The Mau Mau Oath Model
Figure 1.0 The Mau Mau Oath Model,
1952-1960
New Mau Mau Relationships Created by
the 1950s
Gender Oathing Role Type
Mau Mau Role Description
M Eiaoa Mata (Sθ⅛
PK
OaThing Rote Id'
AdministratorName
Addtl Parttcpt Name Desdptn
OatherName*
PK Oatldng Symbol Id’
SymboIIcMeaning Description
PK
PK,FK
PKeFK
PIGFK
PK
PK
PKeFK
PIGFK
PKJsK
Odllt id'
OMhing Location Type'
OMhing dale*
Oadthig Role M,
Oaliiing Symbol Type*
Oattting Statement Id1
Oathing Symbol Id*
Oathtypeid1
Young indicator*
Purfication Date
■|— District Name
Administered By Name
Chief Indicator (yJh)
Church Name Description
Church Indicator (y∕h)
Arrest Date
District Name
Arresting Officer Name
Criminal Offense Description
Court Case Number
Appeal Indicator (y∕h)
Appeal Date
Court Name
Judge Name
Court Ruling Description
PIGFK
PIGFK
PKyFK
PIGFK
PK,FK
PK,FK
PIGFK
PKJFK
Oathing Statement id*
Statement Description
Meaning Description
OMh id’
Oathhtg Location Type*
Oathing date*
Oathing Role M*
Oalhhtg Symbol Type*
Oathhig Symbol kt*
Oathtype id*
PKJFK Young indicator*
Young indicator*
age
The Mau Mau oath was a dynamic, elaborate, and sophisticated system of
relationships, rules, and structures. Through the depiction of the created “Mau
Mau Oath Model”, represented as Figure 1.0, this section aims to walk through
the complexity of the oathing by examining the relationship between the oath and
other oathing related variables within the scope of this research. Unfortunately,
this model is not able to capture every nuance of the oathing experience, but it is
designed in a manner that will allow a careful treatment and analysis of the key
79