A Brazilian Musical bow of African origin, with a single wire string and sometimes a gourd resonator. Despite its origin, in the north and north-east it takes a Portuguese name, the berimbau or berimbau de barriga (jew’s harp of the belly), while it is called urucungu in the south. The berimbau is the principal accompanying instrument for Bahian capoeira, a stylized martial art of the region. A richly creolized product of the black world with several prototypes on both sides of the Atlantic, those in Brazil include several related to Kongo/Angolan bows. The most important found during the colonial period were the Luandan hungu and the embulumbumba of south-western Angola, brought as part of the slave trade.
The player holds a stick and a small wicker basket rattle, called caxixi in Bahia, in his right hand and percusses the string with the stick (see illustration). In his left hand he holds the bow and occasionally applies a metal coin to the string; the coin serves as a bridge, giving a second fundamental pitch perhaps a semi-tone or a whole tone above that produced from the open string. It is often played held against a naked body, specifically in capoeira, as the body serves as a resonating chamber, the gourd resonator actively manipulated against the stomach to shade the timbres of the instrument. According to Graham, ‘pitch change occurs when the space between the gourd’s opening and the player’s stomach is altered, isolating select harmonies of the string’s frequency swing. The performer’s stomach operates in the same way as a trombone mute, its lesser resonating capacity being only secondary in importance’ (p.4). By striking the bow’s string at different heights, subtle variation in both pitch and timbre are obtained. The caxixi usually accompanies the strokes of the stick. The African mouthbow was adopted by Brazilian Amerindian tribes with, for example, the Angolan friction bow mouthbow umgunga reappearing in Brazil as an ‘Indian’ bow called umcunga. It is often played in ensemble context. For further information see R. Graham: ‘Technology and Cultural Change’, LAMR, xxii/1 (1991), 1–20.
JOHN M. SCHECHTER/R