Writing for Kenya

Home > Other > Writing for Kenya > Page 8
Writing for Kenya Page 8

by Wangari Muoria-Sal


  inspiring core values of Kikuyu moral economy. He had picked these

  up from his parents and friends. Th

  ey were values that sustained the

  human will in any context, no matter how threatening or new.

  Th

  e two preceding schools of Kikuyu thought may be called ‘dynastic’

  and ‘generational’. Both translated a partisan self-interest—of lineage

  descent or generational solidarity—into general principles of social

  progress and renewal. Dynastic thought concentrated on legal matters

  to do with patriarchal seniority, clan affi

  liation, and property. Dynastic

  time was linear; it recorded migration, settlement, alliance, and the

  clearance or purchase of land. Generational thought focused on moral

  claims to authority. Kikuyu believed that each successive generation

  became stained with ill-will and jealousy, the inevitable companions of

  competitive lineage investment in land, marriage, clientage, and trade.

  Every so oft en, about every three decades, Kikuyu enacted ceremonial

  62 H. Muoria, Th

  e Kikuyu Spirit of Patriotism is for Victory (1947), amplifi ed in Our Victory does not Depend on the Force of Arms but on the Word of Truth (1948), both reproduced in Muoria’s translation in I, the Gikuyu, 124–36 and 137–47 respectively.

  For Kenyatta’s own hunt for convincing argument see, Bruce Berman & John Lonsdale,

  ‘Custom, Modernity, and the Search for Kihooto: Kenyatta, Malinowski, & the Making of Facing Mount Kenya’, chapter 6 in Helen Tilley, with Robert J. Gordon, Ordering Africa: Anthropology, European Imperialism, & the Politics of Knowledge (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2007), 173–98.

  38

  chapter one

  transfers of ritual and judicial power called ituika, when a new generation, unscarred as yet by successful intrigue or embittered failure, bought

  out the compromised authority of its elders. Generational thought was

  therefore cyclical or recursive. Th

  e two modes of thought, linear and

  recursive, were intimately entwined in the daily experience of all. Th

  e

  saying, ‘One can never escape one’s lineage or age-set’ was a rueful

  refl ection on life’s complexity. So too was the proverb ‘birds which land

  together fl y up separately’. Members of the same age-set—like Muoria’s

  ndege—might as young men enjoy each other’s company; aft er mar-

  riage they would then compete in wealth, reputation and power, like

  well-fed birds. While the two strands of Kikuyu moral thought were

  thus interwoven one can nevertheless detect periods in which fi rst one

  and then another was the more prominent.63

  Th

  e fi rst Kikuyu spokesmen and writers of the colonial age came

  from the more powerful families and espoused dynastic thought. Th

  ey

  claimed to be as deserving of government favour as white settlers, since

  Kikuyu had a civilising mission equal to Britain’s. Like their white

  colonisers they could boast a propertied history of improving the land.

  Th

  ey cultivated demarcated, inter-cropped, hillsides—some of them irri-

  gated—where their predecessors, the uncouth Okiek (Dorobo) people,

  had merely hunted the untamed forests for honey, meat, and ivory. Th

  e

  agents of this Kikuyu civilisation were the tree-felling, hard-digging,

  land-buying, peace-bringing lineages at the core of each of Kikuyuland’s

  many hundreds of mbari or ‘sub-clan’ settlements. Mbari history was one of progress in agriculture and law, as forgetful as any nationalist

  history of such inconvenient setbacks as famine and war. Early British

  offi

  cials out in the Kikuyu districts—but not their seniors in the central

  offi

  ces of government—had shown much sympathy with this dynastic

  view of the past. Dynastic thought scored its greatest political success

  in 1929 when Kikuyu elders gathered before a travelling land-tenure

  committee of two British offi

  cials and the palaeontologist Louis Leakey,

  Giteru’s Kikuyu-born son. Having listened to the elders’ evidence for all of six and one-half days the committee had recommended the reg-istration of lineage, mbari, title to land as it was determined by male descent, at the expense of dependent clients and women. It looked as if

  63 See further, Lonsdale, ‘Contests of Time’.

  henry muoria, public moralist

  39

  Kikuyuland had been saved from white settler greed by its patriarchal

  lineages and, therefore, for their benefi t.64

  Dynastic history crashed in ruins, however, barely fi ve years later.

  Th

  e British government, hoping to silence Kenya’s maddening whine of

  racial confl ict, appointed a land commission under Judge Morris Carter,

  formerly of the Uganda high court, to settle the boundary between

  white and black, once and for all. Th

  is Kenya Land Commission took

  evidence from offi

  cials, settlers and Africans. It was sympathetic not

  only to settler tales of pioneer eff ort on allegedly empty African lands

  but also to progressive, expert, ideas of how smallholder mixed-farming

  would increase African production and welfare under state-enforced

  rules of good husbandry, all within the existing racial distribution of

  land. Th

  e commission therefore declared that mbari, dynastic, history

  was not only unbelievable as a version of the Kikuyu past but also

  irrelevant to Kenya’s land problems. New forms of land husbandry

  were the key to the future, not the redistribution of land according to

  the dictates of past history.

  Carter had some reason for this harsh judgment. Th

  e Kikuyu case

  was fatally disputed between modest historical claims, pressed orally by

  land elders appearing before the commission, and manifestly exagger-

  ated ones submitted in print by their educated sons. Moreover, Okiek

  witnesses stoutly maintained that it was more oft en by ‘force and chi-

  canery’ than by honest purchase that Kikuyu had acquired their land.

  Th

  e Commission, accordingly, believed it was under no obligation to

  restore the specifi c land that mbari spokesmen claimed was now under white-owned coff ee plantations—except in a very few cases like the

  Church of Scotland mission estate in southern Kikuyuland that fea-

  tures in the third of Muoria’s pamphlets reproduced in this volume.65

  Otherwise Carter granted land to Kikuyu as a whole, as a general act of

  compensation. But such land was available only because it was empty,

  either too low, hot, and dry or too high, cold, and wet for smallholder

  farming. Many Kikuyu later attributed the origins of Mau Mau to the

  failure of their mbari elders, the dynasts, to achieve justice in the 1930s.

  64 A Fiona D. Mackenzie, Land, Ecology and Resistance in Kenya 1880–1952 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998), 75–82.

  65 See below, ‘Kenya is our Reconciler’, section headed ‘What Kenyatta Told the Kikuyu members of the Catholic Religion’.

  40

  chapter one

  Less senior people must be allowed to take the political initiative, no

  matter how much this off ended Kikuyu ideas of due order.66

  Defeated dynastic histor
y had been largely oral. It was supplanted

  by its rival, generational history, expressed increasingly in print. Th

  e

  fi rst athomi, ‘readers’, exploited the Kikuyu concept of restorative time and its appropriate social organisation, the candidate generation-set or

  riika, in order to invest their self-interest with patriotic virtue, as the dynastic school of elders had done before them. During and aft er the

  Great War—as Muoria was born—colonial time, Kikuyu, and Christian

  time marched together in a dramatic conjuncture of disaster, confronta-

  tion and hopes of renewal. Th

  e Great War devoured Kikuyu manpower.

  Th

  ousands of porters were conscripted into the army’s Carrier Corps

  to carry supplies for the long British campaign in German East Africa

  (Tanzania). Many died, hungry and sick. Death even marked the end

  of the war, with prolonged drought and a catastrophic local visita-

  tion of the ‘Spanish’ infl uenza pandemic. Th

  ose were the disasters of

  colonialism. Th

  e confrontation came between generations of Kikuyu.

  A generational transfer of power, ituika, was becoming due, in which

  junior elders challenged their seniors in a contest of virtue marked by

  conspicuous sacrifi cial consumption. Th

  e misery of the times certainly

  suggested that a revival of ritual power was overdue.

  But there was another goad to renewal: Christianity. White mission-

  aries had had little success with Kikuyu in their decade of work before

  1914. Th

  e war, however, brought together two incentives to enter this

  new ritual community in a moment of revelation. One was fortuitous,

  the fi rst publication, in any large number, of vernacular Christian

  gospels, over whose translation young Kikuyu had laboured for years

  as language consultants to the missionaries. Harry Leakey, Muoria’s

  teacher, was a particularly successful translator because he paid close

  attention to Kikuyu advice.67 Many besides Muoria were intellectually

  fascinated by the new literacy and sales of scripture boomed. Th

  e second

  attraction of Christian community came when scripture went to war.

  White missionaries formed the Kikuyu Mission Volunteers, to forestall

  the army’s intended conscription of their adherents, to join the many

  thousands of unlettered Carriers who had been taken off to war before

  them. Reverends became temporary gentlemen, offi

  cers commanding

  66 An argument made most cogently in Kershaw, Mau Mau from Below.

  67 Karanja, Founding an African Faith, chapter 5.

  henry muoria, public moralist

  41

  their former students, now military porters and hospital orderlies.

  Unlike the massed ranks of the Carrier Corps, the Mission Volunteers

  returned home with few casualties. Th

  e saving grace of Christianity

  could scarcely have asked for better proof.

  By such means Christian time, enlightenment, became associated

  with the generational version of Kikuyu time, renewal. Missionaries

  permitted their young adherents to pay the goat-fees of ritual pro-

  motion to their fathers, provided the beasts were eaten rather than

  sacrifi ced. Athomi also struck out on their own, publishing the fi rst Kikuyu-owned vernacular newspaper. Its name Muigwithania, ‘Th

  e

  reconciler’, made explicit the link between Kikuyu and Christian time.

  Muigwithania was an honorifi c title given to a persuasive elder, someone with enough authority to resolve local disputes, including those

  between generations. In the pages of the Kikuyu New Testament Jesus

  Christ had already been naturalised as Muigwithania, the mediator of

  a new covenant between God and man. Moreover, his title of Saviour

  was in Kikuyu derived from the cleansing or redemption of the land

  that was anticipated when generations exchanged power at ituika. Th

  e

  Bible was as much Kikuyu as Christian, true to Christianity’s inherently

  polyglot nature.68 Muigwithania’s fi rst editor, in 1928, was Johnstone Kenyatta, general secretary of the youthful Kikuyu Central Association (KCA). He was in his mid thirties, a few years older than Muoria

  would be when he in his turn took to journalism. It was no accident

  that when Muoria published a selection of Kenyatta’s speeches in 1947,

  reproduced below, he did so under the title ‘Kenyatta is our Reconciler

  (or Unifi er’). But Kenyatta was not to be the fi rst-published Christian

  Kikuyu historian.

  When Kenyatta, now Jomo not Johnstone, brought out his Facing

  Mount Kenya ten years later, in 1938, he had been preceded by Parmenas Githendu Mukiri, an Anglican from central Kikuyu or Murang’a (the

  colonial district of Fort Hall), and Stanley Kiama Gathigira, a Presby-

  68 John Lonsdale, ‘ “Listen while I Read: Patriotic Christianity among the Young Kikuyu’, chapter 24 in Toyin Falola (ed.), Christianity and Social Change in Africa: Essays in Honor of J. D. Y. Peel (Durham NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2005), 563–93.

  Th

  e fi rst vernacular Kikuyu newspaper, Wathiomo Mukinyu or ‘Th

  e True Friend’ had

  fi rst appeared in 1916—but it was owned and edited by the Consolata Catholic Mission. For extracts from its pages: Edmondo Cavicchi, Problems of Change in Kikuyu Tribal Society (Bologna: EMI, 1977).

  42

  chapter one

  terian from the northern district of Nyeri.69 In their books both had

  focused, in the early 1930s, on the question of how to reconcile Kikuyu

  custom with social change. Th

  is was a vital issue for ‘readers’. Th

  ey

  wanted to persuade other Kikuyu of the truth of what they themselves

  believed—that to be Christian and literate was the truest expression of

  Kikuyu patriotism, the best form of generational renewal. Not only had

  they become equal citizens of the wider, literate, world, as all patriots

  must claim to be, but their literacy also—or so they wrote—made them

  better able than their elders to reform Kikuyu morals from within. In

  their correspondence with Muigwithania the readers’ printed words

  could be read away down in Nairobi; elders could be heard only on

  their own hillside. And it was in Nairobi, not in the Kikuyu ‘reserve’,

  that the lost, potentially detribalised, souls of migrant male labourers

  must be reclaimed no less than the bodies of Kikuyu women who sold

  beans and, it was said, themselves, in city markets. Readers could advise

  all Kikuyu, a new people; elders could admonish only their own kin

  and neighbours, the people of old.70

  Mukiri and Gathigira resolved the question of custom and change by

  denying that the problem existed. For both, repeated renewal was the

  very stuff of Kikuyu history. Change was customary. Previous ituika

  had been revolutions. Each past generation had made its own history.

  Th

  eir own Christian generation was doing no more than its predeces-

  sors. Christian education was a new way of Kikuyu renewal but fi rmly

  in the tradition of ituika. Gathigira had less to say than Mukiri about ituika but his message was the same. Insofar as Kikuyu had anything

  like a ‘government’ in the past, he said, it had lain in the executio
n of

  elders’ judgments by young adult warriors—and as Christians never

  tired of repeating, the pen was the spear of today, protective of prop-

  erty and honour. Gathigira added that just as Kikuyu had learned new

  farming techniques in the past, so too there was no shame in learning

  agricultural and veterinary practice from white settlers now. For him

  as for Mukiri the past gave youth the authority to adapt, to change.

  Christianity and literacy were not foreign to the genius of Kikuyu his-

  tory. Christians, as Muigwithania’s correspondents asserted, were rural 69 Mockerie, An African Speaks for his People; S. K. Gathigira, Miikarire ya AKikuyu (Church of Scotland Mission, 1934, reprinted by Scholars Press, Nairobi 1986). For translation of the latter I am indebted to James Njenga, research associate of Derek Peterson’s.

  70 For the women’s side of the story see the sources in footnotes 34 and 46 above.

  henry muoria, public moralist

  43

  pioneers of a new ituika, not, as their elders believed, urban prostitutes who were becoming chomba, strangers, detribalised Swahili.

  By the late 1930s their contemporary Kenyatta no longer shared

  their belief in Christianity’s patriotism. He knew both Mukiri and

  Gathigira. Th

  e former had accompanied him to London as the KCA’s

  representative in 1930. Th

  e latter was a local councillor, leader of the

  Nyeri opposition to the KCA. For all their assurance that Christianity

  was no betrayal, Mukiri anticipated a future in which Kikuyu culture

  would be but a memory; and Gathigira openly admitted that while the

  future must build on the past—his rationale for writing—the past had

  many practices too shameful for him to record. In Kenyatta’s retro-

  spective view, both had conceded too much both to modernity and to

  their missionary tutors. Nobody, he argued in 1938, in Facing Mount

  Kenya, could make responsible choices in their lives unless they were proud of their inheritance; how otherwise would one know what was

  worth fi ghting for? Without a didactic past as one’s guide, all that could

  be expected of anybody was unprincipled drift , a spineless laziness,

  detribalisation.

  Kenyatta was the more certain of this, not only because of the general

  Kikuyu crisis over female circumcision in 1929–30 but because of two

  further learning experiences that were peculiar to him. One had been

 

‹ Prev