CHAPTER TWO
4.1 Brief History of Nigeria
4.2 Survey of violence and conflicts in Nigeria 4.3 Causes of violence in Nigeria
4.4 Conclusion
4.0 Nigeria and the Context of violence
This chapter studies the historical background necessary to understand the contemporary causes of violence in this context.
4.1 Brief History of Nigeria
The research topic, “The witness of Non-Violence of the Church of the Brethren in Nigeria in a Violent World: Towards Ecumenical Collaboration” cannot be understood without looking at Nigeria as a nation. It is of great significance to look at history of Nigeria. Various historical and other factors have spurred conflicts between the country's various peoples, especially in post independence Nigeria. Little however is known of the earliest history of Nigeria. This is due to the fact that the literary ability was not developed until sometimes in the eighteenth century starting with the transcription of the Fulani and Hausa languages. M. C. English in giving his historical analysis of the development of written documents in some Nigerian languages states thus,
Hausa was first written in Roman (or English) letters in 1843, and Kanuri in 1853. The first book to be printed in Yoruba was published in 1850; in Ibo in 1860; and in Efik in 1862.
No book in Tiv was published until 1918. Thus written material in these languages can provide information on only very recent events. There are, of course, writings about Nigeria in other languages, apart from those of the country.
Arab travelers from North Africa visited the lands on the southern side of the Sahara desert, and there are some writings in Arabic describing the countries near Nigeria between the tenth and sixteenth centuries A.D.
Unfortunately none of the travelers who wrote about their
170
journeys actually came into what is now Nigeria, though they make some references to it.242
This means that written history on Nigeria is not ancient and most of the information about the history of Nigeria derives from oral sources as well as archaeological discoveries.
In writing on the history of Nigeria, some historians like Ayandele holds to the view that there were imbalances in many historical writings about Nigeria. Such imbalances had various implications on even the current religious, ethnic, economic and socio-political crisis facing the nation Nigeria. Ayandele discusses five of these imbalances in this way,
First, there is the tendency of historians to allow relations between the people of the Atlantic Seaboard and the European intruders dominate, if not monopolize, their writings-a tendency which gives the impression that the history of these peoples is made up entirely of such relations.
Second, there is the serious error of interpreting the external relations of the Seaboard peoples against the background and interests of the European intruders. Third, there is the over-emphasis on factors making for disunity and the neglect of factors making for unity which characterizes much writing on the pre-colonial period. Fourth, there is the fact that the large ethnic groups receive a great deal of attention from historians whilst smaller groups receive practically none.
Fifth, and most important of all, there is the tendency to write the history of the cream of society rather than of the people.243
The researcher looks at the implications of how overemphasis on factors making for disunity and the neglect of factors making for unity by historians have on the current situation of modern Nigeria. Most Nigerian historians will not deny the fact that there were skirmishes and sometimes open hostilities or wars during the pre-colonial era between for example Fulani and the Nupe, the Ibani and the Kalabari, the Sura and the Ngas, the Ife and the Ondo, to mention some. However, worthy of note is the existence of inter-state routes that linked the south and the north. Of course, the existence of such routes did play a major role in the economic life of the peoples. One
242 M.C. English, An Outline of Nigerian History, (London: Longmans Green and Co Ltd), 1959:6.
243E.A. Ayandele, Nigerian Historical Studies, (London: Frank Cass and Company Limited) 1979:1-2.
171
would not doubt also that when there were trans-border trades, there are political, religious and social interactions and influences among the people. To buttress the above point, Ayandele adds,
Few people realized that in the eighteenth century the natron used by the Efik came largely from the Chad basin; that in the same century the Ijebu were the specialist makers of a coarse type of cloth used by slaves and poor people in Northern Nigeria; that up to 1830 the larger part of what is now regularly patronize the market of Kulfu, near present-day Kontagora; that for a long time the Edo trafficked with the Nupe and battered their camwood for manufactured articles of northern origin … that Ijaw men from Nembe were trading directly as far north as the Nupe Kingdom before 1841; that the Yoruba obtained their horses from Tripoli through Kanuri middlemen long before the nineteenth century.244
The above quotation has some implication on the position held and emphasized by people like Richard Akinjide who said that the difference between a southerner and a northerner is much more than that of an English man and an Italian. The Igbos were not exempted either from this interactions nor were they immune to the influences arising from such interactions. It was historically proven that they were some Igbos who went to the north as slaves. In other words, the Igbos too had interactions with people from the north and were also either influenced or had influenced the others in lots of ways. There were evident facts of such influences amongst the Igbos and to this day, there are many Igbos in most cities, towns and villages of the north than any other tribe.
There were of course historical evidences of healthy relationships between large political units and empires, traces could be seen of how they embraced diverse peoples, the Kororofa Empire, the Edo Kingdom, the Old Oyo Empire and the Caliphate did embrace other peoples over a long period of time giving them stability and growth. Ayandele himself refutes the historical imbalance by historians of over emphasis of factors making for disunity rather than factors making for unity and says,
The final point worth considering in any discussion of factors making for unity is the fact of the harmonious relations which existed between rulers on the inter-state level. The commonest way
244 Ibid., p.4.
172
in which rulers got in touch with each other involved correspondence by symbolic messages. I have come across evidence that in December 1842 messengers of the sultan of Sokoto were with Sodeke in Abeokuta; that the Sultan of Sokoto made some effort to persuade the Yoruba to end their civil war, that Balogun Ogundipe, the uncrowned king of the Egba for nearly a quarter of a century, offered advice to the Etsu of Nupe in 1870.245
Prehistoric Nigeria is the history of the existence of people on the present day Nigeria before the present day Nigeria came into existence. In attempting to do so, the classification as done by classical historians of the Stone Age, the Bronze Age and the Metal (Iron) Age is followed. First the Stone Age which is further divided into Old Stone Age (Early Stone Age generally called Paleolithic) and New Stone Age (otherwise known as Neolithic).
It is worthy of note to state what these periods represent and what it means when such periods are used in the description of some events like certain happenings.
When using such “Ages” in historical description, it refers to periods when stone, bronze or iron were the main materials used by humanity for making tools. The Stone Age is by far the longest period in human history. That period extends into thousands of years. That was the period when stone was the most difficult to use and the stone could be used to make some less important tools for human usage. It is interesting to note that, in each of the ages, the material after which the age is named is more difficult to find or to use than the material which the previous age was named after.
In other words, during the Stone Age, stone though could be found almost everywhere was more difficult to shape and to make into a tool. When human beings discovered the use of Bronze it shows that humanity has advanced and had discovered what was more advanced than the stone. Though it does not mean that at the discovery of the say Bronze then stone was abandoned, it simply means when one uses the Bronze, he/she was using the more advanced tool to the one or ones obtained during the preceding age.
245 Ayandele, p.5.
173
Many historians believe that there is a seeming absence of Paleolithic culture in Nigeria though such a position can historically be contested. Meek in comparing West Africa to other parts of Africa says this,
But in West Africa generally there is a remarkable absence of palaeolithic specimens. A few rough flaked types which might be referred to the Early Stone Age have, however, been found in the Northern Provinces. Such a one is the hand-axe, picked up by Captain Best on the surface near Badiko in Bauchi division, and now in the British Museum. It is a core implement of very early type, which would in Europe be referred to the palaeolithic drift period. A number of other stone implements which would in Europe be classified as palaeoliths have been dug up on the tin-mines of the Bauchi-Plateau.246
He goes on to enumerate the implements found on the Naraguta Mine. The above statement no wonder seem to negate the early position held by many historians that there seem to be the absence of Paleolithic culture. Meek adds,
Other seemingly palaeolithic types have no doubt been found, but so little is known of the African Stone Age that it is impossible to assign them to the same periods as would be given to similar types if found in Europe. It would be interesting to have an expert geological opinion on the deposit in which the Naraguta specimens were found. There is, of course, an abundance of polished Celts of the Neolithic Age.247
The Celts were collected at Naraguta by Mr E. A. Langslow-cock, Chief Inspector of mines. English concur to Meek on the discovery of some Stone Age tools but held a different view on the lack of Paleolithic culture as he says,
This stone may have been used (as its name suggests) as an axe-head held in the hand for chopping small pieces of wood or rough joints of meat, but it could also be used as a primitive sort of knife or chisel and as a scraper to remove and clean the skins of animals killed by hunters. The people of the Old Stone Age are wandering hunters and food gatherers, and, to judge by the number of stone hand-axes found, this all-purpose tool seems to have suited their needs very well. You could see from the map on page 18 that palaeolithic hand-axes have been found in Nigeria mainly on the
246 C. K. Meek, The Northern Tribes of Nigeria 11 Vol, Vol 1, (London: Frank Cass & Co. Ltd), 1971:50.
247 Ibid. p. 51.
174
Bauchi plateau, but it is most unlikely that Old Stone Age people lived there and nowhere else in Nigeria.248
Then came the Neolithic (New Stone Age) which was distinguished from the Paleolithic (Old Stone Age) by the development of agriculture and the taming of animals by human beings leading to the development of some tools which could not be used during the Old Stone Age. Some among the tools were the making of pots from clay, building of mud huts and stone bridges to cross streams. There were discoveries of some remains of such huts and fortified villages on the Bauchi plateau, in the Borno Province, Adamawa, Sokoto, Niger, Zaria and Ilorin Provinces. As to the date of the change from the Old Stone Age to the New Stone Age, there was no agreement among historians as to any fixed date. English among other historians accept the fact that it was in Egypt that the New Stone Age began and they said it started in about 5000 B.C.E. They said that the New Stone Age soon began in Sudan and moved to Kenya in East Africa about 3000 B.C.E. As to when the New Stone Age might have begun in Nigeria, though there are still lots of uncertainties, historians are of the opinion that it might have started between 3000-1500 B.C.E.
The Bronze and Iron Ages were of course the age where Bronze was the most advanced tools used by human beings. To obtain Bronze, this was done by heating called smelting. Bronze and metals are obtained from rocks and sands where they would be separated by heat where the impurities are removed. The degree of heat needed to separate bronze is less than the degree of heat needed to extract metal. It is also harder to beat and melt into a shape of the later than the former. As to when each age starts and the change over, we may leave that for further studies. These two ages, there have been many discoveries of the existence of human beings in present day Nigeria using those tools belonging to these ages. The tin mines on the Jos Plateau and other metal tools and sculptures discovered all over the country attest to this.
By about 2000 B.C.E most of the country which made up today’s Nigeria was sparsely inhabited by persons who had a rudimentary knowledge of raising domesticated food plants and of herding animals. From about 800 B.C.E to about A.D. 200 the neolithic Nok culture (named for the town where archaeological findings first were made)
248 English, p. 15.
175
flourished on the Jos Plateau; (the Nok people made fine terra-cotta sculptures and probably knew how to work tin and iron). The first important centralized state to influence Nigeria was Kanem-Bornu, which probably was founded in the 8th century A.D., to the north of Lake Chad (outside modern Nigeria). In the 11th century, by which time its rulers had been converted to Islam, Kanem-Bornu expanded south of Lake Chad into present-day Nigeria, and in the late 15th century its capital was moved there.
Beginning in the 11th century seven independent Hausa city-states were founded in Northern Nigeria—Biram, Daura, Gobir, Kano, Katsina, Rano, and Zaria. Kano and Katsina competed for the lucrative trans-Saharan trade with Kanem-Bornu, and for a time had to pay tribute to it. In the early 16th century all of Hausa land was briefly held by the Songhai Empire. However, in the late 16th century, Kanem-Bornu replaced Songhai as the leading power in Northern Nigeria, and the Hausa states regained their autonomy. In southwest Nigeria two states—Oyo and Benin—had developed by the 14th century; the rulers of both states traced their origins to Ife, (renowned for its naturalistic terra-cotta and brass sculpture). Benin was the leading state in the 15th century but began to decline in the 17th century, and by the 18th century Oyo controlled Yoruba land and also Dahomey. The Igbo people in the southeast lived in small village communities.
In the late 15th century Portuguese navigators became the first Europeans to arrive Nigeria. They soon began to purchase slaves and agricultural products from coastal middlemen; the slaves had been captured further inland by the middlemen. The Portuguese were followed by British, French, and Dutch traders. Among the Igbo and Ibibio a number of city-states were established by individuals who had become wealthy by engaging in the slave trade; these included Bonny, Owome, and Okrika.
Nigeria's over 170 million people belong to more than 250 distinct ethno-linguistic groups, and are evenly split between Muslims and Christians, while there are also significant numbers of people who follow traditional African religions.
The name Nigeria was believed to have been named after the river Niger, the longest river in Nigeria which got its source from the Fouta Djallon Mountains and empties itself in the Atlantic Ocean via the Niger Delta with the river Benue as its main
176
tributary. However, the etymology of the name Nigeria has been a subject of controversy for quiet a long time to this day. In his contribution titled Nigeria: The Country of the Niger Area, Ifemesia struggled with the etymology of the name and as a historian he advised that the controversy be left for linguists to solve. Worthy of note though is this that the name Nigeria was not a name the inhabitants gave to themselves it was given to them by foreigners. However, contrary to popularly held view among many historians and writers that it was Miss Flora Shaw (later Lady Lugard) who coined the term in her efforts to find a shorter word for the terms “Royal Niger Company Territories”, that the name Nigeria first appeared in The Times of London on January 8, 1897; in a letter Shaw writes,
In the first place, as the title “Royal Niger Company' Territories” is not only inconvenient to use but to some extent also misleading, it may, be permissible to coin a shorter title for the operation of pagan and Mahomedan states which have been brought by the exertions of the Royal Niger Company within the confines of a British Protectorates and thus need for, the first time in their history to be described as an entity by some general name.249
There are available evidences of the usage of the words Nigerian and Nigerians before her usage.
This is the background against which the name Nigeria came into use. Shaw argues against using the name 'Central Sudan' as geographers and travelers were fun of using that it could be mistaken to people of the Nile Basin. She goes in her letter to say,
The name Nigeria applying to no other part of Africa may, without offence to any neighbours be accepted as co-extensive with the territories over which the Royal Niger Company has extended British influence, and may serve to differentiate them equally from the colonies of Lagos and the Niger protectorate on the coast and from the French territories of the Upper Niger.250
This shows that at the time she wrote the letter mentioning the name Nigeria, it was exclusive of the western and eastern part of Nigeria.
249 Kalu Ezera, Constitutional Development in Nigeria, (New York: Cambridge University Press) 1964:6.
250 Ibid. p. 6.
177
As stated above, there are available evidences that Flora Shaw did not coin the term and that there were some earlier people who had used the term and Shaw might have taken it from them. Worthy of mention is the statement of Dr Martin Leake, Secretary of the Society for Promoting the Discovery of the Interior Parts of Africa (later known
As stated above, there are available evidences that Flora Shaw did not coin the term and that there were some earlier people who had used the term and Shaw might have taken it from them. Worthy of mention is the statement of Dr Martin Leake, Secretary of the Society for Promoting the Discovery of the Interior Parts of Africa (later known