Gatekeepers and Vengeful Spirits of the Ọ̀wọ̀ Past

Word and Act Made Visible

Dados Bibliográficos

ID9024977
AutoresRobin Poynor (autor correspondente)
Ano2023
Volume56
Fascículo4
Páginas8-23
Data de publicação2023-12-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoAfrican Arts (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0001-9933 • E-ISSN: 1937-2108
EditoraMIT Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1162/afar_a_00727
OpenAlexW4388470144
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas1
Referências citadas22

Under the assumption that there is value in retrospectively examining one's earlier research to assess areas of omission or misunderstanding, I write this article some fifty years after my initial research in Ọ̀wọ̀, Nigeria, the capital city of a once powerful, sprawling kingdom on the eastern edge of Yòrùbá territory, bordering on the powerful Edo Benin Kingdom whose capital is a scant 75 miles south.As a neophyte researcher whose training prior to graduate study was in studio, what attracted me to the study of African art was the thoughtfulness with which African artists translated mental images and ideas into material form. I was entranced by sensitive abstraction in much African art as well as by idealized naturalism of the art of Ife.My choice of Ọ̀wọ̀ as a research site was inspired by Ekpo Eyo's recent excavation in Ọ̀wọ̀ in 1969, where he uncovered naturalistic terracotta objects whose idealized features reinforced Ọ̀wọ̀'s claim of origin from ancient Ife (Eyo and Willett 1980). At the same time, other objects suggested contact with Benin to the south. Seeing these ancient forms as evidence of links to different kingdoms, my project was to use art objects as indexes of cultural contact. I set out to Ọ̀wọ̀ to investigate leadership arts, intent on examining beautifully rendered forms that reinforced roles played by the hierarchy of the Olọ́wọ̀ (king), identifying objects that may derive from Yòrùbá prototypes and those that had resulted from contact with Benin.Over the years I have dealt with images of power and authority in Ọ̀wọ̀—chieftaincy garb, ceremonial swords, textiles and dress, and ancestral images that reinforce the authority of living men while honoring ancestors. (Some of the publications that have dealt with these include Poynor 1976, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1984, 1987a, 1987b, 1989, 1995, 2000, 2003, 2011, 2023; Poynor, Cole, and Visoná 2001.)While conducting my research in Ọ̀wọ̀ in 1973, I encountered several types of objects that, from my point of view at that time, did not fit the traditional categories of leadership art. Made of unfired clay, their medium was not as elegant as the more exquisite ivory, brass, and wooden objects Ọ̀wọ̀ is known for. They were called by several names, ṣìgìdì (pronounced shee-ghee-dee) and ìyègbè being the most often used. At that time, I was drawn to the more sophisticated arts used in leadership contexts and I pushed these earthen figures aside in my research agenda, although they did work in the context of governance.1The purposes of the clay figures were various. They functioned as gatekeepers on the one hand, or as violent forces to wreak havoc on enemies on the other. Both, I now realize, were in the service of important dignitaries within the hierarchy of the kingdom.The functions of objects discussed here are by no means limited to the Ọ̀wọ̀ or to the Yòrùbá. The use of images as guards, sentinels, watchdogs, tutelary spirits, doorkeepers or gatekeepers, detectives, lookouts, or as vengeful spirits of retribution, as the clay figures did, were common in many African cultures. More than a mere assortment of materials, they were created to embody spirit forces that worked for those who commissioned them. While some warded off evil forces such as witchcraft or warned those with ill intentions, others meted out punishment. Images fitting into these categories include kungang figures from Bamileke and Bangwa, bateba of the Lobi, anyammuo of the Igbo, and nungu figures of the Chagga. Two of the most researched types are Fon bocio and minkisi of the Kongo.The Fon have used bocio, power figures that combine a diversity of natural and manufactured substances with various “medicines” to create power (Blier 1995, 2004). Blier speaks of them as “... clearly not ... object[s] of sublime beauty ...” Early visitors to the Fon emphasized bocios’ unattractive features. Fon bocio, Blier suggests, emanate qualities of “tension, anxiety, and danger,” projecting ideas of intrigue and foreboding (Blier 1995: 1). They were created to work in the context of and in conjunction with vodun energies, deities such as Legba, Earth spirits, and the aziza forest sprites. They serve both to protect and to assist in gaining power and change (Blier 1995: 3, 7, 83).Perhaps the most researched objects are minkisi (sg. nkisi) of central Africa, especially those of the Kongo-speaking peoples. Here too, it is not the formal beauty of objects that is of concern to users. Considered “power objects,” their focus is not on appearance or physical form but on efficacious combinations of leaves and medicines and the tasks spirits from the land of the dead within minkisi can perform. MacGaffey refers to minkisi as “residual fragments of operative complexes” and informs us that rituals that activated and made use of minkisi are no longer performed. Even vocabulary used for them is “archaic and obscure” (MacGaffey 1993: 33).MacGaffey's assertion that minkisi are no longer made and the vocabulary used in their context is archaic and thus obscure is not unlike the situation with clay figures in Ọ̀wọ̀. They too are things of the past. Neither minkisi nor ṣìgìdìlìyègbè are relevant to contemporary individuals in the locations where they were once essential. Blier's comment that bocio are not objects of sublime beauty also pertains to the discussion of the figures in question.The figures are not entirely absent from the scene in Ọ̀wọ̀. Many ìyègbè were in place in 1973 and are still visible today. But even when objects are left in place, they can be separated from the context in which they were created and from the function for which they were created.In 1973, rapid change was already evident. While some traditional priests remained, it was apparent that many of the beliefs had for decades been giving way to conversion to Christianity and Islam. Many people I encountered were skeptical of Ọ̀wọ̀ objects used in the context of ancestral religion, while recent discussions with Ọ̀wọ̀ citizens suggest that, although many arts are still vital to leadership in the kingdom, ṣìgìdì and ìyègbè are not among them.Ṣìgìdì and ìyègbè were things that were veiled in secrecy. Their purposes, although alluded to by many, were understood by few. As Polly Nooter reminds us, “In African epistemology and art, secrecy operates in complex, subtle ways, being a key strategy in much secular and ritual experience, including traditional forms of education and the arts” (Nooter 1993: 55). Thus it seems to have been in Ọ̀wọ̀.2 While the secrets of manufacture and specific intent of objects were not known by ordinary citizens in 1973, their general intent was recognized. By 2018 the objects themselves were not recognized.Clay figures, often seen near the entrances of the homes of power to serve as gatekeepers or hidden away to serve as harmful agents were indeed created in secret. They were intended to serve either positive or negative functions in Ọ̀wọ̀ as well as among the Yòrùbá in general. Those seated at entrances served as gatekeepers or watchdogs, protecting inhabitants and property. Others were intended to embody curses, associated with the concept of “nightmares” sent to visit enemies, smothering them in their sleep. The former were clearly visible and understood as protective devices. The latter were secreted away in the homes of those who commissioned them.3 Today, ideas behind their use are associated with the religion of the past, and there is a forgetfulness about why they are present in places like the verandas of the Olọ́wọ̀'s palace.The Olọ́wọ̀ is still the head of Ọ̀wọ̀ kingdom, which consists of the city of Ọ̀wọ̀ and nine “satellite” communities, each with its own ọba (ruler). Once, Ọ̀wọ̀ had been powerful, its control stretching into Akoko to the north and close to the Kingdom of Benin to the south. Ọ̀wọ̀'s organization was much like that of other Yòrùbá kingdoms and that of Benin. Although the power of the ọba does not extend to great distances now, as it did at its height, the influence of those in control continues. Long ago that power was assisted by and by the of those who the power recent discussions suggest many things associated with secrets of power are no longer by the of were not to the secrets of power in the past, but they the and that power was at were by as power in of the not being to their I objects in the Ọ̀wọ̀ to some of the forms I I earthen much in the I associated with Ọ̀wọ̀ and 1). and its was by a with a The and the created with with The fit the its by the The was to many I had seen on wooden and The was to the and the and did not at the The on a its the edge to the to on the on which it was had on the was not as well and it was it was intended to be seen was as although this is the of this I at that encountered other types of earthen figures set in and forms hidden away in homes of powerful individuals The was called the one these figures they were not my research they did not to to the arts of leadership and ancestral in my and I in they played a key in created for use in traditional leadership in served to the still but not to the it did in the past. art is intended to the authority of powerful individuals dress, and are positive in to assist in the of or are in power for those for it is They for the of the and especially for the of a or of Yòrùbá religion, the ṣìgìdì are to be made by to the scant that this of they are created for either or They were as as by the and in the a ṣìgìdì as a of ṣìgìdì in “In traditional a had ṣìgìdì figures have been The of and individuals of power who had enemies among their for even Although they may have been used by for the they are most often by those with While some were used to protect or others were to the of power in of their of a Yòrùbá the of ṣìgìdì where the were in the clay the was the was the Yòrùbá to write on Yòrùbá religion, the of the ṣìgìdì place a of about a to or medicines are not although several specific them and the of a spirit within clay figures with as a for that is common in the of those who in the of and is to and them more As he is Yòrùbá and the of the which been on of the head is and the by is to the the ṣìgìdì is by the its work for the either as or on why and it was created and of the functions of the figures was and protecting people and property. that a place and inspired of it that no one what he called a that the of the of was powerful of a to such clay images as a of which served as of and called it a of it a protective and emphasized the protective discussed ṣìgìdì in the where in rituals that reinforced the of the The was on the of the the of the study of Yòrùbá and religion, the concept of ṣìgìdì is most often associated with negative the focus on from the by the concept of ṣìgìdì in the of the the he as by a or sent by a Although not associated with a the was that a spirit had been sent to discussed ṣìgìdì as a spirit that was that a whose had been to the of one known as to among the Yòrùbá from on Yòrùbá religion, he called ṣìgìdì a form of he called it form of or the of evil examining discussion of the Yòrùbá when are the clay it be with power to to enemies on its function for and and that the and made the ṣìgìdì to the it ṣìgìdì spirits had to with the of was by the of when he that ṣìgìdì was used enemies within a not such as the who had made the did not use it the people use it that ṣìgìdì used in Yòrùbá is the most of figures, that once in clay, the spirit can about as and in their or as its that at ṣìgìdì is to the on its own that being as of ṣìgìdì to the of a it is a that the to control the As of he was for forces of the spirit but he was also for the behind use of those is to in and of and form is emphasized by ṣìgìdì are often of clay with or of seems to be in the of one of the did not of a but a of and to of Although a he most were by a with of the most are some to more in many seen by visitors were to the is not a to and While some are mere others the of the also the of form in that created their own ṣìgìdì as unfired clay figures, and with limited of features me that he had seen a ṣìgìdì while a in in the with me did not fit these but be as a as of and into the project from the The in is of a with earthen 1973, ìyègbè were visible in a of Ọ̀wọ̀ people I to and evil as but they still the them not by at by and to the of such was created to the of the and thus that of the figures were They worked to the But in their the figures that were at evil their mere and their medicines the not unlike the that ìyègbè was visible to the were with medicines to the more and to called of the they were of with powerful and and as substances were and the form was on the of of dignitaries near often with a for who to it Their features and by of clay or used to Willett me he in the Olọ́wọ̀'s in ìyègbè me several a earthen in the of whose power and whose was a of suggested by its features being by years of of clay and of these figures on its into areas and not at the and to the I encountered discussion of the of objects and being in as that ìyègbè have and most physical ìyègbè But not the physical the spirit within the more The of these was and evil away from the and other of Ọ̀wọ̀ earthen was a form and did not in Those I was to other than those in the had been in place in the of the the ìyègbè was the ṣìgìdì was and The clay form was not in had be hidden out to be did not and for enemies to it was sent on specific those made for ṣìgìdì were by who them as forces the use of medicines and by and my ṣìgìdì were for activated by and sent to enemies at ṣìgìdì figures were to being figures by the at the of 1973, I had in the my in in from to most and were more than 7, figures had features not unlike those on were to while were to the on the and a the which were these figures ṣìgìdì in Ọ̀wọ̀ one the and in which these objects Yòrùbá in the was often as a being into and that place The is that the of individuals is from in for and they they to the and power the Ọ̀wọ̀ important individuals have for within a complex, in Nigeria, my to Ọ̀wọ̀ was not in the in and the of in but also The was in was and in years my and had been the or the Olọ́wọ̀ were While at in I of at the the of ọba while still warned to of at the Ọ̀wọ̀ made of this was not the Ọ̀wọ̀'s was by for of as well as for the physical into Ọ̀wọ̀ me to the of the Ọ̀wọ̀ power I on my a at the by of the Olọ́wọ̀ as the from the The of a and the were to the for power was to the recent of Ọ̀wọ̀. had not on the of the kingdom but on traditional of Yòrùbá and on art forms that reinforced the of I was of on by a in contemporary in the I was to the that both and a former of were in these I to a to investigate the leadership arts Ọ̀wọ̀'s such a of was was I to the various I the of where one's is by I to that leadership arts in such a have to be of Ọ̀wọ̀ resulted from for gaining the from a to one Ọ̀wọ̀ origin of of Ife were and but the of Ọ̀wọ̀, was left being on a when the was meted but left Ife with a of the They to the As the of he he near the present site of Ọ̀wọ̀. Ọ̀wọ̀'s can be as the of power he and was in both and ritual by the who from both and power in the at the site where Ọ̀wọ̀ is As Ọ̀wọ̀ other were Many resulted from the same of as in with and were Ọ̀wọ̀ often those they had and other were and some were powerful their use of others power with The was and of and for power were names, were and were were and were 1973, for me Ọ̀wọ̀ are both and have for the of Olọ́wọ̀ and have for he or a did not a for the of on with and of on on of of their and on by and they to their for the past, of the was the of and the were was in this that the ìyègbè at the or the But entirely on positive did not one had to to means to to in the of individuals with were made enemies, and spirits were called to use of among the Yòrùbá is to be in a study on mental among the that were used by many people that Yòrùbá religion for and including and or and But he also in the are among for Ọ̀wọ̀ suggested that not were used but and in some also be about the of especially by the While I was in Nigeria, a me a for The I a Yòrùbá to some not what I the but to it me that or even the of such not be into the power of means by which and are to about some be of as a of the that the of in power objects is in the study of African cultures. in the form of figures or are activated and by to work on the physical it is to to or to research that the are the As suggests, African is with to and The same is for are and vital the of Yòrùbá beliefs about and did not a by The was and such as the or known to and some great in they to to was after their in to about means been to by the Yòrùbá as Ọ̀wọ̀, of is known as called it like both positive and negative on the at which it is or the of the one the But with were material substances such as and such as and The were for ṣìgìdì and used in in the past, as well as in 1973, to earthen objects being created by who used various in with and substances the earthen and among ṣìgìdì material is not or its is by and The of ṣìgìdì as of material and ritual is after ritual that it material can by its mere of the to The a of for the on by and the of that about spirit and is especially for figures that by entrances and and others with evil that powerful of a the is and the general of the been by those of seems to be at with the of earthen objects in Ọ̀wọ̀. of those objects in with those in and suggest that the was of and not the associated often with clay powerful men such as and whose were already with art out who were known for their or who with artists to create the forms for spirit great of agents in clay in Ọ̀wọ̀ may have to with of Ọ̀wọ̀ often its eastern Yòrùbá kingdom, it was close to the Edo kingdom of Benin. At various it may even have been the control of a by Ọ̀wọ̀. As a powerful, kingdom, it its own was also a Yòrùbá kingdoms to the and the Benin kingdom to the a place where from other areas or from and of and of great and from other power the as ọba the of time, have often that with and Even the Olọ́wọ̀ often the of the and on several in Even the of the been and it was the of was my the of that power was it is apparent that of the often it to use of to and enemies and to to me to of my I to Ọ̀wọ̀ I was of a by The of in seen a I my my the and where I with had been a by the of its had away with the and was and was my of with did not place me in with the of the I he me with but he did to out of As I was the where he to a a like great of unfired clay objects on their I was at the of my in Ọ̀wọ̀, and I that was the of contact with the I was to me As the where discussion was to place, he to a of objects he had for the most I had seen with a of for the ancestral several ìyègbè a and the objects were at earthen figures that he had from the he had to on my I was to a of and a of The intended for me to this of had to of the earthen figures 3, The were but at they are was not for and the I that some are much than those in the are have from the head Others have objects projecting from the a have areas in which it is that wooden had been into the clay as but areas into the clay prior to of the have or other of ṣìgìdì had been created to assist the in for the of one of the most and in the my from Ọ̀wọ̀ I one on ṣìgìdì at and other me from them earthen objects were to the At in my were of Ọ̀wọ̀ I a for a these objects were used in Ọ̀wọ̀. I left ṣìgìdì to on a in my and the objects in individuals from Ọ̀wọ̀ me on the and about my was the of one of my in Ọ̀wọ̀. was a of the and on the I was to a limited to Ọ̀wọ̀ As the among most living in but many I images from I had in 1973 and of the I had a I at one As a individuals in were and of those were I of one of the ṣìgìdì was much like many I had seen in Ọ̀wọ̀. The was the The head with from the and the the and a the the with and the were it be and discussion one I had to the of ṣìgìdì and I of gatekeepers at the were for the of the and about being in and these also for the but no or discussion of ìyègbè or ṣìgìdì The in was I to the of but it had of them. They were of the past. They had no in the place where Christianity now But my is than the most comment of be education and Christianity have to a of the of the the same on a site by some I was a form their I for of a of in the same many with those I had seen in the from was The of the a of a of the that I had in ṣìgìdì in the seems that those ṣìgìdì I had seen on their a at have into the Ọ̀wọ̀ who is in the of to ìyègbè in the or I had seen them. sent me a of were indeed still in one figures on a in of the of of clay and and have their features. are no longer been with of clay and on the on which they been a the behind a the them from out in the the of the on the of they as mere in the which more recent in a Yòrùbá can be seen they use they of within the seems to what they are called or the They it as clay figures that once played vital roles in and leadership have been away or are seen as of the objects are separated from their in are objects that be some objects associated with secrets of power in place, but the contexts in which they have or have been The in which they were created no longer such does art its the of ṣìgìdì and ìyègbè and other types of earthen figures, it seems may in which the is left in place but although its is or or even the present as is the of the ìyègbè that are still visible in the today

Art · Visual arts · African history and culture studies