₦airaland Forum

tollyboy5:
I ask you to send me the link of the post you circled . you don't want to. You're scared of been busted right? keep lying to yourself

tollyboy5:
You'll end up disgracing yourself bro. You can't know me more than I know myself

tollyboy5:
Lol half is overrated. Benin never ruled less than half of the present Lagos. Ijebu-epe has the largest division in Lagos today followed by ikorodu. We don't know anything about Benin in these places. Even badagry.

So stop the over hype of Benin influence. We collected tax from the Yoruba interland even during the colonial era . were much powerful

tollyboy5:
Send me the link and stop posting pictures. You don't know what you're saying.

Ijebu traded with the white men as early as 14century . we have access to the ijebu-Epe lagoon . what do we need delta river for?

Stop formulating story to back your claims. My ancestors were even fishermen from ijebu-epe we serious minded people and we invented the earlier means of exchange which was the cowry.

The Benin knew the ijebus were feared and serious minded people. So strong kingdoms avoid picking quarrel with each other. the Benin dare not trespass us.

TAO11:
BTW, the above videos have been debunked at the following link:

https://www.nairaland.com/6234931/why-ikwerres-not-igbo-logic/25#96567759

+ The present Benin palace was built much recently — hence it used to be a ragtag shrine.

Should one really expect much from a heartbroken Bini bald head ??

Nope! Peddling lies is what Binis do best, and that is apparent from all of their posts — which unfortunately have all been debunked on this thread.

I’m super glad that everyone can now see through their falsehood and desperation.

In summary: The word “Oba” has its root in the Yoruba language as has been demonstrated from a Bini dictionary.

[s]No other Edoid people use the term, despite the Binis expedition in their territory[/s]

The reason is simple: Of all Edoid groups, only the Binis have dynastic succession from the Yorubas.

[b]QED!

TAO11:
The videos have been debunked here, btw!

https://www.nairaland.com/6234931/why-ikwerres-not-igbo-logic/25#96567759

+ The present Benin palace was built much recently — hence it used to be a ragtag shrine.

So much for Benin logic.

tollyboy5:
What's on the map is ancient Lagos. Mr man learn and stop being ignorant. Ijebu kingdom has never been under anyone. And ijebu are part of the modern Lagos.
The Lagos on your map refers to ancient Lagos.
If you have any further prove let me know.
I'm from a royal family From a town in the present day Epe and my lineage is from the paramount awujale lineage of the ijebu kingdom.

You don't come online to prove rubbish to me when i know my kingdom territories and people.
Old Lagos is different from present Lagos state.
Get lost if you feel your ignorant self can't take simple instruction.
Thank your star on civilization that kings are no more powerful like before. Stubborn people like you would have been use to appease the gods

tollyboy5:
Just because Benin conquered a small ancient Lagos you want to change history with picture
You must be joking

Explain to me how does a conquered settlement mean no one was there?
By the way it was a tiny portion of the the present Lagos that was under the Benin kingdom. The dahomy and ijebu don't have anything to do with Benin and they're part of the present day Lagos state so what are you trying to prove?

Is it because our ijebu war lords decided not to interfere in the Benin business thats why we did not conquered the ancient Lagos.
Our clan is to large and we all speak one ijebu dialect so we're powerful self sufficient enough. Go ask your grand parents

TAO11:
Yes, they did — the materials from which those imaginative cartoons of Benin are taken always make it clear that the cartoons do not depict the reality.

Juliusmalema:
Reading

TAO11:
So far in the course of this thread, the following retar.ded claims have been devastatingly debunked:

(1) The retar.ded claim (by disgruntled Binis) that Yorubas began using the word “Oba” in the post-1930s.

This has been debunked with written evidence of Yoruba usage from 1899, from 1897, from c.1867, from 1845, et al.

(2) The retar.ded claim (by @samuk) that there exists some “600 years” old written evidence of Benin usage of the word “Oba”.

This retar.ded claim is yet to be substantiated (even with an atom of evidence) despite more than 10 days (and still counting) of their torturous search.

Instead, these disgruntled Binis were at best only able to demonstrate (from their own warped logic) that the Yorubas have an earlier written evidence — 1845 (Yoruba) Vs. 1867 (Bini).

——————————————————
But what does it really mean that I was able to produce an 1845 written evidence and the Binis weren’t able to come even close to that ??

Well, it just simply means that the Binis weren’t able to come close to the Yorubas, despite their own bogus claim of wRiTteN eViDeNcE. Nothing more, nothing less! [I know I’m being too nice now].

To put the same question in other words:
Does the comparative written evidence already provided really mean that the Binis began using this word only in the year 1867 — because that’s all they could provide ??

Funny enough, this line of warped reasoning is what the disgruntled Binis have been trailing. Should I play their game along with them? No, I’m Yoruba!

To every sound and logically mind, such conclusion (based on available writing) is too obvious as a flawed reasoning and logical fallacy — even though I could have forced their own flawed reasoning down their throats.

Such particular logical fallacy is know in analytical logic specifically by the name: argumentum ex silentio.

————————————————————
Having debunked their deluded claim of 1930s [see (1)]; having exposed @samuk’s fraud of “600 years” old writing [see (2)]; having exposed their inability to produce anything close to (let alone earlier than) the Yorubas’ [see (2)]; having debunked their warped logic of arguing from earlier written usage (despite the fact that it favours me); I now turn, at this point, to discussing the actual objective evidence for determining the indigenous ownership of a word — that is, the linguistic evidence.

——————————————————————
The Argument:
(I) If a word is in use in a particular language, but its literal meaning can not be meaningfully analyzed within that language; then such word does not originally belong to that language. Gbam!

(II) The word “Ọba” (as used by the Binis for their monarch) does not have any literal meaning in the language of the Binis.

(III) In conclusion, the word “Ọba” (as used by the Binis for their monarch) does not belong originally to the Bini language — In other words, it is a loanword.

————————————————————
The Evidence:
An objective source of evidence for the meanings of Bini words is obviously and undoubtedly an authoritative dictionary of the Bini language itself.

[This is not to be confused with a dictionary of the English language which simply features a paltry number of non-English words of widespread, global, popular usage — such as: “fufu”, “agbada”, “oba”, et al.]

As such, recourse will now be made to a Bini-English Lexicon. This is so that the English readers here can access the written meanings which are attributed to the actual Bini words.

One such example of an authoritative material for this purpose is the work entitled: “A Concise Dictionary of The Bini Language of Southern Nigeria” compiled by the professor of African Phonetics and Linguistics, Hans Melzian.

———————————————————
Under the entry “Ọba” (for which Professor Melzian used “ɔ” to represent “ọ“, in order to distinguish /o/ as in odd from /o/ as in old ); the following are some interesting observations from this Bini dictionary.

(A) Unlike what the author did with virtually all other Bini words within the same dictionary, he did not give a literal meaning to this word — as I have expected.

Rather, he simply describes the person whom the Binis refer to by this word. Interesting, isn’t it?! See embedded image below:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754901_bb7fcaad09fc479498aedbb24cb57370_jpeg_jpeg80dbd02cb7ce1db81e998db7e161c38e

(B) But more than that, the author (in fact) let the cat out of the bag. He revealed why this word could not have had a literal meaning in a dictionary of Bini language.

Before I reveal his reason, it is important that one is acquainted with a few notations and abbreviations which he define in his work.

Two examples of these are relevant to my discourse here, and they are: “Yor.” and “cf.” which he defines as: “Yoruba” and “etymological reference” respectively.

See embedded image below:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754902_541f22648c37485488282bea682c0e27_jpeg_jpegf272ec9b7e8de333789df15c524980aa

In the light of this background, let’s then see what reason the author indicates as to why this word could have appeared without a literal meaning in the Bini dictionary.

See embedded image below as highlighted on the top-right corner in continuation of the bottom-left corner.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754903_7e31a3d03b7c407ab60e863fbf8fb4c2_jpeg_jpegfba5de93eebde69a9ef00beabf7a605c

In the light of his foregoing definition of abbreviations, what we have here in the phrase “cf. Yor. ɔba” then becomes extremely clear and straightforward.

In other words, the word “Ọba” [ɔba] (used by the Binis for their monarch) has its ”etymology” [cf.] (aka. ”origin”) in the Yoruba language [Yor.].

Quod Erat Demonstrandum!

Etrusen:
but don't you think if iyase ode was really killed as you just said by the next Oba whom was ozuere, there wouldn't be any need of him serving Oba Akenzua1 whom was Ozuere son because research prove that he serve three Obas

Barbilius:
Yes Oyo had cavalry because it was/is still located in the open savannah. Benin was and is still in the forest. How exactly did it use horses inside a tropical rain forest?

Barbilius:
Lmao. They even drew horses there. Did Benin ever used horses? Inside a forest region? How did horses survive?

Johnrake69:
They will get to a breaking point.

Johnrake69:
Southern Masses are not immune to the failures of the Nigerian state. It should be a collective responsibility to get rid of these political jobbers.

Johnrake69:
The masses need to wake up.

Charleys:
The man missed a delicious meal.

TAO11:
Waiting on you all on the next page.

You must make that my post popular on the internet as a top search result.

TAO11:
Well, we learnt that SUICIDE is loading in Benin Kingdom today — because I simply won’t let you peddle lies freely.

The days of unchecked Benin lies on Nairaland are gone, hence enjoy the refutation again as follows:


Well, on this same thread we’ve already seen written evidence of “Oba” usage among the Yorubas — some going back to the year 1845.

The closest the Benin usage came so far is 1863.

Moreover, linguistics evidence have already been adduced on this same thread to establish that the Binis borrowed “Oba” from the Yorubas.



Well I understand your desperation, but guess what: No Benin crown comes close in any way shape or form to any Ife crown.

The closest which one of the Benin crowns came (the tall one) was that it looked like the signature tall crown of other Yoruba kingdoms (excluding Ife) called Ade-Nla.

Moreover, if your claim was that the Ife kingdom had more than one type of crown, that’s factual.

In fact, the crowns are almost innumerable, just as the Binis have more than one as well — two examples (of the Binis’) of which may be seen at this link:

https://www.nairaland.com/6234931/why-ikwerres-not-igbo-logic/20#96543761

This is a false statement which you’ve made here without a shred of evidence.

You have simply peddled this falsehood in the hope that people will swallow it without asking for evidence.

Interesting! Let’s hear it.

Haha!

Insecure Bini Liar: Look, the Ooni of Ife uses “Sir” instead of “Oba”

Sane Person: In what capacity did he use the designation “Sir”? Is it with respect to his traditional stool?

Insecure Bini Liar: [scratches his bald head and goes] Well, that was in his capacity as a politician and governor of Western Nigeria

Sane Person: Why then did you post this when you already know it is nonsense?
——-—

Moreover, I would have thought you should know that Nigeria was a British colony.

And that certain British titles were conferred on certain distinguished public office holders.

One of such distinguished individuals was the then Ooni of Ife. At the time, he was the Governor of the Nigerian Western Nigeria.

Other Nigerians who have been conferred similar the honor are:
Sir Ahmadi Bello; Sir Herbert Macaulay; Alhaji Sir Abubakr’s Tafawa Balewa to name a few.

Well, as the written evidence have shown so far on this thread; your base level of reasoning should have permitted you to conclude that:

The Yorubas have been using the word “Oba” decades before the Binis would first use it — 1845 (Yoruba) Vs. 1863 (Benin).

This has already been demonstrated in this same comment to be a deluded falsehood.

Interesting! An ancient Ife crown is modeled after a more ancient Ife sculpture. So? Hehehe!

Oh, I have an idea!

What about ‘the current dress of the Ashanti king is an imitation of the Ife king’s’?

In fact, this is more tenable since a Ghanaian subgroup claimed to have originated from Ife considering the testimony of the then Supreme King of the Ga people — The Ga Matse, King Ni Adama Latse.

TAO11:
Well, we learnt that SUICIDE is loading in Benin Kingdom today — because I simply won’t let you peddle lies freely.

The days of unchecked Benin lies on Nairaland are gone, hence enjoy the refutation again as follows:


Well, on this same thread we’ve already seen written evidence of “Oba” usage among the Yorubas — some going back to the year 1845.

The closest the Benin usage came so far is 1863.

Moreover, linguistics evidence have already been adduced on this same thread to establish that the Binis borrowed “Oba” from the Yorubas.



Well I understand your desperation, but guess what: No Benin crown comes close in any way shape or form to any Ife crown.

The closest which one of the Benin crowns came (the tall one) was that it looked like the signature tall crown of other Yoruba kingdoms (excluding Ife) called Ade-Nla.

Moreover, if your claim was that the Ife kingdom had more than one type of crown, that’s factual.

In fact, the crowns are almost innumerable, just as the Binis have more than one as well — two examples (of the Binis’) of which may be seen at this link:

https://www.nairaland.com/6234931/why-ikwerres-not-igbo-logic/20#96543761

This is a false statement which you’ve made here without a shred of evidence.

You have simply peddled this falsehood in the hope that people will swallow it without asking for evidence.

Interesting! Let’s hear it.

Haha!

Insecure Bini Liar: Look, the Ooni of Ife uses “Sir” instead of “Oba”

Sane Person: In what capacity did he use the designation “Sir”? Is it with respect to his traditional stool?

Insecure Bini Liar: [scratches his bald head and goes] Well, that was in his capacity as a politician and governor of Western Nigeria

Sane Person: Why then did you post this when you already know it is nonsense?
——-—

Moreover, I would have thought you should know that Nigeria was a British colony.

And that certain British titles were conferred on certain distinguished public office holders.

One of such distinguished individuals was the then Ooni of Ife. At the time, he was the Governor of the Nigerian Western Nigeria.

Other Nigerians who have been conferred similar the honor are:
Sir Ahmadi Bello; Sir Herbert Macaulay; Alhaji Sir Abubakr’s Tafawa Balewa to name a few.

Well, as the written evidence have shown so far on this thread; your base level of reasoning should have permitted you to conclude that:

The Yorubas have been using the word “Oba” decades before the Binis would first use it — 1845 (Yoruba) Vs. 1863 (Benin).

This has already been demonstrated in this same comment to be a deluded falsehood.

Interesting! An ancient Ife crown is modeled after a more ancient Ife sculpture. So? Hehehe!

Oh, I have an idea!

What about ‘the current dress of the Ashanti king is an imitation of the Ife king’s’?

In fact, this is more tenable since a Ghanaian subgroup claimed to have originated from Ife considering the testimony of the then Supreme King of the Ga people — The Ga Matse, King Ni Adama Latse.

TAO11:
So far in the course of this thread, the following retar.ded claims have been devastatingly debunked:

(1) The retar.ded claim (by disgruntled Binis) that Yorubas began using the word “Oba” in the post-1930s.

This has been debunked with written evidence of Yoruba usage from 1899, from 1897, from c.1867, from 1845, et al.

(2) The retar.ded claim (by @samuk) that there exists some “600 years” old written evidence of Benin usage of the word “Oba”.

This retar.ded claim is yet to be substantiated (even with an atom of evidence) despite more than 10 days (and still counting) of their torturous search.

Instead, these disgruntled Binis were at best only able to demonstrate (from their own warped logic) that the Yorubas have an earlier written evidence — 1845 (Yoruba) Vs. 1867 (Bini).

——————————————————
But what does it really mean that I was able to produce an 1845 written evidence and the Binis weren’t able to come even close to that ??

Well, it just simply means that the Binis weren’t able to come close to the Yorubas, despite their own bogus claim of wRiTteN eViDeNcE. Nothing more, nothing less! [I know I’m being too nice now].

To put the same question in other words:
Does the comparative written evidence already provided really mean that the Binis began using this word only in the year 1867 — because that’s all they could provide ??

Funny enough, this line of warped reasoning is what the disgruntled Binis have been trailing. Should I play their game along with them? No, I’m Yoruba!

To every sound and logically mind, such conclusion (based on available writing) is too obvious as a flawed reasoning and logical fallacy — even though I could have forced their own flawed reasoning down their throats.

Such particular logical fallacy is know in analytical logic specifically by the name: argumentum ex silentio.

————————————————————
Having debunked their deluded claim of 1930s [see (1)]; having exposed @samuk’s fraud of “600 years” old writing [see (2)]; having exposed their inability to produce anything close to (let alone earlier than) the Yorubas’ [see (2)]; having debunked their warped logic of arguing from earlier written usage (despite the fact that it favours me); I now turn, at this point, to discussing the actual objective evidence for determining the indigenous ownership of a word — that is, the linguistic evidence.

——————————————————————
The Argument:
(I) If a word is in use in a particular language, but its literal meaning can not be meaningfully analyzed within that language; then such word does not originally belong to that language. Gbam!

(II) The word “Ọba” (as used by the Binis for their monarch) does not have any literal meaning in the language of the Binis.

(III) In conclusion, the word “Ọba” (as used by the Binis for their monarch) does not belong originally to the Bini language — In other words, it is a loanword.

————————————————————
The Evidence:
An objective source of evidence for the meanings of Bini words is obviously and undoubtedly an authoritative dictionary of the Bini language itself.

[This is not to be confused with a dictionary of the English language which simply features a paltry number of non-English words of widespread, global, popular usage — such as: “fufu”, “agbada”, “oba”, et al.]

As such, recourse will now be made to a Bini-English Lexicon. This is so that the English readers here can access the written meanings which are attributed to the actual Bini words.

One such example of an authoritative material for this purpose is the work entitled: “A Concise Dictionary of The Bini Language of Southern Nigeria” compiled by the professor of African Phonetics and Linguistics, Hans Melzian.

———————————————————
Under the entry “Ọba” (for which Professor Melzian used “ɔ” to represent “ọ“, in order to distinguish /o/ as in odd from /o/ as in old ); the following are some interesting observations from this Bini dictionary.

(A) Unlike what the author did with virtually all other Bini words within the same dictionary, he did not give a literal meaning to this word — as I have expected.

Rather, he simply describes the person whom the Binis refer to by this word. Interesting, isn’t it?! See embedded image below:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754901_bb7fcaad09fc479498aedbb24cb57370_jpeg_jpeg80dbd02cb7ce1db81e998db7e161c38e

(B) But more than that, the author (in fact) let the cat out of the bag. He revealed why this word could not have had a literal meaning in a dictionary of Bini language.

Before I reveal his reason, it is important that one is acquainted with a few notations and abbreviations which he define in his work.

Two examples of these are relevant to my discourse here, and they are: “Yor.” and “cf.” which he defines as: “Yoruba” and “etymological reference” respectively.

See embedded image below:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754902_541f22648c37485488282bea682c0e27_jpeg_jpegf272ec9b7e8de333789df15c524980aa

In the light of this background, let’s then see what reason the author indicates as to why this word could have appeared without a literal meaning in the Bini dictionary.

See embedded image below as highlighted on the top-right corner in continuation of the bottom-left corner.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12754903_7e31a3d03b7c407ab60e863fbf8fb4c2_jpeg_jpegfba5de93eebde69a9ef00beabf7a605c

In the light of his foregoing definition of abbreviations, what we have here in the phrase “cf. Yor. ɔba” then becomes extremely clear and straightforward.

In other words, the word “Ọba” [ɔba] (used by the Binis for their monarch) has its ”etymology” [cf.] (aka. ”origin”) in the Yoruba language [Yor.].

Quod Erat Demonstrandum!