Already in 1937, journalist and ethnologist Edison Carneiro noted in Bahia the growing interpenetration of religious practices: 'today many candomblés are no longer dedicated to a single nation, as in the past, whether because the current leader is from a different nation than his predecessor and naturally dedicates himself to both', or because religious experts visit other houses and their hosts are obliged 'to pay homage to such people by drumming and dancing according to their respective nations. It is no longer rare to play after the manner of any nation in any candomble (Carneiro, 1985, pp. 44-46). Edison Carneiro was the first author to speak of Candomblé nations in terms of differences in ritual practice. Nina Rodrigues, founder of Afro-Brazilian studies, talks only of 'brotherhoods' (confraria) or 'schools' (colégios) distinguished by 'special precepts related to food, clothing, and religious duties unique to the cult of this or that saint or orixá (Rodrigues, 1977, pp. 101, 234).  
And yet, despite this general ritual interpenetration, overlapping and creative eclecticism, most houses insist in their public discourse on identifying as belonging to a single nation. Inasmuch as elements of ritual praxis remitting to a real or putative ethnic origin serve the members of a congregation to activate processes of collective identity, it can be said that the religious nation never lost its intrinsic political dimension. Moreover, as happens in any form of collective identity, these processes of religious affiliation respond to very fluid relational, situational and instrumental dynamics which result in continuous historical change and progressive redefinition of the nations' boundaries (Barth, 1969; Cohen, 1974).