KUBA1987:
Which palace ?
which descendents ?
My take on this is that all this is just a folklore.
At least we agree on a few things.

Well, there was a person who played the role ascribed to ‘Oduduwa’ in Ife history; not the Mecca or Sky guy. An usurper who left his part of Ife and planted himself and his people in power.

People have come to peg the folklore oduduwa to him.

KUBA1987:
How do I even know if your Joan Afonso d'Aveiro ever existed ?
All I see is a claim made by a woman who is still alive by the way.
The woman makes a claim about an event which allegedly happened around 600 years ago.
Now I want proof of her claims.
I want to see the documents which she read and which made her to make her claim.
Either she is basing her claim on historical documents from eye witnesses (Joan Afonso d'Aveiro) or people who had a conversation with the eye witness, or she is fabricating.
Are you reasoning badly on purpose ?

You may have to contact the Portuguese archives.

You know, in order to not waste ones time in a wild goose chase, it is best to ask the person who made the claim to show the proof which made him or her make the claim in the first place.
We do things this way also because it is hard and time costing to disprove things, therefor if we accept the fact that one must not claim what he can't prove, each claim would then naturally have a proof attached to it and everybody's life would be easier.

OrisaEsu:


You may have to contact the Portuguese archives.

KUBA1987:
You know, in order to not waste ones time in a wild goose chase, it is best to ask the person who made the claim to show the proof which made him or her make the claim in the first place.
We do things this way also because it is hard and time costing to disprove things, therefor if we accept the fact that one must not claim what he can't prove, each claim would then naturally have a proof attached to it and everybody's life would be easier.

This is why bibliography is an important part of a research. It is for you to go to whatever references provided for a claim and study it further.

No one knows why your Oba told the Portuguese what he said except of course you can go back in time to ask him what made him say what he said. Outside of this, I do not see the need to create a problem where there’s none.

The sources are:

Pacheco Pariera, Duarte. Esmeraldo de situ orbis. Edited and translatedby G H. T. Kimble. London: Hakluyt Society, 1937.

‘Crone, G.C. The Voyages of Cadamosto and other Documents (London, 1937).

The writers were foreigners with no vested interests. Historians of repute, local & international, have used these sources even in theses published Oxford university that would have subjected it to scrutiny.

If this does not work for you, then you may have to personally source for or go to the Portuguese Archives to lay your hands on the raw data Pacheco Pariera, Duarte. Esmeraldo de situ orbis, do your own translation and move on with it.

Silly me I thought we could have an intellectually honest conversation, only for you to return back to your own bias.
Let me remind you that there is still no proof that the Oba ever said what you claim.
Let me also remind you that even the text of suzan doesn't say that the Oba ever said that. Rather it talks of some oghané to whom the rulers of Benin allegedly had a spiritual allegeance. No Oba is mentionned.
Now it seems to me that I have already explained to you that when one makes a claim, one must provide proof. I am not the one making the claim that the Oba said what you guys are claiming, it is up to you people to back up your claim with proof.
Also let me remind you once more that the books you claim to be the references were written in 1937.
Stop being fraudulent. I don't care of the reputation of the book, it could be quoted by the pope for all I care. I care about its historical relevance which depends only on the date of publication.
You can't have an event take place 600 years ago and publish a book about it today with no document written 600 years ago on which you are basing your claim.
I really thought you could go beyond your tribal bias, but I see I was wrong. You are not sufficiently intelligent for that.
Provide proof for your claim or withdraw the claim.

By the way the second text doesn't even claim the ooni of ife as being oghané, it claims he is just one of many possibilities. Meaning that it is guess work at best to even suggest that the ooni of ife is oghané.
And the second text doesn't talk about any spiritual allegiance ("loose spiritual allegiance" is mentionned in the first text) it talks about oghané playing a role in the corronation ceremony.

OrisaEsu:


This is why bibliography is an important part of a research. It is for you to go to whatever references provided for a claim and study it further.

No one knows why your Oba told the Portuguese what he said except of course you can go back in time to ask him what made him say what he said. Outside of this, I do not see the need to create a problem where there’s none.

The sources are:

Pacheco Pariera, Duarte. Esmeraldo de situ orbis. Edited and translatedby G H. T. Kimble. London: Hakluyt Society, 1937.

‘Crone, G.C. The Voyages of Cadamosto and other Documents (London, 1937).

The writers were foreigners with no vested interests. Historians of repute, local & international, have used these sources even in theses published Oxford university that would have subjected it to scrutiny.

If this does not work for you, then you may have to personally source for or go to the Portuguese Archives to lay your hands on the raw data Pacheco Pariera, Duarte. Esmeraldo de situ orbis, do your own translation and move on with it.

The ooni of ife didn't meet the europeans until the 19th century. And some people want to claim he used to be important.
You guys are players. The real kings of Africa all met the europeans around the 15th century or before, because the europeans were in desperate need of strong trading partners. The insignificance of the ooni of ife is such that either his throne is very new either he never was relevent and thus nobody went after him.

KUBA1987:
The ooni of ife didn't meet the europeans until the 19th century. And some people want to claim he used to be important.
You guys are players. The real kings of Africa all met the europeans around the 15th century or before, because the europeans were in desperate need of strong trading partners. The insignificance of the ooni of ife is such that either his throne is very new either he never was relevent and thus nobody went after him.

The guy was irrelevant !! Its that simple

KUBA1987:
Silly me I thought we could have an intellectually honest conversation, only for you to return back to your own bias.
Let me remind you that there is still no proof that the Oba ever said what you claim.
Let me also remind you that even the text of suzan doesn't say that the Oba ever said that. Rather it talks of some oghané to whom the rulers of Benin allegedly had a spiritual allegeance. No Oba is mentionned.
Now it seems to me that I have already explained to you that when one makes a claim, one must provide proof. I am not the one making the claim that the Oba said what you guys are claiming, it is up to you people to back up your claim with proof.
Also let me remind you once more that the books you claim to be the references were written in 1937.
Stop being fraudulent. I don't care of the reputation of the book, it could be quoted by the pope for all I care. I care about its historical relevance which depends only on the date of publication.
You can't have an event take place 600 years ago and publish a book about it today with no document written 600 years ago on which you are basing your claim.
I really thought you could go beyond your tribal bias, but I see I was wrong. You are not sufficiently intelligent for that.
Provide proof for your claim or withdraw the claim.

By the way the second text doesn't even claim the ooni of ife as being oghané, it claims he is just one of many possibilities. Meaning that it is guess work at best to even suggest that the ooni of ife is oghané.
And the second text doesn't talk about any spiritual allegiance ("loose spiritual allegiance" is mentionned in the first text) it talks about oghané playing a role in the corronation ceremony.

KUBA1987:
Silly me I thought we could have an intellectually honest conversation, only for you to return back to your own bias.
Let me remind you that there is still no proof that the Oba ever said what you claim.
Let me also remind you that even the text of suzan doesn't say that the Oba ever said that. Rather it talks of some oghané to whom the rulers of Benin allegedly had a spiritual allegeance. No Oba is mentionned.
Now it seems to me that I have already explained to you that when one makes a claim, one must provide proof. I am not the one making the claim that the Oba said what you guys are claiming, it is up to you people to back up your claim with proof.
Also let me remind you once more that the books you claim to be the references were written in 1937.
Stop being fraudulent. I don't care of the reputation of the book, it could be quoted by the pope for all I care. I care about its historical relevance which depends only on the date of publication.
You can't have an event take place 600 years ago and publish a book about it today with no document written 600 years ago on which you are basing your claim.
I really thought you could go beyond your tribal bias, but I see I was wrong. You are not sufficiently intelligent for that.
Provide proof for your claim or withdraw the claim.

By the way the second text doesn't even claim the ooni of ife as being oghané, it claims he is just one of many possibilities. Meaning that it is guess work at best to even suggest that the ooni of ife is oghané.
And the second text doesn't talk about any spiritual allegiance ("loose spiritual allegiance" is mentionned in the first text) it talks about oghané playing a role in the corronation ceremony.

No time for pedestrian banter.

First emboldened: Pacheco Pariera, Duarte. Esmeraldo de situ orbis. Edited and translatedby G H. T. Kimble. London: Hakluyt Society, 1937.

Second emboldened: How do you say Ooni Ife in Bini? Egharevba said, in his work, ‘Oghene nuhe’.

Third emboldened: The fact that Oghene nuhe is what you call Ooni in your language is the basis of the ‘guess’. Several guesses have been propounded including and not limited to Igala, Nupe tp mention a fee but the theories fell apart because Benin was a power house that conquered its environment.

Fourth emboldened: either loose or tight allegiance, there was some type of allegiance.

KUBA1987:
The ooni of ife didn't meet the europeans until the 19th century. And some people want to claim he used to be important.
You guys are players. The real kings of Africa all met the europeans around the 15th century or before, because the europeans were in desperate need of strong trading partners. The insignificance of the ooni of ife is such that either his throne is very new either he never was relevent and thus nobody went after him.

This is the result of inability to read, smh.

Thankfully, the Europeans themselves attested to not being able to get into the hinterlands and only dealt with coastal kings. I suppose Itsekiri King, Lagos King, Badagry King are all equal & peers to Oba Bini considering Europeans met them all around the same time.

Leo Fobrenius’s excavations in Ife put your sub-par thinking where it belongs, on the floor.

You are deliberately fraudulent.
You are in no position to tell me or anybody how people call oni of ife in the Benin Kingdom.
I see no reason why ooni would turn into ogané.
Providing me the name of a person (who through a guess work of his own alledges that in Edo ogané means ooni of ife) doesn't change the fact that:
1) you still haven't proven that "ogané" actually exists as an Edo word (no proof yet)

2) "ogané" means ooni of ife in Edo (no proof yet)

3) that the Oba ever told Afonso that ogané were a greater king than him (no proof yet)

I would like to bring your attention to the fact that there is absolutely no ressemblance in the words "ogané" and "ooni". That is a fact.

OrisaEsu:


Second emboldened: How do you say Ooni Ife in Bini? Egharevba said, in his work, ‘Oghene nuhe’.

First of all I would reiterate: you are not an Edo speaker. You can in no way tell me or anybody if "ogané " is an Edo word and even if it were you would certainly not be able to tell me what it meant.
You are once again reasoning fraudulently in this manner: instead of proving your claim, you make an other unsubstantiated claim and use it as proof of the first yet unproven claim.

OrisaEsu:


The fact that Oghene nuhe is what you call Ooni in your language is the basis of the ‘guess’.

Once again you run away from the discussion and the need for you to provide proof for your claims.
You come back after a long period and reiterate your unsubstantiated claims.
May I remind you that the story about a "lose spiritual allegiance" (I said it in full contrary to you who is trying to hoodwink others) is still an unproven claim.

OrisaEsu:


Fourth emboldened: either loose or tight allegiance, there was some type of allegiance.

I never said that an african King meeting the europeans made him a great or important king.
What I said is that not meeting the europeans meant your ooni was neither ever great, neither ever important.
You are making a false reasoning: you are confusing A -> B with B -> A .

OrisaEsu:

I suppose Itsekiri King, Lagos King, Badagry King are all equal & peers to Oba Bini considering Europeans met them all around the same time.

Once again you make a claim and provide no proof.
I don't know the Kanem-Bornu kingdom to be costal pre-colonial country, but it had contacts with europeans and arabs, right ?

OrisaEsu:


Thankfully, the Europeans themselves attested to not being able to get into the hinterlands and only dealt with coastal kings.

Anyway, the yoruba have no history because nobody who could write ever visited them. It is that simple.
Any attempt by yoruba to claim any historical past must come through claims that Omo n'Oba n'Edo said one thing or the other to europeans about the ooni of ife or an other irrelevant yoruba village chief.
I encourage the yoruba commentators to embrace reality, your ooni and your alafin were totally irrelavant.

KUBA1987:
You are deliberately fraudulent.
You are in no position to tell me or anybody how people call oni of ife in the Benin Kingdom.
I see no reason why ooni would turn into ogané.
Providing me the name of a person (who through a guess work of his own alledges that in Edo ogané means ooni of ife) doesn't change the fact that:
1) you still haven't proven that "ogané" actually exists as an Edo word (no proof yet)

2) "ogané" means ooni of ife in Edo (no proof yet)

3) that the Oba ever told Afonso that ogané were a greater king than him (no proof yet)

I would like to bring your attention to the fact that there is absolutely no ressemblance in the words "ogané" and "ooni". That is a fact.

1. Read Egharevba’s work.

2. Again read Egharevba’s work.

3 I just provided you with the a reference to the man’s journal. It is on you to provide proof contrary to what is contained there in.

4. What is Ooni called in Edo and what is Ife called in Edo? Egharevba said Ooni is ‘Oghanne’ and Ife is ‘Uhe’

You have a problem with these?

Take it up with Pacheco & Egharevba.

The only proof I can provide you are references to texts. If you can not read then that is not my problem.

KUBA1987:
First of all I would reiterate: you are not an Edo speaker. You can in no way tell me or anybody if "ogané " is an Edo word and even if it were you would certainly not be able to tell me what it meant.
You are once again reasoning fraudulently in this manner: instead of proving your claim, you make an other unsubstantiated claim and use it as proof of the first yet unproven claim.

LOL this man is irredemably slow.

You cannot read and still won’t read. You just stretch forth your hand and demand ‘proof’.

Read Egharevba, he was Edo and that is proof enough.

It seems your brain is blocked at some level. I already said this:

KUBA1987:
You are deliberately fraudulent.
You are in no position to tell me or anybody how people call oni of ife in the Benin Kingdom.
I see no reason why ooni would turn into ogané.
Providing me the name of a person (who through a guess work of his own alledges that in Edo ogané means ooni of ife) doesn't change the fact

Now you are telling me to go and read the book in which your hero claims that my Edo people call ife uhe and call the ooni of ife ogané.
Is this in any way logical to you ?
Should I personnally write a book in which I claim the contrary to your claim and that of your hero before you start using your brain ?
How exactly can I rephrase this: you are not an Edo speaker and therefor can in no way make the allegations you make. You are asking me, an Edo to go and read what someone else says about my language as if I were to take lessons on my language from that person. Me an Edo who speaks Edo and whose parents and grand parents and cousins and brothers and sisters speak Edo. A yoruba tells me to go and consult the book of someone making claims about my language. Ok let me give it to you simple:

the ooni of ife is of no significance to us Edo and we call him by the title he and his people gave him which is ooni.
And we call ife by the same name as you "ife"
Now go and tell your hero to quote me. I actually am Edo.

OrisaEsu:


1. Read Egharevba’s work.

2. Again read Egharevba’s work.

3 I just provided you with the a reference to the man’s journal. It is on you to provide proof contrary to what is contained there in.

4. What is Ooni called in Edo and what is Ife called in Edo? Egharevba said Ooni is ‘Oghanne’ and Ife is ‘Uhe’

You have a problem with these?

Take it up with Pacheco & Egharevba.

The only proof I can provide you are references to texts. If you can not read then that is not my problem.

^^^


I am officially done with you.

You’re in no way in the field of study I deal with nor within which the numerous authorities whose works I have cited to grasp what their debates have been about.

I did not make these claims, the authorities who wrote the research made the claim. If you have a problem with it, write yours.

Need I remind you that not just anybody writes a book, it is why your Oba’s book is of no significant value to academia.

Need I remind you, if your head works right, that authorities who conduct researches are subjected to peer reviews and they take their sources seriously.

If you hav a problem with this, uncle, take it up with them. I can’t help you further.

You asked for proof, I provided you with sources but these are not proofs to you. Fam, you’re daft.

To the yoruba guy, you can't be having a converstaion with an Edo and act as if you were the one representing Edo culture and language of which you know nothing. You read one ligne of one book written by one drunk talking about Edo people. As opposed to me being Edo all of my life.
You really need to get yourself a brain.

KUBA1987:
Once again you make a claim and provide no proof.
I don't know the Kanem-Bornu kingdom to be costal pre-colonial country, but it had contacts with europeans and arabs, right ?

You don’t read & this your problem.

The Europeans who were at Sokoto & Bornu passed through Oyo & made comments about Ife.

If you put in work for your certificate, you would know this.

KUBA1987:
To the yoruba guy, you can't be having a converstaion with an Edo and act as if you were the one representing Edo culture and language of which you know nothing. You read one ligne of one book written by one drunk talking about Edo people. As opposed to me being Edo all of my life.
You really need to get yourself a brain.

Egharevba was Edo.

Debate him.

KUBA1987:
Anyway, the yoruba have no history because nobody who could write ever visited them. It is that simple.
Any attempt by yoruba to claim any historical past must come through claims that Omo n'Oba n'Edo said one thing or the other to europeans about the ooni of ife or an other irrelevant yoruba village chief.
I encourage the yoruba commentators to embrace reality, your ooni and your alafin were totally irrelavant.

LOL.

Coming from Bini whose who items of relevance [monarchy & art] were sourced from Ife.

Actually everybody can write a book if the person is backed by an edition company or has enough funds to get the book published.
This is common knowledge among scientists and novellists.
I have helped my former professors correct the mistekes in the books which they wrote and had published.
You are confusing a lot of things here, it is scientific research which is actually put to a lot of scrutini when being published in scientific journals. And even then a lot of mistakes still appear. Don't confuse scientific journals with actual book publications (two seperate things).
Scientific research is put to a lot of scrutiny especially when the work in question is being presented to a congress of scientists seriously working on (or interested in) a certain topic (e.g: Rieman's conjecture, Hilbert's problems, Quantic physics, Commutative Algebra)
This scrutini is not as intense in non scientific research journals. And once again it is even less present in ordinary book publications.
In a book publication the trend is to have a friend and coworker to read it and validate it or to validate it yourself, or to just publish it.


Anyway, back to topic, I never asked you about the reputation of the people who wrote the text on which your claim was quoted. I never asked you about the reputation of the publication process of the texts which you liked. I asked you to provide proofs of the claims which you made. Don't deny those claims now. Instead of providing proof, you provided a text in which someone else made that same claim and you went on to eulogise the reputation of that person. Yet you failed to provide proof. Well don't take it too hard on yourself, nobody can prove something which is false.

As I have already told you, it is up to you to prove your claims and not up to me to disprove your claims.
Thanks to God the police is smarter than you. If not then one day someone would accuse me of killing somebody one day. And the person wouldn't even have to prove my guilt, I would have to prove my innocence. And how exactly do you prove that you have never killed anybody ?

OrisaEsu:
^^^


I am officially done with you.

You’re in no way in the field of study I deal with nor within which the numerous authorities whose works I have cited to grasp what their debates have been about.

I did not make these claims, the authorities who wrote the research made the claim. If you have a problem with it, write yours.

Need I remind you that not just anybody writes a book, it is why your Oba’s book is of no significant value to academia.

Need I remind you, if your head works right, that authorities who conduct researches are subjected to peer reviews and they take their sources seriously.

If you hav a problem with this, uncle, take it up with them. I can’t help you further.

You asked for proof, I provided you with sources but these are not proofs to you. Fam, you’re daft.

No, I will not debate him because he is not the one whom I am talking to.
I am talking to you and I am Edo and you are not.
And I am telling you that he is wrong.
If him being Edo (as you claim) gives him authority in making that claim, then my being Edo gives me the same authority.
this puts an end to you brandishing your hero's claim as biblical truth.
The crux of the matter is that you personnally have no say in this and your claims are still unproven.

OrisaEsu:


Egharevba was Edo.

Debate him.

yet again backing an ubsubstantiated claim by an other ubsubstantiated claim.

OrisaEsu:


You don’t read & this your problem.

The Europeans who were at Sokoto & Bornu passed through Oyo & made comments about Ife.

If you put in work for your certificate, you would know this.

KUBA1987:
No, I will not debate him because he is not the one whom I am talking to.
I am talking to you and I am Edo.
And I am telling you that he is wrong.
If him being Edo (as you claim) gives him authority in making that claim, then my being Edo gives me the same authority.
this puts an end to you brandishing your hero's claim as biblical truth.
The crux of the matter is that you personnally have no say in this and your claims are still unproven.

OK now take it up with Egharevba. The essence of referencing is to give credit where it is due & to provide whom to debate/engage over any claims.

Did you actually read what you replied to ?
This is what you replied to:

KUBA1987:
No, I will not debate him because he is not the one whom I am talking to.
I am talking to you and I am Edo and you are not.
And I am telling you that he is wrong.
If him being Edo (as you claim) gives him authority in making that claim, then my being Edo gives me the same authority.
this puts an end to you brandishing your hero's claim as biblical truth.
The crux of the matter is that you personnally have no say in this and your claims are still unproven.

How logical is your response ?

OrisaEsu:


OK now take it up with Egharevba. The essence of referencing is to give credit where it is due & to provide whom to debate/engage over any claims.

KUBA1987:
Actually everybody can write a book if the person is backed by an edition company or has enough funds to get the book published.
This is common knowledge among scientists and novellists.
I have helped my former professors correct the mistekes in the books which they wrote and had published.
You are confusing a lot of things here, it is scientific research which is actually put to a lot of scrutini when being published in scientific journals. And even then a lot of mistakes still appear. Don't confuse scientific journals with actual book publications (two seperate things).
Scientific research is put to a lot of scrutiny especially when the work in question is being presented to a congress of scientists seriously working on (or interested in) a certain topic (e.g: Rieman's conjecture, Hilbert's problems, Quantic physics, Commutative Algebra)
This scrutini is not as intense in non scientific research journals. And once again it is even less present in ordinary book publications.
In a book publication the trend is to have a friend and coworker to read it and validate it or to validate it yourself, or to just publish it.


Anyway, back to topic, I never asked you about the reputation of the people wrote the text on which your claim was quoted. I never asked you about the reputation of the publication process of the texts which you liked. I asked you to provide proofs ofthe claims which you made. Don't deny those claims now. Instead of providing proof, you provided a text in which someone else made that same claim and you went on to eulogise the reputation of that person. Yet you failed to provide proof. Well don't take it too hard on yourself, nobody can prove something which is false.

As I have already told you, it is up to you to prove your claims and not up to me to disprove your claims.
Thanks to God the police is smarter than you. If not then one day someone would accuse me of killing somebody one day. And the person wouldn't even have to prove my guilt, I would have to prove my innocence. And how exactly do you prove that you have never killed anybody ?

I don’t know what is proof to you.

In my field, proof is whatever reference you provide be it text, oral data of any form, art work, archival documents and so on that others can access & assess to arrive at similar conclusion [or a different one]

I can’t give you any proof beyond texts that are regarded as proofs within the parameters I work.

KUBA1987:
yet again backing an ubsubstantiated claim by an other ubsubstantiated claim.

You want proof?

Read Clapperton’s journal.

Read Landers’ journal.

Also, apart from the Europeans reaching Yoruba land. The Hausa/Fulani up there told the Europeans about Yoruba. You want proof, read.

If your proof is to show you the Europeans’ path, place & time of conversation then I am sorry for you.

I already explained all this to you.
You are a very bad student.


If you claim that the Oba of Benin said something to Afonso around six hundred years ago, then you must back that claim with a six hundred year old document in which your claim is made. It is as simple as that. If there is no time travel involved then that is the only manner truth can actually be conserved through time (only manner except archeological discoveries which wouldn't make sense in this context).

OrisaEsu:




I don’t know what is proof to you.

In my field, proof is whatever reference you provide be it text, oral data of any form, art work, archival documents and so on that others can access & assess to arrive at similar conclusion [or a different one]

I can’t give you any proof beyond texts that are regarded as proofs within the parameters I work.

KUBA1987:
Did you actually read what you replied to ?
This is what you replied to:

How logical is your response ?

How illogical is your thinking?

I did not arrogate a claim to myself. I made a statement and pointed out its source. You want proof? Study the bibliography of my reference and continue to go back till you find the origin. At least that was what I did till I found Pacheco’s work referenced in one of the books in my study.