Bondarenko Dmitri M. Homoarchy

47
throne the Oba went on playing the exceptionally important and “practical”
role of the all-Benin unity’s symbol, the focus and guard of the people’s
cultural tradition and identity, and thus did promote significantly integration of
socio-political segments into a whole – centralization in its socio-territorial
aspect. This is the real socio-political significance of the essentially irrational
supreme ruler’s sacral power. Characteristically, the notions of “reign”,
“kingdom”, and “government are expressed in the Edo (Bini) language by one
and the same word – arioba, and as a “barbarian”, “foreigner” (ete) in Benin
was considered not any ethnically non-Bini but only the one “who does not
know the law (of the country. – D. B.) and does not recognize the Oba (as his
or her sovereign. – D. B.)” (Melzian 1937: 10, 43). Especially significant part
in Obas’ effective fulfillment of the integrative role was played by their status
of the realm’s high (supreme) priest. Sovereigns played the central part in
performing rites of most important all-Benin cults including those of the
agrarian cycle and immediately connected with royalty: of the Oba’s
ancestors – ugie erha oba (the main holiday in the country from the mid-15 th
century on), his good luck and hand (see Sidahome 1964: 1; Kochakova 1984;
1986: 225–233; Bondarenko 1995: 203–231; 2001: 193–211; 2003c; 2005d;
Roese and Bondarenko 2003: 26–32). As Marc Abйlиs (1981: 3) underlines,
“[t]he rites of sacred kingship are centered on the social drama in which all
members of the society take part.”
To sum up, although it may seem paradoxical, the role of the supreme
ruler in Benin history was becoming as greater as less his profane power (the
only true one in the modern people’s minds) was turning out. The folk “... was
bound together by the reverence felt for... the Oba of Benin...” (Talbot 1926:
III, 563; see also Eweka, E. B. 1992: 82, 83). The critical role of the Oba
became especially clear in the colonial times when after an attempt to abolish
the institution immediately after the fall of Benin in 1897, the British had to
restore it in 1914 as far as it had become evident that “if they were to secure
even the grudging co-operation of the Bini they must restore the monarchy”
(Igbafe 1974: 175; see also Zotova 1979: 105–114; Nevadomsky 1993: 66–67).
3. The rulers and the ruled: political culture as a manifestation of
worldview
Naturally (and the history of controversies between sovereigns and titled chiefs
is the best possible testimony to this) the mechanisms and tendencies of sociopolitical
transformations did not depend on the role ascribed to power and
authorities by the people completely. Even more so, the further the more power
was distancing from the Binis’ ideal understanding of its nature and tasks.
Nevertheless, the influence of political ideas on actual institutions and
processes always remained direct and essentially important.
In general, the relations between the rulers (all-Benin authorities) and
the ruled (communalists), between the political “whole” embodied in the center