₦airaland Forum

(5) Nigeria Field Society at carving shop, Benin
(6) Brasswork shops, Benin
(7) Street scene with children, Benin
( Street scene, Benin

These cherished photographs offer a vivid glimpse into Benin City as it was in February 1976, capturing the timeless grandeur of the Oba’s Palace (Ọmọ n'Ọba n'Ẹdo, Akenzua II) —from the intricate mud-wall carvings to the striking snake-patterned sidewalk leading to the entrance. They also document the local carving and brasswork shops, highlighting the city’s rich artistic heritage. Alongside these cultural treasures are simple yet beautiful street scenes with children that reflect the everyday life and warmth of Benin. Together, these images preserve a powerful visual memory of a city steeped in tradition, craftsmanship, and history.
(1) Museum, Benin
(2) Oba's Palace, Benin City
(3) Entrance to Oba's house, Benin
(4) Snake sidewalk, Oba's house, Benin

University of Ife (Obafemi Awolowo University)

Glimpses of Greatness: University of Ife Graduation, January 1976

These remarkable old photographs capture the vibrant atmosphere of the University of Ife’s graduation ceremony in January 1976. From the iconic road leading to campus to scenes of proud guests, faculty processions, and joyful new graduates, each image reflects a moment of history and celebration. Notable highlights include the arrival of the Ooni of Ife (Oba Sir Adesoji Tadeniawo Aderemi) in his Rolls Royce—a symbol of cultural pride and honor on such a memorable occasion. These photos not only showcase the elegance and tradition of the era but also preserve the timeless spirit of achievement that has long defined the University of Ife (Obafemi Awolowo University).

This commentator (Ghostagain) is full of contradictions. On one hand, you say no one should refer to anyone as an "expert," yet in the same breath, you tell people to ignore "non-experts." Are you even following the flow of this conversation? Perhaps this topic is simply beyond your comprehension because it's evidence-based and doesn’t lend itself to low-level sentiment or rhetorical posturing that lacks factual support.

Your comments about "open access" vs. "non-open access" further reveal a lack of understanding. A basic Google search would clarify this. You don’t need to be a scholar or a researcher to know the difference:

"An open access journal is a scholarly publication that allows free and unrestricted online access to its content—anyone can read and often reuse the research without needing a subscription.
A non-open access (subscription-based) journal restricts content to those with institutional or paid access."

There’s no secrecy here as all the links to the studies and journal articles have already been provided, including publications from respected academic sources like Wiley and ScienceDirect. As for the PDFs, I cannot ethically upload or share them here, as they are institution-licensed and tagged with digital watermarks traceable to my institution. Doing so would violate usage policies.

Also, I’m not in the business of placing one group of bronzes above another. That’s not the goal of my research or my writing. My blog (www.brymostake.com) is a personal educational platform, where I document thoughts after investigations and thorough research for leisure and intellectual engagement. Debates like “this vs. that” are frankly beneath me. The original article listed among other things strictly the scientific dating of bronzes not ivory, not wood, not beads.

Yet, despite linking more than seven peer-reviewed studies from reputable publishers that detail the dating of the Ife and Benin bronzes, you continue to cast baseless doubt and dismiss the entire body of evidence. If you choose not to engage with verifiable information, that's your prerogative but don't expect people to treat unverified opinions as equal to scientifically backed research.

As for the broader historical links of these bronzes to the eras of ancient African states, yes, that’s a topic I will address in a future post. You’re free to ignore it when the time comes, especially if you're only interested in sentiment-driven narratives over substantiated scholarship.

To everyone interested in the scientific dating of the Ife and Benin Bronzes, here are some scholarly works that have applied thermoluminescence, lead isotope analysis, radiography, and alloy composition techniques to establish their historical timelines and authenticity:

For Ife Bronzes, we have these Scientific Dating Studies
1. Willett & Fleming (1976)
“A Catalogue of Nigerian Copper-Alloy Castings Dated by Thermoluminescence”
This landmark study dated 12 Ife bronzes using thermoluminescence (TL) from the 1938 excavation site in Ile-Ife.
Link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-4754.1976.tb00156.x
2. Werner & Willett (1975)
“The Composition of Brasses from Ife and Benin”
They used lead-isotope analysis and alloy chemistry to trace the metal sources and confirmed Ife's distinct metallurgical tradition.
Link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-4754.1975.tb00129.x
3. Craddock et al. (2013)
“The Olokun Head Reconsidered”, published in Afrique: Archéologie & Arts
Using X-ray, SEM-EDS, and corrosion analysis, this study confirmed the authenticity and dating (14th–15th c.) of the famous Ife Olokun head.
Link: https://journals.openedition.org/aaa/266
4. Eisenhofer (dates from TL studies quoted by museums)
TL dates around 1440 ± 65 AD and 1490 ± 85 AD have been widely cited for Ife heads, based on museum-supported testing. While not always published formally, they support a 12th–15th century range.

For Benin Bronzes, we have these Scientific Dating Studies
1. Nevadomsky & Lawson (2019)
“The Dating Game: Scientific Analysis of Benin Copper-Alloy Art—From TL to ²¹⁰Pb”
Covers a range of dating techniques applied to Benin works, including radioisotope dating (²¹⁰Pb) and critiques of forgeries.
Link: https://irispublishers.com/oajaa/fulltext/the-dating-game-the-scientific-analysis-of-benin-copper-alloy-art-from.ID.000525.php
2. Skowronek et al. (2023)
“German Brass for Benin Bronzes: Geochemical Analysis Insights into the Early Atlantic Trade”
Used ICP-MS and lead-isotope fingerprinting to link Benin brass to 15th–18th c. European manillas.
Link: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10075414/
3. Fabbri et al. (2017)
“Authenticity of Benin Metalworks Evaluated by ICP-MS and Lead Isotope Analyses”
Used high-precision lead-isotope dating to distinguish pre-1897 originals from modern replicas.
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0584854716301872
4. Werner & Willett (1975) – also applies to Benin
See above. Their comparative study helped distinguish stylistic and material differences between Benin and Ife bronzes.

I will encourage readers to read about (1) Thermoluminescence (TL) which dates clay cores trapped inside cast bronzes; (2) Lead Isotope Analysis which Matches lead traces to known ore sources or age since smelting; (3) ICP-MS / SEM-EDS which identify alloy content and foreign trade signatures; and (3) Radiography / Metallography: Reveal internal casting structures and corrosion patterns for authentication.

These works demonstrate that both Ife and Benin bronzes have been scientifically dated using rigorous methods, not just stylistic speculation. If you're sincerely interested in the truth about African metallurgy, these sources are a solid foundation.

Let’s move beyond rhetoric and build knowledge grounded in evidence.

I’ve carefully read these works and I’m open to engaging with anyone on their methodologies and findings. While I don’t claim to be an expert, I did take some undergraduate courses in Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, which gave me a some level of foundation to understand the technical aspects of these studies.

Note: Some of these articles are not open access. If you're a student and your institution doesn't have a subscription, feel free to reach out to me privately. I'll be happy to share the PDFs with you for engagement and educational purposes. Thanks!

Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

Your idea of a shared ownership model is a creative and pragmatic approach, especially where legal or diplomatic challenges exist. A negotiated return like the 78.35%/21.65% split you mentioned could promote restitution while encouraging collaboration through joint exhibitions, research, and cultural exchange.

You're right that existing agreements can complicate things, but without meaningful action, these conversations risk becoming repetitive. Restoring agency and pride to the original communities should remain at the heart of any solution.

Thanks again for engaging with the article in such a constructive way.

iboyclassic:
Thank you for this insightful article.
Could both parties reach a mutual agreement to resolve the ongoing debate about returning cultural artefacts, such as the Benin Bronzes, and move past the painful historical associations tied to slavery and colonialism?
One potential solution could involve a shared ownership model, where, for instance, 21.65% of the artefacts remain with current holders and 78.35% are returned to the proven original owners, such as existing African kingdoms or cultural groups. This arrangement could be based on transparent negotiations, fostering a sense of cultural pride, boosting tourism revenue, and promoting global awareness of these societies’ heritage.
However, it’s possible that existing agreements already govern the possession of these artefacts, which may complicate repatriation efforts. Without concrete action, this topic risks remaining a recurring discussion without resolution. Let’s hope for meaningful steps toward justice and cultural restoration.

Since you’ve said the conversation ends here, I’ll respect that but I’ll still leave a final note for the record.

You keep talking about “breaking the intellectual barrier” as if that means dismissing the entire framework of scientific consensus and peer review. But that’s not critical thinking, that’s intellectual isolationism. Verification isn’t magic, and peer reviewers aren’t mystical beings. They’re subject-matter experts trained to evaluate evidence according to established standards, and their work is openly available for others to critique, replicate, or challenge. That is the process of verification in science. No one’s stopping you from doing it yourself but acting like everyone should independently verify every published empirical result before accepting anything is impractical and ahistorical.

Also, calling measured disagreement “worship” just because someone doesn’t accept your line of reasoning isn’t debate. It’s dismissal. And reducing it to an ethnic generalization about Nigerians being unable to admit fault is not just intellectually lazy, it’s deeply offensive.

At the end of the day, science isn’t about ego. It’s about evidence, and it’s bigger than either of us.

Take care.

Ghostagain:
The way I keep getting banned is annoying, I can't just debunk something, as soon as I do so, I'm banned and my comment is erased.

Building on existing work does not mean believing the work to be good, it actually means breaking the intellectual barrier between consumer of knowledge and creator/discoverer of knowledge, then verifying by yourself that the existing work is good then building upon it.

You are supposed to be the one doing the verification! Not some magical "peer reviewers".

I'm tired of this endless back and forth, and I don't know many nigerians who have the ability to admit when they're wrong, you guys would rather descend into pure madness instead of admitting that you are wrong.

The conversation between us ends here. Feel free to keep worshipping "experts" and doing religion while believing you are doing science.

You are misrepresenting my position and misunderstanding how scientific knowledge evolves.

No one here is advocating for blind belief. What I’m saying is simple: in any rigorous field, we start with existing peer-reviewed work, examine the methods, assess the evidence, and if needed challenge it with our own analysis. That’s not blind faith; that’s how science progresses. Without building on prior research, there would be no progress, only everyone starting from zero.

Yes, peer review isn’t flawless and it’s not a divine stamp but it’s a filter. Sometimes garbage gets through (in every field, even math). But that doesn’t mean you throw out the entire system. You improve it by offering better arguments, better data, and better methods.

If you believe a particular paper is flawed, then the scientific thing to do is critique its methodology, replicate its experiments, or publish a rebuttal. A friend of mine in the same field with me once did that while I was in South Africa, and the earlier authors later published a rebuttal to his rebuttal. Simply dismissing all peer-reviewed work especially in fields you haven’t trained in as “soft science garbage” isn’t skepticism, it’s dogmatism.

Also, let’s be clear, you’re the one who completely missed the point and frankly goofed when you blindly asserted that Ife bronzes or other bronzes from that era couldn’t be dated scientifically. I stand to be corrected, but those artifacts have been dated based on their composition and casting residues. The article I referenced clearly lists the analytical methods used, including the material constituents of the bronzes.

These ancient bronze casts, while not necessarily identical in composition, share casting techniques notably the lost-wax process which often left clay cores or mold residues inside the sculptures. And this is evident from a simple inspection or analysis of online images of these bronzes, not to mention the X-ray graphics. These artifacts have been dated using scientific methods like Thermoluminescence, Lead Isotope Analysis, and Stratigraphic Dating and not traditional Radiocarbon Dating.

Quite frankly, based on your responses so far, it appears you’re not in the STEM field, as you haven’t demonstrated a clear understanding of the nuts and bolts of scientific methodology, how hypotheses are tested, how methods are validated, and how evidence is built across time. And that’s okay; not everyone is trained in STEM. But if you’re going to dismiss decades of interdisciplinary research, you need to engage with the details not just rely on rhetoric or personal conviction. I'd also like to make this my second-to-last response to you on this topic, as I don't have the time to keep going back and forth.

If you genuinely want to challenge the dating, then engage with the actual protocols and results. That’s what real scientific discourse looks like.

Ghostagain:
Dude, I'm explaining to you how science works and I'm giving you my analysis of "soft sciences". What is so hard for you to understand in this situation?
You are the one whom is advocating for believing in "experts" without proof so long they are "peer reviewed". You indeed don't break the intellectual barrier between consumer and maker of knowledge in order to be able to verify if the "experts" are saying crap or not.

You are the one advocating for blind faith, blind belief, blind trust without proof, so long the author is "peer reviewed".

Even in mathematics, we often have real garbage which was peer reviewed, talk less of soft sciences.

Did you know? On May 21, 2025, Governor Josh Stein officially proclaimed June 14 as “Igbo Day” in North Carolina — recognizing the cultural pride, resilience, and decades of contribution by the Igbo community in the state.

For over 50 years, Igbos in NC have made lasting impact in education, healthcare, tech, business, and public service — while also preserving their language, dance, food, and traditions through events like the Igbo Day Festival.

With this, North Carolina joins Minnesota, Texas, and New York in honoring Nigerian heritage.

🔗 Read full story:
👉 https://brymostake.com/2025/06/21/north-carolina-declares-june-14-as-igbo-day-honoring-heritage-unity-and-legacy/

#IgboDay #IgboPride #NigeriansInDiaspora #AfricanHeritage #NorthCarolina #NaijaToTheWorld #IgboAmaka

Skepticism is not the same as cynicism. A true scientist questions, examines, and tests but also builds on existing work when it's been verified by rigorous methods. That’s how knowledge grows. Skepticism without a method to test or disprove is simply denial, not science.

I don’t take claims at face value. I read the methods, assess the data, and evaluate the conclusions. That’s exactly why I provided one of the primary sources that lists the composition of these bronzes, outlines the specific dating techniques, and offered to share it with you.

Science isn’t about rejecting all prior work. it’s about standing on the shoulders of others, not pretending they don’t exist. If you disagree with their findings, you’re welcome to present your own data, method, or publication. But calling peer-reviewed scientists “prophets” and comparing scholarship to religion is not a rebuttal. it’s a rhetorical tactic to avoid engaging with the actual science.

I’m always open to opposing views but only those that meet the same standard of evidence I’m expected to follow in my own field. That’s not belief. That’s science.

Stoplying:
Belief in "experts" or "peer review experts" goes against the first foundation of science which is SKEPTICISM !

And unfortunately you are a consumer, a believer, not a scientist. You are like a worshipper in a religion while you believe yourself to be educated.
My friend you are practicing a religion and your "experts" are the prophets of your religion, you are not doing science at all.

Everyone is entitled to feelings; they’re not a “crime.” But in an evidence-based discussion they can’t replace data. Simply repeating “peer review is garbage” doesn’t constitute proof especially when you’ve chosen not to engage the published methods or results I cited.

Declaring yourself a logician is fine. A logician still needs premises grounded in facts. In this case, there are at least three well-documented, methods for dating the Ife and Benin bronzes. These are covered in Archaeometry (Wiley & University of Oxford) and other journals. If you won’t read the article I recommended, that’s a choice, but it weakens any blanket dismissal.

Yes, even in my engineering field peer review isn’t flawless but it is still the best safeguard we have against unchecked claims. Calling all non-open-access “trash” is itself rhetoric, not logic.

Diving into other disciplines “at the same level” requires more than private conversations with friends. It requires reading which you called consumption , replicating, or proposing alternative tests. If your goal is to overturn existing chronologies, by all means outline an experimental protocol that disproves their dating techniques; that would move the field forward. Until then, broad assertions don’t.

Where I (or you) happen to live has no bearing on the validity of this discussion. For your information, I hold two PhDs—one in South Africa and the other in the United States. I’ve also spent six months in your Europe on a scholarly exchange program. So, this idea of attaching intellectual weight to geography is misplaced. Scholarship, by its very nature, is borderless. What matters is the strength of evidence, not your coordinates.

Stoplying:
1.There is nothing emotional in what I said.
2.What I said is not a trend from social media.
3. I'm not good at rhetoric but rather at proving things, I'm a logician.


4. I have no idea of what you are talking about. I am giving you my own experience of having dived into other fields, not as a consumer who loves to quote "experts" but as a person operating at the same level as those "experts".

I have many friends in other fields with whom I exchange and in soft sciences we all agree that peer review is garbage 🗑️

By the way, I live in France and I'm giving you my analysis, you live in Nigeria, it shows. You Nigerians seem to have a tendency to call others "emotional" when they say something you don't like, when you are actually the one being emotional.

Like I said, you're absolutely entitled to your opinion and it's perfectly fine to hold that stance in a space like this. However, that view may not hold up in evidence-based academic discourse, where rigor, not rhetoric, carries weight. That’s my opinion too, shaped by what I do as a calling and not based on populist or emotional views that often trend on social media.

That said, I don’t think it’s fair or even intellectually honest to dismiss research simply because it isn’t open access. I personally don’t publish in open-access journals, and many respected researchers don’t either. Ironically, some of the most misleading or low-quality papers today are found in predatory open-access outlets that exist solely for profit without peer review integrity.

In contrast, the article I referenced was published in Archaeometry, a reputable journal by Wiley and the University of Oxford. That’s not a lightweight journal. it has a strong impact factor and long-standing academic credibility. So yes, if you dismiss that as "trash" simply because it's not freely accessible, then we’re not having a scholarly conversation anymore; we’re just trading opinions.

I’m happy to continue this discussion on the merits of the evidence and methods. But throwing out entire disciplines or journals because of personal biases about access models doesn't help anyone seeking the truth.

Stoplying:
The only fields in which peer review actually makes sense are mathematics and physics, hard sciences.

When it comes to fields related to history (especially African history), you have quacks peer reviewing other quacks for a pay. There is no way around breaking the intellectual barrier between consumer and researcher in these fields if you actually care to be accurate rather than petting quacks.

Also, if it's not open access, then it's trash 🗑️

That’s your opinion. As researchers, we all require solid data not hearsay. For context, I’m an engineer with two doctorates, so while I’m well trained to interrogate evidence and methodology, I’m not an archaeometallurgist. That’s why just as you would expect in any field, I rely on peer-reviewed work from specialists (if “experts” isn’t your preferred term) and evaluate their methods before quoting or referencing them. You might find this peer-reviewed article useful “The Composition of Brasses from Ife and Benin” by O. Werner and F. Willett. It’s not open access, but I’d be happy to share the PDF with you privately if you’d like to read it.

Ghostagain:
Well I myself am an expert on my field. I don't speak as a consumer mervelling at testimonies of invisible experts who did this or that, I need to see the actual scientific work. Benin artefacts were thoroughly studied and contrary to what some people think, Benin artefacts are not restricted to metal works. Their dating is not a work of fiction. Benin has wooden artefacts, beaded artefacts, ivory artefacts...those are easily dated.

Metal/bronze can not be dated with carbon dating. Most of what you hear about ife metal dating is just pure imagination.

If you are interested in a field, then you should break the intellectual barrier between being a consumer and actually knowing what you're talking about on the topic. The moment you start talking about "experts"...I'm directly informed that you're a consumer.

Ghostagain:
This dating is not backed by scientific research. But it is rather backed by jingoistic feelings.

The dating of the Ife and Benin bronzes is actually backed by solid scientific research, not just pride or emotions. You can look this up yourself. Experts from around the world including Europe and the U.S. They have studied these works, and their findings are published in trusted research journals on archaeology and art history.

The Ife and Benin Bronzes are among Africa’s most iconic artistic legacies, each testifying to the exceptional craftsmanship and deep cultural values of their African creators. Although both emerged from neighboring regions in present-day Nigeria, their artistic styles, historical trajectories, and global recognition have followed markedly different paths.


The bronzes from the ancient Yoruba city of Ife—often dated between the 11th and 15th centuries—are renowned for their lifelike naturalism. Sculpted from brass, copper, or terracotta, these pieces include serene human heads, full-bodied figures, and ritual objects. What astonishes many is their realism: the subtle facial features, intricate hairstyles, and anatomical precision led some early European scholars to wrongly attribute them to classical Greek influences. Today, they stand as powerful evidence of a sophisticated indigenous tradition that existed centuries before European contact. Many of these works are believed to represent royal ancestors and deified kings, connecting the living ruler—the Ooni of Ife, who is revered as the spiritual head of the Yoruba people—with the divine heritage of the kingdom.

In contrast, the Benin Bronzes—produced from the 13th century onward in the Edo-speaking Kingdom of Benin—are distinguished by their stylized depictions of royal court life. These artifacts, which include plaques, commemorative heads, and ritual vessels, were typically cast in brass or bronze using the lost-wax method. They adorned the walls and altars of the royal palace in Benin City and functioned as a historical archive, commemorating the power and lineage of the Oba (king). Some plaques even depict Portuguese traders, reflecting Benin’s early contact with Europe as far back as the 15th century.

While both traditions used similar metalworking techniques and materials, their artistic expressions diverged. Ife’s works leaned toward realism and spiritual introspection, whereas Benin’s art emphasized hierarchy, symbolism, and political authority. This distinction is not merely stylistic; it reflects different worldviews and functions within their respective societies.

The question often arises: why are the Benin Bronzes the focus of so much restitution activity from Western museums, while the Ife Bronzes remain largely out of the spotlight? The answer lies in the manner and history of their removal.

In 1897, during the infamous British Punitive Expedition, British forces invaded and sacked Benin City in retaliation for an earlier ambush. They looted thousands of objects from the royal palace and shipped them to Britain. The theft was meticulously documented—by soldiers, colonial officials, and journalists—providing a clear historical record of how these artifacts were taken. Today, this clarity of provenance has become a key factor driving global efforts to return the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria.

The Ife Bronzes, by contrast, were not seized during a single event. Many entered Western collections during the colonial period through archaeological digs, missionary exchanges, or even outright purchase—albeit under the unequal power dynamics of colonial rule. This scattered acquisition history makes legal and diplomatic efforts for restitution more complex. While some Ife works reside in museums abroad, many are already housed in Nigerian institutions, such as the Ife Museum and the National Museum in Lagos.

Another reason for the disparity is visibility. The Benin Bronzes have come to symbolize the broader issue of colonial plunder and cultural restitution. They are frequently cited in media, museum debates, and international campaigns, often serving as the face of global repatriation efforts. The Oba of Benin and the Edo State government in Nigeria have also mounted an organized push for their return, backed by plans for a Royal Museum in Benin City. In contrast, advocacy for the return of Ife artifacts has been more diffuse and lower in profile. Although the Ooni of Ife commands significant respect and holds deep cultural authority among the Yoruba, efforts tied to the restitution of Ife artifacts have not yet galvanized coordinated international campaigns.

Despite these differences, both traditions deserve equal recognition and protection. Their existence disproves outdated colonial assumptions that African societies lacked complex cultures or artistic sophistication. As technology and provenance research improve, and as African institutions grow in capacity and coordination, the hope is that greater attention will be paid to the Ife Bronzes and other equally deserving cultural treasures.

In the end, both Ife and Benin Bronzes stand as enduring testaments to Africa’s historical brilliance. Their stories—how they were made, what they mean, and where they ended up—form part of a larger conversation about identity, heritage, and justice. Returning them is not just about objects, but about restoring dignity and rewriting history on fairer terms.

Reference
https://brymostake.com/2025/06/29/from-ile-ife-to-benin-the-story-of-two-bronze-legacies/

The January 15, 1966 coup in Nigeria remains a highly contentious and debated event in the country's history. At the heart of the controversy is the question of whether it was an "Igbo coup" or a more complex and multifaceted occurrence. This article explores the arguments on both sides of the debate and delves into the implications of the coup on Nigeria's political landscape.

Arguments in Favor of an Igbo Coup:
Ethnic Composition of the Coup Plotters: The majority of the coup plotters were of Igbo descent, with estimates suggesting that over 90% belonged to this ethnic group. The concentration of Igbo officers in the coup suggests a significant Igbo element.
Targeting of Northern Leaders and Other Ethnic Groups: The coup plotters specifically targeted and eliminated several prominent Northern leaders, indicating an anti-Northern agenda. This has been interpreted by some as an Igbo-led attempt to seize power and influence the country's direction.
Igbo Resentment and Grievances: [/b]Igbos perceived themselves as marginalized and discriminated against in post-independence Nigeria. The Northern-dominated government was seen as favoring its own region, perpetuating economic disparities. The coup may have been fueled by Igbo resentment and frustration.

[b]Arguments Against an Igbo Coup:
Non-Igbo Participation: While the majority of coup plotters were Igbo, there were also participants from other ethnic groups, including Yoruba and Middle Belt officers. The diverse composition of the coup suggests that it was not solely driven by Igbo interests.
Coup Goals: The stated goals of the coup were to overthrow a corrupt and inefficient government, end regional biases, and establish a more united Nigeria. These goals do not necessarily align with Igbo nationalism or a desire for Igbo dominance.
Motives of Individual Plotters: Some argue that the Igbo coup plotters were motivated by personal grievances or ambitions rather than a concerted Igbo agenda. The coup might have been seen by individuals as an opportunity to advance their careers or influence national politics.

Implications of the Coup on Nigeria:
Ethnic Tensions and Violence: [/b]The coup heightened existing ethnic tensions, particularly between Igbos and Hausas. The targeting of Northern leaders during the coup fueled anti-Igbo sentiments, leading to retaliatory violence against Igbos in the North.
[b]Political Instability and Military Rule: The coup destabilized Nigeria's political system, paving the way for a period of military rule. The military's intervention set a precedent for future coups and eroded democratic institutions, leaving a lasting impact on the nation's governance.
[b]Biafra War: [/b]The events surrounding the coup contributed significantly to the Biafra War. The perceived marginalization of Igbos and the violence against them played a crucial role in the rise of the secessionist movement in Eastern Nigeria.

The January 15, 1966 coup in Nigeria remains a complex and controversial chapter in the nation's history. The debate over whether it was an "Igbo coup" reflects the intricate dynamics of ethnicity, politics, and power. Understanding the causes, implications, and ongoing legacy of the coup is crucial for comprehending Nigeria's political trajectory and the challenges it continues to face.
@brymostakelink on X

In Nigeria, the convergence of religious, cultural, and ethnic identities has played a significant role in shaping the nation's political landscape. While diversity should ideally be a source of strength, it has often been a divisive force, sharpening biases in ways that threaten the unity and stability of the country. This article explores how these biases are impacting Nigeria's polity in various ways, including the creation of echo chambers, fueling polarization, and promoting violence. Additionally, we'll delve into the factors contributing to the spread of fake news and misinformation in the country and discuss potential solutions.

On September 29, 1958, British conservative politician Alan Lennox-Boyd, secretary of colonial affairs, meets with Nigerian prime ministers at Lancaster House in London to design the Nigerian constitution. From left to right: Lennox-Boyd, Obafemi Awolowo, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Ahmadu Bello, and Nnamdi Azikiwe.

Nigeria Map showing the Ethnic Groups Constituents

Creating Echo Chambers

One of the most pernicious effects of religious, cultural, and ethnic biases in Nigeria is the creation of echo chambers. People tend to consume news and information that align with their existing beliefs, reinforcing their preconceived notions. In this environment, constructive conversations about important issues become increasingly difficult. Instead of fostering productive dialogue, echo chambers isolate individuals, making it challenging to find common ground. This, in turn, contributes to the spread of misinformation, as alternative viewpoints are often dismissed or ignored.

Fueling Polarization

Religious, cultural, and ethnic biases also fuel polarization in Nigeria. Divisions along these lines have made it difficult to build consensus on crucial issues. Political polarization exacerbates gridlock and hinders progress. As different groups prioritize their own interests and ideologies, the common good can get lost in the shuffle. Bridging these divides is essential for the nation's growth and stability.

Promoting Violence

Perhaps the most alarming consequence of these biases is their potential to incite violence. In Nigeria, instances of violence between Christians and Muslims, driven by religious differences, have been tragic and persistent. Ethnic tensions have also erupted into violence, leading to further division within the country. Such conflicts not only claim lives but also perpetuate cycles of mistrust and hostility, making it increasingly difficult to achieve peace and reconciliation.

Factors Contributing to the Spread of Misinformation

Several factors contribute to the rampant spread of fake news and misinformation in Nigeria. High illiteracy rates, at 35.4%, leave a substantial portion of the population vulnerable to misinformation due to their inability to critically assess information. The lack of trust in mainstream media, perceived as biased and unrepresentative, drives people toward alternative, less reliable sources, such as social media.

Furthermore, Nigeria's politically charged atmosphere provides fertile ground for the proliferation of fake news and misinformation. Deep-seated divisions and political tensions lead people to embrace and share information that aligns with their political leanings, regardless of its accuracy.

Understanding the Bias in Information Consumption

Nigerians' deliberate preference for news that aligns with their beliefs can be attributed to several psychological factors. Confirmation bias leads individuals to seek out information that reinforces their preexisting beliefs, while cognitive dissonance drives them to avoid information that challenges their worldview. Additionally, some may simply lack interest in hearing opposing perspectives, believing their own views to be absolute.

The Consequences of Misinformation

The consequences of the spread of fake news and misinformation are dire and multifaceted. Misinformation undermines democracy by depriving citizens of accurate information needed for informed decision-making. It also has the potential to ignite violence and conflict, as seen in instances of religious and ethnic clashes fueled by false narratives. Furthermore, misinformation can have adverse effects on public health, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic when misinformation deterred vaccination efforts, leading to the further spread of the virus.

Addressing the Challenge

The Nigerian government has taken steps to combat the issue of fake news and misinformation, such as establishing fact-checking centers and launching public awareness campaigns. However, more comprehensive measures are needed:

Improve Education and Literacy: Enhancing education and literacy rates is paramount. A better-educated populace is less susceptible to misinformation.

Build Trust in Mainstream Media: Ensuring that the mainstream media is independent and unbiased can help rebuild trust in credible news sources.

Public Education: The government should continue educating the public about how to identify and avoid misinformation, teaching critical thinking and media literacy skills.

Conclusion

Religious, cultural, and ethnic biases have sharpened Nigeria's polity, creating echo chambers, fueling polarization, and promoting violence. The spread of fake news and misinformation exacerbates these challenges, threatening democracy, stability, and public health. Addressing this multifaceted problem requires a concerted effort, from improving education to fostering trust in media and promoting critical thinking. In doing so, Nigeria can hope to overcome its divisions and build a more inclusive and informed society.

Source: Brymo's Take @brymostakelink on X(Formerly Twitter)

CSU 0001: Sample of diploma issued in 1979 by the university which is different from the INEC.
CSU 0008: Sample of diploma issued in 1999 as released by CSU
CSU 0011:Sample of diploma issued in 2003 with a new crest.
Tinubu INEC: What Tinubu submitted to INEC in 2022.

The Ooni of Ife’s Claim: Exploring the Debate Over the Igbo People’s Origins
Source: Source: Brymo's Take @brymostakelink on X(Formerly Twitter)


The Ooni of Ife, a prominent traditional ruler of the Yoruba people, has recently made a claim that has sparked a lively debate among scholars and communities in Nigeria. His assertion is that the Igbo people, one of Nigeria's major ethnic groups, migrated from Ile-Ife, a city considered the cradle of Yoruba civilization. This claim is based on the existence of an Igbo quarter in the Ooni's palace and various oral traditions. However, the question of the Igbo people's origins remains a complex and contentious issue.

Differing Perspectives:
Scholars have long debated the origins of the Igbo people. Some contend that they have deep historical roots in their current homeland, while others suggest they migrated from other regions within Africa. The lack of a definitive consensus underscores the complexity of this historical puzzle.

Shared History and Contact:
One intriguing aspect of this debate is the historical contact between the Igbo and Yoruba peoples. Both cultures exhibit linguistic and cultural similarities, suggesting some form of interaction or influence over the centuries. There are also instances of Igbo settlements within Yoruba territory. However, these shared elements do not necessarily confirm the claim of a migration from Ile-Ife.

Common Ancestry or Separate Migrations:
Another possibility is that both the Igbo and Yoruba peoples may share a common ancestor from Ile-Ife but migrated at different times. Such scenarios are plausible, given the rich tapestry of African history, characterized by diverse migrations and interactions.

Respecting Different Perspectives:
It's essential to approach this topic with sensitivity, recognizing that the Ooni of Ife's claim has the potential to offend some Igbo people. Belonging and identity are deeply personal and cultural matters, and asserting a definitive origin can be divisive. It is crucial to respect the diversity of perspectives within Nigeria and avoid making sweeping generalizations about the Igbo people as a whole.

Conclusion:
The question of the Igbo people's origins is a historical conundrum that may never be definitively answered. While the Ooni of Ife's claim adds an intriguing layer to the debate, it is crucial to acknowledge the multiple perspectives and complexities surrounding this issue. Ultimately, the shared history and interactions between the Igbo and Yoruba peoples are a testament to the rich tapestry of Nigerian culture and history, a tapestry woven from many threads, including migration, contact, and shared heritage.

Source https://brymostakelink./2023/10/09/the-ooni-of-ifes-claim-exploring-the-debate-over-the-igbo-peoples-origins/

Introduction:
The Ooni of Ife, a prominent traditional ruler of the Yoruba people, has recently made a claim that has sparked a lively debate among scholars and communities in Nigeria. His assertion is that the Igbo people, one of Nigeria's major ethnic groups, migrated from Ile-Ife, a city considered the cradle of Yoruba civilization. This claim is based on the existence of an Igbo quarter in the Ooni's palace and various oral traditions. However, the question of the Igbo people's origins remains a complex and contentious issue.

Differing Perspectives:
Scholars have long debated the origins of the Igbo people. Some contend that they have deep historical roots in their current homeland, while others suggest they migrated from other regions within Africa. The lack of a definitive consensus underscores the complexity of this historical puzzle.

Shared History and Contact:
One intriguing aspect of this debate is the historical contact between the Igbo and Yoruba peoples. Both cultures exhibit linguistic and cultural similarities, suggesting some form of interaction or influence over the centuries. There are also instances of Igbo settlements within Yoruba territory. However, these shared elements do not necessarily confirm the claim of a migration from Ile-Ife.

Common Ancestry or Separate Migrations:
Another possibility is that both the Igbo and Yoruba peoples may share a common ancestor from Ile-Ife but migrated at different times. Such scenarios are plausible, given the rich tapestry of African history, characterized by diverse migrations and interactions.

Respecting Different Perspectives:
It's essential to approach this topic with sensitivity, recognizing that the Ooni of Ife's claim has the potential to offend some Igbo people. Belonging and identity are deeply personal and cultural matters, and asserting a definitive origin can be divisive. It is crucial to respect the diversity of perspectives within Nigeria and avoid making sweeping generalizations about the Igbo people as a whole.

Conclusion:
The question of the Igbo people's origins is a historical conundrum that may never be definitively answered. While the Ooni of Ife's claim adds an intriguing layer to the debate, it is crucial to acknowledge the multiple perspectives and complexities surrounding this issue. Ultimately, the shared history and interactions between the Igbo and Yoruba peoples are a testament to the rich tapestry of Nigerian culture and history, a tapestry woven from many threads, including migration, contact, and shared heritage.

The Emir of Ilorin is a Yoruba-speaking Fulani.

Ilorin was founded by the Yoruba, but in the early 19th century, it was conquered by a Fulani jihadist army led by Shehu Alimi. Alimi became the first Emir of Ilorin, and his descendants have ruled the emirate ever since.

Over the centuries, the Fulani emirate has assimilated many Yoruba customs and traditions. As a result, the Emir of Ilorin is now considered to be both Fulani and Yoruba. Rtd Justice Ibrahim Kolapo Sulu Gambari CFR (born 22 April 1940) is the 11th and current Emir of Ilorin.

In Nigeria today, ethnicity is a complex issue, and there is no single definition of what it means to be Fulani or Yoruba, Yoruba-Fulani or even Hausa or Fulani or Hausa-Fulani. Some people may identify more with their Fulani heritage, while others may identify more with their Yoruba heritage. The Emir of Ilorin is one example of someone who identifies with both cultures.

The Etsu Nupe is not a pure Nupe, but rather a Fulani. The current Etsu Nupe, Alhaji Yahaya Abubakar, is the 13th Etsu Nupe. His great-grandfather, Mallam Dendo, was a Fulani warrior who conquered the Nupe Kingdom in 1806 during the Sokoto jihad. Dendo became the first Etsu Nupe and his descendants have ruled the emirate ever since.

Although the Etsu Nupe is of Fulani descent, he is also considered the leader of the Nupe people. This is because the Nupe people have a long history of assimilation and intermarriage with other ethnic groups, including the Fulani. As a result, the Etsu Nupe is seen as a symbol of unity for the Nupe people, regardless of their ethnic background.

In addition, the Etsu Nupe is a powerful political figure in Nigeria. He is the head of the Bida Emirate, which is one of the largest and most influential emirates in the country. The Etsu Nupe also has an influential seat in the Nigerian State Council of Traditional Rulers and Chiefs .

So, while the Etsu Nupe is not a pure Nupe, he is still considered the leader of the Nupe people and a powerful political figure in Nigeria.

The deposition by the CSU registrar, Carl Westberg, did not explicitly say that Tinubu forged his certificate. However, Westberg did testify that the certificate that Tinubu submitted to INEC was different from the certificates that CSU issued in 1979, when Tinubu graduated. Westberg also testified that the certificate that Tinubu submitted to INEC had a number of inconsistencies, including a different date (1979) and a different signature from the registrar at the time.

Based on this testimony, some people have concluded that Tinubu forged his certificate. However, it is also possible that the certificate that Tinubu submitted to INEC is simply a replacement certificate that was issued to him by CSU at a later date. CSU has said that it does not have a copy of the original certificate that was issued to Tinubu in 1979, so it is difficult to say for sure whether or not the certificate that he submitted to INEC is a forgery.

Ultimately, it is up to a court of law to decide whether or not Tinubu forged his certificate. The CSU registrar's deposition is just one piece of evidence that could be considered in such a case.

Source: https://brymostakelink./2023/10/09/understanding-the-csu-registrars-testimony-on-tinubus-certificate/

During the early part of 1997, Albanians were experiencing their first fruits of democracy. The people had not been exposed to many business practices, either legitimate or fraudulent, because of the Communist regime. When some devious individuals introduced a pyramid program to Albania, hundreds of thousands of people participated. When the nation was saturated with this program, the last people to buy in realized that they had nobody to collect money from and the pyramid collapsed. At that point, thousands of the people went on a rampage. Anarchy broke out and a civil war began. To this day, the nation has not regained its stability. The people were naïve and somehow felt that they could get rich without really working, simply by investing in a devious pyramid scheme.

Recently, the famous PSL announced the reduction in the monthly payment from 20% of initial capital to 10%. The payment plan that used to span for 15 months has now been increased to 30 months. However, this announcement didn't go down well with investors in the scheme, especially the new entrants. The proponents of the scheme saw the handwriting and never notified the general public. Instead, they intensified efforts in encouraging people to join in order to swindle them of their money. Cross-section of the new investors who spoke under anonymity said some of the uplines stopped talking to them immediately the new 10% payment was announced. Particular new investors who just invested almost 40 million Naira with the assurance of 20% monthly payment promised to run for 15 months lamented about the sudden decision. Now, he will directly only be paid 10% of his investment for 30 months. Efforts made to recover his investment proved abortive as none of the PSL officials could respond to him. The financial implication of this is that an investor can only get back his initial capital after 10 months of investment, provided the payment percentage is not reviewed downward.
Obviously, the scheme has practically crashed, but the scheme's operators launched late hour propaganda to make innocent people entered the scheme and changed the rule, immediately they attained a particular amount of money that can satisfy their gluttonous appetite for wealth. New investors are now lamenting their foolish decision to join the Ponzi scheme while the scheme operators are smiling to the bank. Those who joined the scheme are naïve and ignorant of the cunny disposition of the operators of the scheme. Members were made to tag their bank deposit reference "donation", thus, the scheme's organizer used this approach to shield themselves from backlash and litigations. The Bible is clear about Ponzi and the pyramid scheme. People should know better, but unfortunately, there are many gullible people in the world. Most of these schemes are run by people who do not care about the other participants. They know that many of them will lose money, but since their motivation is greed, that doesn't stop them.
PSL operators presented themselves as Christians, and this deceived a lot of people. A particular new investor claimed that she was introduced by a church member she trusted to the extent that she didn't even bother to ask about the terms and conditions. The Bible says, "Be not deceived, God is not mocked, whatsoever a man sows, that he shall also reap" (Galatians 6:7). If you sow your time, energy or money into a program that ultimately causes financial loss, suffering and confusion to others, even if you made money temporarily, you will ultimately reap suffering, confusion and financial loss as a result.

No one should cry over this oooo. On a very light note. I think the Yorubas deserve the speakership to balance the two religions in the two zones since some people have succeeded in dividing them along religious lines. Kudos to Buhari for being proactive on this. After all 2 zones in this country have produced a sitting VP and Speaker on two different occasions 1979 & 2011 and heaven didn't fall. God bless Nigeria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYskR2OWT9I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYskR2OWT9I