Incidencia de la escala humana del espacio público ribereño del Río Piura en la

The Yoruba inhabit the deciduous rain forest vegetation belt of the western region of Nigeria. There are several groups that include the Yoruba of Oyo Kingdom, Ile Ife, the Ijebu, the Egba, the Ekiti, the Awori, etc. According to the historical account of Forde, the Yoruba homeland occupies an area that stretches more than 200 miles and this covers areas as far as present day Benin Republic and Togo, and also northwards towards Nupeland (Forde 1951). The fact that the nationality of Yoruba-speaking people consists of several groups gave Forde cause to claim that the Yoruba are more “united by language than by culture” (Forde 1951: 1). Biobaku (1955) argued that the Yoruba, irrespective of location share some traditional and cultural traits as well as the same history of origin traceable to the Kingdom of Ile-Ife.

There is also the summation that the Yoruba share the same mythical ancestor in Oduduwa (Oguntomisin 1981: 223, Ejiogu, 2004). However, according to the accounts of able Yoruba scholars like Atanda, and Oguntomisin, each of the Yoruba groups in Oyo, Ife, Ijebu, Egba, Ekiti, and Awori, founded her own Kingdom or sphere

of influence despite the claim of common descent from Oduduwa²⁰. Although, not without slight differences from each other in some ways (Atanda 1973, Oguntomisin 1981). (See map 3.11 below)

Map. 3.11. Showing the Yorubaland and other minorities in the area. Source: adapted from Coleman (1958:26,) and Ejiogu (2004).

However, scholars like Coleman took a different position on the issue of political differences in pre-colonial Yorubaland. Coleman asserted that for a significant part of the 18th century, it was only the Yoruba of Ijebu stock that was not ruled from Old Oyo, (Coleman 1958: 25). In the opinion of Ejiogu (2004), Coleman’s argument was a historical fact that can be supported by Yoruba history itself. There are other scholars too, who pointed out that “the Yoruba people never effectively come under a single political authority” (Oguntomisin 1981: 223) (Forde 1951, Law 1973). But according to Smith, the Old Oyo Empire, through which several Yoruba groups were joined as a single political umbrella began at around the middle of the 18th century to decline and subsequently collapse around the year 1826 (Smith 1969a).

But, Oguntomisin argued further that despite the differences in the administrative establishments of the different Yoruba Kingdoms, the similarities that existed in their political structures are more than the differences (Oguntomisin 1981: 223). Lloyd asserted also that where differences exist between their administrative organs, such differences usually tend to be minor (Lloyd 1954). Oguntomisin further explained that access to the office of the Paramount chief in each of the Yoruba Kingdoms is by ascription, and that administrative authority is also statutory prescribed and under the leadership of a non military or Warrior person.(Oguntomisin,1981). Nevertheless, there are also elements of check and balances aimed at preventing whoever that is on the throne of leadership from becoming a despot or having the power to plunge any of the Kingdoms into autocracy (Oguntomisin 1981).

___________________________________

20. Oduduwa is the ancestral Father of the Yoruba Nation. He was a legend, who led the Yoruba from the old Sudan to their present homeland in Nigeria.

Another area of similarity between the Yoruba Kingdoms is in their general belief of having a common descent in Oduduwa, and the spiritual enclave of Ile Ife. It is an age-long tradition for every occupant of notable positions of authority in Yorubaland to have a link or connection to the Oduduwa. However, the claim often made by every Yoruba to having a common descent is equally an identity issue, which puts them apart from the other ethnic nationalities in Nigeria (Gbadamosi 1978).

State building in pre-colonial Yorubaland resulted to establishment of large towns and Kingdoms that operate with concentrated or structured authority. How then can someone attribute the incidence and feature of large towns and concentrated power structure in the pre-colonial Yorubaland? However, the answer to the question lies in the history that makes the Yoruba, which shows that unlike the Igbo, they used warfare as an instrument of state building (Ajayi and Smith 1971). However, these two features, that is, large political structure and centralised authority in the process of governance did not in any way translate to autocracy in the governance structure in pre-colonial Yoruba societies.

If one probes deeply into the pre-colonial history of the Yoruba, there is a proof to show there was no dearth of ambitious men, who tried, though unsuccessful in their bid to transform themselves into autocrats. However, as often is the case, the individuals who tried imposing their wills on the society, were always from the military.

Though, they turned themselves into autocrats and despots, but they could still not impose stable control mechanism over their various created societies, and this led to the non realisation of their endeavour. (Atanda 1973: 10, Oguntomisin 1981: 231-2).

Judging from what has already been said earlier in the discourse with regard to the geography of the part of Nigeria, where the Yoruba homeland is located, to argue that geography might have been a facilitating factor that hindered those individuals in pre-colonial Yoruba history, who tried to transform themselves into autocrats from succeeding in their quest. But it was discovered through the presentation of many scholars in Yoruba history that rather than be ruled by autocrats and despots, the Yoruba people often fled into the forest and hills to establish new towns. Some of the towns established by the Yoruba people in such manner are Ibadan and Abeokuta (Ajayi 1965), (Falola 1985), (Oguntomisin 1981).

According to Ajayi and Smith, most of the towns in southern Yorubaland, were consciously sighted within a belt of forest (the Igbo Ile). The areas were deliberately left to retain its undergrowth and was connected only by narrow paths that leads to the city gates” (Ajayi and Smith 1971: 23). The entrenched administrative system of the Yoruba, organised through monarchy was based on stable statutory provisions which spelt out the modalities for power sharing, and checks and balances. The measure was employed to deter the leaders from achieving their ambition of imposing autocratic rule in pre-colonial Yoruba towns and Kingdoms.

(i) The role of Religion and Authority in Yorubaland.

Like it is amongst the Igbo, indigenous religion which is deeply rooted in the social structure and social organization of the Yoruba played a central role in all aspects of their pre-colonial political organization. Much of the reason for this can be located in the fact that Yoruba religion is totally home-grown (Ejiogu 2004)

In relation to the type of governance operated by the Yoruba in the pre-colonial period, the traditional Yoruba religion, which contained some level of power concentration in the centre, is neither rigid nor exclusive in its principles and application. Individuals in positions of authority at different levels of the society, and also priests made up the centres of action through which the people within the society take part in their religious and social affairs (Lawson 1985: 54-6).

The encapsulation of the aforementioned aspects of the flexible worldview of the Yoruba has enabled indigenous Yoruba religion to continue to function as one of the crucial agencies of socialization amongst the Yoruba. Traditional religion of the Yoruba enabled them to adapt to situations, and create the ability to imbibe “secular modes of thought and action that proposed new concepts of power and relationship in creative ways, while retaining the originality of their authority structures. (Lawson 1985: 98, Ejiogu 2004) Its creative response to Christianity gave birth to the Cherubim and Seraphim Church, a popular Christian denomination among the Yoruba, which parallels their indigenous religion in both creed and practice (Ejiogu 2004).

The paramount ruler (Oba or Kabiyesi) in any pre-colonial Yoruba town or Kingdom can only perform ritual offerings through the recommendation of the Chief priests of such Kingdom. However, the paramount ruler has no control over the Chief Priest of his Kingdom. The Chief priests on the other hand have the authority from both the gods and Ancestors to compel any paramount chief of any Kingdom to remain responsive to the subjects in his domain, especially in the discharge of responsibilities his position demands.

According to Ejiogu (2004), in some Yoruba societies, the King’s (Oba, Kabiyesi) oracle is housed in the abode of the Chief priest. This was meant to ensure the independence of the priest in the discharge of his official religious functions. That way, only the Chief Priest has the privilege to consult the King’s (Oba, or Kabiyesi) oracle when asked and he is mandated as a tradition to relay his findings to the latter. It was a traditional taboo for any King (Oba, or Kabiyesi) to initiate the offering of sacrifices to his ancestors by himself.

Anytime, it dawns on a Chief priest that the ancestors were not at peace with the conduct of the King (Oba, Kabiyesi), he will as custom demands call for atonement through offering of sacrifices to appease them (Cole 1975). Sometimes priests were prevailed upon by the disenchanted subjects in a Kingdom or town to prescribe taboos that a King (Oba, Kabiyesi) was bound to obey (Atanda 1973: 4). According to Atanda (1973), Ejiogu (2004), in Yoruba tradition, to be touched by a masquerade implied that the ancestors had vetoed a King’s (Oba) legitimate authority to lead his subjects. In fact, it was on behalf of subordinate members of the Yoruba society that priests established the tradition; that it is a taboo for a King (Oba) to be touched by a masquerade.

According to the historical account of Atanda, there were instances when a King (Oba) who became autocratic and despotic was made to abdicate the throne upon being touched by a masquerade. But then, the action was instigated by the people (Atanda 1973). With fear of possible revolt, and the follow-up unpalatable events that bound to follow such traditional religious actions of the people, the Kings in the pre-colonial Yoruba towns and cities, avoided responsiveness in their practice of authority at the risk of inciting the people against their authority.

(ii) The use of Warfare and Conquest as a State Building mechanism in the pre-colonial Yorubaland.

According to several scholars of Yoruba history, there are periods in time, when the power and influence of the monarchy in the Yorubaland was severely eroded (Ajayi 1965, Awe 1973). The reason for that partly derived from warfare and conquest at the time when they became effective devices for state building and transformation of pre-colonial Yorubaland (Ajayi and Smith 1971). In a space of time that covered about 80 years (1813-1893) Yorubaland witnessed over 50 different wars (Johnson 1921, Smith 1969, Ajayi and Smith 1971). Atanda (1973), Oguntomisin (1981), Falola (1985) have established that there were changes in the leadership style of the Yoruba. The changes were perfectly attributed to the wars and revolts which resulted in the decline and eventual collapse of the Old Oyo Empire. One such change was the rise of militarism and despotism in the conduct of the business of governance particularly in some new states that were founded in parts of post-Old Oyo Yorubaland (Ajayi 1965: 72-81, Awe 1973, Ejiogu 2004). However, Ibadan is one of the new states that were founded in southern Yorubaland by the influx of population of displaced groups from the Old Oyo Empire and the surrounding states (Ajayi and Smith 1971: 11, Ejiogu 2004). The town of Ibadan was founded in 1829, and it grew in all respects as a result of the dependence of its leaders on their military capability. This was used for the sustenance of their various Kingdoms, towns and cities, and also for the transformation of their society. (Ajayi and Smith 1971), Awe (1973), Ejiogu (2004).

Traditionally, the norm in Yorubaland was to mobilize for war and demobilize the army and let the soldiers and their commanders return to their farms immediately after (Johnson 1921: 75, 131, Ajayi and Smith 1964: 10). But Ibadan broke with that tradition by raising a standing military composed of professional soldiers who assumed extensive leadership roles in society. With the exception of two religious positions of authority, recruitment into all other positions in Ibadan was affected by the new norm, which made merit “the most important qualification for achieving chieftaincy titles” (Awe 1973: 66), Ejiogu (2004). The city of Ibadan was to become a Yoruba polity that extended a lot of recognition to soldiers and war commanders in the bid to retain their services (Awe 1973: 66), Falola (1985), Ejiogu (2004).

According to Ejiogu, some state formation and most state transformation undertakings in pre-colonial Yorubaland were conquest-based, and that is what differentiates the Igbo from the Yoruba. This evident disparity in state building and transformation between the two ethnic nationalities did not stem from a history of war prone society, either in Igboland or between the Igbo and their neighbours. (Ejiogu 2004).

(iii) The administrative structure in Yorubaland in the pre-colonial era in Nigeria.

As mentioned before, the Yoruba ethnic nationality settled in the south-western part of Nigeria, and organised their society in kingship groups or lineages. It was those groups that then evolved into kingdoms in each case (Atanda 1973). Thus, while the Egba founded the Egba Kingdom (Abeokuta) with the Alake of Egba as the paramount ruler, the Oyo Town was also founded with the Alafin of Oyo as the paramount ruler, and likewise Ile Ife, with the Ooni of Ife as the paramount ruler of the town, and then the Ijebu founded the kingdom of Ijebu Ode, with the Awujale of Ijebu as the paramount ruler of the founded town, and many more.

As was earlier established, lots of socio-political development and transformation took place in most of the pre-colonial Towns in Yorubaland before and especially during the period beginning from early part of the 2nd decade in the 19th century.

According to Atanda (1973), as well as Akintoye (1971), most of the political domination wielded by the established towns was derived from conquest. This ultimately meandered its way through extension of political authority by towns into other surrounding neighbouring towns.

However, power and authority in the centralized political system of the Yoruba evolved through a particular structural configuration, which is evident in Figure 1 in chapter 1. Every individual Yoruba belonged to a family lineage (Ebi). The male members of a lineage, as well as their wives, and children, but that is, if the Children are married, make up a lineage. Each family lived together in one compound (agbo-ile)” (Akintoye 1971: 13). The lowest level in the leadership structure of the Yoruba political order is the family lineage (ebi). However, a combined groups of many lineages makeup a ward (adugbo). A ward is the next level in the organisational

structure of the Yoruba political system. The Town (Ilu) was classified as the highest level in the leadership structure in Yorubaland. Ordinarily the Yoruba society is structured through the joining of several lineages. (Ejiogu 2004).

(iv)The Clustered Settlement Pattern of the Yoruba in pre-colonial Nigeria (the Ilu)

The Yoruba are town-dwellers, who carved the town (Ilu) out as the apex of their centralised and monarchical political system (Atanda 1973: 3). The settlement and the inhabitant of each Ilu (town) were structured according to several lineages that are held together by strong kinship ties (Atanda 1973: 3). Administrative influence in an Ilu is neither established nor maintained in a haphazard pattern. According to F. I.

Fadipe, “the relationships between the capital town of the state and other towns and villages embraced under it, whether offshoots of the original town or tributary, were closely similar from state to state, so also was the division of the personnel of the state into civil and military ranks (Fadipe 1970).

The functions of the state council were practically the same from one state to another.

The procedure adopted in the conduct of affairs within any given town or Kingdom in the pre-colonial Yorubaland, whether in the judicial sphere or in the military or in the sphere of external relations was likewise, the same from state to state (Fadipe 1970:

200), Ejiogu (2004), and from one group to the other. Most if not all Yoruba states were made up of an original town which serves as the capital, other towns which were either founded by people from the original town or conquered and annexed as tribute-paying towns (Fadipe 1970), and Ejiogu (2004). In the Old Oyo Empire the title of the paramount ruler is Aláàfin. In Ijebu Ode, and Ife, he is called the Awujale and the Ooni respectively. In the Ekiti Confederation, he is called the Oba. (Ejiogu 2004). It is worthy to note that power and authority evolved through an elaborate state bureaucracy in the pre-colonial political structure of the Yoruba.

The first lineage that settled in a town (Ilu) is usually the one that produced the paramount ruler. The administrative structure of subsidiary polities in each of the central Yoruba states was similar to the one that existed in the latter. According to Ejiogu, different public officials were designated to conduct civil and military affairs in

the main Yoruba towns, as well as in their subsidiary towns and settlements.

According to the historical account of the Yoruba by Fadipe, and Ejiogu, a subsidiary town in the pre-colonial Yorubaland has no power of her own in the conduct of external relations, the implementation of capital punishment and the recruitment of the towns’ ruler. Though each subsidiary town within the pre-colonial Yorubaland, this include the conquered towns, and all those tribute paying polities, enjoyed autonomy in the conduct of her political affairs. The authority of the central states over their subsidiary polities was exercised mostly in raising manpower for military campaigns and revenue collection (Fadipe 1970: 201, Ejiogu 2004).

All over Yorubaland the status of the paramount ruler is similar in each kingdom or town and the paraphernalia and rituals of kingship follow a common pattern. Although, the appointment or the choice of a paramount ruler, is mostly guided by the norm of hereditary as sanctioned by tradition. But there are also situations when tradition was bypassed in the nomination and the subsequent installation of a new King in a Yoruba town. However the mythical links to the royal lineage at Ile-Ife or victory in a power situation in a town (Ilu) were used to bring someone into the office (Atanda 1973).

Like Ejiogu enumerated, the Oba, Aláàfin, Ooni, Awujale as the case may be, is the de facto leader or premier leader who directs the governments in every given town within the central Yoruba kingdom polities. The legitimacy of the authority reposed in the office of the chiefs of state in pre-colonial Yorubaland derived from the intricate relationship that exists between religion, the social structure, and social organization of the Yoruba. (Ejiogu 2004). According to Fadipe, the unwritten constitution of the pre-colonial Yoruba Kingdoms designed the King (Kabiyesi) as the companion of the gods which the people of the towns or Kingdoms worshipped (Atanda 1973). He is popularly called “Oba aláse èkeji òrìsà, the king, the commander and wielder of authority next to the supernatural object of worship” (Fadipe 1970: 205). Akintoye maintained also that the King was supposed to have power of life and death over his people (Akintoye 1971: 16).

However, the ‘absolutism’ implied above does not translate to either reality or practice. This is particularly because, among the Yoruba, there are clear limitations

on the power, which is associated with each level and position in the administrative structure. Such generally accepted constitutional as well as traditional restriction

on the power, which is associated with each level and position in the administrative structure. Such generally accepted constitutional as well as traditional restriction