Chapter 7 Managing the Environment: Mau Mau Oath
Purification
Introduction
Similar to oathing, purification has historical roots in the pre-colonial past
but has adapted over time. In Kenya, the process of purification is associated
with long-standing African knowledge of managing the fragile yet resilient
environment. Based on 2008 Kenyan field surveys, these practices are still highly
regarded with over 91% of respondents attesting that the knowledge of old
practices were important.1 Purification means cleansing evil forces. By definition
purification implies the presence of dirt or pollution that can pose a danger.2 The
purification process responded to the time, space, and situational boundaries of
the community. Protection of a society always required a keen understanding of
potential threats and having procedures in place to combat these dangerous
forces.
The Mau Mau oath was a new environmental threat and danger to
Kenyans. Prior to the 1950s, oathing never required purification because
historically it was not associated with impurity.3 However, the Mau Mau oath and
associated acts of Mau Mau created a societal need that required purification
from violence, indecencies, sexual acts, taboos, and violations.
' Appendix, Table 2.0, Kenya 2009 Survey Percentage Analysis
2 See Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger, “An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, ” (London:
New York: Ark Paperbacks 1966).for more background on this concept.
3 Oathing actually once worked with purification as a reinforcement of the cleansing. Also, this relationship
should not be confused with noted cleansing traditions that included oath statements during the purification
process. In the case of the Meru, Jeffrey A. Fadiman states that the unclean or accused were able to take “a
cleansing oath to proclaim that any return to antisocial practices would result in their death.” From When
WeBegan, 319.
188