NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014

The idea of joint research between NIGERIA archaeology and anthropology was rooted in the American academic tradition in the early 19th century Digging Facts Through following the recognition of analysis of culture Tape-recording and Trowel: an through the remains of human activities (Binford Archaeological Study of Owu in 1964). Thus, the American understanding of the Southwestern Nigeria two disciplines suggests a very strong intersection between archaeology and anthropology. It should Aderemi Suleiman Ajala, PhD be noted that the shift from archaeological focus Department of Archaeology and on the process, to the need for combining both Anthropology cultural process with function in the analysis of University of culture and society necessitated the joint research Ibadan of archaeologists and anthropologists (Teltser Nigeria 1995). Thus, shifting the locus of culture and [email protected] social change from process to function serves as a satisfactory explanation for the anthropological relations with the archaeological methodology of studying the human distant past. While the older process paradigm relied on simple linear causality, the new functionalist logic runs through the entire Introduction causal chain. The functionalist perspective treats material culture as a response to some human Twenty-first century knowledge production needs, making it adaptive (but not creative), and not requires collaboration among different academic just a technological desire occasioned by the human disciplines in order to develop inter-disciplinary environment (Pauketat 2001). In essence, material and multi-disciplinary perspectives. Despite the culture expresses entire cultural processes and richness of this trend in scientific research, its functions. Hence, while archaeologists searched practice is less popular in West African archaeology for ‘material correlates’ of those processes, it is not and anthropology studies. Even at the University a wasteful exercise for archaeologists to equally of Ibadan, Nigeria where the two disciplines extend their search to the functions which those (archaeology and anthropology) share a single materials serve as well as how they are adaptive in department, little emphasis is placed on joint their different contexts within the contents of space research between archaeology and anthropology. and time. The above becomes more imperative The Ibadan school of archaeology and anthropology especially when the object of study requires a is therefore confronted by a number of factors, constructive link between the immediate past and which includes incapacitation in putting cultural the present, focussing certain attributes of social ideas into full analytical contexts. Similarly life such as leadership, identity, subsistence, and the production of cultural knowledge through a gender among others. As I intend to argue later in comprehensive and intensive field-based research the context of migration, settlement and identity is lacking. However, this does not suggest that the of the Owu people in southwestern Nigeria, such subjects of archaeology and anthropology are not social life can only be explained in terms of their connected in Ibadan, but rather, the point remains roles in a larger social system such as in resource that in the most recent time, evidences of joint field- distribution, innate urge for war and migration based research involving the two disciplines is very caused by coincidence of history; and in a larger scanty if it exists. context in the appropriation of space and trade contact, causing population increase and drift. In

34 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014 this example, or/and in any other similar study, Not until 1974 when the Department of Archaeology reliance on archaeological methodology that sticks and Anthropology was established at the University to causality of material culture, will somehow be of Ibadan, the relevance of contemporary culture extraneous in the proper analysis of historical in the study of extant human ways of life was settings and their functions in contemporary not embraced in Nigeria. Despite persistent calls societies. for collaborative research between the two units of culture study (Ajala 2008), archaeology and Similarly since historical processes are anthropology scholars in the department were very quite different from what used to be called ‘cultural slow to extol the richness, which the new scientific processes’ (Binford 1965), explaining history entails paradigm was supposed to offer. However in 2011, seeking the proximate causes of how a certain social joint and collaborative research that combined the feature (identity) developed in a particular time or two units of culture study in Ibadan, focussing on place (Binford 1983). Thus, it is equally improbable migration, settlement and identity of Owu people for anthropology relying mainly on oral texts and in southwestern Nigeria was initiated. This novel verbal records to establish how material culture are idea was cultivated from the American tradition translated to identity construction and how such of archaeological and anthropological research. are functionalised into specific traits and symbols What were the rationales for joint research typical of a particular society. As further elaborated between archaeology and anthropology at the by Pauketat (2001) what used to be called ‘cultural University of Ibadan? How was the methodology processes’ were abstract, thus to explain the marshalled? What are the implications of this joint principles of social life and why something occurred, and collaborative research to archaeology and ultimate and convincing explanations must therefore anthropology in Nigeria? partly rely on the material constructs associated with the society under study. In other words, social What follows is an explanation of how life is neither a text, nor a surface of activity with and why Ibadan archaeologists and “socio- an underlying scheme of meaning (Isambart 1986), cultural anthropologists” are positioned to make but a multiplicity of actions structured by different joint contributions to building cultural knowledge and simultaneous past and present logics guiding on settlement, migration and identity of Owu in social life. In essence, fieldwork in anthropology is southwestern Nigeria. more than a simple reading of the material cultures as Geertz (1973) argued. Indeed there are plenty of texts in life. According to Isambart (1986), while Rationale for Owu Study anthropology is capable of interrogating text as cultural metaphor, its generalization to the entirety Designed as a five year research plan in of social life, both material and non-material the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology requires archaeological appreciations of the human starting in 2011, both archaeological methods of remains especially when time perspective is to be reconnaissance survey, collection of oral history considered. This can also afford anthropological and excavation, and anthropological methods of study with a multi-dimensional representation of key informant interviews, textual analysis of oriki the textual data. Without these, ethnography will and relevant traditional oral genres, biographical exclude the precision of time and spatial context of analysis as well as retrieval of archival materials social and cultural interrogation. are thought useful in creating cultural knowledge of Owu people. This is important considering The interdisciplinary nature of culture the complexities surrounding 18th century study using both archaeology and anthropology as Yoruba history. Such complexities relate to the methods of research was least recognized in Nigeria. interrelationship among the Yoruba communities

35 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014 that existed prior to the 18th century and their expressed in terms of diasporic and ‘original’ Owu recreation in the late 19th century and later. indigeneship. The political relationship with other Yoruba, especially in their diasporic settlement in Towards the end of the 18th century a , is a clear indication of Owu origin and general upheaval in destroyed the identity problems. peaceful existence of the residents of present day southwestern Nigeria; the area known to have been Salient is the identification of the original under the control of the powerful Kingdom of Old settlement of Owu people in Yorubaland. Owu Oyo. At that time the kingdom extended to some was initially in some kind of ‘special relationship’ portions of the present day republics of Benin and with the powerful Old Oyo Kingdom before the Togo. Within this forest region there was large scale outbreak of hostility between Owu and the Old Oyo migration and identity dislocation exacerbated by Empire (Mabogunje and Omer-Cooper 1971), and refugees and tendencies to build new political according to Johnson (1921) the capital of Owu hegemonies in several places in Yorubaland Kingdom was evidently one of the major towns (Ausman 1971). Among the affected of southern Yorubaland. Despite this assertion by the upheavals were the Owu people, who in 1830, to the present, there is uncertainty both about the together with the Egbas, (another Yoruba people original home of the Owu people and even about who fled Ibadan to jointly establish Abeokuta with the site of the town that was besieged and destroyed other Yoruba war refugees), founded their own in the war. In contestation of Owu origins, two heterogeneous encampment of Abeokuta. Owu communities, Orile Owu and Owu-Ile in the present people first moved from their original settlement day Osun State in southwestern Nigeria and Owu- after unsuccessfully resisting the Oyo people and Isin in Isin Local Government Area of their allies. They were eventually routed out by the region of the present day Kwara State, lay claim combined forces of the Ijebu and the together to autochthonous settlement of the . with their allies, and joined with the Egbas to found Apart from knowing the original settlement, the size a quarter in Abeokuta (Biobaku 1957). But the and military might of Owu people in the earliest Owu remained a distinct community, equal in status time are still conjectural issues in Yoruba history. with each of the three dominant Egba sections: the While it was established that Owu people were Egba Alake, the Gbagura and the Oke Ona, who dreaded by old Oyo imperials, having defeated Ife presently dominate the socio-political space of thrice and Ijebus once in warfare (Johnson 1921), Abeokuta. The Owu in Abeokuta initially thought one wonders what was the size and the military of Abeokuta as an army camp, a temporary abode might of the people that put fear in their neighbours, to reside until it was safe to return to their old town including the Ikoyi-Igbo, Apòmù, Ìkirè, Gbògán, around Oyo forest (Biobaku 1957). Before the Akiibótó and Ìwárò among others. foundation of Owu quarters in Abeokuta and the attempt to return to their original settlement was The precise connection between Owu unmet, some other Owu, who migrated from a space and other Yoruba, both in pre-Abeokuta and in that still remains controversial, settled closed to Ile- the contemporary period, remains speculative. Ife in the thick forest known as Orile-Owu. Orile- Research is still less interested in the relationship Owu also fell to a war caused by Ijebu/Ibadan/Ife. between Owu and Oyo, Egba, Ijebu and Ife Yorubas The war caused serious displacement of the Owu before and after the fall of Owu. Following the defeat to the extent that many Owu communities sprung of Owu people by the combined forces of Ijebu and up in southwestern Nigeria initially as refugee Ife, relying on the then Ijebu modern weaponry of camps. Like many other Yoruba that migrated from guns, which the cutlass and bow and arrows used by their original settlements, Owu people are today Owu could not suppress, a curse was said to have enmeshed in contestation of identity and history been placed on anybody who ventured to rebuild

36 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014

Owu (Klarke 2002). This suggests that Owu people and anthropological research in Nigeria. As the had lived with other Yorubas with unforgiving Director of CBAAC and an historian, he saw the memories of the past. One is curious to know what need to support our fieldwork. The situation further these memories were? In what ways have these suggests that the present Nigerian administrative memories impacted the Owu relationship with other norm of using incompatible professionals to Yorubas in contemporary southwestern Nigeria? manage institutions in the country is a serious threat to development. In the case of CBAAC, the right Emerging from this is the need to establish peg was fixed in the round hole, thus the result is the original settlement of Owu people in order to excellent productivity. explain Owu diasporic problem. There is also the need to aggregate memories and traditions about As the fieldwork intends to promote inter- Owu people in order to contextualize Owu self- disciplinary perspectives, students from other identity, values and their quest for survival in departments in the University were attracted to every Owu location in Yorubaland. This is with fieldwork. As student registration swelled, students the view to engage memories as capital capable of from other departments including Geography, being translated to heritage. In the case of Owu, Botany, Linguistics and Theatre Arts showed as with other Yoruba groups, it is desirable to interest in the fieldwork. Through their participation identify distinctive heritage and traditions that are the fieldwork was not only enriched in its multi- particular to each of the Yoruba groups, as well as disciplinary perspectives, but various disciplinary the dynamics of such traditions within the context skills such as cartography and mapping from of time and space. geography; botanical and palynological skills from botany as well as language analysis from linguistics students provided a good foundation for the research Owu Fieldwork on Owu. Many students lacked basic knowledge of ethnography and excavation because they were not The fieldwork started with fund drives from majors in archaeology and anthropology. For this corporate agencies, students’ registration for field reason a fieldwork workshop was imperative. The school and personal donations from members of staff workshop was not only meant to equip the team of the Archaeology and Anthropology Department, in the rudiments of excavation and ethnography, University of Ibadan. Not much was realised, as it is but in line with entrepreneurship in anthropology obvious that support for research in Nigeria is still and archaeology, the fieldwork workshop was not encouraged. Even, the most related Nigerian made to achieve skill acquisition that went beyond agencies to research and development could not excavation or ordinary ethnography. In essence, support this research because they claimed to skills including photography, filming, surveying, have dwindling financial resources. However, the and computer editing programmes were taught. intervention of the Centre for Black African Arts and Culture (CBAAC), supported the fieldwork. The actual fieldwork was conducted at Although the funding was relatively small, the two sites instead of the three that were suggested CBAAC support did not only confirm that it is a in the fieldwork proposal. These were Orile-Owu centre that appreciates research in culture study but and Ilemowu communities in Osun State. The third also one that appreciates the need for innovative and site, Owu quarters in Abeokuta was dropped for ground breaking research in Nigeria. In addition, logistical problems for fieldwork accommodation the Director of CBAAC was then a Professor of in Abeokuta. Nonetheless, since the project will History from the University of Lagos and has a continue for five years, it is hoped that the problem number of inspiring research projects, so it is not will be resolved in subsequent fieldwork. Owu surprising that CBAAC supported archaeological quarter in Abeokuta is very strategic to the research

37 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014 objectives, since the community has the largest knowledge advancing not only within the core of the population of Owu people in state. Besides, various disciplines but increasingly at the interface Owu quarter in Abeokuta also claims supremacy of disciplines and through new combinations of over Orile-Owu in Osun State, as the first settlement disciplines. Because of their complexity, current of Owu people after the war that sacked Orile-Owu societal, global, and scientific problems frequently in the 1830s. require contributions from multiple fields to achieve understanding and solutions. In particular, many Intensive archaeological work was groundbreaking advances in science and technology engaged in Orile-Owu with reconnaissance and are being achieved by combining results from fields excavation, while ethnography was favoured in once thought to be unrelated: e.g., the discovery of Ilemowu. Although excavation was also attempted the structure of DNA, medical imaging techniques in Ilemowu, success was limited as the excavated such as MRI, and satellite-based global positioning site yielded little archaeological findings. It did system (GPS). If this is achieved in disciplines serve to demonstrate to students how to conduct that are distant in relationships, how much more archaeological excavation. Orile Owu site yielded could a better result be achieved if archaeology a collection of rich archaeological materials and anthropology deepen interdisciplinary research including potsherds, iron slag and smoking pipes. in Nigeria? Besides combining archaeology and The materials are undergoing analysis in the anthropology field methodology in the Owu study, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology. and including other disciplines such as geography, Settlement history was also collected through history, botany, religious studies and theatre arts ethnography relying on textual analysis of Oriki demonstrated the strength in unity in diversity. The and oral accounts from respondents using intensive present Owu study therefore suggests that fieldwork key informant interview. Similarly, collection is not only interactional between the respondents of oral data through the analysis of Oriki, oral and the researcher, but it is more so among various interviews and Ifa verses from Ilemowu suggested disciplines engaged in fieldwork. It is thus an a relationship between Orile-Owu and Ilemowu. informal way of acquiring the knowledge and Some other Owu communities around Ilemowu are practice of research in other disciplines involved in located in Telemu, Kuta, Ogbaagba and Iwo in Osun fieldwork. State. All these communities are linked with Orile- Owu. Thus, there seems to be more concentration The challenge now for archaeologists and of Owu settlements around Ilemowu environs. This anthropologists in Nigeria is to become better region measured about 40 kilometers square. The positioned to undertake the kinds of research and first round of the fieldwork in 2011 was two weeks. to develop the kinds of instructional programs that address issues with many dimensions and that require combining knowledge from more than Conclusion one field. Through the present research enterprise on Owu, the Department of Archaeology and Universities in contemporary times often Anthropology, University of Ibadan will make these describe their missions as the creation and the changes possible in order to strengthen its research transmission of knowledge. For generations, and educational programs to address compelling researchers in universities have organized core national and global problems, to assume even areas of knowledge that have come to be called stronger leadership in higher education in Nigeria, “disciplines.” Traditionally, knowledge advanced and to continue serving the people of southwestern within disciplines, and curriculum was organized Nigeria well. Indeed, the comprehensiveness of within discipline-based departments. However, as archaeology and anthropology academic programs shown in the current research endeavour, we now see and the challenges of Yoruba cultural history

38 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014 provide exceptional opportunities to accomplish Bibliography here what cannot be attempted at other institutions. In this regard, the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Ibadan does not only Ajala, A.S. have an opportunity but also has the responsibility st to fully engage in the next phase of knowledge 2008 Anthropology (in the 21 Century) generation, one that is more interdisciplinary, as a borderless discipline: implications for more cross-disciplinary than research conducted archaeological studies in Nigeria. Nyame previously. Current research in Owu demonstrates Akuma 69: 23-30. that, like other research interests, Yoruba cultural studies are particularly ripe for this kind of inquiry. Ausman, J.L. Even with the positive experience from the Owu study, there are many challenges at the 1971 The disturbances in Abeokuta in 1918. institutional level. The existing opportunity for Canadian Journal of African Studies / research funding in Nigerian universities does not Revue Canadienne des Études Africaines accommodate inter-disciplinary research. Thus 5(1): 45-60. access to funding is a stumbling block to the optimal success of our novel fieldwork. Again departmental course structure, especially at the undergraduate level, has cut off the historical concentration Binford, L.R. on interdisciplinary discipline-based programs, which the department was established to achieve. 1964 A consideration of archaeological research It is therefore important to review these structures design. American Antiquity 29(4): 425-441. for on-going research, to build foundational relationships not only for prospective researchers in archaeology and anthropology, but also to Binford, L.R. potentially and significantly break the disciplinary barriers in the two disciplines. This will establish 1965 Archaeological systematics and the study new ways of doing research and instruction that will of culture process. American Antiquity 31: cross the traditional boundaries as the current Owu 203-10. study seeks to achieve. In essence, the present Owu study anticipates that current research interest in the department move to more effectively combine several other disciplines to expand knowledge and Binford, L.R. to address problems of great complexity especially confronting Yoruba cultural history in the 21st 1983 Working at Archaeology. New York: century. Academic Press.

Biobaku, S.O.

1957 The Egba and Their Neighbours. London: Macmillan.

39 NYAME AKUMA No. 81 JUNE 2014

Geertz, C. Mabogunje, A.L., and J. Omer-Cooper

1973 The Interpretations of Cultures. New York: 1971 Owu in Yoruba History. Ibadan: Ibadan Basic Books. University Press.

Isambart, F.A. Pauketat, T.R.

1986 Meaning, Comprehension and Value. In 2001 Practice and history in archaeology: an Max Weber (ed.), Ethique et pratiques emerging paradigm. Anthropological symboliques, adapted in English as Theories 1(1): 73-98. Notebook 3, Meaning and Comprehension. Paris: EHESS-CNRS, pp. 28-76. Teltser, P.A. (ed.)

Johnson, S. 1995 Evolutionary Archaeology: Methodological Issues. Tucson: University of Arizona 1921 History of the Yorubas. Lagos: CMS Press. Publishers.

Klarke, K.M.

2002 Governmentality, modernity and the historical politics of Ò yọ ́-hegemony ̣ in Yorùbá trans-national revivalism. Anthropologica 44(2): 271-293.

40