
Upon leaving the Navy, Hébert took over the Collège d' Athlètes in 1913, establishing himself in the civilian world (Defrance, 2014). His dedication to his work made him increasingly well-known, earning him the attention of educators, journalists, and doctors. Furthermore, his participation in the Congrès... International d' Éducation Physique de 1913 was considered controversial. The French newspapers Le Figaro and L'Opinion published articles that took Hébert 's athletes' victory for granted. However, Sarremejane (2007) states that Hébert 's victory in the event would not have been recognized without the support of the Armed Forces.
Still in 1913, the then commander of the Joinville-le-Pont, Colonel Boblet (1910-1914), allegedly presented a military preparation report containing elements of the Natural Method. The clashes between the two figures reached their most critical point, with accusations of plagiarism. Hébert publicly pointed out these irregularities (Sarremejane, 2007). Subsequently, a new accusation was made by Hébert when the Joinville-le-Pont distributed aptitude measurement sheets, supposedly plagiarized from the book Code de la Force (1911), which Hébert had published with the intention of highlighting the originality of his work (Villaret, 2005). In an effort with Paul Vuibert, the publisher of his books, the index cards distributed by Joinville-le -Pont were reportedly withdrawn from circulation.
Hébert accused Joinville-le-Pont of plagiarism in 1916, after the institution published a new military manual written by Commander Labrosse (1916-1919), entitled Guide pratique d' éducation physique. According to Delaplace (2003), the guide seemed to incorporate the teaching propositions of Hébert and his work also entitled Guide pratique d'éducation Physique, published in 1909, presented the application exercises, which included the seven families of natural exercises and a sports and athletic Physical Education.
Hébert (1941, p. 158, our translation) expressed himself regarding the dissemination of the new military regulations by Joinville-le-Pont: “Unfortunately, it is painful to note that this document, drawn up by well-meaning but incompetent officers, is merely an amalgam or a simple copy without links to existing works on the subject matter.” In contrast, the residents of Joinville asserted that the method of the 1916 regulations differed from that envisioned by Hébert, both in its application and doctrinal principles, as well as in its pedagogy and forms of execution, which were analytical and military (Philippe-Meden, 2017).
In the 1920s, with the intention of formulating a national method and regaining its representative strength in the area, Joinville-le-Pont published a new regulation, entitled Règlement General of Education Physique, better known as the French Method, a model considered eclectic in its essence. In its development, the institution juxtaposed models, appropriating the best theses or elements circulating on Physical Education, reconciling them with a view to obtaining a broader system, rather than building a new one (Terret & Saint-Martin, 2015).
If elements of the Natural Method were integrated into this project, Joinville-le-Pont should have recognized that it was part of Hébert's work, but it resisted doing so. If the institution's objective was to resolve disputes over existing methods in the country and demonstrate its representative strength in decision-making for Physical Education, it ended up reviving the "war of methods." Saint-Martin (2005) points out that, after the publication of the versions of the Règlement, the solution proposed by eclecticism accentuated this dispute. Enthusiasts did not hide their discontent and criticism of the syncretism of ideas and the distortion in the use of their respective methods.
While Hébert had previously accused Joinville-le-Pont of stealing his ideas, he then went on to demand recognition as one of the inspirers of the French Method. He requested that the institution mentioned him as one of the contributors to the model, alongside names such as Francisco Amorós y Ondeano1 and Georges Demenÿ. However, until the 1930s, Joinville-le-Pont publicly denied Hébert's contributions, accusing him of treating the matter as a personal triviality, above the interests of the Nation.
Following the public outcry over the appropriation of his ideas by Joinville-le-Pont, an agreement was reportedly reached in 1930 (Delaplace, 2003). Hébert's name was timidly included as one of the inspirers of the French Method. The institution resisted giving credibility to an officer who had "rebelled" by creating a method bearing his own name that did not fit within the prerogatives of Joinville-le -Pont2.
Georges Hébert, the "father" of the French Method?
Around the 1920s, French literature on Physical Education was on the rise in Brazil. French works by various pioneers began to arrive in the country through officers who had participated in the MPM (Military Police Military), some of whom were even graduates of Joinville-le-Pontifical School of Physical Education. (Bruschi, 2019). According to Suppo (1999), the French mission, in addition to its military influence, also pursued diplomatic, cultural, and economic objectives.
General Gamelin, head of the MPM, seemed to be aware of the imperialist project in the political and cultural sphere unleashed by France in the interwar period, with the creation of the Service des Oeuvres Françaises à l'Étranger. He related the mission to “French propaganda” in Brazil, stating that “It is good that a mission leader has at his disposal a certain number of copies of works that honor French thought and that he can, from time to time, insert them where their influence is useful” (Gamelin, 1920, p.27, our translation). A notable intellectual influence was exerted through the cultural exchange established in language, mentality, and literature.
French influence intensified in Brazilian Physical Education with the presence of the French Military Medicine (FMM). One of the first initiatives was to replace, in the Brazilian Army, the regulations that were based on a different perspective of physical exercise orientation with the French proposal, using as a reference the method adopted by Joinville-le-Pont (Buys, 1920). This involved an intellectual exchange, with the arrival of several works, such as those by Fernand Lagrange, Philippe Tissié, Maurice Boigey, Georges Demenÿ, and Georges Hébert (Dutra, 1925a). Records also show the arrival of manuals and regulations, such as the Guide Pratique de l'Éducation. Physique (from Joinville-le-Pont) and the Projet de Regulation General of Education Physique (“From the French KING”, 1919)3. Readings were carried out by Brazilian officers, with the intention of updating the understanding of Physical Education and disseminating them in other formats and places, such as the translations and summaries propagated in the military publication A Defesa Nacional, and in the effort to publish the Manual de Educação Física, launched in 1925, authored by Captain João Barbosa Leite and Lieutenant Jair Dantas Ribeiro.
What came to be called the French Method became evident as the model that would guide Physical Education in the Brazilian Army. The eclecticism of the method was not denied, and the need for Brazilian officers to read works by authors whose work the Joinville-le-Pont school appropriated for its elaboration was highlighted as necessary. In this context, great emphasis was placed on Hébert's Natural Method, even being considered the "father" of the model created at Joinville-le-Pont (Dutra, 1925a). Many of his works began to be read by Brazilian officers as a way to understand the new proposals being implemented.
With the necessary discernment, we have, for the past three years, been reading the interesting and engaging publications (more than nine books already) of the French naval officer G. Hébert, who, even before 1913, has become famous for the so-called 'natural method' or 'return to nature' [...]. It is the same method officially followed in that navy, at the Laurent School, and in the army, in the corps that do not yet have special instructors from the Joinville-le-Pont School, a method whose paternity is attributed to him, Hébert, and which he has been crowning with precious fame, created by his natural enthusiasm for this cause and by his proven industriousness and practical and somewhat technical capacity in the subject (Dutra, 1925a, pp. 29-30).
In Brazil, Hébert came to be seen as a collaborator of Joinville-le-Pont in the development of the French Method. Apparently, the fact that his works were appropriated without his consent was silenced, while disagreements continued intensely in France. It can be presumed that the omission of these rivalries was a strategy used by French officials to legitimize a particular project in Brazil, capitalizing on advantages and contributing to the imperialist policy pursued by France.
So, unlike the French context, where Joinville-le-Pont categorically denied appropriating Hébert's ideas, in Brazil this blending of ideas was done without any embarrassment (Jubé, 2017), since Hébert would possibly not have followed the repercussions of this outside of Europe. Let's see:
The demonstrative part by prints of our last (1921) 'Regulation of Military Physical Instruction', a summary of the various parts of the still French 'Draft Regulation of Physical Education' (1919), in turn an offshoot of the Joinville- le-Pont School, of a somewhat more scientific method, with eclectic tendencies [...] even after the last and recent reform (in 1916) of the physical education processes in that School, is a borrowing, albeit provisional, as is already understood, from the Practical Guide to Physical Education of that hopeful Navy officer [Hébert] (Dutra, 1925a, p. 30).
The grouping of natural movements into seven families (Hébert, 1916) - marching, climbing, jumping, lifting and carrying, running, throwing, and swimming - was foreseen in the actual lesson section of the French Method, and became widely exemplified as a pedagogical possibility, with this contribution attributed to Hébert (Barbosa Leite, 1929). Thus, the French officers of the FMF, far removed from the intense power struggles occurring in their country of origin, gave credibility to Hébert 's work. Apparently, no mention was made of the intense confrontations between the individuals involved. There is a silencing of the disputes that occurred in France, and Hébert was understood as a figure who established a dialogue with Joinville-le-Pont for the elaboration of the French Method.
In the 1920s, the Brazilian Army became a fertile ground for constructing a rhetoric that strengthened the image of Joinville-le-Pont as the one that created the scientific foundations for the area. Such representations did not remain within the Army, expanding into the civilian sphere. In these other spaces, how was the relationship between Joinville-le- Pont and Hébert perceived?
Printed materials, representation, and disputes
For some time now, academic production has directed its research towards the periodical press, focusing attention on the representations conveyed, the characters involved, and the groups that form around this medium. The word "press," its supports and prescriptions, are now perceived, according to Darnton (1996), not only as a record of what happened, but as a constituent part of the event. The press can be analyzed on a microscopic scale, observing its uses to update the knowledge of the reading public, or on a macroscopic scale, perceiving it as a strategy/tactic of dissemination and persuasion regarding a particular project, cultural, educational, or sanitary reforms, among others (Luca, 2011). According to the author, the press was capable of capturing
The acceleration of time and the confrontation with the artifacts that made up modernity (automobiles, streetcars, electricity, cinemas, nightclubs, phonographs, photographic cameras), the diffusion of new habits, aspirations and values, the social, political and aesthetic demands of the different layers that circulated through the cities, the conflicts and efforts of the political elites to impose their worldview and control the "dangerous classes", the constitution of public spaces and the intricacies that governed their use and circulation, the interventions in the name of sanitation and hygiene, cultural production and aesthetic renovations-all this became part of the concerns of historians, who did not shy away from seeking some of the answers in the periodical press, through whose pages future projects were formulated, discussed and articulated (Luca, 2011, p. 120).
The author complements her idea by stating that, even though they were called "variety" magazines, they catered to diverse audiences: they were aimed at children, women, and dealt with daily life, religion, politics, sports, etc. In our case, in these spaces, the writings of Brazilian military personnel were added to those of civilians, expanding the possibilities of understanding the representations circulating about Physical Education and the disputes between authors and their projects within the national periodical press.
When observing the Brazilian variety press, some understandings about Joinville-le-Pont and Hébert were perceived, among them: a) the recognition of the Natural Method as a method of its own; b) the correlation between the Natural Method and the French Method as harmonious and complementary perspectives based on eclecticism; c) the denial of Hébert and his method as a strategy for legitimizing the French Method.
Mentions of Hébert's name begin in the Brazilian press in 1913, with news of his participation in the Congrès International d' Éducation Physique, in Paris (Jubé, 2017), a moment that coincides with the internationalization process of his method (Saint-Martin, 2000). Mentions of Hébert appeared in that decade in national periodicals, such as Fon-Fon! (RJ), Jornal do Commérico (RJ), O Pharol (MG) and Pacotilha (MA). The Natural Method is mentioned in Brazil, gaining notoriety, being presented as a new model created in the French context, offering new possibilities for thinking about the systematization of Physical Education:
All methods of physical education known to date have fulfilled their intended purposes, contributing to the physical improvement of man. But among these various methods, the so-called 'natural method', practiced by the client Georges Hébert, director, has long been raising the palm of the 'riussite'. The technical aspects of teaching physical exercises in the French Navy, whose results are unanimously proclaimed by experts and specialists in the field, placed him in a position of special prominence (Damazio, 1914, p. 3).
In the national press, the fundamentals of the Natural Method began to be disseminated, highlighting naturalist ideas and the classification of physical exercises into seven families of movements. At the same time, Hébert's proposal was presented as an important contribution to the Brazilian cause, since its principles concerned the ideas of racial regeneration and the physical and moral formation of citizens (Jubé & Dalben, 2018). Publications about the method that arrived in Brazil were promising, finding enthusiasts who came to recognize the scientific value of the model "[...] considered the most efficient of all" ("Os Sports", 1916, p. 6).
Simultaneously, Joinville-le-Pont was mentioned as a center of military, scientific, and educational reference that, since the mid-19th century, had contributed to the cause of Physical Education and training instructors, paying attention to the physical preparation of military personnel, and investing in the training of athletes ("A School of Athletes", 1914). Mentions of the institution favored its international prestige as a vibrant space that preserved the memory of its past and projected current and future perspectives (Simonet, 1998).
Regarding the participation of the two characters in the Congress International d' Éducation Physique, the newspaper O Pharol, presented Hébert as a new enthusiast and Joinville-le-Pont as an already established place. Furthermore, national periodicals were divided as to the "winner" of the congress: O Pharol said that "The highlight of this great muscle festival was certainly the group of 350 of Lieutenant Hébert, whose rough method "The physical training to which they were subjected transformed them solely into athletes of the school” (“The Congress of Physical Education”, 1913, p. 1); in contrast, the newspaper Pacotilha wrote that “It can be said that the Paris congress marks the apotheosis of the Joinville Military School” (“Joinville-le-Pont Apresentada”, 1913, p. 3).
In the 1920s, Hébert's Natural Method continued to be represented as a "method of its own," especially when the topic was harmonic gymnastics for women (Jubé, 2017). This fact offers us an indication that the circulation of his work Muscle et beauté plastic: education physique feminine (1919) caught the attention of civilian authors interested in the subject of female Physical Education (D'Oliveira, 1920; “Gymnastica e Dança”, 1920; May, 1923). However, we note that he began to be associated more specifically with Joinville-le-Pont still within that decade, probably due to representations promoted by French FMF officers.
This correlation began to become evident from 1925 onwards, when the National Defense League supported the merging of the Natural Method with the proposals of Joinville-le-Pont for the creation of a National Physical Education Plan4. The Jornal do Brasil presented the proposals of Moitinho Doria, a member of the League, in which he placed Hébert as a teacher at Joinville-le-Pont and combined the guidelines of the "method". Hébert-Boigey's "Physical Culture as a Means" (National Defense League..., 1925) refers to the plan of Lieutenant Colonel Maurice Boigey, then a doctor from Joinville.
It is in this context that the French Method began to circulate in the Brazilian press. Gradually , the idea that the French proposal was in effect in the Brazilian Army, as a result of the guidance and supervision of the MMF (Military Police Force), was reinforced. Joinville-le-Pont was usually referenced by interlocutors as the place where all the methods that emerged in the French context were experimented with, tested, preserved, and enriched. The eclecticism of the model was once again highlighted, now being publicly disseminated to civil society. General Francisco José Dutra, in a publication in the Gazeta de Notícias (RJ), stated the following about the various methods:
[...] heterogeneous or different, contradictory and controversial, even among the same authors. And, despite this, they are such The Methods, there in France, adopted and observed in the special schools preparing future instructors of physical education [...], including in the Army and Navy. In the latter, the 'Natural Method', empirical, attributed to the still young naval officer G. Hérbert, its enthusiast and propagator, is officially and generally observed. In the Army, the rational or scientific method, with pretensions to eclecticism, of the Joinville-le-Pont School [...] is followed officially and almost generally. But even so, the last Method, that of the Joinville School, does not escape the condemnation of doctors and specialists in Physical Education with long experience, such as Drs. Philippe Tissié and Fernand Lagrange, and the highly competent educator G. Demenÿ, all French (Dutra, 1925b, p. 2).
In this case, the Natural Method is attributed only to the French Navy, while the French Method is related to Joinville-le-Pont. Given the accusations of plagiarism that followed the publication of the Réglement Générale, the criticisms and discontent regarding the syncretism of ideas and the distortion in the use of their respective methods are reserved for Tissié, Lagrange, and possibly Demenÿ, if he were still alive, without mentioning, however, the name of Hébert. Strangely, General Francisco José Dutra, who had pointed out that Hébert was the "father" of the Joinville-le-Pont method, now separates the model used in the French Navy from the one officially adopted by the institution.
With the exception of the article written by Dutra, some newspapers led the reader to understand that the Joinville-le-Pont method was Hébert 's own method. This understanding took shape in the press from 1927 onwards, when it was stated that "The management of the Joinville School and the General Staff of the French army, charged with creating a national method to replace the 1919 regulations, modeled on the Swedish method, took as their basis the system..." (“The Preliminary Match at Vasco da Gama”, 1927, p. 9, excerpt replicated in three more newspapers: Correio Paulistano, SP, O Imparcial, RJ, and Correio da Manhã, RJ).
The exercises based on the seven families of natural movements are highlighted as the synthesis of the teaching methodology applied at Joinville-le-Pont, lending credibility to Hébert as its creator (“The Preliminary”, 1927). At times, the method adopted by Joinville-le-Pont is even referred to as “French naturalism” (“The Physical Culture Used”, 1934). Despite Hébert's proposal being recognized as scientific (“Physical Education”, 1929), Joinville-le-Pont and those responsible for writing the regulations, Général was given the task of “[...] mitigating the harshness of the natural method” (“A Preliminar no Vasco da Gama”, 1927, p. 9), as a way of reinforcing the historically established institutional and scientific prestige.
Sometimes, the way these correlations are presented leads the reader to believe that there was a joint effort between Joinville-le- Pont and Hébert, with the latter even contributing authorship to the writing of the French Method. A similar misconception occurred in 1929, during the elaboration of a National Physical Education Plan to be implemented in Brazil. The document was supposedly based on the Joinville-le-Pont proposal, under the auspices of the Minister of War, Nestor Sezefredo5. Professor Jorge Figueira Machado stated that the project would be guided by a “[...] uniform and general physical education system, oriented by the natural methodology of Georges Hébert” (Machado, 1929, p. 20).
Certain contradictions (and even inaccuracies) regarding French gymnastic methods appear in the Brazilian press. It is observed that Hébert has ceased to be seen solely as an enthusiast who developed his own method and has become associated with Joinville-le-Pont, implying that he was, in fact, a collaborator in the development of the French Method. It is known that the author's systematizations contributed to the elaboration of this method, but this did not occur in an authorized or consensual manner, and the accusation of "usurpation" of Hébert 's principles is never mentioned in the Brazilian press.
We attribute this lack of consensus to the increase in writings by military personnel about the cause of Physical Education in the general press. The presence of the French Method of Physical Education in the Brazilian Army aimed to construct a rhetoric in order to strengthen the image of Joinville-le-Pont abroad. In addition, we identified the need to transmit knowledge about the French Method, which, being eclectic, may have been the cause of the numerous contradictions that occurred in Brazil.
We also note that, in the 1920s, our country was still in the early stages of discussing gymnastic methods, while in France the debates were in full swing. Consequently, the disputes between both sides were marked by fierce power struggles and influence battles, in various attempts to ensure that the "war of methods" had only one winner in France. In Brazil, however, press articles had no commitment to the parties involved. Thus, the sources presented comparisons, confusions, and contradictions in the most versatile ways possible.
Mentions of Hébert and Joinville-le-Pont decreased in the general press from the 1930s onwards, although they did not disappear completely and remained, thematically, similar to those citations identified in the 1920s. One of the likely reasons for this gradual decrease may be related to the creation of the first scientific journals in Physical Education, which were launched in 1932, since specialized periodicals became suitable spaces for addressing issues in the field.
Representations in specialized magazines
Representations involving both characters gained traction in specialized journals, notably in REF and REPHy. We highlight that the journals' approaches were distinct. In the case of REF, when discussing a place of personal will (Certeau, 1994), the columnists published articles whose theories aligned with the journal's editorial profile, dedicating publications based on the French Method and having Joinville-le-Pont as its representative.
The eclectic principle of the French Method is again evidenced in the REF: “An eclectic method par excellence, it draws from the masters Ling, Amoros, Hébert and Demenÿ filtered through science [...]” (Molina, 1932, np). Thus, it is clear that the efforts made by Joinville-le-Pont to juxtapose the knowledge of different proposals are reaffirmed in Brazil. Hébert 's work continues to be considered in this project of creating a new method; however, we perceive an attempt not to give too much visibility to his name, with an indication of obscuring his model: “ Hébertism, which was at its peak during the years surrounding the world war, was now in decline” (“The League of Nations”, 1932, np). In an attempt to diminish the great visibility that Hébert 's name had been gaining in Brazil, it is perceived that the French Method was gaining a new representative, with Georges Demenÿ and his work being given the necessary support (Martins, 1932).
Other arguments in the publication signaled possible shortcomings in Hébert 's method, even if subtly pointed out under the guise of female beauty and compared with Maurice Boigey’s proposals and Émile Jaques-Dalcroze (Mendes, 1933), in addition to a discontinuity in the mention of his name.
The eclecticism of the French Method was the argument used to justify the changes that could be made to the other proposals and to remedy their possible shortcomings. The debates heralded negotiation processes between the creators of the different methods, adapting them to the pedagogical principles established by Joinville-le-Pont based on the concepts of Demenÿ, considered prudent eclectic" ("The League of Nations", 1932).
The observations noted in REF contradicted the findings of Saint-Martin (2000), who states that in the 1930s the Natural Method reached the peak of its recognition in France and internationally. Thus, REF strategically criticized Hébert's Method, pointing out shortcomings in order to reaffirm the superiority of Joinville-le-Pont and the French Method. The journal's contributors did not want to leave room for ambiguity and possible contradictions, as had happened in previous years in the general interest press, thereby helping to promote the institution at the expense of Hébert.
On the other hand, REPHy was modulated from another editorial project and announced a panorama of discontinuity in relation to the principles of the French Method, with no articles based on its principles remaining absent until 1938, indicating that the subject could be a source of tension. Its contributors, mostly civilians, offered interpretative possibilities to the creation processes of the different methods, centralizing their scientific knowledge as a way to offer pedagogical support to the teaching of Physical Education (Cassani, 2018).
Eclecticism was also considered, but it was not based on the idea of the French Method. The concern was not to delimit gymnastic systems by the theoretical bias that offered them foundation, but rather on the need to present possibilities that would respond to the professional demands of the area. Hébert was considered an important reference by the authors of REPHy, whose method gained prominence: “Hébert's method is the best system of athletic culture. [...] the natural man is the most beautiful of men and at the same time the most vigorous” (Azevedo, 1936, p. 68). The periodical even presented a higher number of mentions than REF, without, however, associating the author with the French Method, such a connection being reserved for only two articles authored by military personnel who sought to defend the implementation of the French Method (Américo Neto, 1941; Bernard, 1944).
Between 1941 and 1943, six articles attributed to Hébert were published in REPHy, demonstrating the effort of columnists interested in his work to receive his writings. They dealt especially with the theme of sports and the distinctions between "sport" and "education". The text discusses the use of physical education in Brazil, specifically focusing on "physics" and "gymnastics" (Soares, 2003). It highlights the importance of their knowledge in contributing to discussions on topics such as sports practice (Dehoux, 1939b; Rodrigues, 1940; Rocha, 1942; Araujo, 1944), women's physical education (Dehoux, 1939a), outdoor physical education (Rouet, 1938), and childhood (Loyola, 1942), representing considerable progress in terms of professional adaptation and sports specialization. The Brazilian National Program for Physical Education (REPHy), by drawing on Hébert and his Natural Method, reaffirms its unique approach to the Brazilian context, offering valuable scientific contributions to the development of physical education in Brazil.
Final remarks
The "war of methods" was intense and heated between Joinville-le-Pont and Hébert in France. However, this dispute was marked by contradictions in the Brazilian context, interfering with the way Physical Education was conceived and institutionalized in the country. Contrary to the French scenario, in Brazil, Hébert gained legitimacy among French officials and was presented as a contributor to Joinville-le-Pont. Therefore, Hébert's Natural Method was correlated with the French Method, understood as harmonious and complementary proposals. Contradictorily, the Natural Method was also received in Brazil as its own model, as Brazilian research attests.
Hébert's national and international prominence in France led to a certain caution being directed towards him in the 1930s, with the creation of the REF (Rede de Educação Física - Physical Education Network), once again attributing the promotion of the French Method to Joinville-le-Pont. Strategically, the focus shifted to Georges Demenÿ, also an important figure in the systematization of this model, while certain limits were established for the Natural Method. Conversely, the REPHy (Rede de Educação Física Brasileira - Brazilian Physical Education Network), which did not favor the exclusive use of the French Method in Brazilian Physical Education, continued to present Hébert 's work as its own method, with important contributions to offer to the field.
As a strategy of struggle and cultural production, sources acted as privileged instances in the circulation of models, aiming at the establishment of a status and a position. The information circulating about Brazilian Physical Education, whether truthful or fabricated with the intention of moving, criticizing, demoralizing, exalting, or simply slandering, are records, as we show in this article, of the struggles for representation for control of the way of thinking and for the production of an authorized place of speech.
References
- A cultura physica como meio de solução das crises sociais, econômicas e políticas: Methodos francezes, instrucção pre-militar. 3ª conferência do dr. A. Moitinho Doria, na Liga da Defesa Nacional. (1925, 21 de agosto). Jornal do Brasil
- A cultura physica usada no exército. (1934, 21 de novembro). Correio Paulistano
- A liga das nações e a educação fisica. (1932). Revista de Educação Física, 1(1), 8.
- A preliminar. (1927, 1 de novembro). O Paiz
- A preliminar no Vasco da Gama. (1927, 23 de novembro). Correio da Manhã
- Américo Neto. (1941). Conjuntos atléticos: Décatlo. Educação Physica, 58, 26-27.
- Araujo, F. F. (1944). Fenômeno fisiológico do treinamento desportivo. Educação Physica, 77, 8-9.
- Azevedo, F. (1936). Aphorismas de educação athletica. Educação Physica, 7, 67-69.
- Barbosa Leite, I. (1929). O regulamento geral de educação physica. A Defesa Nacional, 16(184), 259-263.
- Bernard. (1944). O regulamento geral da educação física. Educação Physica, 83, 29-30.
- Bloch, M. (2001). Apologia da história ou o ofício do historiador Jorge Zahar.
-
Bruschi, M. (2019). Entre a França e o Brasil: Criação, circulação e apropriações do Método Francês de Educação Física (1931-1960) [Tese de doutorado, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo]. Repositório Institucional da UFES. http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/11278
» http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/11278 - Bui-Xuân, G., & Gleyse, J. (2001). De l’émergence de l’éducation physique: Georges Demenÿ et Georges Hébert. Un modèle conatif appliqué au passé Hatier.
- Buys, F. (1920). A cultura physica: Ideias e suggestões. A Defesa Nacional, 8(87-88), 72-73.
-
Cassani, J. M. (2018). Da imprensa periódica de ensino e de técnicas aos livros didáticos da Educação Física: Trajetórias de prescrições pedagógicas (1932-1960) [Tese de doutorado, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo]. Repositório Institucional da UFES. http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/10768
» http://repositorio.ufes.br/handle/10/10768 - Certeau, M. de. (1994). A invenção do cotidiano Vozes.
- Chartier, R. (1991). A história cultural: Entre práticas e representações Difel.
- Coco, D., Riccardi, V., Jubé, C., Zarantonello, D., & Casolo, F. (2024). I princìpi dottrinali, il gioco e il ruolo del moniteur nel metodo naturale di educazione fisica e morale di Georges Hébert. In D. Colella, M. Ladogana, & D. Monacis (Eds.), Il gioco nelle attività motorie in età evolutiva (pp. 49-64). Progedit.
-
Cunha, L. B. da. (2017). A Educação Física Desportiva Generalizada no Brasil: Princípios e sistematizações de um método de ensino em circulação (1952-1980) [Tese de doutorado, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais]. Repositório Institucional da UFMG. http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUOS-AWNH49
» http://hdl.handle.net/1843/BUOS-AWNH49 - Damazio, R. (1914, 10 de março). A educação physica sportiva: As excelências do “methodo natural” de Hébert - a regeneração das raças - obrigatoriedade da educação física. Jornal do Commercio
- Darnton, R. (1996). Introdução. In R. Darnton & D. Roche (Eds.), Revolução impressa: A imprensa na França - 1775-1800 (pp. 15-17). Edusp.
- Defrance, J. (2014). L’œuvre du Collège d’athlètes de Reims et le processus d’institutionnalisation des activités physiques et des sports. In T. Froissart & J. Saint-Martin (Eds.), Le Collège d’athlètes de Reims (pp. 21-41). Épure.
- Dehoux, L. (1939a). A ginástica educativa e a mulher. Educação Physica, 26, 42-46.
- Dehoux, L. (1939b). O papel do esporte na educação. Educação Physica, 33, 11-13.
- Delaplace, J.-M. (2000). Georges Hébert, la méthode naturelle et l’école (1905-1957) [Tese de doutorado, Université Lyon I].
- Delaplace, J.-M. (2003). Georges Hébert et l’École de Joinville (1905-1939). In P. Simonet & L. Veray (Eds.), L’empreinte de Joinville: 150 ans de sport (1852-2002) (pp. 83-103). Insep Publications.
- Delaplace, J.-M. (2005). Georges Hébert: Sculpteur du corps Vuibert.
- D’Oliveira, B. (1920, março). Dança e gymnastica. Kodak
- Do R.E.I. francês de 1920. (1919). A Defesa Nacional, 8(91), 225-226.
- Dutra, F. J. (1925a). Cavacos profissionais: VIII Educação Physica. A Defesa Nacional, 13(133-134), 29-30.
- Dutra, F. J. (1925b, janeiro). Educação Physica. Gazeta de Notícias
- Educação Physica. (1929, 5 de maio). O Paiz
- Ferreira Neto, A. (2005). Publicações periódicas de ensino, de técnicas e de magazines em educação física e esporte. In L. P. Costa (Ed.), Atlas do esporte no Brasil (pp. 776-777). Shape.
- Froissart, T., & Saint-Martin, J. (2014). Le Collège d’athlètes de Reims Épure.
- Gamelin, M. (1920). Mission Militaire Française Arquivo Histórico do Exército.
-
Gleyse, J., Soares, C. L., & Dalben, A. (2014). L’œuvre de Georges Hébert au Brésil et en France dans les écrits sur l’éducation physique: Deux facettes de la nature (1909-1957)? Sport History Review, 45(2), 171-199. https://doi.org/10.1123/shr.2013-0014
» https://doi.org/10.1123/shr.2013-0014 - Goellner, S. V. (1992). O método francês e a educação física no Brasil: Da caserna à escola [Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul].
- Gymnastica e dança. (1920, 3 de abril). Kodak
- Hébert, G. (1916). Guide pratique d’éducation physique Vuibert et Nony.
- Hébert, G. (1941). L’éducation physique ou l’entraînement complet par la méthode naturelle: Historique documentaire, exposé original et résultats initiaux, rapports, comptes rendus, articles de presse, critiques... concernant l’application de la méthode naturelle dans les milieux les plus divers Vuibert.
- Joinville-le-Pont apresentada por Stockolmo. (1913, 3 de dezembro). Pacotilha
-
Jubé, C. N. (2017). Educação, Educação Física e natureza na obra de Georges Hébert e sua recepção no Brasil (1915-1945) [Tese de doutorado, Universidade Estadual de Campinas]. Repositório da Produção Científica e Intelectual da Unicamp. https://repositorio.unicamp.br/acervo/detalhe/990714
» https://repositorio.unicamp.br/acervo/detalhe/990714 -
Jubé, C. N., & Dalben, A. (2018). Amid progress and wilderness: Early reception of Georges Hébert’s naturist ideas in Brazil during the first half of the twentieth century. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35(14), 1541-1562. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2018.1459575
» https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2018.1459575 - Liga da defesa nacional: Trabalho em prol da educação nacional. (1925, 2 de agosto). Jornal do Brasil
- Loyola, H. (1942). Educação física infantil: Breve noticia sobre a educação física nas escolas primárias das principais nações do mundo. Educação Physica, 67, 15-16.
- Luca, T. R. de. (2011). História do, nos e por meio dos periódicos. In C. B. Pinsky (Ed.), Fontes históricas (pp. 111-153). Contexto.
- Machado, J. F. (1929, março). A educação physica e a nacionalidade. Vida Doméstica
- Martins, I. G. (1932). A defesa de Georges Demenÿ: Insincero ou não? Revista de Educação Física, 1(2), 2-3.
- May, J. (1923, agosto). A gymnastica rhythimica e os sports. Leitura para Todos
- Mendes, D. (1933). Beleza e educação física da mulher. Revista de Educação Física, 2(12), 22-23.
- Molina, A. M. (1932). Importancia da educação fisica para um povo: O metodo adotado. Revista de Educação Física, 1(3), 12-13.
- O congresso de educação physica. (1913, 17 de abril). O Pharol
- Os sports como meio pratico de cultura physica: O methodo do professor Hébert. (1916, 26 de agosto). Gazeta de Notícias
- Philippe-Meden, P. (2012). Georges Hébert et le théâtre: Une esthétique de la nature au fil de “L’éducation physique, la revue sportive, scientifique, pédagogique, d’enseignement et de critique” (1902-1940) [Tese de doutorado, Université Vincennes-Saint-Denis Paris 8].
- Philippe-Meden, P. (2017). Du sport à la scène: Le naturisme de Georges Hébert (1875-1957) Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.
- Pociello, C. (1998). Un désir ambigu de science... In P. Simonet (Ed.), L’Insep: De la gymnastique joinvillaise aux sports contemporains (pp. 76-97). Klopp.
-
Queiroz, K. F. S., & Cancella, K. (2018). A implementação do regulamento nº 7 de educação física no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte, 32(3), 379-389. https://doi.org/10.11606/1807-5509201800030379
» https://doi.org/10.11606/1807-5509201800030379 - Rocha, M. (1942). A saude e os esportes. Educação Physica, 62, 38-39.
- Rodrigues, S. (1940). A especialização atlética, inimigo da saúde. Educação Physica, 42, 31-32.
- Rouet, M. (1938). A educação física: Método de aperfeiçoamento individual e social. Educação Physica, 25, 12-13.
- Saint-Martin, J. (2005). L’éducation physique à l’épreuve de la nation (1918-1939) Vuibert.
- Saint-Martin, J.-P. (2000). L’hébertisme à l’heure de son internacionalisation. In J.-P. Saint-Martin & T. Terret (Eds.), Le sport français dans l’entre-deux-guerres: Regards croisés sur les influences étrangères (pp. 146-150). L’Harmattan.
- Sarremejane, P. (2007). L’héritage de la méthode suédoise d’éducation physique en France: Les conflits de méthode au sein de l’École Normale de Gymnastique et d’Escrime de Joinville au début du XXe siècle. Paedagogica Historica, 42(6), 817-837.
- Simonet, P. (1998). L’Insep: De la gymnastique joinvillaise aux sports contemporains Klopp.
-
Sirvent, R. F. (2007). Memoria y olvido de Francisco Amorós y de su modelo educativo gimnástico y moral. Revista Internacional de Ciencias del Deporte, 3(6), 24-51. https://doi.org/10.5232/ricyde2007.00603
» https://doi.org/10.5232/ricyde2007.00603 - Soares, C. L. (2003). Georges Hébert e o método natural: Nova sensibilidade, nova educação do corpo. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, 25(1), 21-39.
-
Soares, C. L. (2015). Uma educação pela natureza: O método de educação física de Georges Hébert. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, 37(2), 151-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbce.2014.11.016
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbce.2014.11.016 - Suppo, H. R. (1999). La politique culturelle française au Brésil entre les années 1920-1950 [Tese de doutorado, Université Sorbonne Nouvelle].
- Terret, T., & Saint-Martin, J. (2015). Journey in the historiography of the French Method of Physical Education: A matter of nationalism, imperialism and gender. In M. Freeman (Ed.), Sport, health and the body in the history of education (pp. 17-50). Routledge.
- Uma escola de athletas. (1914, 15 de junho). A Federação
- Villaret, S. (2005). Naturisme et éducation corporelle: Des projets réformistes aux prises en compte politiques et éducatives (XIXe-milieu XXe siècles) L’Harmattan.
-
Peer review rounds:
R1: two invitations; one review received.R2: three invitations; no review received.R3: three invitations; one review received.
-
How to cite this article:
Bruschi, M., & Jubé, C. Joinville-le-Pont and Georges Hébert: the debates in France and their representation in the Brazilian press (1913-1949). Revista Brasileira de História da Educação, 26, e414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4025/rbhe.v26.2026.e414en
-
Funding:
The RBHE has financial support from the Brazilian Society of History of Education (SBHE) and the Editorial Program (Call No. 30/2023) of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) This article was supported by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Grant no. 2022/00116-8.
-
1
Francisco Amorós y Ondeano (1770-1848) inspired the work of Georges Hébert, Georges Demenÿ, Joinville, and many other names in French gymnastics. However, in this work, due to the almost century-long gap between Francisco Amorós and the "war of methods," we have chosen to highlight the figures more directly involved in the disputes in question. For more information on the work of Francisco Amorós y Ondeano, see Sirvent (2007).
-
2
The disputes in France were complex and involved various actors defending different interests. Therefore, our goal is not to exhaust this discussion, but rather to understand how the "war of methods" that occurred in France reverberated in Brazil through the national press.
-
3
With the intention of creating a national method in France, pamphlets were produced between 1919 and 1922 under the name Projet de Règlement Général d'Éducation Physique. Put into practice and revised several times, their final versions were published between 1925 and 1928 under the name Règlement Général d'Éducation Physica, officially establishing a national method, commonly known as the French Method.
-
4
The National Defense League was founded in 1916 in Rio de Janeiro by Olavo Bilac, Pedro Lessa, and Miguel Calmon, under the presidency of Rui Barbosa, who favored Brazilian support for the Allies in World War I. The war helped popularize the idea of compulsory military service and reinforced the importance of the Armed Forces. Because it defended the idea of the "citizen-soldier" and military service as a school of citizenship, the League received support from the Army. In his lectures, Bilac emphasized the importance of intellectuals' engagement in the nationalist cause, pointing to them as responsible for the defense of the homeland and the modernization of social structures (Jubé, 2017).
-
5
In 1929, General Nestor Sezefredo dos Passos drafted a preliminary bill aimed at regulating Physical Education nationwide. One of the key points highlighted was the importance of standardizing teaching, adopting the method practiced by the Brazilian Army based on the Joinville-le-Pont method, until a national model could be developed.
-
Licensing:
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY 4) license.
-
Data availability:
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.
Edited by
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.
