From the indigenous Ẹ̀gbá Yorùbá perspective, the ultimate repercussion of breaking ìmùlè ̣ is death. From the result of oral interviews and the Questionnaire, the majority of Yorùbá people would not venture into ìmùlè ̣ except in serious situations because they are haunted by the fear of the possibility of death as a result of careless violation of ìmùlè demands. However, if it is perceived that the threatened repercussion ̣ of breaking a pact is minimal or that the probability of actual occurrence of the threat is remote, then there is a more likelihood that the pact would be taken lightly. Even in the
454 Wande Abimbola. Ìjìnlè ̣ Ohùn Ẹnu Ifà
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
171
case of real danger, the failure of the person to actually recognise the danger minimises its effectiveness in motivating compliance with the terms of a pact based on the fear of occurrence of that particular danger.
4.3.5 A formal process:
Another good basis of an evaluative hermeneutic of the Ancient Israelite
tyrIB.
is the premise that there are various specific forms which are considered as giving validity to the ìmùlè ̣, with certain particular forms being peculiar to specific cultural contexts. In the indigenous Yorùbá context, the adoption of a specific formal rite provides the avenue of expressing consent or disagreement with the terms of the pact. It emphasised the exercise of freewill in the ensuing relationship. As the text revealed, Israel had expressed acceptance of the terms of thetyrIB.
, and by virtue of executing the ratification and renewal formalities during the various epochs of her history, has continually reinforced the full implications of thetyrIB.
terms, including the implementation of the repercussion for breaking the pact. The last performance of the renewal rite under King Josiah further strengthens the imprecative force of thetyrIB.
. Even though the catastrophe may have been postponed to a latter period, if the generality of the populace had been morally transformed by the reform, yet the re-enactment of the formal rites of the pact makes the fulfilment of the terms more imminent. It is, therefore, no wonder that the doom of the nation follows so quickly after the demise of King Josiah. From the perspective of ìmùlẹ̀, even the tragic death of Josiah could be tied to the inability of a human ruler to impose moral reform by royal edict. The reform of Josiah was effective in re-structuring the religious and political institutions of Israel and Judah, and to a great extent, he also reformed the judicial system to conform to the terms of thetyrIB.
. But in terms of real moral reform, there was little achieved. The general populace were not inwardly transformed.The real import of the content of the book-find was not realised in them. They merely
―stood to the
tyrIB.
‖ in loyal support of their monarch. They definitely held Josiah in a high esteem, probably due to a dislike of the previous despotic rules of Manaseh and Athaliah; Unlike the time of Hezekiah depicted by the Chronicler, in which the people of the Northern Kingdom would not co-operate with the messengers sent by Hezekiah to urge them to return to the LORD, but virtually ―laughed them to scorn‖:2 Chronicles 30:6, 10
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
172
%l,M,Þh; tw:ïc.mik.W hd"êWhywI) ‘laer"f.yI-lk'B. wyr"ªf'w> %l,M,äh; dY:ômi tArøG>aiB'(
~yci’r"h' •Wkl.YEw:
‘bvoy"w> laeêr"f.yIw> qx'äc.yI ‘~h'r"b.a;
‘yhel{a/ hw"©hy>-la, WbWvÜ laeªr"f.yI ynEåB.
rmo=ale
`rWV)a; ykeîl.m; @K:ßmi ~k,êl' tr<a,äv.NIh;
hj'êyleP.h;-la,
‘Wyh.YI)w: !Wl+buz>-d[;w> hV,Þn:m.W
~yIr:ïp.a,-#r<a,(B. ry[i²l' Ÿry[ióme
~yrI’b.[o ~yciør"h' Wy“h.YI)w:
`~B'( ~ygIß[il.m;W ~h,êyle[] ~yqIåyxif.m;
2 Chronicles 30:6,10 -
―So the posts went with the letters from the king and his princes throughout all Israel and Judah, and according to the commandment of the king, saying, Ye children of Israel, turn again unto the LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, and he will return to the remnant of you, that are escaped out of the hand of the kings of Assyria.
10 So the posts went from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh even unto Zebulun: but they laughed them to scorn, and mocked them.‖455
The text depicted the case of Josiah‘s reform as a more popularly accepted reform, but in the political perspective, not in the moral and ethical parlance. The sections examined from the book of Jeremiah, depicted the state of moral decadence among the people, and their unwillingness to accept a moral change, whereas they place their confidence in the inviolability of Jerusalem based on a promise of YHWH‟s Divine protection. The prose sermons of Jeremiah, to which the people refuse to harken, are basically directed at the moral aspect of popular life whereas the reform of Josiah is basically directed at the political aspect. Josiah himself, as the corporate head of the people, from indigenous perspective of Ìmùlè ̣ cannot be totally exempted from the repercussion of the popular non-compliance with the moral dictate of the
tyrIB.
, hence his untimely and tragic death. The compilers of DH, however, depicted his death in positive light, emphasising the fact that Josiah did not witness the ultimate catastrophe attending the exile to Jerusalem, whereas455 The scope of the present work did not cover the work of the Chronicler, but this instance is cited to showcase that there were similar trends of though in Ancient Israel, that at one time or the other, a section of the populace, particularly of the Northern Kingdom, derided the
tyrIB.
. Thecompliance of these grass-root people is very essential to the efficacy of the blessings because of the corporate nature of the
tyrIB.
.UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
173
Jehoiakim, who was portrayed as a real representative of the unrepentant stance of the people, in that he was not moved to repentance by the words of the prophecy of Jeremiah with regards to the impending punishment, was shown to suffer the full blow of the catastrophe. Impenitent Zedekiah‘s children were killed in his sight before he was blinded and taken in chains to Babylon, where he died in exile, whereas, tender hearted and penitent Josiah died in battle and was buried with full royal burial rites. For a warrior to die in battle is among the Ẹ̀gbá people, considered a higher honour than to die in captivity, hence the saying ―ikú yá jẹ̀sín‖ meaning ―death is more honourable than ridicule‖. Hence, the death of King Josiah is quite commensurate in terms of its tragic as well as palliative purpose in tandem with his situation within the ambit of ìmùlè ̣ as the corporate head of Judah and Israel, with regards to the
tyrIB.
he ratified on behalf of the people.UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
174
CHAPTER FIVE
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE
tyrIB.
IN ANCIENT ISRAEL IN THE CONTEXT OF INDIGENOUS Ẹ̀GBÁ CULTUREIn order to fully grasp the use of
tyrIB.
as a means of regulating human behaviour, there is a need to look at the way in which thetyrIB.
affects the social and political structure of Israel during the great epochs of her history.The diachronic survey of Ancient Israel‘s
tyrIB.
traditions contained in the text of the Tanakh shows significant adjustments in the expression of thetyrIB.
ideology as Israel‘s religious thinkers continue to re-interpret and re-apply the motif of the
tyrIB.
between Israel and YHWH to their changing socio-cultural context. As they face new challenges of political transformation due to internal and extraneous forces, they undertook self-evaluation through the prism of thetyrIB.
relationship with YHWH, with the aim of providing a positive impetus towards social stability under the crushing gravity of internal apprehensions and external aggression. It could be argued that the guardians of Israelite religio-political heritage which culminated in the production of the Tanakh, were aware of the dual forces of political apprehensions and external aggression, and harnessed these particular negative social and political forces as a vehicle to entrench the berith principle, which they see as the very pillar on which Israel‘s existence as a people stands. In other words, they use the very fears of the people as a motivation towards fidelity to thetyrIB.
. A brief look at the application or adaptation of thetyrIB.
to various epochs in the political history of Israel could elucidate this argument.5.1
tyrIB. .
in the pre-monarchical social structure of ancient Israel in the light of ìmùlè ̣ in the indigenous Ẹ̀gbá contextThe social structure of pre-monarchical Israel shares much in common with that of the indigenous Ẹ̀gbá before the dispersion and sack of their original homesteads.
According to sources, there were no less than three hundred independent Ẹ̀gbá towns/settlements before the dispersion. They were organised into four states/sections as follow: Ẹ̀gbá Alake, Ẹ̀gbá Òké-Ọnà, Ẹ̀gbá Òwu and Ẹ̀gbá Àgùrá.456 They were in confederation with each other, having the Aláké, as the supreme ruler among the four
456 A.K. Ajisafe. 1972. Iwé Ìtàn Abé̩òkúta. 16 -19.
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
175
autonomous Ọbas,457 probably because of the prestige accruing from his perceived direct descent from Odùduwà, the legendary Yorùbá Patriarch458. As at present, the Ẹ̀gbá town of Abé ̣òkúta hosts the confederacy of the Ẹ̀gbá Alake, the Ẹ̀gbá Òké-Ọnà, the Ẹ̀gbá Òwu and Ẹ̀gbá Àgùrá, which were representative of the original indigenous Ẹ̀gbá homesteads, as well as the Ìbarà, who were co-settlers at Abẹ́òkúta during the inter-tribal wars. There is such a mutual relation and understanding within this new confederation such that all were equally seen as one people. Today, all five segments are collectively seen and treated as Ẹ̀gbá, without prejudice or racial discrimination.
This could be used to illuminate the situation in pre-monarchical Israel.
First is the intrinsic ìmùlè ̣ mentality of the Ẹ̀gbá people. There was no formal ratification of ìmùlè ̣ rites among the tribes collectively, but by virtue of common fate, having being brought together to co-habit due to the perils of the inter-tribal wars, the people see themselves as bound to seek the common good of each other. In the indigenous Ẹ̀gbá philosophy, the ìmùlè ̣ status of the various clans is evident to the common populace. The vicissitudes of life have made them to drink from the same source of water, and to be sustained by the produce of the same land. They are implicitly bound in ìmùlè ̣459. There is the likelihood of ritual based ìmùlè ̣ enactment among the leading chiefs and elders of the community, which form the ―Ògbóni‖
council that governs the political bureaucracy of the commonwealth, but this is to ensure individual loyalty to the council460. It is the Ògbóni that enforced the law of retributive justice, similar to the lex talionis found in the
tyrIB.
document reflected in the Covenant Code, and expanded in the Deuteronomic Code, and the Holiness Code (Exodus 21:22-25; Deuteronomy 19:16-21; Leviticus 24:19-21). The Ògbóni also ensures the perpetuity of the royal line by maintaining the law of restrictive royalty, which is mirrored in the stipulations of thetyrIB.
peculiar to457 The confederacy of the Ẹ̀gbá townships before the dispersal was a very loose one, having many similarities with the pre-, monarchical Israelite tribal confederacy. The major differences include the fact that the Ẹ̀gbá confederacy was not a theocratic amphictyony, and that the Ẹ̀gbá sister towns were first merged into three distinct states, which had their own monarch, which were then joined in confederacy with each other.
458 S. O. Biobaku. 1991.The Ẹ̀gbá and Their Neighbours.4; J. Blair. 1937.Intelligence Report on Abé̩òkúta.4.
459 This deduction is from an oral interview with Pa. Amos Ayinde Oduroye, of 49, Kémta Òkebodè, Ìsábò ̣, Abé̩òkúta.
460 The Aláké explained that there was no need for a formal agreement once settlers see themselves as the same people who have come under one roof, for mutual defence. They are seen as one family, and the principle of Alájọbí is upheld. The essence of formal enactments among members of groups such as the ogboni is to ensure truthfulness and fidelity of the individual member. Interview held with Ọba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo (Òkúké ̣nù IV), Aláké of Ẹ̀gbá Land, at Aké Palace, Aké, Abé̩òkúta, 11 August 2008, 9:00 – 11:00p.m.
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
176
the Deuteronomic Code (Deuteronomy 17:14-15). It is worthy of note that scholars have recognised the fact that it is not a common practice in human communities for every man, woman, and child to participate in contracting treaties and expressing opinions about them461. Usually, such communal prerogatives were delegated to the leaders of the community. The case of the
tyrIB.
at Moab deviates from this norm. It is the ―first instance in history where all segments of the society are present at a covenant ratification‖462.In Ancient Israel, the tribes brought together by the
tyrIB.
at Sinai were not all direct blood descendants of Jacob. There was the Mixed Multitude that went with them from Egypt463 and the Kenites who accompanied them(Judg.1:16). Also, during the earlier period of settlement in Canaan, there were indigenous Canaanite tribes that were assimilated into the Israelite Commonwealth like the Gibeonites who tricked the Joshua team into granting them a suzerainty covenant. The Kenites464, the Kenizites465 and the Kadmonites466, who were initially, non-Israelite ethnic groups also were later mentioned in the text in affiliation with the tribe of Judah467. Mention is also made of the Rephaites468 in Genesis 15:20, but these were not seen as being in any way461 J. M. Grintz. 1966. The Treaty of Joshua with the Gibeonites.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/596424.Accessed: 01/04/2013 02:31. 117-118
462 J. Faur. 2008.Horizontal Society. 50
463 These were explicitly referred to in Exodus. Numbers 11:4 mentions a ―mixt multitude‖ that came out of Egypt along with the children of Jacob. These probably would have included individual and families that must have either been struck by the awe of the pre-exodus signs and wonders through the hand of Moses, or in a state of discontent in one way or the other, with the social order of Egypt.
James Hoffmeier referred to them as ―other enslaved workers‖ J. K. Hoffmeier. 1996. Israel in Egypt.
114. Sharpe however referred to them as some of the inhabitants of Lower Egypt who were expelled due to the change of dynasty which caused the expulsion of the Jews. S. Sharpe.2008 .The Early History of Egypt. 13; they have also be described as ―a mixture of Bedouins‖ A. S. Yahuda. 2003.
Language of the Pentateuch. 60
464 Numbers 10:29-32; Judges 1:16; 1 Samuel 15:6; P. M. McNutt. 1993. Kenites. 407; J. A.
Thomson.1986.Kenites.6-7.
465 The Kenizzites also were probably a foreign tribe assimilated into the Israelite Commonwealth. It is not certain whether Caleb ben Jephuneh belonged to the tribe of Judah or to the foreign Kenizzite clan (Genesis 15:19; Numbers 32:12; Joshua 14:6) see further, J. D. Douglas. & M. C. Tenney. Eds. 2011.
Zondervan Illustrated Bible Dictionary EPub Edition. Ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan; S. Japhet. 1993. I
& II Chronicles: A commentary. London: SCM.112-114.
466 The Kadmonites were also ranked among the Indigenous tribes assimilated into the Israelite commonwealth, with much uncertainties clouding their real genealogical roots. J. Lightfoot. 2007.
From the Talmud and Hebraica Vol.1. New York: Cosimo Inc. 283-284
467 Keneth Mathews described the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites as ―people groups in the Negev who probably assimilated with Judah‖. He pointed out the fact that their inclusion in the list of the original Canaanite population of the promised land, which were later to be displaced by Israel occurs only in Genesis 15. He also noted the inclusion of the Rephaites in the list. Of the four peculiar entries in this list of Ten Cannaanite tribe, only the Rephaites were not depicted as having positive relations with Israel in the later history of the conquest and settlement in Cannaan. K. A. Mathews.. 2005.
Genesis 11:27-50:26.177
468 The Rephaites have been described as original settlers in Canaan, but there is much to debate with regards to their original ancestry. They were at times liked with the Giant Race in Deuteronomy 2:11.
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
177
affiliated with the Israelite tribal league. These non-Israelite tribes were often collectively referred to as Canaanites469.
In both cases of Pre-Monarchical Israel and the Pre-dispersion of Ẹ̀gbá communities, they exhibit the characteristics of segmentary470 societies. Such societies are usually composed of autonomous units. In most cases, tribes or ethnic sub-groups who more often than not, refer to a common genealogical descent in which the genealogies and kinship systems are used as ways of organising and expressing relationships within a social system.471 Hence, in the indigenous Ẹ̀gbá-Yorùbá worldview, the concept of Alájọbí provides the incentive for mutual cooperation and trust within each clan first, and then between the clans in concert actions against forces that are extraneous to the confederacy. It is however not strange that the individual autonomous segment usually tends to align itself politically so as to obtain maximum advantage for itself and where the political conditions change, the subgroups may change their political and familial relationship with other sub-groups within the tribe, or even with other tribes472 as exemplified in the merger of the Ìbarà with the Ẹ̀gbá at Abé ̣òkúta, and the Biblical instance of the assimilation of non-Israelite tribes.
Anthropologically speaking, the ancient Israelite social structure follows the pattern of ―segmentary lineage system‖473 and due to the inherent nature of this societal structure before the Monarchy, the role of the
tyrIB.
is very significant.This structure is expressed in the Hebrew Bible as the successive branching of large lineage groups into ever smaller ones. This is codified in form of lengthy genealogies, depicting extensive segmentation at several different levels, including at
The King James Version merely translated the word Rephaim as ―Giants‖. Genesis14:5, reckoned them among the races slain by the Kedorlaomer coalition. But Gen 15:20 mentioned them along with the original Canaanite population whose land was promised to Abraham. See further- T. C. Butler. Ed.
1991. Rephaites. Holman Bible Dictionary. USA: Broadman & Holman. 5310.
http://www.studylight.org/dic/hbd/view.cgi?n.
469 Douglas Stuart noted in his commentary on Exodus 23:23 that the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites and Rephaites were mentioned in the Genesis 10:15-18 and 15:19-21 because their influence may have been more pronounced in Canaan in the time of Abraham than it was in the time of Moses, hence the reason why they were not mentioned by name to Moses in the Exodus account. D. K. Stuart.2006.
Exodus.544.
470 The term ‗segmentary‟ is used here to denote a society which is egalitarian and acephalous. Lemche, N. P. 1985. Early Israel; Anthropological and Historical Studies 206-244; Llyod, Peter C.2012. The Political Structure of African Kingdoms; A good study of the segmentary system in African Indigenous communities is provided in J. Middleton & L. Bohannan. Eds. 2004. Tribes Without Ruler: Studies in African Segmentary Systems.
471 P. McNut.1999. Reconstructing the Society of Ancient Israel. 75
472 P. McNut.1999. Reconstructing the Society of Ancient Israel. 78
473 B. Schwimmer. 2003. Hebrew Lineage Organisation.
http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/case_studies/hebrews/lineage.html