On Yoruba origin controversy:

 Professor Ade-Ajayi's view is politicised, ethnicised, and ahistorical

 

 

Ewaen Edoghimioya, B.A(Hons) & M.A.History

Member, Institute for Benin Studies, Benin-City, Nigeria

 

ewaenfedo@yahoo.co.uk

 

Monday, May 24, 2004

 

The interview granted your paper by the Emeritus Prof J. F. Ade-Ajayi of the University of Ibadan on the Yoruba origin controversy and his views are most disappointing and most unbecoming of an emeritus professor of his calibre. To say the least, it lacked the objectivity, professionalism, and decorum which you expected him to bring to the issue. He allowed his ethnic bias and accompanying anger to take the better part of him, and it could be seen that he only just managed to restrain himself from resorting to insults and abuse. But the harsh tone of his language was suggestive enough of his disrespect for the Omo n’ Oba  n’Edo, Uku Akpolokpolo, Oba Erediauwa, who is his elder and a royal father. As a leading light of African history and culture, I started to wonder what kind of African history he was teaching his students and the kind of example he was giving to us younger historians who are expected to look up to him.

 

A reading of the interview shows that Prof Ade-Ajayi has either  not read the portion of the book dealing  with the origin of the Oduduwa published in Nigerian dailies or he was too disoriented by the content as to be able to articulate his comments or replies to the questions posed by the interviewer. Otherwise, he would not have resorted to falsifying the  Omo n’ Oba's statements as contained in the book. The first and  major falsehood he fabricated is his claim that  Omo n’ Oba wrote that Egharevba  “….has Akoko Edo blood in him.”  There is no where in the book where Omo  n’Oba  made such a statement. What Omo n’Oba wrote was  “…Apart from the fact that Edo n'Ekue (Edo-Akure,  partly Benin and partly Yoruba by birth) blood in the man” (Egharevba) manifested itself….” So one  does  not know how Prof Ade-Ajayi got his "Akoko Edo,"  which he used to replace Edo-Akure. He went further to ask:  “Akoko Edo people are no longer under Edo State”? This latter question based on his fabrication was obviously aimed at ridiculing  the Omo n’Oba as one who does not know the ethnic belonging or categorization  of the Akoko Edo.

 

Another outright falsehood is Ade-Ajayi’s statement that “…there is no doubt that Oranmiyan founded Oyo and he also founded Benin.” To state that Oranmiyan founded Benin is a mistake, which I am sure an elementary school pupil who studied social studies in Nigeria will not make. For an emeritus professor of African history to make such public gaffe, without retracting it after it was printed, is,  to say the least,  disappointing. Prof. Ade-Ajayi’s statement is the big lie of Nigerian history of the twenty-first century.

 

The most terrible blunder of Prof.  Ade-Ajayi was the statement that “The Oba of Benin  has no locus standi, as it were,  to tell the story of Oranmiyan.” If the Omo n’Oba , who is a direct descendant of Oranmiyan, has no locus standi to tell the story of his forebear, I wonder who has the local standi? Is it  Prof Ade Ajayi, (though a historian) whom I am sure cannot even trace  the relationship between his native sub-Ekiti groups relations with Oduduwa? If anybody has the locus standi anywhere in the world, it is the direct descendants of  Oranmiyan, of which the Omo n’ Oba  is the foremost.

 

On the professional level, Prof  Ade–Ajayi only exposed his ethnic bias and politicking rather than engage in historical analysis. The major areas  of his comments in which he abused professionalism are his use and source of historical evidence,  and definition of a  professional historian. The major plank of Ade-Ajayi’s comments is the claim that “His (Omo n’Oba’s) father used to attend and meet at the conference of Yoruba Oba [kings]  regularly during the colonial rule. His own father did not object to this….” The evidence  of Oba Akenzua II attendance of such meetings  is one issue which many a Yoruba historian have struggled over the years to force down as “fact” or evidence of history,  and they cite the seating arrangement in the meetings of  Yoruba Oba  (attended by Omo n’ Oba n’Edo, Uku Akpolokpolo, Oba  Akenzua II (1933-1978) in which the Ooni sat at the head of the table. This development has been falsified  and projected as evidence of Oba of Benin subordination to the Ooni of Ife. Though Ade-Ajayi  stated that these meetings were taking place under colonial rule, he deliberately refused to state the context and circumstances in which these meetings took place. The silence on the context and circumstance  misleads the public into thinking that the meetings were traditional and customary and creates the impression that a relationship of superiority andor affinity has always existed between  the Oba of  Benin and the Yoruba Oba and even within the ranks of Yoruba Oba. Professionally, Ade Ajayi should have told us why and how these meetings came into being, the purpose, and interest which they served.

 

Until Oba Akenzua II, no Oba of Benin  attended any conference or meeting of  Yoruba Oba. Such kind of pan-Yoruba Oba meeting never existed in history as a pan-Yoruba consciousness and state never existed. These meetings were not started until the late 1930s. Attempts by some Yoruba Oba  in present day Ondo and Ekiti states to pay customary tributes to Omo n’Oba, Uku Akpolokpolo, Oba Eweka II -- after restoration in 1914 -- were  stopped by the British and prohibited. This shows that the British were not interested in such interactions. But in the late 1930s,  certain administrative changes were implemented by the British which divided Southern Nigeria into Western and Eastern provinces. The British colonial administration initiated and instituted  these meetings of Sole Native Authorities (wrongly called conference of Yoruba Oba) in the western provinces to discuss and solve common problems of the provinces. Oba Akenzua II,  as the only Sole Native Authority in Benin Province under the  directive of the colonial government,  was always “invited” by the government and was bound to attend. The meetings were held under the auspices of the British  and  it was the administrative mechanism for foisting regionalism and formed the basis of the latter western region house of chiefs which Oba Akenzua II also attended by virtue of his status as a first class ruler.

 

While the house of chiefs lasted, the Egbe Omo Oduduwa and Action Group government foisted Yoruba leadership on the house. Late Obafemi Awolowo went as far as trying to control the traditional rulers and forcing them to toe his party line. He did not hesitate to subtly threaten or “advise” Oba Akenzua II  on  8th March 1955 to desist from party politics, and Oba Akenzua reminded him of the partisanship role of the Ooni  and the Alake. What happened to traditional rulers in Western Region who did not toe Awolowo’s party line is well documented. When Midwest Region was created, the Omo n’ Oba stopped attending the meetings. That Oba Akenzua II attended these meetings had nothing to do with any history or traditional affinity,  as Ade Ajayi would  want to mislead the public into believing. It was sheer colonial administrative politics and later day Action Group-influenced ethnic politics.

 

Another major and faulty plank of  Ade-Ajayi’s comment had to do with evidence. He harangues that “He (Omo n’ Oba) did not cite any evidence.”  But he did not ask a similar question in the case of Egharevba,  and he  went ahead to uphold Egharevba's work as some gospel. If  I may ask what is difference between the sources of Omo n’Oba and Egharevba and are both not based on oral traditions!  Egharevba selected the oral traditions which he presented as history and Omo n’Oba did same. Why the double standard , and what makes Egharevba  traditions acceptable? Is it because the “traditions” he cited  are supportive of Oyo Yoruba-biased history of Samuel Johnson?  Omo n’Oba even went as far as showing the Akure-Yoruba influence on Egharevba in order to prove the bias and context of Egharevba's history,  and this is an application of historical method.

 

Permit me to further buttress the context and sources of Yoruba biases and influences on Egharevba's work. Apart from the Akure ancestry, Egharevba had part of his early education in Yorubaland; he was a benefactor of Bishop James Johnson (a Yoruba); he was Anglican (CMS) and worked with Reverend Payne,  who introduced him to the CMS Press controlled by the Yoruba intellingentsia; his first editor was C. J. Smart, a Yoruba letter writer resident in Benin City;  and he was also influenced by Ajisafe, another Yoruba author with whom he consulted for his publications.

 

To claim that Egharevba was right to continuously revise his books was another gaffe. Ade-Ajayi did not explain the kind of revision and their basis expected of a professional. The  revisions were not based on credible evidence and were largely introduction of materials that suited his fancy, pet theories of  his mentors. All these are evident in his works. He was continuously challenged for his biases. Even  in his later life, Egharevba stated  that and I quote that “...Oduduwa was not a Yoruba man. Oduduwa found the Yoruba already living in Ife when he arrived” (Text of interview,  3rd May 1975). I am sure that if Ade-Ajayi (and the Yoruba whose cause  he is championing) were aware of this , he (they) would start having a second thought on calling him for evidence to support their case.

 

Permit me to ask what qualifies Egharevba as a better historian on Benin Kingship history than the Omo n’ Oba? Is it because Egharevba was the first to write or less educated or less interested in politics than Omo n’Oba? Egharevba  selected the tradition  that suited his fancy and published it to the exclusion of other traditions. That he was the first to write  neither  makes his work nor the traditions he selected gospel. Egharevba was no less a politician too and his political leaning was the (CMS/Yoruba- initiated Reformed Ogboni Fraternity influenced) Benin Tax Payers Association,  which was allied to the Action Group. Other traditions have always existed and  Egharevba attention was drawn to them and were used to challenge him too. If these traditions  were not published then, it does not mean that they must be silenced for the sake of the Yoruba.

 

Let all the traditions be published for critical examination and enrichment of our history. Ade-Ajayi  cannot just wake up and dismiss one tradition and try to force his favoured version down our throat. What he has done is no history, but politics and an ethnicised one.

         

 

================================================================================

Yoruba origin controversy:You can’t just wake up and say Oduduwa was a Benin prince — Prof. Ade Ajayi
Sunday, May 16, 2004

 

“People don’t just wake up and say that Oduduwa must have been a Benin prince rather than an Ife king, that Ife took their kingship from Benin, that a Benin prince that they wanted to execute escaped and ran and ran to a village and you call Ife a village”.  With these words, accomplished historian and former vice-chancellor of University of Lagos (UNILAG), faulted the claim by Oba of Benin, Omon’oba N’edo Uku Akpolopolor that Yoruba progenitor Oduduwa originated from Benin.  Excerpts of interview:

There is this on-going controversy sparked off by different accounts of the Ooni of Ife and Oba of Benin on the origin of Yoruba progenitor Oduduwa. What is your position?

The thing is that none of us was present when the world was created, so we just accept story of creations and myths of origin as a matter of belief, we cannot as a matter of fact because none of us was present.  So, we just believe what the ancestors handed over to us. We can ask questions to why the ancestors took a certain position.  But if we are to find out what the Yoruba believe about the origin of the Yorubas, I don’t think we will go to Benin, we will go to Ife.

The Oba of Benin actually said that the controversy over the Yoruba progenitor was caused by historical experts in Ibadan. Do you share such a view?

I think what the Oba is trying to say is that a Bini historian, Jacob Egharevah, wrote a book and he says that the fourth edition of the book was edited in Ibadan.  So, there is no contradiction between the first and the fourth editions of the book. But Oba of Benin says he is dismissing Egharevah because Akoko-Edo blood in him (Egharevah) made him favour the Yorubas. 

He didn’t say that the man is a Yoruba man but that he has Akoko-Edo blood in him. Akoko-Edo people are no longer under Edo State. I think the Oba of Benin has been saying things like this before. He just wanted to use the opportunity of this book to provoke a controversy and I think he is getting that already.

 He did not cite any evidence. At least those who said that Benin tradition agree with Ife tradition quote Egharevah who was a Benin chief, who actually did a lot of research not only on Benin but on Akure and surrounding areas, Urhobo and Itsekiri. He even wrote a book entitled a short history of Benin.  And any day, I will rather follow that book than follow what an Oba who is not an expert in the field and whose only interest in the matter is to be able to assert his own opinion and everybody is entitled to his own opinion.

So what you are trying to tell us now is that the account of Oba of Benin as recorded in the book is not the correct position of things regarding Oduduwa?
Of course not, he himself knows that. The book is an auto-biography and about his experience as a civil servant. How did he suddenly drag in the question of Ife and Benin?  He says this is because during his coronation rites, there is a point he had to take a name, every Yoruba Oba takes a name, and in every way, the monarchy in Benin is very similar to the monarchy in Ife. Now, from his own personal opinion, he wants to say that it is the Ife who took from Benin not Benin that took from Ife, that is just his own modern politics. 

His own father used to attend and meet at the conference of Yoruba Obas regularly during the colonial rule. His own father did not object to this but he, from his own point of view of politics, thinks it is departure from his own status to say that Ife monarchy is derived from Benin monarchy.

Does it mean from all these, Oba of Benin is playing politics?
Of course he is playing politics.  From where did he get his own information?
He said from his own studies?

What studies?  What did he study that was not available to Egharevah?  How can his own studies in Benin tell him more about Ife than Ife people themselves?
Omon’oba’s contention was that Oduduwa could not have been the father of Yoruba kings?

Yes, on what evidence, you don’t say something without evidence to back it up. The Yoruba say that Oduduwa came from somewhere in the far East, others say he descended from heaven like Johnson wrote.  What did the Oba of Benin study? Did he study Johnson? Did he study Egharevah? Did he study the historians of Ife who had written about Ife, the cradle of Yoruba and so on? Although I say that myths of origin is a matter of belief and because none of us was present there, some beliefs are more credible than others, so you go by probability, there is no certainty in history, you go by probability and many people will say the story told about Ife in Benin is less likely to be credible than the story told about Ife in Ife.

The Oba of Benin went further in the book by saying that the modern historians tried to confuse Oduduwa with Orunmila?

On what basis did he say that because Orunmila used figures 16, the latest figure in Ifa?  We have 16 Odu and people have pointed out that modern computer goes more by the figure 16 than the figure 10 or 12.  In English, you will rather say ten or eleven. The Yorubas in anticipating computer science in their own mathematics, use 16.  16 is the figure that is 2x2x2x2.

What you are trying to tell us is that Oduduwa is not different from Orunmila?
Oduduwa is different from Orunmila. Orunmila founded Ifa and that is the religious basis of the Yoruba, but Oduduwa is reckoned with as introducing monarchical system, the obaship and the culture. You see, people don’t just wake up one day and say that Oduduwa must have been a Benin prince rather than an Ife king that Ife took their kingship from Benin, that a Benin prince that they wanted to execute escaped ran and ran to a village and you call Ife a village. 

The thing is that people who studied languages say that Yoruba must have been spoken for about 4000 years in order to explain the similarity surrounding languages so the people who used to say that Yoruba people migrated from Middle East backed up their research work because the Yoruba people themselves who speak Yoruba language must have been here a long time ago, we have dug up a skeleton near Akure which was said to be the oldest skeleton that has been found, it s about a thousand and nine hundred years old.

 So, we then conclude that the myths around Oduduwa must be myths about kingship. That is the tradition, they derive from Ife. If you go to Oyo, the people there believe they are from Ife.  Only the Ijebus are disputing that they are from Ife. Again, that is probably because of the modern politics of the current Awujale who does not want to agree with other Yoruba obas, that they came from Ife.

 Now, who is the Oba of Benin to come and tell the Yorubas what they should believe about themselves? I think it is very very wrong and impertinent to assume that you know more about the Yoruba people than the Yoruba know about themselves. On what basis? What information could he have?  When he says from his studies, what did he study?  What books?  Is it in the colonial days or before then or is the books written by educated Yoruba people of the 19th century?

Another dimension was added to the controversy by the Oba of Lagos who said that he believes the story of Omon’oba of Benin?'

Yes, because Lagos itself used to be a Benin colony. If you go to Lagos, you have the evidence of the Benin connection, some of the places in Lagos, I mean the names of places, evidently shw the Benin connection.  The Benin says that Eko means Oko, a farm and nobody is disputing that. So, nobody says that the monarchy in Lagos is derived from Ife even though there are other subordinate chiefs in the villages outside Lagos on the road to Badagry, as an example, who believe that their ancestors came from Ife.  But we do know that the kingship of Lagos, the Oba of Lagos derives more from Benin than from Ife. 

The Oba of Benin also said that Oduduwa could not have been the father of Yoruba nation because he said that before the arrival of Oduduwa in Ife, the Ifes had had five rulers?

This is also emphasising kingship, not the coming of the people. Oduduwa represents the coming of monarchy, and not the coming of the Yoruba people.  We acknowledge this fact, but to say that Oduduwa has seven children, one was deformed, anther a cripple and so on, I don’t agree. 

There are several traditions and what we need really is a more intensive and more extensive research so that we can collate all these stories and interprete them in the light of what we know, in the light of chronology, for example, in the light of what we know about slave trade. The trend is that there is enough evidence that Ife is the origin of Yoruba people.

If the Oyo people can say that their coronation rites will not be complete until they go to Ife to take certain paraphernalia to complete the coronation, they are not disputing the fact that Oranmiyan was the founder of Oyo, the same Oranmiyan the Yoruba people believe founded the Benin kingship and he started from Ife. We now have to interprete all these in the light of what we know about others, what we know about Benin and so on.  So, what we need is more research and not political speculation such as the Oba of Benin is trying to provoke.

From your own research, is there any link between Ogiso dynasty in Benin and Oduduwa dynasty?

The Yoruba believe and I don’t think the Oba of Benin is in position to dispute that, that Oranmiyan was an Ife prince, the other people will say he is the eldest or the youngest of Oduduwa’s sons.  This is immaterial but there is no doubt that Oranmiyan founded Oyo and he also founded Benin and later on he returned to Ile-Ife where “Opa Oranyan” (Oranya staff) is still located.

From what you have been saying, you believe the story as told by the Ooni of Ife?
Yes, I believe the story as told by the Ooni of Ife. It is better founded than what the Oba of Benin is trying to tell Nigerians.  The Oba of Benin has no locus standi, as it were, to tell the story of Oranmiyan.

And what he is trying to deny, his own father accepted for many years and took his place among Yoruba obas without questioning and this is what Benin well known historians Egharevah told us. You cannot just come along with no evidence at all because you are an oba to say that your father was wrong, that Egharevah had Akoko-Edo blood in him and therefore was wrong and from your own studies, what did he study?

 Was it in Cambridge that he studied and discovered this or from the two or three months coronation rites he underwent?  Let him come out with the historian who taught him that during his coronation rites, he has been touting this for long, he just wants to provoke controversy, that is why he dragged in the story in the book about his life which is not relevant to the book.  He is evidently playing politics.

 

 

culled from the Vanguard: http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/politics/p116052004.html