By Yinka Kareem
According to a statement by Bode Durojaye, the Media and Publicity Director for Alaafin Akeem Owoade, in the ultimatum addressed to the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi, Ojaja II, Alaafin Owoade is portrayed as the “Titan of Yorubaland” (https://guardian.ng/news/nigeria/metro//2659425alaafin-gives-
ooni-48-hr-ultimatum-to-revoke-chieftancy-title-conferred-on-ibadan-businessman/)
Describing the Alaafin as the “Titan of Yorubaland” reflects a revival of Oyo’s cultural hegemony under Alaafin Akeem Owoade. In the past, the Oyo Empire, built through military conquest by its powerful cavalry also wielded cultural hegemony as a potent tool to assert its influence over subjugated peoples.
Sophie Raine suggests that cultural hegemony functions when “Dominant views [are] transmitted through culture…[as] a way of obtaining the consent of the population. Rather than using military force, these cultural works are designed to convince society that the dominant ideology is common sense and that there is no alternative.”
(https://www.perlego.com/knowledge/study-guides/what-is-cultural-hegemony/)
In the past, the Oyo people made use of oral traditions to convey their dominant beliefs among other Yoruba people that they represented the authentic Yoruba identity and the Alaafin, their king, was the rightful owner of Yoruba Land.
One of the known praise songs of the Oyo people is “A ji se bi Oyo laari, Oyo kii sebi baba eni koo kan,” which means that others may follow Oyo’s lead, but the Oyos do not imitate anyone. However, the arrival of Christianity in Abeokuta in 1843 marked a shift, with the Egba emerging as the new trendsetters.
This change was symbolized in the 1904 visit of Alake Gbadebo I, an Egba monarch to England on a state visit.
The fact that it was the Alake, rather than the Alaafin, who first embarked on an official visit to England, alongside numerous other historical developments, demonstrates that the Egba have taken the lead as trendsetters in Yoruba Land. Yet, while the Egba proudly proclaim “Ilu Egba, ibe lolaju ti bere…” (Egba Land is where Western civilization among the Yoruba began), the Oyo still sing “A ji se bi Oyo laari, Oyo kii sebi baba eni koo kan.”
The Oyo people ensured cultural domination with the legend that “the seventh and last born [of Oduduwa], Oranyan, …was the progenitor of the Yoruba proper, or as they are better distinguished OYOS” (Samuel Johnson, The History of the Yoruba) Labeling the Oyo as the ‘Yorubas Proper’ reflects a hegemonic narrative.
In a paper, “Rethinking the Origin and Meaning of the Name Yoruba”, Yinka Kareem explains that the name traces back to the Arabic personal name Ya’rab, which itself stems from the Hebrew root ‘arab,’ meaning ‘west’ or ‘sunset.’ Thus, the term ‘Yoruba’ can be interpreted as ‘the people from the west’ or ‘those who dwell where the sun sets’(https://www.academia.edu/69698735/RETHINKING_THE_ORIGIN_AND_MEANING_OF_THE_NAME_YORUBA).
Although the Hausa used the term “Yariba” to describe the Oyo and other groups as people from the west or those dwelling where the sun sets, they did not single out the Oyo as superior or more authentic. The Oyo, aiming to assert dominance and set themselves apart from other Yoruba communities, created the narrative that positioned them as the authentic or Yoruba Proper. The Oyo’s cultural hegemony is also evident in how they categorized other Yoruba communities. They labeled those from Idode, Masifa, Ife Odan, Ara, Iwo, Ilora, Akinmorin, Fiditi, Awe, Ago Oja, and Owu as “Epos,” meaning weeds.
According to Johnson in The History of the Yorubas, this label, a derogatory one, stemmed from the belief that these communities were located in the kingdom’s most distant regions, exhibited crude and dishonest behavior, and lacked the loyalty seen in other Yoruba groups.
It is quite ironic that the Oyo people, who once considered certain groups beneath them, were themselves viewed as inferior by the Ijebu during the era of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. The Ijebu perceived the Oyo and other communities as people fit for enslavement—a sentiment clearly reflected in their saying: “A fi Ijebu, a fi Oyinbo, awon toku eru ni won,” meaning “Apart from the Ijebu and the white man, everyone else is a slave.”
In addition, the Oyo considered their dialect to be the genuine form of the Yoruba language. Johnson points out that, “The Ekun Osi Oyos are regarded as speaking the purest Yoruba. The ancient city of Oyo also lies in this province” (The History of the Yorubas).
But in the 19th century, the Egba people actively resisted the dominant narrative promoted by the Oyo, refusing to view the Oyo language as superior to their own. In 1868, the Egba community in Abeokuta declined to use a Primer labeled as a Yoruba translation, insisting that it be renamed as an Egba translation. (John Peel, Religious Encounter and the of the Yoruba ).
Their resistance was rooted in the perception that the so-called Yoruba version was essentially written in the Oyo dialect, which they did not consider superior to Egba. At that time, the Egba did not even see themselves as part of the wider Yoruba identity, and therefore dismissed any claim that elevated the status of the Oyo language above theirs.
Oyo people also dominated other Yoruba in the past through the saying “Alaafin l’oni ile,” meaning “the Alaafin is the lord of the land.” Oyo tradition holds that after Oduduwa’s demise, rulers of Benin, Ila, Sabe, Popo, Owu, and Ketu received his movable possessions, while Oranmiyan, the youngest, inherited the land itself. This inheritance made Oranmiyan the most prominent and wealthy among them, as all his brothers’ belongings were ultimately situated on the land he owned. (The History of the Yoruba)
Biodun Adediran questions the reliability of the narrative, especially because it names Olupopo, the King of Popo, as one of Oduduwa’s descendants, despite historical records indicating that Olupopo existed before Oduduwa’s time in Ile-Ife. In addition, Adediran also highlights Robin Law’s interpretation of the story as a tool of cultural hegemony, noting Law’s argument that it “is an attempt by Oyo to legitimize its imperial claims over …neighbouring states.”( The Frontier States of Western Yorubaland…)
The cultural hegemony of the Oyo is even reflected in how they historically interpreted the title of the Ooni of Ife. According to Johnson, the name “Ooni” originates from the phrase “Omo Oluwo ni”, meaning “child of a sacrificial victim,” which was shortened to Owoni, with Oluwo referring to someone offered in sacrifice. Over time, Owoni became the official title for the spiritual leader or high priest of Ife. Johnson emphasizes that this role was considered national rather than merely local or tribal (The History of the Yorubas).
The Oyo people used this interpretation to portray the Ooni not as a sovereign ruler, but as a religious figure, thereby reinforcing the idea that the Alaafin, who they claimed ruled all of Yoruba Land, held superior authority. However Elugbaju has debunked the claim that the Ooni is just a chief priest in Ile-Ife (https://escholarship.org/content/qt8kt3g586/qt8kt3g586_noSplash_917ec86cc082b22e93618ca201759449.pdf?t=r6l1jm).
It’s important to know that the Oyo interpretation of the Ooni’s title isn’t the only perspective within Yoruba traditions. Babatunde Lawal notes that after Oranmiyan’s death, Obalufon was invited back from exile to reclaim the throne of Ife. During this time, he reportedly changed the king’s title from Olofin—meaning “owner of the palace,” a term introduced by Oduduwa, to Ooni, meaning “owner of the land.” This shift symbolized the restoration of power to the original Ife inhabitants, predating Oduduwa’s influence ( “Aworan: Representing the Self and its Metaphysical other in Yoruba Art”).
In promoting the Alaafin’s primacy through cultural hegemony, the Oyo engaged in a form of historical denialism. According to Kleo Catienza, historical denialism “…is the clear dismissal of historical narratives “for the sake of coming up with an extremely prejudiced historical interpretation or opinion” (https://www.
scoutmag.ph/72395/historical-revisionism-vs-denialism/) The Oyo in the past dismissed any historical narrative asserting the seniority of the Ooni over the Alaafin.
On the issue of seniority, Bascon states that in Yoruba Land, “…if any King outranked the other it was the Oni of Ife by virtue of his seniority. Letters written to the Oni by other Yoruba kings in the 1920s and 1930s addressed him as “Father” and were signed “Son”, and he replied reciprocally ; even Johnson …admits that the King of Oyo receives his ” Sword of Justice ” from Ife…” (The Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria). Nonetheless, Oyo persistently sought to persuade the wider Yoruba populace not to regard the Ooni, the Father of Yoruba monarchs, as a senior of the Alaafin.
In the present dispensation, with Alaafin Akeem Owoade, on the exalted throne of the Alaafin, the Oyo cultural hegemony is experiencing a revival, accompanied by familiar patterns of historical denialism. Part of the narrative now from Oyo Palace is that “the British had signed a treaty with Alaafin recognising him as the superior head of the Yoruba Nation” (https://punchng.com/uk-recognises-alaafin-as-yoruba-supreme-ruler-owoade…)
Given this assertion, it becomes essential to focus on the issues of traditional treaties and international treaties among the Yoruba.
According to Encyclopedia Britannica, “The term treaty is used generally to describe a variety of instruments, including conventions, agreements, arrangements, protocols, covenants, charters, and acts” ( https://www.britannica.com/topic/treaty). Given this context, the Ita Ijero Treaty, an informal agreement among the descendants of Oduduwa that existed prior to any treaties signed between the British and Alaafin Adeyemi, should also be taken into account.
Regarding the traditional Ita Ijero treaty, Akinjogbin and Ayandele suggest that the essence of the agreement seems to affirm “… that Ile-Ife should be kept absolutely inviolate and must never be attacked by the departing princes or their descendants. This is in keeping with the Yoruba belief that you should not strike your father or desecrate your orirun, which is at the same time the place of origin and the final resting place of the spirits of the ancestors” ( “Yorubaland Up To 1800” in Groundwork of Nigerian History).
This informal agreement formed the foundation of the royal tradition in Yorubaland during the 1920s and 1930s, where Yoruba kings continued to refer to the Ooni of Ife as their father, despite the Alaafin having entered into a treaty with the British that recognized him as the leader of the Yoruba people.
At this point, it is important to highlight a significant flaw in the treaties that Alaafin Adeyemi signed with the British as the recognized leader of Yorubaland. One such treaty, dated July 23, 1888 and titled “The Treaty,” identifies him as the ruler of Oyo and the head of Yorubaland, which was defined to include Egba, Ketu, Jebu, and Oyo. However, the inclusion of Egba as part of the Alaafin’s domain undermines the validity of the document, given that Lisabi had successfully led the Egba to break free from Oyo’s control around 1780.
Any treaty in which Alaafin Adeyemi is presented as the head of Yorubaland, including Egba territory within his jurisdiction, lacks credibility and reflects a colonial fabrication by the British aimed at simplifying their control over the Yoruba people. These treaties fail to represent the true historical dynamics of the 19th century. Therefore, such documents should no longer be referenced by the Oyo Palace, as doing so not only disregards the earlier Ita Ajero traditional agreement but also erases the significant triumph of the Egba over Oyo in the 18th century.
The British and the Alaafin owe the Egba an apology for wrongly placing them under the authority of the Alaafin of Oyo in treaties that misrepresented the actual political realities of the 19th century. Such treaties, which falsely portray the Alaafin as the overlord of the Egba, are fundamentally flawed and lack historical legitimacy. In contrast, the Ita Ajero traditional treaty offers a more accurate and culturally grounded framework for determining seniority between the Ooni and the Alaafin—symbolically viewed as a relationship between father and son.
(Yinka Kareem, a member of Ogun ANA (Association of Nigerian Authors) writes from Abeokuta, Ogun State.)
