May I ask what it really is that you are trying to say. I see all these flowery words but I'm not seeing anything behind said words. In my humble opinion, I personally think that you do not believe that the Igbo-Ukwu can be attributed to the Nri people and by extention Igbo people in the area.

You keep bringing up the Igala people as though, despite all your shadiness about the whole matter, you believe the works should be attributed more to them than anything else.

Add to the fact a few 'akward' comments you have made and directed towards Igbo people adds to my overall hunch about your motives.

Whatever floats your boat dear, but do not think you are fooling anyone under the guise of 'knowledge'

Why are some people so sensitive and innately addicted to whining?

Terracotta, don't let them distract you...

You're winning the debate against both PhysicsQED and Ezeagu...

shymexx: Why are some people so sensitive and innately addicted to whining?

Terracotta, don't let them distract you...

You're winning the debate against both PhysicsQED and Ezeagu...

Hey--no troll-feeding allowed here. There are other threads in this zoo for that.

This isn't a debate with Physics in my mind. It's a discussion since he's one of the few posters (Katsumoto, ChinyenyeN and Jarus are others) that are civil and back up their points with evidence. You might be too but you like the e-brawling too much

I'd tell other people to just skip the discussion if there's too much reading or it's too boring or whatever. I skip past stuff on here all the time. I wish I had the same free time as some of the people on here.

TerraCotta:
Hey--no troll-feeding allowed here. There are other threads in this zoo for that.

This isn't a debate with Physics in my mind. It's a discussion since he's one of the few posters (Katsumoto, ChinyenyeN and Jarus are others) that are civil and back up their points with evidence. You might be too but you like the e-brawling too much

I'd tell other people to just skip the discussion if there's too much reading or it's too boring or whatever. I skip past stuff on here all the time. I wish I had the same free time as some of the people on here.

Lmao... I'm not feeding the troll - I'm just trying to get "her" off the thread with her insecurities...

You should be able to discern who the poster behind that handle is...

TerraCotta: He quotes a missionary's interview with a native-born Nri woman who says the marks are also called "ogba ubi" (farming furrows) and then elaborates on the story about Eri planting the heads of his first-born children to grow the first yams, as mentioned above. Just an example of how a common belief or interpretation can have alternative explanations.

Okay, so, there are no four ruling families of Nri, that would mean that the various exogamous lineages in the Umunri communities are non-existant. Perhaps MDW Jeffreys was mistaking Igala for Igbo. The Nri are not dead, it was 1930 so these families couldn't have just disappeared. You can get the lineages from Onwuejeogwu, or you can just search online. There's still an Eze Nri. With a quick search of 'Igala ruling families' I've already found "Aj'Akwu, Aj'Ocholi, Ame'cho, and Aj'Akogu ruling houses". Despite all that, the role of Attah and Nri cannot even be compared even if there were equal amount of ruling families in both. So that's that.

The UNN write up is politics.

MDW Jeffreys already touched on the supposed farming furrows pattern in 1951 (The Winged Solar Disk or Ibo Itchi Facial Scarification, the same one referenced by Keith Ray), and he quoted an interview between a missionary named Miss Yeatman and an "Ndri" who denied that their facial marks were yam furrows and recounted the yam tale of how they had the patterns before the yam sprouted on earth. Miss Yeatman also got information about the sun and the moon pattern on mburuichi heads and they claimed "they were engraved on the face so that they might shine in the house and make it light", they also admitted forgetting what the marks on their cheeks represented. The differing patterns were insisted by Nri that they remain different from community to community, many of the styles have names from the wings of birds like the eagle (although MDW Jeffrey interpreted ugo as 'sacred vulture'), but the two marks on the forehead were named onwa and anwu (moon and sun). MDW Jeffreys opinion is that 'yam furrows' is a taunt by non-mburuichi (or "ichi" as it was called) which was not accepted by the mburuichi.

Eri was not the one that planted his son and daughters heads, it was his son Nri.

Pfft...

Keep creating gazillion handles just to talk to me lol..

^^^whatever.

I have stopped caring.

Lmao... Love unspoken - better say the truth before the moment pass you by...

"Just when I thought I was out, they.keep.pulling.me.back.in!"

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUPw-3e_pzqU

I've got some other stuff I want to talk about that's more related to the thread topic ("Maps of Kingdoms, Peoples, States and Cities in Africa Through Time" ) but first, a thorough (hopefully final?) response to the Nri questions. This will be a long one:

ezeagu:

Okay, so, there are no four ruling families of Nri, that would mean that the various exogamous lineages in the Umunri communities are non-existant. Perhaps MDW Jeffreys was mistaking Igala for Igbo.

Like the old cliche goes, you're entitled to your own beliefs but not your own facts. Jeffreys wrote dozens of articles on the Nri religion, political system, symbolism etc. He specifically says there are four ruling families (reduced to three) and goes into long, explicit anthropological detail about the coronation ceremonies for an eze Nri. Why would someone who's spent much more time than us (I'm assuming you've studied Nri using Jeffreys' materials) studying this system firsthand all of a sudden mistake Igala for Igbo? If he doesn't name the families to your satisfaction, that's an approrpiate criticism, but the man was writing about what he saw and in a fair amount of detail as well. We can't discount that just because it doesn't fit conveniently into someone's beliefs. We have to have a reason to disbelieve or reinterpret eyewitness accounts. So far you haven't provided one. This is a minor point to me. It only suggests one possible point of connection between Igala and Nri. In fact, there are numerous of other links that are much harder to dispute.

Jeffreys and other historians and anthropologists (including Dr. Nwaezeigwe of UNN) have concluded that Nri culture has a strong Igala element. That upsets the folk mythology and fantastic village legends that some people hold dear, but it's important to give the evidence in detail so there's a sufficient amount of proof for casual readers to follow the argument:

The Nri "royal" families

Jeffreys article is clear enough for anyone who can read it. For anyone who doesn't have access, I'll quote some excerpts and you can make up your own minds:

"the king is chosen from three (originally four), royal families, by the ancestral spirits. The candidate is usually a youngest son ... Both his parents must be dead ... He discards his ordinary clothes and may thereafter wear only white or blue Igala ones (as does his wife) ... the Umundri tradition is that they come from the ruling stock of the Igala ..."

He adds some speculation about Nri links to other Nigerian cultures, which perhaps is the source of anxiety about this relatively straightforward concept on Nairaland. The statements above are detailed and clear enough for anyone to read and decide what you will. Jeffreys isn't done though; he wrote even more detailed descriptions about the coronation ceremony of Nri, the patterns of ichi markings (his illustrations are still the most consistently cited sources), and other invaluable cultural data. Again, he's not a perfect source. Few are. He may be completely wrong about the Igala ancestry in Nri; he's likely to be wrong about his Egyptian suggestions, for instance. The difference is that he's only reporting what the Nri told him about their Igala ancestry, not his personal opinion. He is speculating on his own about Egyptian ancestry and other fanciful theories later. The difference should be clear. I try to make it plain all the time in my posts too.

The Nri are not dead, it was 1930 so these families couldn't have just disappeared. You can get the lineages from Onwuejeogwu, or you can just search online.

I don't remember asking for the lineages or whether these families had disappeared. Do you own Onwuejeogwu's books? I can direct you to some passages that would tell you clearly that Eri met an indigenous population in the 'Nri' area, suggesting that he was a settler. We'll come back to this point later.

The UNN write up is politics.

This is, sadly, too weak a response for me to pass up. You may need to reread Dr. Nwaezeigwe's paper. It's clearly-written, not overly academic and presents very convincing evidence that the current Nri system (dynasty?) is of Igala ancestry. Here's a link to the full thing and, again, some useful quotes for those who care:

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19709056/630751156/name/THE+POLITICS+OF+IGBO+ORIGIN+AND+CULTURE.pdf

In recent times, quite a number of writings on the subject of Igbo origins have emerged on the scene of historical scholarship, most of them by non-scholars and non-historian scholars. They wear the garb of history but are in their forms, structures and analysis unhistorical, lacking in depth, proven sources, critical analyses and unbiased judgment. They fundamentally aim at elevating one group in the course of Igbo history and cultural evolution at the expense of the others and against the rules of historical writings, which subsequently gravitates into a riotous contest of primacy in the body history and cultural evolution of the Igbo.

Thus, instead of teaming up to develop a unifying ground for the study and understanding of the Igbo past, these people engage on building false historical castles on a foundation of mythological fallacies and fables engrained in prejudices and uncanny sentiments. The works of the likes of Michael Angulu Onwuejeogwu, an Ibusa-born anthropologist of Nri extraction, Emmanuel Ifesieh of Oraeri, I.C.K. Anadi also of Oraeri; and B.I.O Odinanwa of Ikenga-Nri; the Enuguwu-Agidi-born S.O.N. Okafor; C.M. Ezekwugo of Nnokwa, then of the philosophy of life fame; and of recent, Ambrose Nnalue Okonkwo of Agukwu-Nri; F.C. Idigo of Aguleri; Charles Ujah of Arochkwu, Hyacinth Ugwu Ezema of Edem-Nsukka; and the most sensational of all, Cathrine Acholonu-Ulumba; are all guilty of building the castle of Igbo history and culture on a foundation of false historical precepts, fabricated myths and fables and unproven sources ...Eri, definitely an Igala warrior, is said to have founded the present Igbezunu village of Ikenga quarters while the other half, Umunkete was founded by the followers of Onoja Oboni, another Igala warrior who invaded Aguleri many years after Eri ...

Whether the artifacts beneath the present Igbo-Ukwu town were used by their ancestors or not, is immaterial at this pint of our inquiry. The commanding fact is that, unlike the Oraeri and their Nri and Umunri kinsmen who, are engaged in a perennial conflict of identity between their Igala origin and their Igbo identity, the Igbo-Ukwu are primordially of Igbo origins.

Anyone who's interested in this topic should really read the paper. Thanks again to Physics for providing the title since I wasn't aware of it before then. As I said earlier, the professor is in agreement with the views of other writers I've read on this issue.

MDW Jeffreys opinion is that 'yam furrows' is a taunt by non-mburuichi (or "ichi" as it was called) which was not accepted by the mburuichi.

I'm glad to see you're doing your own research and quoting Jeffreys' views now. I'm assuming you still think he confuses Igala and Nri though? In any case, I cited the dispute between the interpretation of ichi as an example of how easily one version of mythical history can suppress other traditions. Many people believe that the marks represent the rays of the sun. Jeffreys agrees with this, but as diligent scholars, he and Yeatman do us the great favor of recording alternative traditions. Let's quote again:

Ms. Yeatman reported that one day there were a number of men in the Mission compound, some with ichi and some without. She asked if these designs had any meaning. Peter of Amobia stated that the top lines of the scarification represented the moon and the second lot represented the sun ... what the patterns on the cheeks meant was forgotten ... She said, "I am told that the long lines on the cheeks represent farming furrows (ogba ubi). And Ndri replied, "Not at all. We cut our faces before we saw the yam..."

Yeatman presents an interview, supplemented by information she's heard before, about the meaning of various ichi. The sun, moon and farming furrows aren't contradictory claims; the sun and the moon are on the forehead while the cheeks represent the rows of yams planted, which seems quite logical. The ndiichi themselves had forgotten the meaning but reject the idea that they represent rows of yams. Perhaps they're embarrassed by this in the modernizing 20th century? Perhaps they have another secret meaning they couldn't share with the missionary? We don't know. What we do now is that the footnote shows that she got the term from Nwora, an Nri village man who had these ichi marks. Jeffreys interpreted this as a taunt, as did some of the other men; whether they're right is hard to say since the men claim to have forgotten the meaning of the other marks. I'm speculating here (how can I say this more clearly, I wonder) but I think it makes sense that both interpretations are correct and represent the ritual logic of agriculture: the sun shines on crops to make them grow, and yam and cocoyam were the staple foods of the Nri culture (after a certain point). We'll see some evidence for why I'm suggesting this a little later.

Eri was not the one that planted his son and daughters heads, it was his son Nri.

That depends who you believe. Myths evolve and have multiple versions--the reasons for that is most of the fun of cultural research. Jeffreys says it was Nri who planted his children's heads to grow the first yams. Fine. Onwuejeogwu on the other hand--who you seem to trust more--quite clearly identifies Eri as the founder, as I wrote in that post. You don't have to take my word for it; Onwuejeogwu's work is unavailable online but here's a book that quotes him. By the way, his quote also suggests quite clearly that Eri (if he was real or a myth, we don't know) settled among a pre-existing population and was not part of the autochthonous residents of the era:

"The father of Nri was Eri. No one knows where he came from. Tradition (odinani) says he came from God (Chukwu). He was a great man sent by God to rule all the people of Anambra. Before he came to the Anambra all the people were living in scattered huts. They had no kings ... When he came there was no food for the people. He prayed to God to send food for the people. God demanded that he should sacrifice his first son and daughter to him. He did the sacrifice and buried his children ... That is why the first son and daughter of Eze Nri after his coronation have ichi marks made on their faces ... Eri brought yam and all food. The earth produces it.

The 'ogba ube' or 'farm furrows' interpretation for some ichi marks on the cheeks is obviously strengthened by this version of the myth. Either side is not ultimately what's important for this discussion though; the point is that there are multiple interpretations for a phenomenon and you have to listen to every story and weigh their claims carefully.

From: http://books.google.com/books?id=9hhmzVrYPHAC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=eri+nri+yam&source=bl&ots=n1q_wwd5cc&sig=TtQbeDuRzgplQq_NOgSCol0XXnI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0EqCUavOKKHliALEuYG4Dw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=eri%20nri%20yam&f

One more note: every single one of the myths about Eri/Nri etc I've cited refer to the active participation of the Awka/Oka smithing tradition we talked about earlier in "making the earth", and some even assume that the Oka smiths were here first. Jeffreys himself says the Oka artists were responsible for making the ichi marks in the past, which I'd forgotten that he mentioned. These signs point to the Oka area as a major site of early Igbo cultural development. I'll restate my speculation that they would be a very useful guide in where to look for the production of Igbo-Ukwu metalworking when future archaeologists and historians have the funds for all that. We see this same connection between metalworking, art production and ritual/political structures all over the related Nigerian cultures and in much of Africa.

Okay, on to the next one.

The OP wanted to discuss maps, states and societies in early Africa, and I thought it would be a good time to introduce Suzanne Preston Blier's AfricaMap project. Professor Blier is a Harvard art historian that specializes in West Africa, particularly Ife and Dahomey (she's written about mudbrick architecture and Benin as well though). She is a brilliant woman that has done some rewarding and revolutionary analysis of Nigerian art history. My favorite of her essays is thankfully online: http://www.collegeart.org/pdf/artbulletin/Art%20Bulletin%20Vol%2067%20No%203%20Blier.pdf . She discusses the links between metalworking, art production and title holding in Ife society in that paper, which is relevant to the discussion above.

I bring her up because she's expected to publish her latest book on the architectural plan of Ile-Ife this summer. Here's why it's so important: she used GPS mapping technology to demonstrate that the layout of Ife/Ufe was planned to resemble a turtle, an old symbol of wisdom, and that this layout was meant to encode their society's most important spiritual and political beliefs. These are groundbreaking interpretations of what's called material culture: the physical things that people built, made and left behind, not only the myths and legends that we now use to explain the issues we don't understand. The quote below is a very good summary of her work. When the book is out, maybe I'll come back and post some maps from it:

Suzanne Preston Blier, a professor at Harvard University, said not all landscapes are enchanted in the ancient Yoruban city of Ife in southwestern Nigeria, but many are. Combining landscape architecture with a rich cosmological system, the Yoruban kings and Ifa priestly castes laid out Ife as a giant turtle, with criss-crossing pathways embedded with deep cultural and religious meaning. Interestingly, much of this has been unknown to the outside world, until Blier and others at Harvard created AfricaMap, an amazing open-source geospatial mapping Web site, to unearth the patterns underneath the buildings and vegetation. She said “technology may actually be key to uncovering the past.”

[b]Some scholars put the earliest settlements at Ife at 350 BCE, with the kingdom reaching its peak as an artistic and cultural center around 1300AD. Arriving in the area, Blier said she was “stunned by the landscape,” and the “amazing system of spatial engagement, buildings, and ritual pathways” that form the landscape of the city. The topography is like a “bolder hat,” with a palace and temple in the middle, and then a set of hills circling. The lowlands are continually covered in rain, providing fertile soils. Nowadays, the city is 50/50 Muslim and Christian. She said this “hybridity” is also reflected in the landscapes, which mixes baobab trees from the savannah with palm trees from the south.

The archeological elements of Ife follow closely the current city. Yoruban cities were “centrally planned.” Ife’s palace was an “ancient center, with a garden environment.” The back of the palace was a historic forest used to grow herbs and medicinal plants. Buildings formed a square courtyard in the center where rainwater was collected. In ancient Yoruban culture, when people died, they were buried in their living or bedrooms. She discussed how this was important in the distinction between interior and exterior spaces.

Yoruban mythology centers around two primary figures: Obatala and Odudua. Obatala was sent down from the heavens (on a chain or boat) to create earth, but instead got drunk on palm wine. So the supreme god sent down his younger brother who managed to finish the job. As a result, Obatala is considered the sky god, and is associated with ritual power, while Odudua is associated with earth, and earthly political power. “These are the cosmological heroes,” but they also stand for “the division of Ife and different dynastic rulers.” Obatala is connected with the first dynasty, while Odudua is with the second. Along with sky and earth, there is light, which is represented in the mica Yoruban kings where in their crowns. Mica is spread throughout the soil in Ife so “when it rains, the pathways become glittery and enchanged landscapes, powered by light.”[/b]

Unearthing the city’s turtle shape via AfricaMap, Blier found that each of the four main gods in Yoruban religion had different spaces associated with different roles, which “coincide with Ife divination.” There were also divisions according to family and a ward system that follows those lines. Each have different pathways. She emphasized the “primacy of pathways” and their role in preserving “time – past, present, and future.” Also, chiefly compounds with old and new dynastic leaders have specific locations around the palace, with guaranteed “viewsheds” that allow the priestly caste to “keep the king in view and in check.” The viewsheds actually represent the political landscape as well.

From: http://dirt.asla.org/2011/09/23/the-primacy-of-pathways/

A beautiful, little-known indigenous tradition of architecture and urban design that hasn't been understood for centuries became clear because she approached the issue with modern tools, an open mind, respect for cultural traditions but also an understanding of how to evaluate and interpret mythology. I think it teaches anyone interested in culture and history something profound. The reason I stick around to write stuff like this on the Internet is because I really hope there's some bright Nigerian boy or girl who is inspired to study history, anthropology or archaeology reading this sometime in the future. I'd want them to be inspired and to contribute to the next set of groundbreaking scholarship on the world-class, connected cultural treasures we have in Nigeria. I also hope it's helpful for anyone interested in the topic.

Physics--there are also some interesting correlations in the concept of the four cardinal points and their similarities, which you've alluded to in some old posts. You were definitely on to something, in my opinion.

Dr. Blier's upcoming book is called "Art and Risk in Ancient Yoruba: Ife History, Power and Identity circa 1300: http://www.cambridge.org/aus/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9781107021662

The AfricaMap project can be found here: http://worldmap.harvard.edu/africamap/

Woo!!

TerraCotta: "Just when I thought I was out, they.keep.pulling.me.back.in!"

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUPw-3e_pzqU

I've got some other stuff I want to talk about that's more related to the thread topic ("Maps of Kingdoms, Peoples, States and Cities in Africa Through Time" ) but first, a thorough (hopefully final?) response to the Nri questions. This will be a long one:



Like the old cliche goes, you're entitled to your own beliefs but not your own facts. Jeffreys wrote dozens of articles on the Nri religion, political system, symbolism etc. He specifically says there are four ruling families (reduced to three) and goes into long, explicit anthropological detail about the coronation ceremonies for an eze Nri. Why would someone who's spent much more time than us (I'm assuming you've studied Nri using Jeffreys' materials) studying this system firsthand all of a sudden mistake Igala for Igbo? If he doesn't name the families to your satisfaction, that's an approrpiate criticism, but the man was writing about what he saw and in a fair amount of detail as well. We can't discount that just because it doesn't fit conveniently into someone's beliefs. We have to have a reason to disbelieve or reinterpret eyewitness accounts. So far you haven't provided one. This is a minor point to me. It only suggests one possible point of connection between Igala and Nri. In fact, there are numerous of other links that are much harder to dispute.

Jeffreys and other historians and anthropologists (including Dr. Nwaezeigwe of UNN) have concluded that Nri culture has a strong Igala element. That upsets the folk mythology and fantastic village legends that some people hold dear, but it's important to give the evidence in detail so there's a sufficient amount of proof for casual readers to follow the argument:

Since this relates directly, what then is your reasoning for disbelieving Christopher Ehrets claim that "the kings of the Igala claimed descent from the Nri of Igbo-Ukwu, and they continued to be enthroned by Nri ritual experts right down to the early twentieth century."?

This is not the only person that claims Nri-Igala coronations by the way.

TerraCotta: The Nri "royal" families

Jeffreys article is clear enough for anyone who can read it. For anyone who doesn't have access, I'll quote some excerpts and you can make up your own minds:

He adds some speculation about Nri links to other Nigerian cultures, which perhaps is the source of anxiety about this relatively straightforward concept on Nairaland. The statements above are detailed and clear enough for anyone to read and decide what you will. Jeffreys isn't done though; he wrote even more detailed descriptions about the coronation ceremony of Nri, the patterns of ichi markings (his illustrations are still the most consistently cited sources), and other invaluable cultural data. Again, he's not a perfect source. Few are. He may be completely wrong about the Igala ancestry in Nri; he's likely to be wrong about his Egyptian suggestions, for instance. The difference is that he's only reporting what the Nri told him about their Igala ancestry, not his personal opinion. He is speculating on his own about Egyptian ancestry and other fanciful theories later. The difference should be clear. I try to make it plain all the time in my posts too.

If the "Umundri tradition is that they come from the ruling stock of the Igala and are thus connected with the Atah of Idah" (In the way that it is being read) will place Eri after the 14th/15th century, which completely rubbishes any estimate of Nri's age and kings list, and we then have to re-calculate the age of Nri-related settlements like those in Delta State (Ogwashi, Igbuzo, Owa, etc).

My explanation for this interpretation of Nri history (because these things were interpreted and there's a difference between seeing and interpreting) is that Jeffreys was referring to the Onoja Oboni story of Nri which states Eri was the father of the Igala prince who went to live in his mothers native Igala land. Onwuejeogwu quotes John Boston (The Igala kingdom 1968) on the origin of one of the royal Igala families:

"The third group, holding the priestly title of Obajadaka, claims descent from Onoja Oboni, one of the protodynastic royal ancestors whose relationship to Ayagba is obscure. In the view of other members of the royal clan the first two groups are unquestionably of royal descent, but outside the mainstream of the ruling house. The third group's claims to royal ancestry are regarded as somewhat doubtful, in part because Onoja Oboni's own status is obscure, and there is one school of thought in the royal clan that regards him as an omonobule or uterine kinsman rather than a full member by agnatic descent."

TerraCotta: This is, sadly, too weak a response for me to pass up. You may need to reread Dr. Nwaezeigwe's paper. It's clearly-written, not overly academic and presents very convincing evidence that the current Nri system (dynasty?) is of Igala ancestry. Here's a link to the full thing and, again, some useful quotes for those who care:

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19709056/630751156/name/THE+POLITICS+OF+IGBO+ORIGIN+AND+CULTURE.pdf

Anyone who's interested in this topic should really read the paper. Thanks again to Physics for providing the title since I wasn't aware of it before then. As I said earlier, the professor is in agreement with the views of other writers I've read on this issue.

Yes, very convcing indeed, like when it says Eri is "definitely" of Igala descent or "if Eri is connected with the founding of Igbezunu village and the same village is characterized as Igala in Aguleri tradition, then it becomes obvious that Eri was never of an aboriginal Igbo identity, but Igala." Then he's quoted on the Umudiana Adama website, what a surprise.

By the way:

"In fact, it was in recognition of the primacy of settlement of the Umudiana people that the Umunri gave them the Igala title-name of Adama, which in Igala language and tradition means first-born or what the Igbo call Okpala. Even the institution of Eze-Nri, came into existence through the institutional inspiration of the aboriginal Igbo settlers, the Umudiana, who originally used the kingship as a means of servicing their rituo-economic needs. In this respect, the Eze-Nri was initially appointed by the Umudiana to over-see the activities ofthe Nri ritual agents, who in turn made returns to the Umudiana (Adama)."

Nwaezeigwe doesn't agree with your theory that Nri kingship is of Igala origin.

TerraCotta: I'm glad to see you're doing your own research and quoting Jeffreys' views now. I'm assuming you still think he confuses Igala and Nri though?

Yes I'm quoting because it isn't one obscure sentence that can be read in many ways.

TerraCotta: In any case, I cited the dispute between the interpretation of ichi as an example of how easily one version of mythical history can suppress other traditions. Many people believe that the marks represent the rays of the sun. Jeffreys agrees with this, but as diligent scholars, he and Yeatman do us the great favor of recording alternative traditions. Let's quote again:



Yeatman presents an interview, supplemented by information she's heard before, about the meaning of various ichi. The sun, moon and farming furrows aren't contradictory claims; the sun and the moon are on the forehead while the cheeks represent the rows of yams planted, which seems quite logical. The ndiichi themselves had forgotten the meaning but reject the idea that they represent rows of yams. Perhaps they're embarrassed by this in the modernizing 20th century? Perhaps they have another secret meaning they couldn't share with the missionary? We don't know. What we do now is that the footnote shows that she got the term from Nwora, an Nri village man who had these ichi marks. Jeffreys interpreted this as a taunt, as did some of the other men; whether they're right is hard to say since the men claim to have forgotten the meaning of the other marks. I'm speculating here (how can I say this more clearly, I wonder) but I think it makes sense that both interpretations are correct and represent the ritual logic of agriculture: the sun shines on crops to make them grow, and yam and cocoyam were the staple foods of the Nri culture (after a certain point). We'll see some evidence for why I'm suggesting this a little later.

The Nri men Yeatman interviewed denied the patterns being farm furrows for whatever reason, Jeffreys says is out of resentment. In any case, the Nri men claim that the Ichi marks (or at least the symbolism) comes before the yam/cocoyam myth. Anyway, the names for the patterns vary from community to community, like the Agbaja eagle wings. The accepted are the sun rays.

TerraCotta: That depends who you believe. Myths evolve and have multiple versions--the reasons for that is most of the fun of cultural research. Jeffreys says it was Nri who planted his children's heads to grow the first yams. Fine. Onwuejeogwu on the other hand--who you seem to trust more--quite clearly identifies Eri as the founder, as I wrote in that post.

You're confusing the myth. The myth is that Eri came down to the Anambra river and had children, his second son Nri (or Menri) moved away to establish an ideal community. It was on his journey that Chukwu taught the starving Nri the ritual. That's another funny thing about this discussion, the kingship itself is claimed to have began with Nri (or Nri Ifikuanim), not his father Eri. Nri was allegedly the (half) brother of Onoja who supposedly founded a dynasty in Igala land. Source? Onwuejeogwu, from the Keith ray source you provided.

TerraCotta: One more note: every single one of the myths about Eri/Nri etc I've cited refer to the active participation of the Awka/Oka smithing tradition we talked about earlier in "making the earth", and some even assume that the Oka smiths were here first. Jeffreys himself says the Oka artists were responsible for making the ichi marks in the past, which I'd forgotten that he mentioned. These signs point to the Oka area as a major site of early Igbo cultural development. I'll restate my speculation that they would be a very useful guide in where to look for the production of Igbo-Ukwu metalworking when future archaeologists and historians have the funds for all that. We see this same connection between metalworking, art production and ritual/political structures all over the related Nigerian cultures and in much of Africa.

I agree.

Interesting read...

ezeagu:

Since this relates directly, what then is your reasoning for disbelieving Christopher Ehrets claim that "the kings of the Igala claimed descent from the Nri of Igbo-Ukwu, and they continued to be enthroned by Nri ritual experts right down to the early twentieth century."?

This is not the only person that claims Nri-Igala coronations by the way.

I want to answer your questions but I also want to move on from this discussion because I think I've covered the topic in as much detail as I know.

The Ehret quote is what kicked off the discussion. Both Physics and I found his claim strange because it's a reversal of the known records on the topic from the colonial era. Nri informants at that time claimed that the Nri government/ritual system was derived from the Igala region. Again, this is what the Nri people said to anthropologists in the early 20th century (not just to Jeffreys, but JS Boston and other field anthropologists doing government research). It is not what the anthropologists thought or interpreted; it's the claim the Nri people made at the time. They could have had lots of reasons for doing so: perhaps it was another example of the prestige-by-association tactic practiced by other groups. Perhaps it was the truth, or perhaps it was a mix of traditions. We can't say for sure. What we know is that in the early 20th century, the Nri residents interviewed believed that their mythical ancestor came from Igala country. I don't think this is too controversial a claim since it is in virtually everything you read about the area at that time. In the early 21st century, it's a politically unpalatable claim, but it can't be ignored for that reason alone.

I've never encountered Ehret's claim that the Igala kings were from Nri and were crowned by Nri ritual experts in the 20th century in the historical record (until the claims of Onwuejeogwu and Afigbo etc, which I'll discuss shortly). It's important to give the historical order of the claims of origins, because as I've said, we see shifting claims of ancient pedigrees all over Africa in oral history, and they tend to reflect current political needs and not the facts about the past. It's a well-explored issue in West-Central Africa, we have the same issues with Oyo's Nupe and Borgu ancestry etc. It's hard to give details without going off the point but we can have this discussion separately if you want. If tomorrow, the Tiv claim to be ancestors of the Ijo and have kept that knowledge secret of thousands of years, we couldn't ignore the claim outright but we'd have to look at the known historical record and consider why they might make such a claim. I hope the Ijo and Tiv can forgive the analogy.

Here's the timeline as I know it. Michael Onwuejeogwu and his peers in the late 1960s into the 1970s started popularizing an ancient pedigree of Nri after the Igbo-Ukwu finds were dated by Thurston Shaw to 900-1000 AD period (not without some controversy, by the way, but they're generally accepted dates now and I don't want to go off another tangent). Shaw suggested Nri as a source of the culture that made the bronzes, the theory gained some popularity--perhaps because of the changing political prestige needs of the era?--and here we are today. Likewise, other claims about the involvement of Nri specialists in the coronation of Benin kings appeared, which also seems unsupported in the records. If you've got some records or information showing that the attah of Igala claimed Nri descent or was enthroned by Nri specialists that predate this period of myth reorganization during the 1970s, please share it. I've said repeatedly that Nri may ultimately prove to be the source of Igbo-Ukwu--that should be clear enough from my early posts. My point was the Nri earlier claimed to be of Igala ancestry, and they currently use some items of allegedly Igala design in their regalia, so they don't seem to be the most likely source to me. Nwaezeigwe points out that there are separate and indigenous groups in the area (which is obvious from the Eri myth in any version) and suggests that they might be connected to the Igbo-Ukwu producers. That makes sense. I suggested the Oka groups from my non-specialist point of view, which you seem to agree with now.

Is there evidence of Igbo interaction with Igala? Definitely. Most scholars today assume that the ikenga personal shrines to success you alluded to earlier were adopted from Igbo areas into Igala ones (as okega), Benin areas (as ikegobo), Urhobo (as ivri) etc. Some people see this as the mark of this Nri influence. Ikenga and the ideas around masculinity and achievement it represents are almost certainly derived from Igbo inspiration, but I would find it hard to associate this specifically with Nri, since ikenga and their focus on valour, warfare, headhunting and individual glory are completely opposed to all these claims of the Nri role as peaceful priest-kings with no armies etc. Ikenga are also a general Igbo cultural feature and aren't specifically linked to Nri in any way, as far as I'm aware. Much like Igbo-Ukwu, I think Ikenga has been conflated with Nri.

I think I addressed your other points in detail earlier.

You're confusing the myth. The myth is that Eri came down to the Anambra river and had children, his second son Nri (or Menri) moved away to establish an ideal community. It was on his journey that Chukwu taught the starving Nri the ritual. That's another funny thing about this discussion, the kingship itself is claimed to have began with Nri (or Nri Ifikuanim), not his father Eri. Nri was allegedly the (half) brother of Onoja who supposedly founded a dynasty in Igala land. Source? Onwuejeogwu, from the Keith ray source you provided.

I think you missed this point in my post. The myth that credits the planting of heads/first yams to Eri--not Nri--is an alternative version recorded by Onwuejeogwu. The link to the citation is underneath the quote in my previous post. I'm not confused and I doubt Onwuejeogwu is either; it's yet another example of how inconsistent myths are and why they shouldn't be relied on as an exact history. They tell us more about general ideals (the coming of agriculture and establishment of rituals) than specific people and personalities (Eri, Nri etc. who may or may not have existed). There are several versions, just as there are several interpretations for the ichi marks.

Also--you misrepresented Nwaezeigwe on the Igala issue. He obviously believes that the current Nri lineage is from the Igala area (whether from the attah's line etc is another issue) and says that several times during the paper. He does identify an indigenous Umudiana group as the earliest settlers. I've discussed earlier on in this thread how helpful that information is. Igala origins at Nri are, once again, not my theory or anyone else's--they are the records we have from colonial interviews with residents of Nri.

I was traveling during the week when I was responding to this and when I wrote this yesterday but I have a little more access to materials on these issues now that I'm at home. Again, I don't know what else there is to add to the debate (perhaps you have sources on the Nri origin of the Igala attahship that predate Onwuejeogwu?) but I hope I've been clear and that pointing to the sources of people who know more than I do about Nri society has been helpful to readers.

TerraCotta:

I want to answer your questions but I also want to move on from this discussion because I think I've covered the topic in as much detail as I know.

The Ehret quote is what kicked off the discussion. Both Physics and I found his claim strange because it's a reversal of the known records on the topic from the colonial era. Nri informants at that time claimed that the Nri government/ritual system was derived from the Igala region. Again, this is what the Nri people said to anthropologists in the early 20th century (not just to Jeffreys, but JS Boston and other field anthropologists doing government research). It is not what the anthropologists thought or interpreted; it's the claim the Nri people made at the time. They could have had lots of reasons for doing so: perhaps it was another example of the prestige-by-association tactic practiced by other groups. Perhaps it was the truth, or perhaps it was a mix of traditions. We can't say for sure. What we know is that in the early 20th century, the Nri residents interviewed believed that their mythical ancestor came from Igala country. I don't think this is too controversial a claim since it is in virtually everything you read about the area at that time. In the early 21st century, it's a politically unpalatable claim, but it can't be ignored for that reason alone.

I've never encountered Ehret's claim that the Igala kings were from Nri and were crowned by Nri ritual experts in the 20th century in the historical record (until the claims of Onwuejeogwu and Afigbo etc, which I'll discuss shortly). It's important to give the historical order of the claims of origins, because as I've said, we see shifting claims of ancient pedigrees all over Africa in oral history, and they tend to reflect current political needs and not the facts about the past. It's a well-explored issue in West-Central Africa, we have the same issues with Oyo's Nupe and Borgu ancestry etc. It's hard to give details without going off the point but we can have this discussion separately if you want. If tomorrow, the Tiv claim to be ancestors of the Ijo and have kept that knowledge secret of thousands of years, we couldn't ignore the claim outright but we'd have to look at the known historical record and consider why they might make such a claim. I hope the Ijo and Tiv can forgive the analogy.

Here's the timeline as I know it. Michael Onwuejeogwu and his peers in the late 1960s into the 1970s started popularizing an ancient pedigree of Nri after the Igbo-Ukwu finds were dated by Thurston Shaw to 900-1000 AD period (not without some controversy, by the way, but they're generally accepted dates now and I don't want to go off another tangent). Shaw suggested Nri as a source of the culture that made the bronzes, the theory gained some popularity--perhaps because of the changing political prestige needs of the era?--and here we are today. Likewise, other claims about the involvement of Nri specialists in the coronation of Benin kings appeared, which also seems unsupported in the records. If you've got some records or information showing that the attah of Igala claimed Nri descent or was enthroned by Nri specialists that predate this period of myth reorganization during the 1970s, please share it. I've said repeatedly that Nri may ultimately prove to be the source of Igbo-Ukwu--that should be clear enough from my early posts. My point was the Nri earlier claimed to be of Igala ancestry, and they currently use some items of allegedly Igala design in their regalia, so they don't seem to be the most likely source to me. Nwaezeigwe points out that there are separate and indigenous groups in the area (which is obvious from the Eri myth in any version) and suggests that they might be connected to the Igbo-Ukwu producers. That makes sense. I suggested the Oka groups from my non-specialist point of view, which you seem to agree with now.

Is there evidence of Igbo interaction with Igala? Definitely. Most scholars today assume that the ikenga personal shrines to success you alluded to earlier were adopted from Igbo areas into Igala ones (as okega), Benin areas (as ikegobo), Urhobo (as ivri) etc. Some people see this as the mark of this Nri influence. Ikenga and the ideas around masculinity and achievement it represents are almost certainly derived from Igbo inspiration, but I would find it hard to associate this specifically with Nri, since ikenga and their focus on valour, warfare, headhunting and individual glory are completely opposed to all these claims of the Nri role as peaceful priest-kings with no armies etc. Ikenga are also a general Igbo cultural feature and aren't specifically linked to Nri in any way, as far as I'm aware. Much like Igbo-Ukwu, I think Ikenga has been conflated with Nri.

I think I addressed your other points in detail earlier.

There were no interviews (shown here) from the 30s or later/earlier that had Nri people quoted as saying they or Eri came from anywhere but Chukwu, Jeffreys in his 'Divine' article doesn't mention Eri anymore after this:

"The descendants of the royal families live in Aguku and claim ancestry from a sky-being called Eri, sent down by Chiuku, a sun-god. These descendants call themselves Umundri, the children of Ndri, the youngest of the four sons of Eri and their first divine king."

No reference to any place or people on earth. Jeffreys was biased towards a common origin of the Igbo, Igala, Yoruba, Jukun, so it's understandable that he would use the "ruling stock" line without any reference (like Onoja Oboni). There are also no references to an Eri-Igala link at that time, so if there was a claim by the Nri that they were from Idah (which there wasn't) then it would have been so by reference to Eri. None of these claims (made by outsiders) ever mention Eri, if Eri was an Igala warrior as Nwaezeigwe claimed, how is this important information completely missing from any interview or any of the earlier claims? "Secondly, the claims by the Umueri clan to a right to crown the Atah of Igala, and the latter's claims of the right to confer titles on the neighbouring Igbo towns contributed to Jeffrey's conclusions. It is clear, however, that Jeffrey's conclusions were influenced by the diffusionist theories that were fashionable at the time." Edward Harland Duckworth (1984). [Link]

There are also no claims that Nri regalia is of Igala origin. That's in reference to comparison made between the bronze masks worn on both the Attah and Eze Nri's chests, and also from Jeffreys observation that Nri coronation involved "Igala clothes" (which really doesn't support anything). "bronze pectroal mask presently worn by Eze Nri of Oreri and Ata of Igala) suggest interactions between the Igbo and the Igala in the past." [link]

There were no informants about Nri origin (other than the 'myth') otherwise it would have been quoted on this thread. The Igala claim (by Dr. M.D.W. Jeffreys and Mr. G. J. Lawton), like Ehrets, was vague, only difference is that Ehret went on to elaborate a bit more about Igala-Nri coronations. I am not claiming that Ehret was right, I am giving an example of how things can be interpreted wrongly by people who have spent months/years studying a people, especially when they have an agenda (proving diffusion). It doesn't help when none of these claims are backed by an actual interview on either side or any recent admittance of it. It's also awkward that Jeffreys and Lawton completely ignore Eri when they made their claims. Today the Umuezechima ruling clan of Onitsha still claim descent from Benin, so also do Igbo communities of Igala origin claim their Igala ancestry.

TerraCotta: I think you missed this point in my post. The myth that credits the planting of heads/first yams to Eri--not Nri--is an alternative version recorded by Onwuejeogwu. The link to the citation is underneath the quote in my previous post. I'm not confused and I doubt Onwuejeogwu is either; it's yet another example of how inconsistent myths are and why they shouldn't be relied on as an exact history. They tell us more about general ideals (the coming of agriculture and establishment of rituals) than specific people and personalities (Eri, Nri etc. who may or may not have existed).

"Nri people believe that all forms of production were introduced and authorized by Eze Nri. The validation for production was derived from the body of religious 'mythology' that Nri people disseminated in one form or another in most Igbo settlements in the past. In this way they were able to control the religious aspect of production.

There was famine. Eze Nri called on Chukwu for food. Chukwu said: "Offer your first son and first daughter." They were made Ichi marks. They were offered to Chukwu. After twelve days, On the grave of the son, Grew yam and palm oil. On the grave of the daughter, Grew cocoyam and maize and vegetable. Chukwu said: "Distribute all these to all Igbo And receive tribute from them".' Onwuejeogwu (1981)

TerraCotta: Also--you misrepresented Nwaezeigwe on the Igala issue. He obviously believes that the current Nri lineage is from the Igala area (whether from the attah's line etc is another issue) and says that several times during the paper. He does identify an indigenous Umudiana group as the earliest settlers. I've discussed earlier on in this thread how helpful that information is. Igala origins at Nri are, once again, not my theory or anyone else's--they are the records we have from colonial interviews with residents of Nri.

Nwaezeigwe was clear that the Eze-ship of Nri is an institution of the Umudiana and that the 'Igala-Nri' somehow appropriated it. The whole discussion on this thread concerns the origin of Nri kingship and especially how that relates to Igbo-Ukwu. Nwaezeigwe, in my opinion, is trying to delegitimise the current Nri communities by claiming that they do not have an ancestral stake in Nri. Nwaezeigwe is partial towards the Umudiana (not the first comments he's made about the issue) and he makes a lot of uncertain claims and uses a lot of words like "definitely" too much.

Again, too much credit has been given to records made by people who admittedly had an "imperfect understanding" of these societies. Ehret himself made a record. There are a lot of claims that were made during those times that could be used to claim a lot of things. These writers were helpful in recording some things that may have been lost forever, but they are in no way the official scribes of West African history. I don't take colonial/missionary writing too seriously until they can be validated, maybe that's the problem. The point is, there is no solid evidence that the Nri kingdom is of Igala ancestry and there are no recorded claims by the Nri that their kingship is of Igala descent, the same is with the opposite.

All this does not consider the dating of the Nri kings list relevant to Eri's age of origin vs. the Igala kingdoms age, the age of Nri settlements all over the Niger River Delta like Ogwanshi-Ukwu, Igbuzor, Owa on the Western side of the river, and people of Nri descent and Nri influence like that of the Aro confederacy which rose in the 1600s.

TerraCotta:

I'd like to see your responses. If it's too detailed to fit in here, let me know and you can email it. I would have elaborated much more on sources and ideas in my post but it wouldn't fit this conversational tone too well.

I'd actually prefer responding on a place like this forum for the simple ease of editing mistakes or clarifying mistakes that it offers. If a person sends an email and they unintentionally write a wrong date, or mix up a reference, or commit a bunch of spelling or grammatical errors, that person can't edit the already sent email but instead has to start spamming the other responder with follow up emails. Here all one has to do is edit, or make an additional short clarification post. And no, I don't think the responses will really be too detailed, just a bit long.

I thought you would have already seen it, but it cites a variety of sources on the origins and development of Benin that directly contradict the current Oba's preferred narrative (re: Ekaladerhan etc). Some of these sources are collected from older Benin royal sources in the early part of the 20th century who presumably would have known of Oba Akenzua II's version if it were current/believed at that time (I recognize of course that it might have been omitted for other reasons, but I think it's logical to ask about the first time the story became widely known). The archaeological evidence also offers clues and suggestions re: the "phantom capital" called Udo that also don't match current royal myths of origin at Benin. I say all this because I think it's a useful example of the political/'court' manipulation (perhaps 'interpretation' is a less loaded word) of heritage. I am not singling out Benin in this regard, since the current court myths at Ife, Oyo, Ijebu (and to lesser extent Ilesha, Ado, Lagos etc.) show signs of similar distortion and for many of the same likely reasons.

FYI, I made some edits to my previous posts to clarify points that I glossed over earlier.

I'll comment on this post a little later when I comment on some related comments from your earlier post.

ezeagu:

These claims may have confused the Igala prime ministers, Asadu/Achadu, who are supposedly of Igbo descent, although I do not know where from.

I don't see what relevance this comment has to the post from me that you quoted. Perhaps you could go into more detail about what you're saying here. I didn't comment on the ancient ethnic origin of the kingmakers (Achadu), but on whether any Igala kings or any Igala traditions claimed descent from Nri. To the best of my knowledge, none of them did, but Ehret's book would make one think that they did (yet he doesn't go into detail about his sources or reasoning for reaching his conclusions).

Now if the original Idah dynasty, from before the Benin and Jukun connections, did happen to be of Nri origin or at least claimed to be of Nri origin (although I haven't seen the evidence for this), it may have had something to do with a preexisting link/connection between the Igala people and the Nri people.

My point was that Ehret should have included the mentions of the Nri supposedly having an Igala origin, even if he didn't agree with this idea, if he was going to talk about the connection at all.

TerraCotta: Again, I don't know the certain answers to these issues. If you think the conventional explanations are factual/satisfactory, i dont have a problem with that. Is it possible that great Benin warriors conquered Ijebu, retreated in a period of decline, and were replaced by great Oyo warriors who also skulked off when their military prowess was waning? Yes. It's entirely possible and that's the way various historians present the timeline right now. My position of skepticism is to ask a) what someone has to gain by their claims and b) how are these claims validated by outside/third-party records? Duarte Pacheco Pierera wrote the earliest account of a visit to Ijebu in 1502 and makes no mention of a Benin influence. Ijebu oral traditions do not recongize either group's influence. Compare this with Lagos or Onitsha, re: Benin or Dahomey and Nupe/Borgu re: Oyo. Pierera was accurate in his ethnic catalogue of the area (from Lagos to Urhobo to Ijo etc). Why not mention this issue? Perhaps he missed the reign of Ozolua by a few years (this would fall into the 16th century time frame you propose) or perhaps the Benin court made an exaggerated claim to their Portuguese trading partners to bolster their assumed sphere of influence. The Danish source you quoted already shows signs of this by claiming Benin's limits reach the Gambia. It's not impossible either, but it's unlikely for a number of reasons I won't go into here. However, you can absolutely see the utility of such claims in a trading relationship.

1.

a) Right, but the earliest written claim about any kind of Benin authority over Ijebu only appears in European records in the writings of the Dutch, not the Portuguese. So if Benin had any authority over Ijebu or claimed such during the period when there was great interaction with the Portuguese (the 16th century), rather than the Dutch (17th century), they either didn't mention it, or the proselytizing Portuguese didn't care to ask about that or write it down. There is also little information on any other areas Benin had as tributaries from the Portuguese documents throughout that whole century - or even the names of the specific neighboring groups one early Portuguese souce (the same Duarte Pacheco Pereira) claims Benin was "usually at war with".

b) I don't see how removing or adding kingdoms from their "tributary list" (or as some would have it, "boasting list" ) would have changed the overall perception of their status/power by their trading partners considering that the perception of Benin as an important place in the area or potential good trading partner in the early documents does not seem to be dependent on how big their sphere of influence was claimed or perceived to be but on what they have to trade. Or is there some quote you've come across where the influence of the kingdom in the wider region is commented upon favorably by a European writer in the context of assessing the worthiness of the kingdom (Benin) as a profitable or reliable trading partner?

c) If those sort of claims were all about bragging and telling tall tales to look grand and powerful, why even bother listing any places closer to the coast (along with tributary kingdoms in the interior) that the Europeans, whether Portuguese, Dutch, or any other group might have been able to visit to see if they really were tributary? (The Portuguese did visit Ijebu on more than one occasion - this is mentioned in Robin Law's article on Lagos that is mentioned below) Why not just claim power over a vast network of tributary kingdoms extremely far into the interior that no European can verify except through weeks of traveling blindly in the interior and somehow stumbling on these kingdoms themselves? These are rhetorical questions by the way.

d) And although this may seem counter-intuitive - because it is normal for kingdoms to self-aggrandize - I'm also a little skeptical of the idea that the Benin court made really exaggerated claims about its own influence or power to the Portuguese (or even the Dutch). In previous posts, haven't we actually been discussing and alluding to reports from the Portuguese, which they got from Benin informants, which clearly place that Pope-like "Hooguanee/Ogane" ruler above them in the hierarchy that existed at the time and one of which also suggests that there is another (militarily) strong power ("Licasaguou," i.e. the king of either Oyo or Nupe - although I have stumbled upon one reference in Ade Ajayi and Crowder's History of West Africa which suggests that "Licasaguou" is a spelling/version of "Tlika-Saguou," a title found in the Mandara kingdom) besides Benin in the wider region? If it was all about boasting to the Portuguese, why not just claim to be the overlord of everyone and anything significant and just not bother to volunteer information about other important states in the interior? The already documented honesty of the Benin informants in these two instances seems to belie the idea that they would just lie blindly before Europeans about the extent of their territory or power for trade benefits, so I'm skeptical of the idea that their claims about territory or power can easily be dismissed as mostly just bragging.


e) On Pereira, like other early (16th century) Portuguese sources on southern Nigeria, his descriptions don't exactly strike me as being completely thorough or extremely informative as far as including information about all the tributary states, political connections, etc. like some of the later sources do. Of course that's just my opinion, but I think his descriptions of specific places don't go into the kind of detail that would allow us to know much about the actual histories, customs, and connections of the places that he mentions in the way that Dapper's compilation of information is able to. And of course, Duarte Pereira could have simply written about the place too early - the invasion and/or conquest could have come a few years later than when he wrote, while still being an event that happened in Oba Ozolua's reign.

f) Furthermore, I'm not sure the logic of your reference to Pereira there is really consistent with your skepticism of, or rejection of, the claim in Dapper's work. Is it that the Portuguese sources are somehow more credible than the Dutch sources? Or that if Peirera had written something similar to what Dapper's sources wrote, then you actually would have accepted that Ijebu was tributary? Or are you saying that every place that was tributary would have automatically volunteered that information (about who they were tributary to) to the first Europeans that showed up on their doorstep?

g) As an additional point, although it has not been brought up yet, I should note that I am a bit puzzled by the perception that exists in some accounts I have come across that because Ijebu was a powerful kingdom at times that it could not be have been conquered by or made tributary to another powerful kingdom, whether Benin or Oyo. I know this isn't entirely what you're saying - you're really saying that any Benin influence or indications of previous authority there are not acknowledged anywhere in Ijebu tradition - but I have seen this explanation of "it was too powerful for a conquest to have happened" given before (such as by Robert Smith in his section on Ijebu in his book Kingdoms of the Yoruba, or from others on this forum) and I can't make any sense of this claim so I think I should note the problems with such an explanation before it might be brought up again as if it were a legitimate objection. Benin (a powerful kingdom) was almost conquered by the Igala, Igala (a powerful kingdom in their area) was conquered by Benin, and later by the Jukun. Allada/Ardra was conquered by Dahomey, Dahomey was conquered by Oyo, Oyo had once been conquered by Nupe in the past, etc.

All of these conquests and almost conquests suggest to me that being a powerful kingdom was not some sort of guarantee of safety against being conquered by another powerful kingdom and I find the argument that such a conquest could not have happened based on a kingdom being powerful (such as the argument made by Smith) to be a weak argument. And once again, I'm not saying that you're making this particular argument, I'm just saying that's it's a factor that should be set aside as having no real weight or relevance in considering whether the claim is true or not.

h) I think the evidence of past connections is obvious from other information that has nothing to do with what Dapper's sources were told in the early or mid-17th century or what Egharevba was told in the early 20th, so I'll refer to other sources that mention other evidence of connections besides the conquest/tributary claims of Dapper's sources and Egharevba's sources:

pp. 117-120 and p. 241 of Yoruba: Nine Centuries of Art and Thought
pp. 178-181 of Benin: Kings and Rituals

Even if one ignores what Dapper's sources were told in the early or mid-17th century, and ignores what Egharevba was told in early 20th, one would still see the same obvious signs of connections or influences between the two places and nobody seems to have missed these influences so of course we can't pretend they didn't exist.

And I don't think these are the only sources which discuss Benin and Ijebu connections. I've come across mention of connections in a few other publications besides these before. The two sources that I actually did list above go into more detail than I would want to attempt to summarize, and I wouldn't be able to summarize them if I wanted to because I don't have these books with me all the time or anything (and I don't have them with me where I'm at right now). So I can't look over them to recall and summarize their contents, but I remember from a previous discussion when I did have those books with me that these sources mention the Benin-Ijebu connections and they touch on more than just the alleged tributary relationship.


i) Now, to summarize what I've written above, although I'm not necessarily pushing for the validity of the claim, I don't think the explanations I've come across for the tributary claim not being true are really very strong:

"It's not mentioned in early Portuguese documents" - But Portuguese documents over most of that entire century are very vague at best concerning details about places that are tributary to Benin or the relationships or connections between most of the different polities in Nigeria that they were aware of and/or visiting at the time.

"The Benin court informants were dishonest about their power in the region so that they could look important and gain European attention and trade advantages" - But on two different occasions different Benin informants went out of their way to elevate another far away king unknown to the Portuguese above themselves and on one of these occasions also mentioned a militarily powerful king in the same wider region who lived much further in the interior.

Also, I'm not sure how exactly Benin's trade at Ughoton with the Portuguese (which died down for reasons that have already been noted by historians - reasons which clearly have to do with practical considerations, not ideas about what Benin's power was) could really have been improved by claiming a whole bunch of other kingdoms or one particular kingdom as tributaries without actually having a greater amount of goods/valuable trade items to show for it.

"Ijebu was a powerful kingdom, therefore. . ." - This was addressed above, the "too powerful" stuff suggested by Smith and in a few other places makes very little sense. If Oyo can fall to another kingdom, if Dahomey can fall, if Igala can fall, etc., I don't see the relevance of this fact. I'm not saying that you're saying this, but I read this sort of statement from some other people the last time this Benin-Ijebu issue was brought up (by shymmex) and I couldn't understand the relevance of that point then and probably wouldn't understand it now, so I might as well explain my view of this point before it is possibly brought up again.

"The influence or connections are not acknowledged, therefore they don't actually exist and never existed. . ." - See the references I listed above for evidence of Benin-Ijebu connections. Should the fact that certain people decide to ignore the connections/influences have any bearing on whether or not they actually exist/existed? I don't think so. Now the Benin side claimed/claims these connections came about through some sort of earlier conquest or military victory, and that may be completely incorrect, but I think that if we want to establish that the claim is incorrect we need alternative/better explanations for any connections and also stronger arguments against the claim.

Hopefully you have a completely different/distinct argument for why the Benin-Ijebu claim is implausible or false that isn't just a variation/combination of the ones that I commented on immediately above.

2.

I'm not sure what relevance the example of the Danish source has to the issue of Benin courtiers possibly exaggerating the range of their kingdom's influence/power for the supposed benefits in trade it would bring them. The Danish source (Roemer) did not get his exaggerated claims about Benin's former territory from Benin or any Benin informants. Roemer did not set in foot in Benin, as his original document makes very clear, even in just the translated excerpts from it. He got his information from a local informant in the Accra area and from that Englishman who once traded at the Benin river and who did not have a particularly high view of Benin's power and level of organization - this same Englishman felt Benin's capital city and its government was no better than that of any of the ordinary kings in the Gold Coast (this English man might have visited Benin in the early 1700s, as the article I posted a link to earlier suggests, which was a period immediately following Benin's major civil war, when Benin was a much weaker kingdom and lost much of its influence or authority over other polities).

Roemer was in a part of Accra and was listening to the nostalgic tales of one of the coastal inhabitants about the greatness of the rule of the Benin viceroys who he (the informant - an elderly Accran nobleman named Noyte) alleged used to have control in that particular area and Roemer goes into brief detail about their claims - including descriptions of the accoutrements and weapons of the supposed Benin viceroys and their descendants in the Accra area. The description of their appearance (red garments, horsetails on headgear, using assegais/lances, carrying swords which they valued as symbols of prestige) seems to slightly match the depictions of certain Benin war commanders and nobles in some of the Benin art and the descriptions of Benin warriors and nobles in other written accounts - suggesting that either the Accran informant had legitimate information about how Benin officials dressed that they based on the appearance of real "Benin viceroys" and their descendants that had been in their area, or Roemer obtained such information from the Englishman or other unnamed European sources (who had seen such people in Benin city or an outlying section of the kingdom) and dishonestly suggested that the Accran claimed to have knowledge of viceroys who used to wear the same attire in the Accra area.

As for the territory claim itself, I would imagine that the Accran told him that Benin's territory used to stretch to the Gambia river (a ridiculous claim, of course) if he was somehow aware of where Gambia was, because of the apparent nostalgic and romanticized view about the supposed Benin viceroys, not because of any mischief or guile on Roemer's part, although it is also possible Roemer himself could have been the source of his own exaggerations, but I doubt that the anonymous Englishman could have been told about the "Gambia river" (or maybe he misidentified the river that he was told about) by anyone he met in Benin, since I don't see how they (the people of Benin) could have understood where exactly Gambia was or how far away the Gambia river was located relative to Benin.

My point was basically in line with that of the authors of that paper - that even though some of the wilder exaggerations are clearly false, such as the Gambia river claim - there is also an element in there that does not seem to merely be a fanciful claim, and may have a basis in reality. That is, although the claims about the extent of Benin's territory as told to Roemer by that Gold Coast man or as possibly invented by Roemer were false, it doesn't mean the claim that there were Benin viceroys and/or soldiers there at some point is necessarily entirely false. Now certainly, there is no compelling evidence for the truth of the idea and the Accran may have been trying to associate with a state that was considered prestigious (although not claiming a Benin origin, but just claiming that Benin viceroys had authority there in the past). But that's why I admitted I didn't believe everything about the claim and had also seen no corroboration from other sources such as any mention of the idea in Edo tradition (although, of course, I don't have even half knowledge of all of Edo tradition either). It was speculation.

But I'll speculate even further: We read in various publications about how in the late 15th to early 16th century Benin-Portuguese trade, the Portuguese initially bought some slaves from the Benin kingdom and resold these people at a large profit to some inhabitants of the Gold Coast (among other places) in the early 1500s. But is it possible that other people (who were free men) might have later gone there from Benin (either on the boats of the Portuguese, or through some other coastal land route from the east, or along the coast in indigenous boats/large canoes) as settlers or mercenaries or guards? And might this explain the claims of these Accrans to Roemer about those Benin viceroys and their descendants who used to have authority in the area in the past and who wore red garments, wore horsetails on their hats or helmets, carried assegais/lances and kept certain swords as symbols of prestige?

These are rhetorical questions. I'm just letting you know what my line of thought is for there possibly being some truth to the idea of Benin viceroys there even in the midst of certain exaggerations in Roemer's account. It would only take some free men of high rank accompanying the Portuguese and their newly acquired slaves to Ghana or a few people using large canoes to transport themselves along the coast (traders came from as far away as Ghana to western Nigeria (Lagos, specifically) using canoes in the 17th century, as the Law article on Lagos mentions in one part of the article) in order to plant some of the so called "viceroys" from Benin in the Gold Coast.

I don't think there's any compelling evidence that such things happened, but it's not outside the realms of possibility, and I was willing to speculate about it.

TerraCotta: This claim cites Robin Law but I'm not aware of any Benin provenance for these two towns. I'd be open to being corrected.

Law's article is "Trade and Politics behind the Slave Coast: The Lagoon Traffic and the Rise of Lagos, 1500-1800" (1983)

On Idole, Ado, and Ikpokia, Law writes:

"In the seventeenth century the main focus of European trade moved west again, to the kingdom of Allada, and perhaps in response Benin military operations were extended west of Lagos. Although Benin tradition remembers Lagos as the most westerly dependency of Benin,52 local traditions on the coast indicate that Benin authority reached much further west. The traditions of the towns of Ado and Ipokia, in the hinterland of Badagry, connect their origins with Benin,53 and there are recollections of a Benin colony which once existed still further west, at Idole, near Porto Novo.54 This extension of Benin authority west of Lagos is confirmed by contemporary European sources, which show that in the late seventeenth century Benin was in conflict with Allada. A Dutch account of Allada in I670 actually describes it as tributary to Benin,55 but this is perhaps merely an exaggeration or misunderstanding of the gift-giving which normally accompanied diplomatic exchanges. A French account published in 167I reports more credibly that Allada marched in the east with Benin, and was often at war with it.56 The account of the French trader Jean Barbot, written in 1688, states that the boundary between Allada and Benin was a river which ran from Allada to the coast at Offra, in the vicinity of Godomey.57 This statement, however, is difficult to fathom. The River Weme, which runs into the coastal lagoon east of Godomey, might well have formed the eastern boundary of Allada inland, but at the coast itself Allada authority certainly extended much further east, to include the town of Apa, on the southern bank of the coastal lagoon.58 If Barbot's informants told him that Allada was separated from Benin by the river which ran by Offra, it seems probable that they meant to refer to the coastal lagoon itself, which would indeed have separated the Allada province based on Apa, to the south of the lagoon, from the Benin colonies of Idole, Ado and Ipokia to the north."

These are the citations for this paragraph in the article:

52 Egharevba, Short History, 82.
53 Peter Morton-Williams, 'The Oyo Yoruba and the Atlantic trade, I670-I830', J. Hist. Soc. Nigeria iii, (I964), 30.
54 R. L. V. Wilkes & W. G. Wormal, 'Intelligence Report on the Central Awori Group in Ikeja and Badagri Districts of the Colony' (1934, in National Archives, Ibadan, CSO. 26/29979), 5.
55 'Short memoir on trade within the present limits of the charter of the West India Company', I670, in Albert Van Dantzig, Dutch documents relating to the Gold Coast and the Slave Coast (Coast of Guinea) I680-I740 (Legon, cyclostyled, I971), I.
56 'Suite du journal du Sieur d'Elbee', in J. de Clodore, Relation de ce qui s'est passe dans les Isles et Terre-ferme de l'Amerique pendant la derniere guerre avec l'Angleterre et depuis en execution du Traitte de Breda (4 vols, Paris, I67I), III, 557, 558.
57 Barbot, 'Description des Cotes', I 39; cf. idem, Description of the Coasts, 345. Barbot also notes elsewhere that 'the island which the maps call Ichoo', i.e. Lagos, was a dependency of Benin: 'Description des Cotes', I49. Barbot never visited Allada, Lagos or Benin but he appears to have been at Whydah to the west in I682.
58 Apa is described as a 'province' of Allada in Archives Nationales, Paris (hereafter AN): C. 6/25, Du Colombier to Compagnie de Guinee, I6 April I7I5. Dapper, Naukeurige beschrijvinge, I 5, states that Allada extended east as far as 'Acqua', which is probably also Apa.


I found a small part of Peter Morton-Williams' 1964 article in the JHSN (his article is cited in that article by Law above that mentions Ikpokia and Ado) that states that Ipokia was founded by people from a Benin colony. I don't have the full article, but found a relevant part:

"Benin founded colonies along the shore - of these, Lagos is of course best known, but the town of Ado (the Yoruba form of Edo, i.e. Benin) north of Badagri was, so its traditions imply, also a Bini foundation or at least got its crown from it; and Ipokia, west of the River Yewa and only thirteen miles ENE of PortoNovo, claims to have been founded from Opo Bini (the Benin colonies), though it was at the beginning of the nineteenth century, if not earlier (Clapperton), subject to Oyo. I am unable at present even tentatively to assign dates to this penetration by Benin, but Snelgrave seems to have been aware of it. . ." - Peter Morton-Williams

I've read that article from Law before, but I did not mention the quote from Law's article earlier because this mainly talks about the 17th century, and I was speculating about possible further exploration or contacts in the early 16th century or earlier. I don't think the presence of some Benin elements operating in the Dahomey/Republic of Benin coastal area in the 17th century well after the establishment of Benin's influence in Lagos is really contested, but what I was more interested in and was speculating about was the early 16th century.

Incidentally, Law mentions Römer, Benin, and Accra in footnote 38 in that article;

"There is some suggestion of Benin interest in the lagoon area to the west in contemporary records already in the first half of the sixteenth century. A report of 1539 states that the king of Benin then held prisoner ambassadors sent to him by the rulers of 'Arida and Labida',37 of which the first is almost certainly Allada, to the west of Lagos, while the second is presumably Labadi, a settlement on the Gold Coast just east of Accra.38 These diplomatic contacts may be presumed to have operated through canoe-borne communication along the coastal lagoons, but unfortunately nothing is recorded of the context of these exchanges.

37 Ryder, Benin, 73.
38 It is noteworthy that tradition current on the Gold Coast in the mid-eighteenth century claimed that the rulers of the Accra area had in early times been appointed from Benin: L. F. Roemer, Tilforladelig efterretning om Kysten Guinea (Copenhagen, 1760), 112-17. Accra tradition current in the late nineteenth century does not seem to have retained any recollection of this Benin connexion, though an origin from east of the Volta was claimed: cf. C. C. Reindorf, History of the Gold Coast and Asante (2nd edn, reprinted Accra, I 966), 21, 41, 47. "

TerraCotta: The name 'Ado' brings up other issues about the origins of the name Benin/"Ado"/Udo/Edo that are worth discussing in another post as well. Where do these terms come from and what might they tell us with a critical reading?

Regarding the names question, I think one has to actually ask many people from the places involved and obtain the majority opinion on the meaning/origin of the name before one can engage in a "critical reading" of the names. Forming opinions, even ones formed through critical analysis, without doing any real in-depth searching for additional and possibly more useful/direct information might just lead one astray.

Also, you seem to believe (or maybe I'm reading too much into those backslash marks) that Udo is some dialectical variant of or altered version of the word Edo or vice versa - that one of them is an alteration/corruption of the other. In the language spoken by both groups (the Bini of Benin City and the Bini of Udo) there is no confusion between the vowels "U" and "E" and the two are not close in pronunciation. U's do not change to E's or vice versa in Edo, the way I's and U's sometimes swap places in Yoruba names.

Now to discuss the names:

a) Ado, or at least the Ado that we're talking about, is an altered pronunciation of Edo by Yorubas and Igalas (who also called Edo as "Ado" in the past), and that town (Ado) referenced earlier was near a Yoruba area from what I've read about the description of its location. I doubt that the original pronunciation of the name would have been maintained.

b) On Edo, in one very popular tradition (and this is the tradition that was incorporated in a later edition of Jacob Egharevba's book), Edo was claimed to be the name of a servant who saved Oba Ewuare's life and Oba Ewuare named the kingdom after him out of gratitude.

The name also appears as the name of one of the first three Obas of Lagos (the first three had Edo names - Aisikpa/"Ashipa", Edo/"Ado", and Guobaro/"Gabaro" ). It's possible that the name (Edo) became less popular as a personal name among the Edo (Bini) to avoid confusion with the name of the larger ethnic group and kingdom. The fact that Edo was a personal name would lend some weight to the story of Egharevba's, but I am wary of accepting that story automatically. I do have my doubts about this Oba Ewuare and "Edo" story though. Granted, Ewuare would have had a pretty much deity-like authority among the populace of the kingdom at that time, and if he had simply said, "you'll now all call yourselves and this land 'Edo' in honor of this one man", then they would have certainly done it, but I still am not so convinced that it is merely a personal name applied to a larger ethnic group. I don't think that's how the names of the vast majority of ethnic groups actually come about. So although it's clear that Edo is an "Edoid" personal name, it's not certain to me that the ethnic group name did necessarily only come about during Oba Ewuare's time.


c) Regarding Udo, I'm sure that like the word Edo, it has meanings in many African and non-African languages, since it is a simple three letter, two-syllable word, but I haven't bothered to look into what the people of Udo say the origin of the name is. Maybe the next time I'm in Nigeria, and I visit some people that our family knows there (Udo), I'll try and ask around for the meaning of the name, but that might be a while from now. Even if it's a long time from now, when I'm no longer posting on this forum, I'll still eventually find out for my own personal edification. Interestingly enough, Udo is an Edoid personal name as well. There may be some sort of connection there.

d) "Benin" could be from "Ile-Ibinu" as Egharevba suggested, or as some writers have suggested, it could be from "Birnin" the Hausa term for a moated or walled area/town - assuming there were some northern contacts/traders (Nupe? Or Nupe and Igala?) from central Nigeria who started calling the place that and then the name caught on - since Benin was walled/moated, or it could be from "Ubini" which is supposedly what the Itsekiri called the place. Whatever the origin, I don't think there is usually much significance in what exonyms different groups of people use for other groups or places.

TerraCotta: The issue of contact isn't the dispute though.

The issue isn't contact, but the dates of contact, how far west this contact went, and whether in certain places, it could have been more than just contact. This is mostly just speculation on my part, of course.

The problem is the interpretation or inspiration for the link. Other scholars (John Thornton among them in "Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World" ) cite a writer named De Sandoval as evidence that Lucumi (Yoruba) was the court language throughout this region during this period, and that political leaders in places like Allada preferred to speak it to their own language. A creative scholar could extrapolate from these points that Benin conquered all the way to Allada but imposed Yoruba as the language of court all the way down the coast. Is it possible? Absolutely. It's again not too likely in my book. The logical answer would be to consider the source mistaken or misinformed by someone who had some political stake in exaggerating the Yoruba linguistic link.

1. I own that book by Thornton and I've read it. What you've written there does not seem to be an accurate account of what Thornton wrote. He stated (in chapter 7, 'African cultural groups in the Atlantic world') that Yoruba was being used as one of multiple lingua francas in the wider region, not as a court language throughout the region. These are two different things. He also notes in chapter 8, 'Transformations of African culture in the Atlantic world', that creole versions of European languages, especially Portuguese, were used for trade and as lingua francas on the Atlantic coast of Africa. Also, Thornton's claim about Benin's soldiers and administrators going as far west as Allada is that Benin's expansion played an "integrating role" and "created a cultural unity" between different groups in a part of the wider region.

2. I don't think you read in Thornton's book that he claimed "political leaders in places like Allada preferred to speak Yoruba to their own languages". Perhaps you got that from another source or perhaps you're mixing up Allada with another place mentioned in Thornton's book. If not, please post the statement of Thornton's in the book that states this, or if the source of this statement about Allada (and places like Allada) isn't Thornton, you can just indicate that.

3. Assuming there were "many Yoruba in the Benin court" as Thornton extrapolates from the possibly exaggerated/inaccurate (as you suggested) information from Alonso de Sandoval (which claims that the king at the time used them because they were foreigners so he could punish them if they erred without encountering interference/trouble from any relatives), I don't see how that would touch on the issue of administrative languages of courts - if one looks at the precolonial and early colonial documents for Benin all one sees are Edo names for titled palace officials and every palace association, title or ceremony documented in the colonial era and earlier is also Edo. I certainly can't detect any trace of an administrative Yoruba language in any of the mentions of the Benin palace societies, ceremonies and officials that were published in any of the earliest accounts.

As far as language it probably wouldn't matter if someone from Owo or Akure or Ilaje or some other place in Yoruba land that Benin had connections to was being employed in the palace. There is one Owo tradition of a certain Owo prince going to Benin to learn some administrative styles/concepts that Benin used and then bringing them back to Owo (this is mentioned in the section on Owo in the book Yoruba: Nine Centuries of Art and Thought), so a group of people from Owo, large or small, serving in the Benin palace is not somehow implausible or that unlikely, but what I don't see is what bearing it has on the question of court languages, especially since the administrative/court terms (such as Edaiken (Edayi n'Iken), which takes the form Idaniken in Owo) that they may have learned directly from the Benin court are all Bini words or Yorubaized versions of Bini words.

Since one of the groups of "Lucumies" (Yorubas) - those from Owo - that oral tradition suggests may have gone to learn some administrative practices/systems at the Benin court, actually have Bini words in their court systems, it would be hard to see how Benin was spreading Yoruba as an administrative language in a further away land when it was spreading Bini words for use in administration to some neighboring Yorubas much closer to Benin.

The point is, I don't see how the use of "foreign Lucumies" would suggest the use of Yoruba as an administrative language when the one oral tradition we have which clearly comments on this idea (use of Yorubas from states that were tributary to Benin in the Benin palace), is from a group (Owo 'Lucumies') who instead seem to have spread Bini words and administrative concepts back to their home kingdom. I think the assumption that the few Yorubas, or Yoruba princes from tributary polities who came to the Benin palace wouldn't learn to speak Edo, but instead would speak the various Yoruba dialects from their various areas, may be based more on modern Nigerian politics (where the Bini/Edo are not politically powerful/influential) than on the historical reality and what the surviving evidence suggests.

4. If one assumes that Thornton was claiming what you thought he was (even though I don't see how one can extract that from what Thornton actually wrote) about "court languages", I don't think that the hypothetical scenario you suggested about what a "creative scholar" could extrapolate from the available information could be plausible, because we know from actual history that the Edo did not impose any languages upon anybody they conquered or made tributary, but that a few Edo (Bini) words, phrases, concepts, etc. could be found among some (but not all) of those groups. The loose relationship/control between Benin and the places it had or considered as tributary are already well known (I believe R.E. Bradbury had a specific observation about this in one of his publications, but unfortunately, I don't have the book that I think the relevant quote is in with me right now) so I'm not sure how the scenario you posted could ever come about. I mean, if there were a single instance of Benin going so far as imposing a whole "administrative language" or "court language" on anybody, even despite what we know (about the looser administration/control it had on places that were conquered or tributary), then maybe this would "absolutely" be a plausible argument that a creative scholar could make, but since there isn't such an instance or anything in the history of Benin's administration of its outlying territories that suggests such, then it's an argument that a creative scholar could make only if that scholar was not familiar with or acquainted with the dynamics of Benin's influence upon and control of places that were tributary.

People like Sandra Greene have talked about these broad generalizations and the problem of substantiating them. Ambassadors were detained at courts all the time. If this were proof of dominion over foreign entities though, then we'd have to revise a whole series of histories to reflect this. We'd have to accept that 1970s Iran was an imperial power in America because they held American diplomats hostage there, for instance.

I don't think this comment accurately interprets/represents my original comment that you quoted. Maybe if you re-read what I wrote and then re-read your comment, you'll see that it does not correspond to what I said. I speculated that they were being held hostage because the king of Benin was either in negotiations with those other polities over something (exchanging hostages as insurance was a standard practice in some medieval/feudal societies around the world, as I mentioned earlier), or was holding them prisoner because he had a hostile attitude to those places and was planning something against them, or was just keeping them prisoner because they were useful in some way (perhaps for geographical knowledge). I did not say that Benin had leverage or dominion over Allada and Labadi in 1538 because Benin had two hostages.

I was saying it clearly implied contact. The point was about Benin having contact with places further west than Lagos even before the Benin war camp in Lagos. I didn't make a claim of Benin dominion over Allada or Labadi in the 16th century or imply/suggest that.

The example you gave of the hostile detainment of American diplomats by Iran would be an example that would actually better fit my speculation/conjecture that the detainment of the Labadi and Allada ambassadors was evidence of hostility to those places on the part of the king of Benin. But of course, as I said before, there could have been no real hostility at the time and the king might just have thought they could be useful in some way so he was holding them there.

TerraCotta:
Again, not the first time a group will claim descent or affiliation with a prestigious neighboring group. The Ewe claim to have come from Ife by way of Ketu. Keep in mind that Ife and Ketu trasitions dont claim any specific dominion or ancestry over the Ewe and the Ewe are obviously an independent language and culture group. So why would they claim this? In my opinion, for the same reasons Christian Nigerians see their roots in Israel and Muslim ones see their roots in Saudi Arabia. A few more years and we may start to unearth cultural links with China, Malaysia and other emerging economic/political powers. In the book "Making The Town" about the history of Accra, there's a long discussion about the Beninois and Lagosian origins of certain quarters in the city (now James Town) that are now 'Ga'. These people were enslaved and brought there by Portuguese merchants. They were called "Alladas" which over the years became 'Alatas'. That's now a common term for Nigerians or anyone from east of Ghana. The descendants of these people would certainly prefer a prestigious origin in Benin than the more ignoble truth. I'm not saying this explains the claims but it's another possibility to be aware of.

What you wrote here, is obviously quite plausible as an explanation. I agree that this alternative explanation may explain the Benin claims (although not all of those claims are really about origin).

But on the Ketu issue, there may be a better explanation for the Ketu-Ewe story than mere prestige claiming.

Perhaps the founders of Ketu came from Ife (or at least somewhere near Ife) and met some Ewe people in the area they settled in and they absorbed some of them and drove others out:

"The town [Ketu] was conquered from an aboriginal population of Aja or Ewe extraction. In Ghana, many Ewe groups continue to trace their migration to the ancient city of Ketu." - Anselme Guezo, "From Dahomey to Benin: Exorcising the Ghosts of Memory in a West African State", from Society, State, and Identity in African History (2008), p. 384

And this link (pp. 24-27 of the book The Akpinis and the echoes of German and British colonial overrule: An archaeological investigation of Kpando, Ghana) mentions some connections of the Ewe with the Ketu area:

http://books.google.com/books?id=UozFJWHRm04C&pg=PA24

(I'm too lazy to type out what is written there.)

Possibly, Ewe people who would have absorbed some of the Ketu Yoruba culture or lived in the (now Yoruba dominated) Ketu area and interacted with some of the Ketu Yorubas (before migrating to a non-Yoruba controlled area or any freer and uninhabited area further west) might have learned of Ife and gleamed some idea of its importance or details about it from these interactions. The Ife stories could have spread among other Ewe who had never been near Ketu through interactions with some of the Ewe refugees who were fleeing the Ketu area.

The Ewe-Ketu claims seem to me to likely be a memory of a real event where some Ewe people left the area that they originally occupied after Ketu Yorubas expanded into and then took over that area. It doesn't seem that they are really claiming Ketu Yoruba ancestry but mostly just claiming to have previously lived in Ketu or in the Ketu area.

TerraCotta: For me, this is the exact type of imperial exaggeration I wouldn't take seriously. Ewuare almost certainly wouldn't have made it to the Congo.How and why? What contemporary evidence do we have?

Well, I said it was indeed an exaggeration in some aspects, but I'm not sure how going to the Congo would have been some kind of impossibility just because it is several hundreds of miles away. Lagos is 250 miles from Benin City, and Allada is 350 miles from Benin City, yet people from Benin traveled to Lagos and at least one ambassador from Allada went to Benin. Also, Ghanaian sailors (using large indigenous boats/canoes) from the Gold Coast/modern Ghana sailed to as far away as Angola by sailing along/close to the coast centuries ago in the 1500s (see "The Canoe in West African History" (1970) by Robert Smith) and they may have been doing so before the 16th century, so maybe when Ewuare was wandering in exile while his brother was ruling he hitched a ride on a boat somewhere.

But on a serious note, the part I was saying was an exaggeration was the idea that any one person could have traveled basically everywhere in, or to "all parts" of, all of those countries back then without it taking them many decades of uninterrupted traveling.

However, the idea that these other countries could have been reached from Nigeria and a small area of these countries, probably along the coast, could have been briefly explored by someone who wanted to explore them is not somehow impossible to me. The distance between Ghana and Angola is greater than between southern Nigeria and the coast of Congo, after all, and if Ewuare was even half as ingenious as he is portrayed to be in those stories, I don't see what would have been so hard about building one big indigenous boat like the Ghanaians/Gold Coasters did and/or hiring some Gold Coast people and taking a tour of the Congo coastal areas either as an exiled wandering prince or a full fledged king with a lot of supplies at his disposal.

Basically I was mentioning the possibility that travels, migrations, etc. could have established contacts between these somewhat distant African societies that I mentioned at an even earlier time than Oba Orhogbua's foray into Lagos and without the Portuguese facilitating such contact. You don't agree with that, and that's fine - it's a perfectly valid point of view and of course it's reasonable to take a cautious view in the absence of evidence (although if it happened, it would probably be hard to find any evidence of his visiting/traveling there, given the probable dates). But what I mentioned was merely speculation on my part, not an assertion that it was necessarily true.

The letter suggests that people from Benin were making trouble in the Kongo. The letters from Spanish viceroys in Latin America around the same period complain about Jellofes (Wolofs) making trouble in Hispaniola and Mexico. Why? Because they were enslaved under horrific conditions and they were a warrior people prone to military action. I don't think that complaint is substantive proof of a Benin military presence. I think that's a royal complaining about unruly and rebellious foreigners likely sold to him by the Portuguese.

Maybe you were unable to view the preview page I included as a hyperlink in that post, but if you could view the page shown from the hyperlink, you would see that the book makes a mention not only of slaves, but specifically of free men from the same place causing trouble there at a later date (1541) alongside some Portuguese "adventurer" (troublemaker?), and of course the first group of troublemakers from Benin mentioned in 1526 may have had some slaves among them, but if there were any slaves it is certainly not mentioned there. If there were free men in the 1541 group of troublemakers mentioned in that source, there could certainly have been many of such people in the 1526 group or they could have all been free. Even if they had come there via the Portuguese (which I said is still the most likely cause, in my opinion) and not through other means of transportation or by foreknowledge of the existence of the place through pre-Portuguese contacts, it still wouldn't necessarily mean they were slaves, since we know that Africans went on some voyages with Europeans in capacities other than as slaves.

I included a link to that particular book because I thought the relevant part would be easily accessible/viewable, but I guess you couldn't see it. The information about contact between some people from the kingdom of Benin and the kingdom of Kongo is really from Alan Ryder's book (Benin and the Europeans), where it was first published, but of course Ryder's book cannot be previewed on Google Books. Anyway, if I recall correctly (it's been a while since I read the book), Alan Ryder's mention of a few Kongo-Benin contacts does not provide evidence for anything like pre-Portuguese contact like what is suggested by the mention of Ewuare's travels in Egharevba's book, but I wouldn't assume that such contacts should automatically be ruled out just on the basis of the distance involved.

Also I did not suggest a Benin "military presence" in Congo. I think you may have misread what I wrote there. It seems clear (at least to me, upon re-reading what I wrote there) that I was talking about exploration and establishing contacts with/knowledge of far away places.

TerraCotta: Egharevba is prone to these traditional exaggerations

You are certainly welcome to your opinions of his work, but I would be careful about making assumptions about intent or authorial tendencies/inclinations without first having a fuller picture of the man and his work.

One of the tasks that Egharevba had in undertaking his project to document the history of his people was to sort myth and exaggeration from history and on many issues he performed absolutely brilliantly. I would go as far as to say that a great percentage of what the wider world knows about the basic contextual meanings (although not necessarily the specifics/finer details) not only of some of the archaeological features of Benin but also much of the Benin art today - that is, the basic/general idea of who many of these figures were, and what they were doing in the art, and why - is due to Egharevba's several decades of research on the culture and history of Benin. The understanding of the art is definitely not all due to him, and many other researchers have uncovered much more information in later studies, but his contribution is immense and invaluable.

Now the fact is, we have no idea how many fanciful stories Egharevba may have discarded until he was left with his final product. He may have heard many more things that are far more unbelievable than anything he ever wrote down and published, and he may have excluded these things, while at the same time hearing certain amazing and detailed things over and over again about specific figures (Ewuare, Esigie, Idia, Akenzua I, etc.) and events and deciding that there was some historical truth to some of those stories, and thus kept them and presented them basically in the form that they were given to him, without trying to beautify them, rationalize them, or to cut out all that he personally thought was too unbelievable or fanciful. I don't know if that was actually his approach and I have no way of knowing, but it's certainly what I would do if I were in the same position - I wouldn't alter the raw "data" too much but present it mostly as it is given and then let others make up their minds about the quantity of truth therein or leave future generations to sort the legend from the truth. But at the same time, those who think he was too prone to exaggeration really have little to go on to show that he was actually prone to such exaggerations and wasn't just accurately recording the general idea of the significance of the individuals or events that he was informed about by those he asked for information.

Also, I think an important distinction should be made between whether or not Egharevba was prone to "traditional exaggerations" and whether or not the very traditional people in the early colonial era - some of whom were not highly educated by modern standards - that he was getting information from were prone to expressing real truths and events in remembered stories that sometimes come across as mythological or legendary or sometimes even unbelievable, some of these accounts being oral accounts about figures or events from many centuries ago. If we see some supernatural or unrealistic elements in Egharevba's main book, they sometimes (but not always) mean or imply something else (a few later scholars have uncovered some of these implications through more research) and only have that form because of the sources he had to rely on or because he innocently accepted some of the stories he obtained from people who he felt were knowledgeable and included summaries of their accounts in his main book.

TerraCotta: Ewuare conquered "201 towns"

To be accurate, Egharevba actually wrote "201 towns and villages," so what is written here is actually a misquotation. If he was exaggerating he would have said "201 cities" or "201 kingdoms!"


a) 201 was/is clearly a symbolic number in Edo culture - it was/is a kind of expression or numerical figure of speech which basically means or signifies "an immense amount" or "a huge quantity," which Egharevba either didn't feel the need to indicate was a symbolic figure or which he may have assumed his Edo readers would understand as just symbolizing a very large amount. One will actually see the number (201) pop up multiple times in different sources relating to Benin except in different contexts (sometimes its towns or villages, sometimes it's dance steps in ceremonies, sometimes its other things), and different events relating to different people. It just means a great amount, but the number also might have some sort of religious/mystical significance (it's already been documented by other scholars that there are multiple numbers that have/had some sort of mystical association in Edo tradition). I think Egharevba assumed his Edo readers of the time would already know what "201" signified so he didn't leave a footnote for the uninitiated. Of course an average Edo youth today, in the post-colonial era, would probably be just as uninitiated (unless they took the time to find out about it, as I did), so the claim might get repeated literally even by some naive modern Edo people as if "201" were some sort of exact number of his conquests.

b) But hypothetically speaking, since we're on this issue of 201, why would it automatically be an "exaggeration" if one were to (wrongly) interpret it literally? There's actually nothing impossible about literally conquering "201 towns and villages" over a period of more than 30 years if you have a larger and more powerful army than other surrounding groups, have a very ingenious, aggressive and warlike leader (Ewuare) and have a lot of time on your hands. He did rule for over 3 decades and spent a lot of that time on war, so I don't see how it's so implausible that his "town conquest count" (as if anyone was keeping count) was in the triple digits.

However, let's raise the stakes of difficulty slightly, and then see if things still sound so impossible. Now even though 201 is just a symbolic figure (which may have some mystical significance) that the Edo of the past used to signify some very large amount, let's assume that it is to be taken literally, and let's examine whether it's possible to conquer that many places in a few decades. And let's make things even harder by requiring that no villages are included and that all that is conquered are full fledged towns (having at least 1,000 inhabitants - several countries around the world today use either 1,000 or 2,000 as their yardstick for what constitutes a town, but of course the truth is that what would have been considered a "town" in the past was probably a little smaller - especially with there being smaller overall populations and fewer places with significant/high population density). Now let's make things even harder and cut short the length of the reign attributed to Ewuare by Egharevba - even though there is no compelling reason to do so. Let's just assume on a whim that it was shorter than the more than three decades he is usually said to have reigned. Let's give him only 25 years on the throne to carry out those conquests.

Furthermore, let's assume - although there's no real reason to do so - that Ewuare lost as many as one-fourth of his attempts at conquering a new town, and after losing, his army would move on to the next town to conquer it or attempt to conquer it. In other words, let's make the claim even harder to satisfy and assume Oba Ewuare lost as much as 25% of all his conquest attempts, even though this would hardly fit in with the kind of success attributed to him in the stories lionizing him.

Now to successfully conquer 201 towns (assuming a 1/4th loss rate), he would have to attempt to conquer nearly 270 towns. That would require invading about 11 towns a year for 25 years. Now to invade 11 towns in a year, he would have to have to invade a new town every 33 days. Is invading a new town every 4 and a half to 5 weeks and being successful in 75% of these invasions somehow outside the realms of possibility for an aggressive leader with a moderately large main army (in the low tens of thousands - anywhere from 20,000 to 40,000 soldiers) at his command who is expanding constantly/frequently? I don't see why it would be. Even if we do assume that these 201 places are all full fledged towns of that time (at least 1000 inhabitants, although I doubt that very many places in Nigeria in the mid 1400s would have actually have had such large populations in one area), I still don't see how it's such an impossible feat.

c) In another instance of this sort of thing in his most important publication, Egharevba says that Ozolua fought and won "no less than 200 battles" (once again, who was keeping count as the battles were happening? This "200", "201" stuff is a figure of speech) in subduing rebellious towns, conquering new towns and expanding the reaches of the kingdom.

But is the general idea conveyed by Egharevba about Ewuare and Ozolua's military expansionism really inaccurate? Not likely. And in the case of the (likely time of) Oba Ozolua's reign, we even have independent confirmation of some of what Egharevba was writing about - the first European source (Portuguese - Duarte Pereira) that mentions Benin's wars says explicitly that the kingdom is 'usually at war with its neighbors' and this source is from a time (late fifteenth/very early 16th century) when Ozolua is held to have reigned. If a kingdom is 'usually" at war with its neighbors and this state of affairs persists for two or even three decades, then the battle victory count or the "town conquest count" could be quite high for the ruler of that kingdom if his troops are successful.

These stories about certain specific warrior kings like Ewuare and Ozolua warring very frequently and expanding widely that we see in the "native born" accounts are not merely exaggeration, especially with there being independent written confirmation from outside sources in some cases (late fifteenth and early 16th century documents), and especially considering the more glaring fact that there is no way that Benin could have had all the well documented influence and power in the wider region which the precolonial documents suggest in that time without these leaders carrying out the sort of wars of territorial expansion attributed to them.

d) I don't have a professional/academic interest in history, but I suggest that if anyone reads Egharevba's publications for research or for some other professional/academic reason, that person should try and find somebody knowledgeable (much more knowledgeable than me) about the culture and customs of the place and people whose history they are reading about, so they don't end up confused about what is actually indicated. That's what some (but definitely not all) of the foreign scholars who have published articles and books on Benin have clearly done. They have gone to Benin and other places in Edo state to actually ask for elaboration about certain things (that were only covered briefly by Egharevba or other Edo people who wrote about the kingdom), from informants who are still engrossed in the some of the traditional ways of life and/or who have heard a lot about the stories, traditions and history of different important places, people and events. With some notable exceptions (Bondarenko being one of them), many of those foreign scholars (people like Bradbury, Nevadomsky, Ben-Amos, etc.) didn't just read something and start guessing at what is meant without asking an opinion of or explanation from people from the culture about what a statement or story really means (although they still sometimes make errors/mistakes anyway). Since some of the foreign scholars - and some of them have already noted in publications what the manner of the use of "201" and "200" was by the Edo - have actually gone and obtained first hand information on the typical use of those numbers (as a number meant to represent a very large amount), I think Nigerian researchers who have similar questions about issues in Egharevba's work should do the same thing.