samuk:
…[s]The report by the British governor, R. E. Dennett that the Alaafin he visited told him of his predecessors paying tributes to Benin is firmly established in the pre colonial history of Nigeria and your fable attempts to deny it will only end here on nairaland. The history has already been written in history books.[/s]

A gentle reminder of the devastating refutation to your crap👇🏾

https://www.nairaland.com/6482972/name-lagos-called-ekonunuame-benins/9#104422658

[s]Again the Alaafin that told Hugh Clapperton in 1824 that he has sent for his friend the Oba of Benin for troops to assist him didn't say the Alaafin paid for such services/help from the Oba of Benin. The issue of payment was purely your own makeup.[/s]

Yes, this representation from H. Clapperton has a firm historical basis.

And my point is that this representation has nothing to do with Kiriji war. You didn’t know that.

This relates to events which happened in the 1820s (i.e. about 50 — 60 years before Kiriji war) when Oyo was amassing as many army as it can in preparation for a decisive engagement against Ilorin which had a very, very large army.

Again, this has nothing to do with Kiriji war, and also Benin is not the only place from where the Alaafin had planned to swell the seize of his army against the engagement with Ilorin. He also looked towards the the Bariba country for the exact same reason.

And IF you really think that Benin would have served in the Alaafin’s army free of charge, then it speaks so much of the imperial domination which Oyo still had over Benin even at a time when Oyo had a civil crisis.

The rational explanation that a thinking brain would muster in this context is that Benin, if independent of Oyo, would have served in the Oyo army not free of charge, but at a cost.

And there is in fact a historical case from Lagos (which is semi-independent of Oyo) serving Oyo — against Badagry — not freely, but at a cost.

[s]All you have written, are attempts to downplay, misrepresent what actually happened and what was actually recorded to have been said[/s]

Well, let those who have a thinking brain use it. Let them read and conclude just has historians have long done.

No historian (not even the most notorious Benin liar) hold the weird idea that one spurious line (against diverse contrary lines) holds an atom of weight.

[s]You were not there when the British governor visited the Alaafin to know what was discussed. Why would the British governor lied about what the Alaafin told him? The British were not Benin best friends Judging from what they wrote about Benin and the subsequent destruction of the city and stealing of her artefacts.[/s]

Gosh! R.E. Dennet was not a British Governor at any point in human history. He was merely a trader and writer doing his thing. And where is it written that Dennett LiEd?

[s]I quoted verbatim, I didn't add my opinions and meanings into the historical narratives I presented, whilst your reply is laced with conjectures, ifs, maybe this, maybe that, you even implied that the British governor R. E. Dennett lied in his report.

Must everyone that doesn't agree with your ethnic biases be liars.

The Benins are liars, British governor R. E. Dennett was a liar. Take it easy.[/s]

Eeya, sorry oo.

Anyways, I have only reached the same conclusion reached by historians despite the one spurious line you want to hang on to against the corpus of Oyo and Benin literature.

Again, Dennett is not a Governor of anywhere in human history. Also, he didn’t necessarily have to lie to be mistaken. God didn’t give you a Brian so that you shouldn’t use it.

Refer to details at the link below: https://www.nairaland.com/6482972/name-lagos-called-ekonunuame-benins/4#104243257

Cheers!

Benin had over 400 years of documented history stating from 1400s to 1897 and Yoruba had atleast 70 years of eyewitness documented history up till 1897. Unless you can show the readers were Benin/Ife relationship was either mentioned in Yoruba or Benin history up till 1890 other than your fitctional Ogane that was supposedly mentioned once in the 1400s, it will be a complete waste of my time to continue to reply an obvious troll like yourself.

Provide the evidence of Benin/Ife relationship, mentions of Oranmiyan, Ife and Oduduwa in pre 1890 Benin history or continue to wallow in your lies.

Cheers.

samuk:
Benin had over 400 years of documented history stating from 1400s to 1897

Stop embarrassing yourself, family, and friends.

There is no single written material (not one) on, about, or concerning Benin in the 1400s.

and Yoruba had atleast 70 years of eyewitness documented history up till 1897.

Eyewitness written materials about Yoruba kingdoms began in the early 1500s.

Another account about Ife (transcribed into Arabic as “Yufi” following the classic Ife dialect which articulates it as “Ufe” — just as “Ubini” was transcribed into Portuguese as “Beny”) although not directly from an eyewitness, but just like Dapper’s materials on Benin (i.e. from testimonies of eyewitnesses) comes from the early 1300s.

In other words, writings about "Yufi" (i.e. "Ufe" or Ife) collected from eyewitnesses in Mali dates to the 1300s.

Unless you can show the readers were Benin/Ife relationship was either mentioned in Yoruba or Benin history up till 1890 other than your fictional Ogane that was supposedly

Ogané is fictional only in your fictional brain -- and that’s understandable for your brain.

But for historians (whom I stand with), Ogané is none other than the Oghene n’Uhe — the Ooni of Ife to whom the kings of Benin was almost like a servant.

mentioned once in 1400s it will be a complete waste of my time to continue to reply an obvious troll like yourself.

It wasn’t even mentioned in any 1400s material. There is no 1400s material from Benin to start with.

However, he was mentioned repeatedly from the early 1500s, and the mentions span centuries.

Provide the evidence of Benin/Ife relationship, mentions of Oranmiyan, Ife and Oduduwa in pre 1890 Benin history or continue to wallow in your lies.

Cheers.

I have provided you the with archaeological evidence establishing that Benin was a son kingdom to Ife — the very same thing that the European texts point to. And that’s all that matters.

The specific name of an Ife king doesn’t have to appear in the Benin writings, just as the names of many Benin kings do not appear anywhere in the Benin writing from the early 1500s — until towards the end of the 1800s.

It is sufficient that archaeological evidence of Ife king (excavated from Benin palace) dating to the year c.1420 already proves the classical connection between son Benin and father Ife.

All I can ask you to do is read the very comments that I have provided on this thread — on this page, the previous page, and especially the page before that, and those earlier. You will find them helpful in killing your gross ignorance.

Peace.

Reposting Because I Love This Comment:

samuk:
•••
Benin/Ife history was concocted after the fall of Benin empire in 1897.

CoNcOcTeD? LMAO

Who prepared the supposed CoNcOcTiOn? And what proof have you that a CoNcOcTiOn was prepared?

Again, if you have an atom of dignity and if you wish to be taken seriously by the readers, then proceed to adduce evidence for your claim of CoNcOcTiOn.

There were no mention of Ife, Oduduwa and Oranmiyan in the eyewitness documented Benin history between 1400s to 1800s.

This is not true.

Eyewitness testimony/writings from the late-1400s & early-1500s which references the monarch of the Ife kingdom & his suzerainty over Benin kingdom exist.

NB: Yes, there used to be a debate in academia in the 1970s/1980s (between the mainstream scholars on one hand; and one, two, or three others on another hand) over the identity of this suzerain.

This debate was particularly on the usage of the word “east” in those early writings.

In present time, however, there is no single academic historian who holds the notion that this suzerain (of the early writings) is other than the Ooni of Ife [i.e. Ọ̀ɣọ̀ni Ufẹ̀ in the Ife dialect of the Yoruba language].

The symbol ⟨ɣ⟩ being the voiced velar fricative with its consonant sound as in this audio sample.

This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that no king, throughout the Guinea Forest of West Africa matches the specific sacral details given in those early writings, except the Ooni of Ife.

In addition to this significant fact, the debate over the word “east” was subsequently quelled by the fact that
from Atakpame (in present-day Togo) to the kingdom of Benin (in present-day Nigeria), from Èkó (next to the Atlantic Ocean) to Ọ̀yọ́-Ilé (not far from the Niger River) Ife is known by the interesting epithet: Ibi ojúmọ́ ti ń mọ́ wá — i.e. “the place from where the sun rises”.

For some written references to the widespread usage of this epithet (in reference to Ife) among the natives of this region of West Africa, please refer to:

(A) Rev. D. Hinderer, “Diary Impression,” June 4, 1851, Ibadan, C.M.S.

(B) R. Horton (1979), p. 89., citing B. Maupoil (1943), A. Akinjogbin (1967:41-43), R. Smith (1969:31), as well as A. Obayemi (1976:206).

This reverential (rather than literal) epithet of Ife informed the literalist Europeans’ writings whose source(s) are Benin spokespersons of their king.

Hence the appearance of the word “east” in the early European writings in reference to the kingdom of the Ọ̀ɣọ̀ni (who is transliterated in the early writings as “Hooguanee”, “Ogané”, etc.).

Side Note: Binis, till today, still sometimes refer to the Ooni as Oghene. Refer to the entry “ɔɣɛnɛ” (i.e. “ọghẹnẹ”) in Hans Melzian’s “A Concise Dictionary of the Bini Language of Southern Nigeria” where its second definition is given as: “Bini name for the ↄni at Ile Ife”

Moreover, another piece of historical evidence which quelled the academic debate on the word “east” (as is seen in the early writings in reference to this overlord) are early maps.

There are maps (e.g. from the early 1500s) which show the phrase Dominion of the ‘Orguene’ annotated across the western half of today’s Nigeria.

These historical information leaves anyone (not only the historians) with the only logical conclusion that the appearance of the word “east” in those early writings is of course not literal.

In conclusion, contrary to your ignorant assumption, there are writings from the early 1500s (on the basis of interviews of Bini representatives in the late 1400s) which references the king of Ife & his overlordship on Benin kingdom and other places.

Apart from early writings, there are other types of historical evidence which also establish clearly that there exist a classic (i.e. pre-1800) father & son relationship between Ife & Benin respectively.

These other type of historical evidence which I come to here are classical artifacts from the hard science of archaeology. One crucial examples in this regard is discussed below.

The artifact shown in this link is the image of an Ooni of Ife. ~ S. P. Blier, “Art in Ancient Ife,” 2012, Figure 17.

The Ife naturalism of this artifact, its facial striations, as well as its classical Ife ceremonial costume and the pair of chest ornament help art historians (as well as Benin chroniclers alike) with identifying this image as an Ooni of Ife.

What is very, very crucial here is that this artifact was found in the archaeological deposits of Benin. To be more precise, it was excavated from the royal palace of Benin kingdom.

Furthermore, the production date of this artifact has now been established by science. This artifact is dated, by thermoluminescence technique, to the year 1420 [± 60 years].

~ Calvocoressi & David, “A New Survey of Radiocarbon and Thermoluminescence Dates for West Africa,” 1979, p. 19.

For more pictorial angles (and details) regarding this particular artifact, please refer to:

(A) W. Fagg, “A Bronze Figure in Ife Style at Benin,” British Museum, June 1950, Plate Fa, Fb, Fc

(B) F. Willett, “Ife in the History of West African Sculpture,” McGraw-Hill, 1967, Figure 89.

(C) C. Adepegba, “The Descent from Oduduwa,” 1986, Plate 4.

In other words, a more-than 500-year-old ‘bronze’ cast of an Ooni Ife was discovered in the (archaeological deposits of the) palace of Benin kingdom.

In conclusion, it thus becomes clear that there exists a classical (i.e. pre-1800) father & son relationship between Ife & Benin respectively.

Cc: kjhova, rhektor, nisai, gomojam, forgiveness, LegendHero

[quote author=gregyboy post=104406497][/quote] Lol

TAO11 those Benin boys will go absolutely ballistic over this but that is their own Problem everybody else is rejoicing



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38vHAM521rk



Long Live the New Olu of Warri !!!!!!!!

christistruth01:
TAO those Benin boys will go ballistic over this but that is their own Problem everybody else is rejoicing



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38vHAM521rk

Why are you trying to give Benin miscreants HBP na?

Going forward, please alway mention me properly as “TAO11”, I may not see the mention if you use “TAO”.

The moniker is actually TAO11. I don’t have a “TAO” moniker.

Thanks for your understanding.

TAO11:
Why are you trying to give Benin miscreants HBP na?

Going forward, please alway mention me properly as “TAO11”, I may not see the mention if you use “TAO”.

The moniker is actually TAO11. I don’t have a “TAO” moniker.

Thanks for your understanding.

Ok , Thank you

christistruth01:
Ok , Thank you

Do you enjoy music about traditional history?

If yes, you may like a certain Awori song about Isheri as the Awori capital, not Otta.

I remember putting out that correction some months ago, and someone also corroborated my point with the oriki — ka fi opa wa, ka fi aje wa, ka fi ogedegede owo wa oko de Isheri-Olofin.

Let me know if you would like to listen to this song on Awori traditions and Olofin’s sons.

TAO11:
Do you enjoy music about traditional history?

If yes, you may like a certain Awori song about Isheri as the Awori capital, not Otta.

I remember putting out that correction some months ago, and someone also corroborated my point with the oriki — ka fi opa wa, ka fi aje wa, ka fi ogedegede owo wa oko de Isheri-Olofin.

Let me know if you would like to listen to this song on Awori traditions and Olofin’s sons.

TAO11 you have already corrected me and I have accepted that Isheri Olofin is the Awori Capital when I went back to Study the Awori History I could understand why Isheri Olofin was the Capital and not Ota, Isheri Olofin was the first real Awori Settlement

It is a bit like Oyo and Ibadan ,Oyo is the Capital of Ethnic Oyo People but everyone thinks it is Ibadan because of it's Political and Military Prominence

Let me listen to the Awori Song, Thanks

Do you know I could understand everything in the Itsekiri Song they were practically singing in Yoruba it was almost as if I was listening to my Ekiti Aunties and Cousins singing in their Igede Ekiti dialect

christistruth01:
TAO11 you have already corrected me and I have accepted that Isheri Olofin is the Awori Capital when I went back to Study the Awori History I could understand why Isheri Olofin was the Capital it was the first real Awori Settlement

It is a bit like Oyo and Ibadan ,Oyo is the Capital of Ethnic Oyo People but everyone thinks it is Ibadan because of it's Political and Military Prominence

Let me listen to the Awori Song, Thanks

Got it. I truly remember you noted to have then realized it.

I was actually enjoying that music at that moment, and I felt the need to ask if you would like to enjoy it too while also giving a background of when we had a discussion along that line.

Here is the song: https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=ICMaNKJDRG8&feature=share

I love how it contains some salient correction & details on popular mistakes — it does this while still being very enjoyable. Makes me feel kind of nostalgic.

A key correction to mistake I hear a lot of people make is in the name of the first Olofin who came to Isheri from Ife:

The name is Ògúnfúnminíre NOT Ògúnfúnminírè. The last “re” is as the “re” in “ire” (goodness) — NOT as in the “rè” in “irè” (a place in Ekiti).

Etc.

Do you know I could understand everything in the Itsekiri Song they were practically singing in Yoruba it was almost as if I was listening to my Ekiti Aunty singing in her dialect

I can understand why the Itsekiri dialect of the Yoruba language would be more clearly intelligible to you.

The reason being that the Ekiti dialect of the Yoruba language is a walk over for you.

I am personally very happy for the Yoruba dialect along the eastern-Yoruba axis — from the south-east (Itsekiri, Ijebu), up to the eastern frontiers (Ondo-Owo-Ekiti axis), and further up to the the north-east (the Okun region).

This Yoruba dialects in this axis generally have the most minimal linguistics innovations/evolutions.

As as such, they have more mutual intelligibility as they’ve all remained relatively non-evolving as compared to central Yorubaland where there has been linguistic evolutions.

That eastern axis is a linguistics treasure oo. You can hear a word and be confident that this is closer to what our ancestors uttered from their mouth — kudos to the minimal linguistic innovation along that axis.

Let me know if you enjoy the music.

Christistruth00

TAO11:
Got it. I truly remember you noted to have then realized it.

I was actually enjoying to that music at that moment, and I felt the need to ask if you would like to enjoy it too while also giving a background of when we had a discussion along that line.

Here is the song: https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=ICMaNKJDRG8&feature=share

I love how it contains some salient correction & details on popular mistakes — it does this while still being very enjoyable. Makes me feel kind of nostalgic.

A key correction to mistake I hear a lot of people make is in the name of the first Olofin who came to Isheri from Ife:

The name is Ògúnfúnminíre NOT Ògúnfúnminírè. The last “re” is as the “re” in “ire”(for goodness) — NOT as in the “re” in “irè” (a place in Ekiti).

Etc.

I can understand why the Itsekiri dialect of the Yoruba language would be more clearly intelligible to you.

The reason being that the Ekiti dialect of the Yoruba language is a walk over for you.

I am personally very happy for the Yoruba dialect along the eastern-Yoruba axis — from the south-east (Itsekiri, Ijebu), up to the eastern frontiers (Ondo-Owo-Ekiti axis), and further up to the the north-east (the Okun region).

This Yoruba dialects in this axis generally have the most minimal linguistics innovations/evolutions.

As as such, they have more mutual intelligibility as they’ve all remained relatively non-evolving as compared to central Yorubaland where there has been linguistic evolutions.

That eastern axis is a linguistics treasure oo. You can hear a word and be confident that this is closer to what our ancestors uttered from their mouth — kudos to the minimal linguistic innovation along that axis.

Thank you TAO11

These Traditional Songs are so important treasure houses of History

There was a time whenever I heard those Benin Fabrications about Lagos a song kept coming to me, Awori Lo Leko O, Omo Olofin and I don't even remember where I heard the song from

As usual, every history thread gets trolled by yoruba with inferiority complex. Nairaland is one big trash and it is thanks to its owners' tribesmen.
Seun, I pity you.

Stoplying:
[s]As usual, every history thread gets trolled by yoruba with inferiority complex. Nairaland is one big trash and it is thanks to its owners tribesmen.[/s]

LMAO!

Did you just say nAiRaLaNd iS oNe BiG tRaSh??

Why??

Because historical facts (backed by evidence & studies) expose your age-long, strongly-held lies on history.

Actually, Nairaland owners are not the dummies you wish they are. I’m not sorry to break that to you.

As such, they will obviously not be bullied into closing down this thread just because you feel that too much historical information and education is being put out to educate the public.

This thread, like many others on Nairaland, is a great repository of valuable historical information with the uniqueness of being backed by historical evidence.

Kudos to the owner of this platform for having come up with this brilliant S. M. platform which continues to serve humanity.

@Stoplying

You ‘promised’ somewhere that you won’t be having any exchanges with Yorubas— i.e. Yorubas who don’t have a mAsTeRs degree.

A moment ago, I caught you having an exchange with a Yoruba person another thread.

Are you having that exchange because they stopped being a Yoruba person.

Or perhaps because they confirmed to you that they have a mAsTeR’s degree.

Or because you’re certain that that person is not TAO, and as such they’re not familiar with your falsehoods and manipulation which only TAO has the cure for.

Which of these is the reason why you’re engaging that Yoruba [probably] ex-Yoruba person?

I am suspecting the third reason sha.

Peace!

samuk:


Apart from the Oba of Benin, every other traditional rulers in that photo was selected, sometimes by politicians. The only one that is born king is the Oba of Benin.

You are right, the sitting arrangements was purely political. When the British arrived Yoruba land in 1824, they met the Alaafin on ground as the leader of Yoruba people but the Alaafin wasn't even in that photo. The Ooni is a political Oba.

The significance of a sitting arrangement in a group photo of leaders is non existent except in the minds of imbeciles. When leaders of independent countries take group photos, does their position in the photo imply a certain ranking amongst them ?

When Japan's prime minister stands behind Canada's prime minister, does that mean Canada's prime minister outranks Japan's prime minister ?
In a classroom photo, do students sitting in the front outrank students standing in the back ? All this is just a show of low self-esteem, the yoruba seek validation so bad that they are boasting of the fact the oni of ifa was sitted closest to prince Charles. How self-esteem can get as low as that ? Only in nigeria.

All this illiterate talk which has become the standard on nairaland is annoying. It feels like most people here are children.

Stoplying:
[s]The significance of a sitting arrangement in a group photo of leaders is non existent except in the minds of imbeciles. When leaders of independent countries take group photos, does their position in the photo imply a certain ranking amongst them ?

When Japan's prime minister stands behind Canada's prime minister, does that mean Canada's prime minister outranks Japan's prime minister ?
In a classroom photo, do students sitting in the front outrank students standing in the back ? All this is just a show of low self-esteem, the yoruba seek validation so bad that they are boasting of the fact the oni of ifa was sitted closest to prince Charles. How self-esteem can get a slow as that ? Only in nigeria.

All this illiterate talk which has become the standard on nairaland is annoying. It feels like most people here are children.[/s]

You try.

See your consolation prize attached.

Stoplying:


The significance of a sitting arrangement in a group photo of leaders is non existent except in the minds of imbeciles. When leaders of independent countries take group photos, does their position in the photo imply a certain ranking amongst them ?

When Japan's prime minister stands behind Canada's prime minister, does that mean Canada's prime minister outranks Japan's prime minister ?
In a classroom photo, do students sitting in the front outrank students standing in the back ? All this is just a show of low self-esteem, the yoruba seek validation so bad that they are boasting of the fact the oni of ifa was sitted closest to prince Charles. How self-esteem can get a slow as that ? Only in nigeria.

All this illiterate talk which has become the standard on nairaland is annoying. It feels like most people here are children.

The sitting arrangements in a photo give them satisfaction and sense of accomplishments in the absence of glorious historical heritage compared to their Edo neighbours.

samuk:
[s]The sitting arrangements in a photo give them satisfaction and sense of accomplishments in the absence of glorious historical heritage compared to their Edo neighbours[/s]

You try.

See your consolation prize attached.

—————
+ A disastrous refutation of your laughable claim of “absence of glorious historical heritage” is what this thread [at least its later part] is dedicated to.

TAO11:
You try.

See your consolation prize attached.

[b]Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom. Mastering others is strength, mastering yourself is true power[/b



Clean it off your profile you know nothing about your enemy if it was a real war your head would have way long decay by the hands of the benin sword

TAO11:
One would have expected the supposed vAsSaL states to have been summoned by Benin (in order for Benin to arbitrate between them), not the other way round.

Isn’t it interesting to even you that sUzErAiN Benin was caused by its vAsSaL state(s) (either via invitation or via summon) to leave Benin city? In fact, please tell me more about these omnipotent vAsSaLs.

What gArRiSoN? LMAO!

I could swear you’ve never set your eyes on what the complete account of Ulsheimer looks like. Stop relying on partial internet quotations which always lands you in humiliation, as will be done below again.

I will focus only on the actual quotation and not ‘your’ side commentary which is full assumptions and more assumptions.

(1) This account was collected by Andreas Joshua Ulsheimer who was the surgeon of a trade voyage which visited the coast of West Africa sometimes between late 1603 & early 1604.

(2) His report actually doesn’t say a word about present-day Lagos as a whole. Instead, his report alludes only to one of the islands on present-day Lagos. Nothing is said about the mainland and the other islands.

This fact is clear from the words: “It lies on an island”

(3) Furthermore, his account continues to show that on this said island, there are some towns, one of which is a town whose name he recorded as “Lago”.

This fact is clear from the words: “a … town called Lago … lies on an island and is a frontier town”

In other words, the town “Lago” is a frontier town, i.e. a town which lies in-between two other towns — that is, it lies exactly on the border of two other towns.

This same conclusion (that there is more than one town on this particular island) can also be reached from the words: “Many people come to … town Lago, by water and by land”

Given the fact that some people come to this town Lago by land [and this town Lago is situated on an island], the logical implication then become obvious.

That is, those who come to the town Lago by land are people who reside on that same island, but in another town on that same island.

In conclusion, according to Ulsheimer’s account, Lago is NOT the only town on that island. There were other towns on that very island.

(4) Ulsheimer’s account notes that this specific town Lago (NOT any other town on that very island, nor any other town on any of the other islands, nor any town on the mainland) belongs to Benin.

Did Benin come to acquire their portion of that island by virtue of aboriginal right, or by forceful take over, or by conferment from the native aboriginal owners?

Considering each of these above means of ownership carefully and in turns:

(A) Whether or not Benins’ ownership of their portion of that island resulted from some aboriginal right is silent from Ulsheimer’s account. However, both Lagos and Benin traditions admit that this island (and beyond) is the aboriginal property of the Aworis.

(B) Did Benin’s ownership of its portion of that island result from a forceful take-over?

Firstly, it must stressed that as at the time of his visit to the coast of West Africa sometimes between late 1603 & early 1604; Ulsheimer found that the Benins were already settled on the island — specifically in their portion of the island, i.e., in town Lago.

In other words, he could not have possibly witnessed how their predecessors originally came from Benin to settle on that island in the mid/late-1500s. In fact, as at the time of his visit, the Benins had long built their portion of that island into a walled town which has a tested, year in, year out internal political and religious system.

Ulsheimer’s account is therefore silent on how the predecessors of the 1603-4 Benins of Lago came to originally settle on that island in the first place in the mid/late-1500s — a forceful takeover or a peaceful infiltration?

Furthermore, in the year 1603-4, Ulsheimer met the then Benins of Lago living as a military unit within their portion of that island — i.e. within the confines of the walls of town Lago.

Does this not establish that their predecessors (who came originally from Benin to settle on this island in the mid/late-1500s) actually settled-in via a forceful takeover in the 1500s??

The 1500s events can not be established for certain on the basis of the events of 1603-4. In fact, what seems plausible is that their condition (as a military unit) as observed by Ulsheimer in the year 1603-4 was in response to a relatively new situation which called for nothing but a military intervention.

In other words, the plausible scenario is that their predecessors (who came originally from Benin in the 1500s) actually settled-in peacefully into the island; but that they (their successors) only began to later live as a military unit because they were attempting to respond militarily to a relatively fresh situation that called for nothing but a military response.

Is there any corroboration, from Ulsheimer’s account, for this foregoing scenario?? The answer to this is a big, fat YES!

On page 24 of the same material, Ulsheimer alludes to another Benin-settled town (apart from Lago). The location of this second town is unspecified except to the extent that it appears to also lie somewhere near the Atlantic coast, but apparently closer to the Lagos region than to the Benin region.

This account continues to show that the subjects there (unlike those at town Lago) happened to have rebelled against their oba. As a result, the subjects at town Lago were tasked with the duty of returning them back to status quo.

This account continues to show that those subjects at the town Lago (acting on behalf of their oba) asked Ulsheimer’s team for help (when his trading team got to the Lagos area) since they by themselves could not easily conquer the said Benin-settled rebel town — because like Lago this town too is “walled”, and the town Lago residents have no canon.

In conclusion:
While it is impracticable to definitively establish the condition under which their predecessors originally came to settle in the island in the 1500s on the basis of the successors’ living formation in the year 1603-4; the account of Ulsheimer does point to the fact that the military formation in which these successors lived in the year 1603-4 was in response to a relatively new situation which called for nothing but such response.

(C) In the light of the foregoing analysis what becomes clear is the fact that Ulsheimer’s account is silent about the condition under which the predecessors of the 1603-4 Lago Binis came originally to settle in into that island. He also couldn’t have been a witness to such event from the 1500s.

It is also clear from his account that the 1603-4 Lago Binis were living in a military formation because they
have been attempting to respond militarily to a fresh situation that called for nothing but such.

This foregoing information from Ulsheimer’s account does corroborate Lagos traditions (rather than Benin traditions which came later) quoted below:

“Some little time after the Olofin's death there began the peaceful penetration into Lagos of settlers from Benin. The Binis probably realised that they would not be able to occupy Lagos by force, as they had already been so decisively beaten in their attacks on Iddo, and it is thought that they were also prevented from further aggression by superstitious fear, the dying wife of the Olofin having pronounced a terrible curse on any further invaders from Benin. Whatever may have been the reason, the Binis arrived with no great show of force, and permission was asked of the Lagos people for them to land. This permission was granted, probably with no very good grace, although at that time Lagos island was very sparsely inhabited and there must have been room for many more settlers.” ~ Sir A. C. Burns, “History of Nigeria,” 1929, p.43.

In summary, the Benin ownership relates only to one portion of the island — that is, a town called Lago, to the exclusion of other towns on that island & beyond.

The Benin ownership of town Lago is the result of a granted permission to land which was sought by the Binis from the Yoruba owners of the island.

Their living condition (within the walls of their portion of the island) — in the year 1603-4 — as a military unit did not begin with their predecessors, but was in response to a relatively new situation that called for military intervention.

Finally, the 1603-4 Lago events that were quoted from Ulsheimer’s account actually took place about eighty (80) years prior to establishment of the present Èkó dynasty by Ashipa who, according to Lagos traditions, is an Awori-Yoruba chief (of Ife royal descent) from Isheri-Olofin.

Refer to the END NOTE at the link below for details of the relationship between Ashipa and Benin kingdom per Lagos traditions.

https://www.nairaland.com/6663008/how-bini-used-sold-igbos/30#104331000

Peace!
Cc: rhektor, lifeisgood12, nisiw365, LegendHero, macof.

The problem with all these urchins is that they don't know the difference between Lagos City of today and Lagos Town within the island
There's Lagos State, Lagos metro, Lagos city, Lagos Island, Lagos Town/village
Each level within the next

I remember i will be in Obalende (geographical still on Lagos Island) and we will still say we are going to "Lagos" (Lagos Town)

Infact in Lagos Town, the area known to be settled by the Benins before being permitted to come further into the island is called Enuwa.. A very small area at the edge of the island
Anybody who knows Issale-Eko knows this

Imagine, Isale-eko, the most yorubatic place in the Island parts of Lagos state being claimed to be Biniland.. Where did all the Bini people go?
Isale-eko that you spend 3 months as a newbie and you will start eating amala and speaking Yoruba as if you've always done so all your life

gregyboy:
[s][b]Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom. Mastering others is strength, mastering yourself is true power[/b



Clean it off your profile you know nothing about your enemy if it was a real war your head would have way long decay by the hands of the benin sword[/s]

Go clean it off by yourself.

My username is: TAO11.

My password is: gregyisinpains.

REPOSTING BECAUSE I LOVE IT:

The context of the actual passage shows that the area involved is not Lagos as a whole.

Lagos has its mainland and some islands. The context of the passage relates only to one of these islands.

The specific location involved from the context of the passage is simply a portion of one specific island.

The earlier Portuguese coinage ‘Lago’ is the name used by Ulsheimer to describe this specific portion.

And Ulsheimer added (in his report) that this portion of the island belongs to Benin kingdom.

The Binis (like some other non-native) had settled on this island some decades before Ulsheimer visited.

A number of trading groups from different ethnicities were drawn to this island to benefit from the growing European coastal trading activities along its coast.

How Benin came to own that piece of that island isn’t specified in his report — i.e. by aboriginal right, or by forceful takeover, or by conferment from the natives.

An analysis of Lagos accounts on the subject (which is earlier than the Benin accounts on the subject) in the light of this Ulsheimer’s report shows that the Benins settled there like other non-native groups — that is, by a peaceful infiltration subject to owners’ approval.

The analysis of the accounts in the light of the report shows, however, that after some decades of peaceful coexistence, the Bini residents were required to take up arms (especially against a second Bini camp/town which had just betrayed its Oba of Benin).

Sit back, relax, and enjoy the relevant passage as well as the clear, step-by-step examination of the nuance and salient points in the passage.

"Forty miles from Benin lies a large town called Lago, which also belongs to the King of Benin. It lies on an island and is a frontier town, surrounded by a strong fence. In it live none but soldiers and four military commanders, who behave in a very stately manner. Every day they come together in the king's house and make a sacrifice every morning. After the sacrifice, they hold court in the open air, in front of the king's house. Whoever has anything to complain about makes his complaint. They all fall on their knees when they present their case, and when one man is given a verdict in his favour, he thanks the authorities and the king. Also, two envoys always stand with the judge and listen to what is done. Every day these two send news off to the king, informing him of what the judges have done that day. They do this throughout the whole year. This is practiced not only in Lago, but also in other towns of the king, as well as in Benin itself. Many people come to the aforesaid town Lago, by water and by land, with their wares, which consist of beautiful cotton cloths woven in all kinds of colours and patterns.”
~ Andreas Ulsheimer's Voyage of 1603-4.

(1) This report was written by A. J. Ulsheimer who was the surgeon for a trade voyage that visited the coast of west Africa between late-1603 and early-1604.


(2) His report doesn’t say a word about present-day Lagos as a whole.

Instead, his report relates only to one of the islands of present-day Lagos.

Nothing is said about the other islands, or the mainland, or elsewhere.

This fact is clear from the words: “It lies on an island”.

~ Refer to the passage for this line and its context.

(3) His report indicates that on this very island alone, there are more than one town.

And he named out one of these towns (on this very island) as “Lago”.

These facts are clear from the words: “Many people come to the aforesaid town Lago, by water and by land,”.

~ Refer to the passage for this line and its context.

Town Lago is a town located on an island. An island is surrounded by a water-body.

As such, whoever comes to that town “Lago” by water must have paddled (or swam) from some other town which is not on that same island.

However, whoever comes to that town “Lago” by land must have walked (or rode) from other town/s which are located on that same island.

His report clear says people also came to town “Lago” by land, this thus means that there are other town/s on that same island.

(4) Ulsheimer’s report notes that this specific town Lago belongs to Benin.

~ Refer to the passage for this line and its context.

Did Benin come to acquire their portion of that island by virtue of some aboriginal right, or by forceful take over, or by conferment from the native owners?

Considering each of these above means of ownership in turns:

(A) Whether or not Benins’ ownership of their portion of that island resulted from some aboriginal right is silent from Ulsheimer’s report. However, both Lagos and Benin traditions admit that this island (and beyond) is the aboriginal property of the Aworis.

As such, their later ownership of their portion of the island was clearly not as a result of some aboriginal right. They’re not the aboriginals of that specific area.

(B) Did Benin’s ownership of its portion of that island result from a forceful take-over?

Firstly, it must stressed that as at the time of his visit to the coast of West Africa (sometimes between late 1603 & early1604), Ulsheimer found that the Benins were already settled on the island — specifically in their portion of the island, i.e., in town “Lago”.

In other words, he did not witness how their predecessors originally came from Benin to settle on that island in the mid/late-1500s.

In fact, as at the time of his visit, the Benins had long built their portion of that island into a strong-walled town which also has a working, year in, year out internal political/religious system.

Ulsheimer therefore could not possibly have given an eyewitness account of how those Binis’ predecessors settled into that island originally in the 1500s.

Although he met them there living as an armed unit in 1603-4; this living condition of the year 1603-4 does not provide any useful information as to how their predecessors originally settled in there in the 1500s.

It is very likely that their living condition of 1603-4, was in response to a relatively new development which requires nothing but a military response.

Is there any corroboration, from Ulsheimer’s report, for this being the case?? The answer to this question is a big, fat YES!

On page 24 of the same material, Ulsheimer alludes to another Benin-settled town (different from Lago).

The location of this second town is unspecified except that it appears (from Ulsheimer’s report) that it also lie somewhere near the Atlantic coast, but closer to Lagos region than to Benin region.

The report continues to say that the subjects there (unlike those at town Lago) had rebelled against their oba — their Benin king.

As a result, the subjects at the town Lago were tasked with the duty of returning them back to status quo.

This report continues to show that those subjects at Lago (acting on behalf of their oba) asked Ulsheimer’s team for assistance when his trading team arrived at the Lagos region.

They approached his team for help because they had not been able to conquer the said Benin-settled rebel town prior to his (and his team’s) arrival.

The Binis of Lago had particularly found it difficult to conquer this second town because it is also a walled town like town Lago, and the Binis of town Lago have no canons.

In any case, it is impossible to know how precisely the predecessors settled there in the 1500s based on the living formation of the successors of c.1603.

As has just been recalled from page 24 however, the only event specified in the text as a plausible reason for their successors’ military-life formation in c.1603 is the task that they must return a certain Benin town (which had recently rebelled) back to status quo.

This foregoing indication from Ulsheimer’s report is in clear and almost shocking agreement with Lagos traditions which was first recorded about 200 years later.

Lagos traditions maintain that that the Binis settled in the island peacefully & amicably after having gotten permission to land from the native owners.

The Lagos accounts continue that that it was not until some time long after they had settled peacefully that they now began to be involved in some skirmishes.

The following is a quotation of the Lagos accounts as may be seen in the publication of a British officer:

“Some little time after the Olofin's death there began the peaceful penetration into Lagos of settlers from Benin. The Binis probably realised that they would not be able to occupy Lagos by force, as they had already been so decisively beaten in their attacks on Iddo, and it is thought that they were also prevented from further aggression by superstitious fear, the dying wife of the Olofin having pronounced a terrible curse on any further invaders from Benin. Whatever may have been the reason, the Binis arrived with no great show of force, and permission was asked of the Lagos people for them to land. This permission was granted, probably with no very good grace, although at that time Lagos island was very sparsely inhabited and there must have been room for many more settlers. … Some time after, the Binis began to attack the people on the mainland, and the leader of one of their marauding parties dying at Isheri, his remains were conveyed to Benin by one of the Isheri chiefs named Ashipa, who was anxious to secure the favour of the powerful King of Benin. ”

~ Sir Alan C. Burns, “History of Nigeria,” 1929, p.43.

SUMMARY
The Benin’s ownership relates (not to the island as a whole, but) to a portion of it which was conferred to it by the native owners themselves.

This is what is meant when Ulsheimer’s account says that the town Lago (a portion of today’s Lagos-island) “belongs to” Benin — that is, they own[ed] what was conferred on them.

APPENDIX
These events of 1603-4 cited from Ulsheimer actually took place about eighty (80) years before the present Èkó dynasty was founded by Ashipa (the Awori noble from Isheri) the father of Ado.

Peace!
Cc: rhektor, nisai, gomojam, forgiveness, LegendHero

When I first presented the 1603 eyewitness historical account of Benin ownership of Lagos little over a year ago, it was initially dismissed as a lie, they argued that Benin was nowhere close to Lagos as early as 1603. They called the eyewitness historical accounts a hogwash.

The same ignorant people are now the ones doing lengthy writeup on it after studying the narrative for over a year. They realised that this amongst several other eyewitness historical accounts of classical Benin can't just be discounted by ignoramus, so inserting their bias subjective opinions into what was clearly written in English is their best alternatives. to even think that most of the audience can't read the relevant passages and comprehend for themselves what was written without an ethnic bigots inputs shows the height of their delusion.

Someone that said the 1603 eyewitness historical accounts was a lie over a year ago is now writing opinion filled gibberish as if this will change the actual historical accounts. I hope audience can see how these sets of people have been writing their subjected bias opinions into Benin centuries old eyewitness historical accounts.

samuk:
[s]When I first presented the 1603 eyewitness historical account of Benin ownership Lagos little over a year ago, it was initially dismissed as a lie, they argued that Benin was nowhere close to Lagos as early as 1603. They called the eyewitness historical accounts a hogwash.

The same ignorant people are now the ones doing lengthy writeup on it after studying the narrative for over a year. They realised that this amongst several other eyewitness historical accounts of classical Benin can't just be discounted by ignoramus, so inserting their bias subjective opinions into what was clearly written in English is their best alternatives. to even think that most of the audience can't read the relevant passages and comprehend for themselves what was written without an ethnic bigots inputs shows the height of their delusion.

Someone that said the 1603 eyewitness historical accounts was a lie over a year ago is now writing opinion filled gibberish as if this will change the actual historical accounts. I hope audience can see how these sets of people have been writing their subjected bias opinions into Benin centuries old eyewitness historical accounts.[/s]

Well, at no point did Benin own Lagos because there is no single observer who ever said that in any report.

Instead, Binis [like different immigrants] came to live on a portion of one of the islands in Lagos as a trade immigrant group.

And Benin owned that portion of that island because it was conferred to Benin by the native owners of all the land in the region after they had sought permission to land.

And at no point was it ever contested that Binis came and sought permission to live on a part of the island.

Address the specifics of my comment if your hand itch to type, and let me pieces you. Otherwise ‘go to sleep’.

Take heart.

samuk:
When I first presented the 1603 eyewitness historical account of Benin ownership Lagos little over a year ago, it was initially dismissed as a lie, they argued that Benin was nowhere close to Lagos as early as 1603. They called the eyewitness historical accounts a hogwash.

The same ignorant people are now the ones doing lengthy writeup on it after studying the narrative for over a year. They realised that this amongst several other eyewitness historical accounts of classical Benin can't just be discounted by ignoramus, so inserting their bias subjective opinions into what was clearly written in English is their best alternatives. to even think that most of the audience can't read the relevant passages and comprehend for themselves what was written without an ethnic bigots inputs shows the height of their delusion.

Someone that said the 1603 eyewitness historical accounts was a lie over a year ago is now writing opinion filled gibberish as if this will change the actual historical accounts. I hope audience can see how these sets of people have been writing their subjected bias opinions into Benin centuries old eyewitness historical accounts.

This is their usual trademark. They have to defend their predetermined conclusion irrespective of the actual facts, they must therefore make contradictory statements because you can't prove a lie within a non contradictory theory.

One of the reasons I stopped talking to some of these yoruba lie peddlars is that I have actually talked to them in the passed, I kept correcting their lies and obvious ignorant statements only for them to keep offering more lies and ignorant statements. I prove my claims, and they still think it is open for debate, basically we had a discussion with no end since the yoruba were mot following logics.

I had a choice between living my life or talking to a yoruba lie peddlar everyday all day until I am old and blind. The thing is when people don't follow logics while talking to you, you need to ignore them. I used to object to the idea of not talking to people whom are less educated than myself, because I believe in the democratisation of knowledge, but given the current crop of yoruba dogma driven, disrespectful and delusional people, I had to adjust and limit my contacts with yoruba people to those who have a masters degree or a PhD.

Besides, talking to an ignorant person whose arrogance make him believe he is at your level (whereas he isn't even at the level of your worse students) is incredibly annoying, you just feel that you are literally insulting yourself by entertaining such an individual and each ignorant statement of that person feels like you are engaging an ape in a discussion (not a good feeling).

Stoplying:
[s]This is their usual trademark. They have to defend their predetermined conclusion irrespective of the actual facts, they must therefore make contradictory statements because you can't prove a lie with a non contradictory theory.

One of the reasons I stopped talking to some of these yoruba lie peddlars is that I have actually talked to them in the passed, I kept correcting their lies and obvious ignorant statements only for them to keep offering more lies and ignorant statements. I prove my claims, and they still think it is open for debate, basically we had a discussion with no end since the yoruba were mot following logics.

I had a choice between living my life or talking to a yoruba lie peddlar everyday all day until I am old and blind. The thing is when people don't follow logics while talking to you, you need to ignore them. I used to object to the idea of not talking to people whom are less educated than myself, because I believe in the democratisation of knowledge, but given the current crop of yoruba dogma driven and disrespectful delusional people, I had to adjust and limit my contacts with yoruba people to those who have a masters degree or a PhD.[/s]

[s]Besides, talking to an ignorant person whose arrogance make him believe he is at your level (whereas he isn't even at the level of your worse students) is incredibly annoying, you just feel that you are literally insulting yourself by entertaining such an individual and each ignorant statement of that person feels like you are engaging an ape in a discussion (not a good feeling).[/s]

Take the advice from your own moniker — i.e. stop lying.

I caught you having a heated exchange (not long ago on another thread) with a Yoruba person.

Yet you come here to lie that you’ve stopped arguing with Yorubas (except those with mAsTeRs and pHd)

No, you love engaging with Yorubas, i.e. particularly those whom you can bamboozle due to their being unfamiliar with your false rhetorics and insanity.

You only give these excuses when it’s my turn. You’re smart enough to know that I have the cure to your madness.

Stoplying:


This is their usual trademark. They have to defend their predetermined conclusion irrespective of the actual facts, they must therefore make contradictory statements because you can't prove a lie within a non contradictory theory.

One of the reasons I stopped talking to some of these yoruba lie peddlars is that I have actually talked to them in the passed, I kept correcting their lies and obvious ignorant statements only for them to keep offering more lies and ignorant statements. I prove my claims, and they still think it is open for debate, basically we had a discussion with no end since the yoruba were mot following logics.

I had a choice between living my life or talking to a yoruba lie peddlar everyday all day until I am old and blind. The thing is when people don't follow logics while talking to you, you need to ignore them. I used to object to the idea of not talking to people whom are less educated than myself, because I believe in the democratisation of knowledge, but given the current crop of yoruba dogma driven, disrespectful and delusional people, I had to adjust and limit my contacts with yoruba people to those who have a masters degree or a PhD.

Besides, talking to an ignorant person whose arrogance make him believe he is at your level (whereas he isn't even at the level of your worse students) is incredibly annoying, you just feel that you are literally insulting yourself by entertaining such an individual and each ignorant statement of that person feels like you are engaging an ape in a discussion (not a good feeling).

The bigotry from some of these people is unbelievable. They first argued that Benin didn't have the means to be in Lagos as early as 1603 let alone the 1500s, some even argued that Benin would have had to travel through territories controlled by Ijebus, which according to them would have been impossible.

Toda they conceded that Benin was already well established in Lagos in 1500s, but that Benin literally beg the aboriginal inhabitants for a piece of land to settle in.

Benin that was already building fortified military fortresses with residents soldiers, and walled garrisons that can only be breached and penetrated with help of European made canons as early as the 1500s, will be begging for land? From whom?

At this period in Benin history, the 1500s, the Benin literally believe that the Oba of Benin owns all lands and all body of water that are accessible to the Benin people. This is why when Benin move into any land of interest, they lord it over and any traditional ruler that protest are beheaded and replaced.

Benin history is too well established to be affected by side notes, subjective opinions born out of ignorance, malice and jealousy.

samuk:
[s]The bigotry from some of these people is unbelievable. They first argued that Benin didn't have the means to be in Lagos as early as 1603 let alone the 1500s, some even argued that Benin would have had to travel through territories controlled by Ijebus, which according to them would have been impossible.

Today they conceded that Benin was already well established in Lagos in 1500s,[/s]

Well, at no point did Benin own Lagos because there is no single observer who ever said that in any report.

Instead, Binis [like different immigrants] came to live on a portion of one of the islands in Lagos as a trade immigrant group.

And Benin owned that portion of that island because it was conferred to Benin by the native owners of the land in the region — after Benin had duly sought for permission to land from the owners.

And at no point did I ever contest that Binis did come to Lagos and sought permission, from the natives, to live on the island. At no point did I not know that.

[s]… but that Benin literally beg the aboriginal inhabitants for a piece of land to settle in.[/s]

Exactly!

Because Ulsheimer’s account (yes silent on how the predecessors of the 1603-4 Binis came to settle into the island in the 1500s) actually supports the traditions from Lagos better.

And the traditions from Lagos noted that the Binis got permission to their portion of the island from the native owners — just like other immigrants too did.

+ The traditions from Lagos were collected and published way too earlier than the much later reactive revision (fraud) which the Binis came up with in the 1950s.

[s]Benin that was already building fortified military fortresses with residents soldiers, and walled garrisons that can only be breached and penetrated with help of European made canons as early as the 1500s, will be begging for land? From whom?[/s]

The settlement which the Binis couldn’t penetrate was a walled-town not a MiLiTaRy FoRtReSs or WaLLeD GarRiSoN. That’s the description from text. Now you’re hallucinating too much.

Also, stones, sticks, etc. can not efficiently bring down any mud wall — in the context of warfare.

No where in the account was it described as MiLiTaRy FoRtReSs or WaLLeD GarRiSoN. It was a town just as the one on the island (i.e. Lago) is also a town.

The Lago one, however, had its residents living as a military formation in c. year 1603-4 because they’ve just been tasked with a military assignment by their oba in response to a new development that had just come up relatively recently.

The settlement itself, from Ulsheimer’s observation, is not supposed to be anything else than a town.

[s]At this period in Benin history, the 1500s, the Benin literally believe that the Oba of Benin owns all lands and all body of water that are accessible to the Benin people. This is why when Benin move into any land of interest, they lord it over and any traditional ruler that protest are beheaded and replaced.[/s]

Perhaps that is why they move into an area thinking they can take it — and then come to know better when they meet unyielding resistance and even humiliation sometimes, e.g. in the case of Ọ̀wọ̀ in the early-1400s, in the case of Eṣan in the late-1400s, and in this case of Èkó in the mid-1500s, etc.

The Lagos traditions (which is the earlier of the native traditions) make it clear that the Binis, having realized they can’t settle in against the owners’ wish, went the amicable route and did what others did.

In other words, they sought permission to land, and a part of the island was conferred on them. Hence they became the owners of the portion given to them.

[s]Benin history is too well established to be affected by side notes, subjective opinions born out of ignorance, malice and jealousy.[/s]

Clarity drives liars insane. So, I can imagine the roots of your bitterness and pain.

Don’t be scared to point out the specific parts of my comment which do not derive from Ulsheimer’s own account.

Do that (and let me pieces you) or you ‘go to sleep’.

Peace!

Cc: rhektor, nisai, gomojam, macof

TAO11:
Well, at no point did Benin own Lagos because there is no single observer who ever said that in any report.

Instead, Binis [like different immigrants] came to live on a portion of one of the islands in Lagos as a trade immigrant group.

And Benin owned that portion of that island because it was conferred to Benin by the native owners of the land in the region — after Benin had duly sought for permission to land from the owners.

And at no point did I ever contest that Binis did come to Lagos and sought permission, from the natives, to live on the island. At no point did I not know that.

Exactly!

Because Ulsheimer’s account (yes silent on how the predecessors of the 1603-4 Binis came to settle into the island in the 1500s) actually supports the traditions from Lagos better.

And the traditions from Lagos noted that the Binis got permission to their portion of the island from the native owners — just like other immigrants too did.

+ The traditions from Lagos were collected and published way too earlier than the much later reactive revision (fraud) which the Binis came up with in the 1950s.

The settlement which the Binis couldn’t penetrate was a walled-town not a MiLiTaRy FoRtReSs or WaLLeD GarRiSoN. That’s the description from text. Now you’re hallucinating too much.

Also, stones, sticks, etc. can not efficiently bring down any mud wall — in the context of warfare.

No where in the account was it described as MiLiTaRy FoRtReSs or WaLLeD GarRiSoN. It was a town just as the one on the island (i.e. Lago) is also a town.

The Lago one, however, had its residents living as a military formation in c. year 1603-3 because they’ve just been tasked with a military assignment by their oba in response to a new development that had just come up relatively recently.

The settlement itself, from Ulsheimer’s observation, is not supposed to be anything else than a town.

Perhaps that is why they move into an area thinking they can take it — and then come to know better when they meet unyielding resistance and even humiliation sometimes, e.g. in the case of Ọ̀wọ̀ in the early-1400s, in the case of Eṣan in the late-1400s, and in this case of Èkó in the mid-1500s.

The Lagos traditions (which is the earlier of the native traditions) make it clear that the Binis, having realized they can’t settle in against the owners’ wish, went the amicable route and did what others did.

In other words, they sought permission to land, and a part of the island was conferred on them. Hence they became the owners of the portion given to them.

Clarity drives liars insane. So, I can imagine the roots of your bitterness and pain.

Don’t be scared to point out the specific parts of my comment which do not derive from Ulsheimer’s own account.

Do that (and let me pieces you) or you ‘go to sleep’.

Peace!

Cc: rhektor, nisai, gomojam

Hmmmm. Very nice.

I want to learn about Ijebu. You have books to recommend?