₦airaland Forum

juwoonn: Ok... I can see your point.

Most of these are painting work. Very easy to fake.

Now I know your problem. You have a psychiatric problem and you think you know more than you actually know bcs that your big head is deceiving you.

If you don't know what to say....

Just keep quiet or keep off.

kingston277: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Ikpe_nsibidi.jpg/400px-Ikpe_nsibidi.jpg

ROSSIKE: Abeg make we hear something. The white man is the EXACT SAME. Very greedy and thoughtless for tomorrow. Look at the state of the planet. The environment is almost irreversibly damaged, meaning the next few decades could be catastrophic for all of us. Why? Because out of sheer monopolistic greed, the white man promoted the use of toxic fossil fuels for energy production, rather than use free and renewable energy resources. He built hideous nuclear weapons, more than enough to destroy the planet hundreds of times over. He invades and destroys countries, killing millions, to steal their resources, forgetting that he's creating generations of future terrorists hell-bent on getting even. He creates unsustainable economic systems featuring monstrous inequality, forgetting that anything built on sand will crumble like a pack of cards. I mean, if the Africans are foolish, the white man is 1000 times more foolish because his thoughtlessness is actually leading the entire globe to hell.

RandomAfricanAm: That sh*t is sad man. sad
The worse part is that they feel like they are being "realistic" "responsible" "progressive" or my personal favorite "civilized"(even though they completely miss the keyword *civil*) Automation & mechanization does not equal civilization; Automized & mechanized barbarians are still practicing barbarism. Simply put mechanized barbarism is still barbarism.

Neutral Example: When the tent dwelling, spear chucking, horse riding Mongolians sacked and overran china they were barbarians being barbarous. When the mansion/castle dwelling, rifle/cannon shooting, galleon/wagon riding Europeans sacked and overran china they were also barbarians being barbarous.

Self haters conveniently skip that and other episodes in world history nor do they dare say they the fact that china was overrun by a pack of tent dwellers on horse back means that they should stop city planning, administrative practices, civil engineering projects, etc. and accept the superior tent dwelling "civilization" that was obviously justified by chinas round defeat and occupation by Mongolians. Nor do they say that the Japanese should give up their Shinto tree, rock, etc spirits and become "civilized"(or in self hater language "industrialized", "mechanized", & "automized" ...which is what they really mean when they say "civilized"wink

As concerns my ideas surrounding African spirituality I suggest you checkout my reply on the second page of...
https://www.nairaland.com/1554976/whats-literal-translation-north-south/1


As I like to say...
1. Freedom is a necessity but not enough. Choices are predicated on what you know at the time of calculating a decision. If I control what you know I control the range of your possible choices.
2. Knowledge is a necessity but not enough. Knowledge derives it's usefulness from being processed when calculating a decision. The smaller the range of process you are capable of carrying out the less you can do with what you know.
3. Processing(intelligence) is a necessity but not enough. There are a series of Processes done in executing a plan. If you have no plan your interests are subject to those who do have a plan. Be that in using your ability to process knowledge to further their plans(not yours) or simply by your interests being displaced in the execution of their plans.
4. Plans are a necessity but not enough. Plans are simply a means to accomplishing a goal. If you have no goals in life your interests are subject to those who do have a goal. Be that in using your ability to plan and/or process knowledge to further their goals(not yours) or simply by your interests being displaced in the execution of their goals.
5. There are more but I can successfully reply without stating the rest


While I commend the Self haters for wanting better for themselves and Africa as a whole.

I question...
1.The range of knowledge they have at there disposal when coming to their stated positions
2.The range of processes they were able to employ on that knowledge.(Which led to their inability to make historically consistent positions)
3.The extent to which their self hate surrounding colonization impedes absorption, development, & execution of new knowledge and processes.

frankben: silliest quote i've ever gotten

all4naija: How is that trolling?

ROSSIKE: How do we even know that the traditional African elite's refusal to share their knowledge or popularize writing, record keeping etc, wasn't borne out of thousands of years of cold hard experience in which these seeming ''advances'' have actually led to the disastrous decimation and decline of earlier civilizations? African civilization is thousands of years old, stretching into prehistory. Africa gave the world writing. The sciences.There are ruins of stone cities like Kerma in modern day Sudan, built with stunning geometry, which have been dated at over 10,000 years old! By comparison, the first voice from Europe was Homer of Greece, in 800 BC, less than 3,000 years ago. How do we know the African's decision to simplify life isn't actually an advancement based on human experience, and that he is right to deny high knowledge to the majority, seeing that they would inevitably make a mess of it? I mean, look at the world today. Knowledge has spread, and we're on the brink of annihilation from environmental, economic, and military catastrophes. Everyone can read and write. But the world is a lot less safe, secure and stable than it was in the time of our fathers. The whites - relative newcomers to civilization - wouldn't know the ancient histories of the earth... It's ancient cataclysms. Maybe our ancestors WERE RIGHT afterall. Maybe keeping records is actually a bad thing. As it reminds people of ancient wrongs... locking them into a cycle or negative recollection and action.... Maybe writing is actually an attractive but double-edged sword...leading to the spread of knowledge capable of destroying the planet.....Maybe the ancestors were right that simplicity was the antidote for another round of planetary/continental destruction.

all4naija: It is basically a cultural thing. Nigerians are culturally blinded to the extent they have to accord more rights to a male child than a female one. It is totally a biased thing to do.

frankben: @OP, you're right in your observation... Male child preference is subject to inheritance and is rampant in the south eastern part of this country(igbos to be precise)... I think it's an overlooked form of discrimination in certain families... Mother inlaws are always the ones orchestrating this idea/belief and executing it by persuading the son to chase out the wife for not giving birth to a Son...

It is only in Africa that you can observe this farce... It isn't practised in europe, asia and america... A good example is barack obama... His two kids are females and he's contented with it... If it were in nigeria, he would marry another wife who he believes would get his much coveted Son.

Danielotuya: Of cos yes! The African society gives a difference status to a male child than a female. Bt westernizatn has help a little to cushion d effect of dis belief. Bt truth be said,na person wen see pikin dey select. Tell a barren couple for 15yrs if they wld take a boy or gal child,if they will nt tel u anyone as long it's a child

myspnigeria: Blame it on our rich tradition

hensben: because our culture made it so and you know, we still have those generation around, they pass it to their children but thank God for civilization, that believe is on the decrease.

CongoleseQueen: As an individual who was raised in a home centered around culture, I fully understand the importance of traditional practices. However, I have struggled with grasping the reasoning behind some of these practices. I recall having a conversation with a friend about the process of traditional marriage. She once told her mom that she was not interested in receiving a bride price. She is all for having a traditional wedding, but refuses to participate in a ceremony that she feels is unnecessary. Her mom was certainly not pleased with her request. In fact, she informed her that it wasn’t a decision that lied in her hands. It had already been decided for her the moment she was born. While I do see where her mother is coming from, I don’t think she should be forced to adhere to a custom that doesn’t apply to her as an individual. If anything, it should be a choice.

In 2004, activists from Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Senegal, Ghana, Rwanda and South Africa gathered in Kampala for the International Bride Price Conference to discuss ways of eliminating its practice in Africa. Quite frankly, I don’t think it is a good idea to get rid of it completely. I simply think that people should not be forced to participate. It should be optional.

A single African country can have anywhere from five to two hundred tribes, and each tribe carries its own customs. With so many rituals in place, individuals who come from the same country, but belong to different tribes, are not encouraged to marry. This is not a progressive way of thinking. If these traditions aren’t creating unified sense of belonging, why are Africans still holding on to them?

For many Africans, the rise of inter-tribe and inter-Africa marriages is a sign that tribal disputes have ended. That’s like saying, inter-religion marriages have ended religious wars and disputes. It couldn’t be further from the truth. Tribal fighting is still an ongoing problem in Africa. Africans are still committing atrocious acts of violence towards one another due to tribal differences. A friend of mine once said that Africans are always complaining about how badly they were treated by Europeans, but refuse to acknowledge the fact that they are doing the same thing to each other.

Inter-tribe and inter-Africa marriages are becoming more popular due to Western influence. Most Western societies encourage cultural diversity and tolerance. Africans who have been exposed to it tend to become more open. The average African, living within the borders of Africa, would prefer to marry a person from their tribe. In fact, they have zero interest in knowing what goes on in other regions.

South Africa was listed as one of the world’s most multilingual countries. The average South African can speak or understand all of the country’s main languages. This is a great strategy towards creating a sense of unity and belonging within its frontier. It is a fantastic way of promoting cultural diversity.

In conclusion, before we start advocating for a “united Africa”, let’s first encourage a “united Congo”, “united Nigeria”, “united Sudan” and so forth. Africans love culture. That is what makes our continent so beautiful. However, it’s very difficult to genuinely appreciate the culture when it is playing key role in dividing our people. Africans hold traditional practices very close to their hearts, as they have been passed on from generation to generation. Change is not something most of us are quick to accept, but if we are working towards a unified and progressive Africa, accepting cultural diversity and tolerance is the right way forward.

The most interesting difference, however, was in the construction of the stem and sternpost. The mtepe had fairly conventional timber posts, except that the stem was in two pieces joined by an unusual mortise-and-tenon joint open at the front and rear. The dau al mtepe's was even stranger: it consisted of a series of stacked, V-shaped breasthooks, each one about as tall as a strake, tapering aft, and pegged to one another. In some cases, a solid timber was fastened outboard of this stacked construction. It is not known how planks were fastened to the stems/sternposts in either case, or if the timbers were rabbeted.
In 2003, a mtepe was built for an exhibit on dhow culture at the House of Wonders Museum in Zanzibar. The design was to be a roughly half-size (but not half-scale) interpretation of a mtepe that had been measured in 1877 at 97 feet long, 24 feet beam, and depth of 9.5 feet (apparently including draft plus freeboard). The boatbuilder who was contracted for its construction it had never worked on a mtepe, but had heard about some of the construction processes from his grandfather, who was one of the last builders of dau al mtepes. Even though guided by academics and museum personnel, the builder diverged from several known aspects of mtepe construction, most notably in building the boat frame-first as opposed to shell-first, and in refusing to cut off the plank lashings on the hull's outer surface. Named Shungwaya, the boat was briefly tested in Zanzibar harbor, where it proved to be quick and to leak somewhat as expected. It is now on display at the House of Wonders Museum.

The sail was made from many strips of plaited palm leaves, sewn together. There were two or three sets of reef points near the head of the sail. The sail was supported by a yard and a boom of delicate appearance. The yard was equipped with parrels; the boom with a simple loop of rope to perform that function. In addition to a halyard, the yard was supported by two "lift braces," which served both functions implied by that name. As I don't understand how this could work, I'll copy my source and perhaps a reader can explain:
"(The yard) is hoisted to the mast-head by means of a halyard supplemented by two lateral tackles which combine the functions of lifts and braces and may therefore be termed "lift braces". The upper end of the halyard is rove through a sheave-hole some way below the mast-head and made fast to the middle of the yard. Each lift-brace functions through a purchase fitted between the mast-head and one end of the yard, a tackle consisting of two single blocks. One end of the rope is rove through the block at the end of the yard, passes to the block at the mast and returns to be made fast to the yard-arm just inner to the first block. These lift-braces, as the name implies, also control the set of the yard; by slacking away on one and hauling on the other, the yard is veered." ("The Sea-Going Mtepe and Dau of the Lamu Archipelago," James Hornell, Mariner's Mirror, January 1941)

Differences Between Mtepes and Dau al Mtepes
Throughout the above discussion, I've treated both types of vessels together, as the features described seem mainly to have applied to both. But there were some differences between mtepes proper and dau al mtepes, some obvious and others significant but not apparent.
The stem and stern of a dau al mtepe were raked considerably more than those of a mtepe, so that, for boats of identical length, the dau would have a far shorter keel. The stem of the mtepe was surmounted by a large curved terminal that may have represented a camel's head. The dau had no such device, but instead had a long bowsprit. The mtepe was more colorful and far more highly decorated, with occuli both fore and aft, painted bands on the topmost strakes, and amulets, tassels and flags. Perhaps by the time the dau came into being, the trade was already under competitive pressure from other, more modern boat types, and decoration was discarded as uneconomic.

Most reports indicate that after the strakes were sewn together, pegs were inserted by drilling obliquely upward into the outboard face of a plank so that the drill exited the plank on the edge and penetrated the plank above it also on its edge. Others disagree, claiming that the strakes were first edge-drilled on their matching faces, "dowel tenons" set into the holes, and the upper strake then pounded down onto the lower one. Only then were the planks through-drilled and sewn together.
If the first method (oblique pegging) is correct, then the pegs' main function seems to be to eliminate shear between adjacent strakes. If the second method (edge-set pegs) is correct, then the pegs seem to function primarily as an assembly aid. In both cases, the stitches are primarily responsible for holding the planks tight against each other. It is not impossible that both methods were used.
Interior framing was added only after strakes were in place. Amidships, there were futtock frames which rested on floor timbers but were not attached to them. Moving outboard were half-frames, and then one-piece frames (i.e., gunwale to gunwale) in the very ends. The frames were lashed to the hull with a few light cords passed through holes in the planks. Frame spacing was reportedly wide, but no specifics are available. Five or six sets of cross-beams or thwarts were installed in pairs, upper and lower, separated by a few planks. These were notched and passed through the planks, and were gammoned to each other. In addition to transverse strength, the upper thwart of each set served as deck supports and mast partners. Two or three stringers were installed, so lightly lashed to the frames that they seem to have provided little lateral strength: perhaps they helped support and secure the cargo.
During the southwest monsoon, when the mtepe was laid up annually, every stringer and frame was removed and every stitch was replaced. With a full crew working, the job could be done in about eight days.

Rig
Although most reports indicate a plum mast, more recent measurements of models and photographs indicate that the mast had a forward rake of 6 to 14 degrees. The mast was supported by a forestay, two backstays, and usually one shroud per side, although some mtepes may have had a single shroud that was passed from one side to the other when tacking – a rare occurrence for tradewind sailors.

With their deep V-shaped hulls and flexible sewn construction, mtepes were not stiff enough to lie on their sides. They were never allowed to take the ground unless supported by props.

Construction
The mtepe bears many similarities to dhows and the two might have influenced each other's development in unknown ways in ancient times. Certainly, the dau al mtepe (which I think translates roughly as "dhow-style mtepe" ) adopted some of the characteristics of the dhow late in the 19th century.
A crew of five or six carpenters, being supervised by the ship's future captain, would typically built a mtepe in two to three months, including harvesting their own timber, which was used green. Like all relatives of traditionally-built dhows, mtepes were built shell-first, on a keel, with smooth-laid planks of mangrove wood. (I hesitate to call it carvel, because that implies a construction method and certain details which do not apply here.)
Garboards were sewn or stitched to a one-piece keel. It is not known whether the keel was rabbeted. On many dhows, the garboard butts against the side of the keel or a beveled surface at the intersection of the top and sides. Stem and sternpost were lashed to the keel only after two or three strakes were in place. There were no deadwoods or stem knees. Partial-length planks were scarfed diagonally without butt blocks.
Planking the hull was an enormously laborious process. After holes were drilled through the planks near both edges, the planks were sewn together with three-strand coir (coconut husk cord). First, coir fiber was pounded into the seam from inside. Then, over the seam was spread a thick paste of made of pounded mangrove bark, the tannin in which preserved the coir caulking. Onto the paste were laid strips of crushed coconut husk, and then a layer of palm leafs. A sharpened piece of palm leaf was attached to one end of the cord and used as a sewing needle. Men worked in pairs, inside and outside the hole.
Each time the man inside passed the cord through the hole, he would pound it with a mallet to compress the package of caulking material beneath the stitch, then would plug the hole with a tapered plug to hold the cord in place temporarily, until his turn came for the next stitch. The man outside would wrap the cord around a short stick, place one end of it against the hull, and lean back, using the stick as a lever to tighten the cord before passing it back through the next hole. About six feet of seam length was sewn at a time, the coir being passed around and through each hole several times, both straight up and down and diagonally. Tapered plugs were then pounded into each hole from the outside.
After the the hull was completely stitched, the plugs outside the hull were cut off flush, and then the stitches themselves were cut off on the outside! This would leave the planks fastened to each other by thousands of very short pieces of cord, held in place only by the plugs pounded in from outside – a very odd way to address the vulnerability of the stitches outside the hull. This last process was omitted only near the stem and sternpost, and apparently some mtepes were built with the stitches remaining on the outside over their whole surface.

Mtepes varied considerably in size. Most seem to have been between 40 and 75 feet (I presume that the measurements were taken on deck, and did not include prow extensions, bowsprits or outboard rudders) and of 12 to 50 tons burthen, but one recorded in the 19th century was 30 meters long and 186 tons. All references report them to have been very fast and able sailors, easily able to out-point settee-rigged dhows. This is surprising considering their rig, which consisted of a single square sail of palm leaf matting.
Faza in the Lamu archipelago was the center for mtepe building: as many as 20 were being built there annually early in the 20th century. With a crew of about 20, they traded north to Zanzibar and south to Kenya's Mrima coast. Toward the end of their employment, their primary cargo was mangrove poles, but earlier cargoes included grain, pottery, cattle, salt, firewood and slaves. To collect the mangrove cargoes, the crew would punt the vessel into a swamp and cut and load the poles themselves, receiving payment from the proceeds of the voyage on a "share" basis. Oars were also used for propulsion when necessary.

Mtepes leaked copiously, so bailing was constant. It is recorded that, as a test for employment, a prospective crew member had to demonstrate his ability to lift a bailer full of water measuring 24" in diameter and 9" deep. (This works out to about 3 U.S. gallons or 25 pounds. As a test of strength, lifting it isn't impressive, especially when considering that the bailer was made of woven palm leafs and probably leaked, and that it was very wide and shallow, so unlikely to have been lifted full in any case. On the other hand, if you're bailing a vessel, lifting that weight several hundred times per hour is indeed an impressive demonstration.)

The Mtepes of Kenya
Among the indigenous boats that disappeared in the 20th century was the mtepe, the world's last large sewn vessel. The last mtepe built was in 1930, and the last one in existence was wrecked in 1935 (they might have been the same vessel: my sources are unclear).

History and Usage
Unique to the Swahili culture of east Africa, mtepes were built in the Lamu archipelago off Kenya. Evidently an old design, their origin is unknown: there are references to sewn boats in the region that date back to classical antiquity and to the earliest years of Portuguese exploration, but these might have been other designs that were similar to mtepes in some respects. The earliest unmistakable references to mtepes date from the 19th century.

Mtepes were of two types, the mtepe proper, and the dau la mtepe, which superseded it. The transition apparently occurred in the 19th century because, while there are contemporary models and documentary evidence of the earlier mtepe, the only photos seem to be of the later dau la mtepe. Both were double-ended and generally similar in design, but there were a few significant differences between the types, which we'll get to below. (I will use "mtepe" in Roman text to refer to both types, and will italicize it as mtepe to refer to the mtepe proper as distinct from the dau al mtepe.)