ABBREVIATIONS
C. M. S—-Church Missionary Society
O. B. E—– Order of British Empire
O. U. N—— Ogidi Union Nigeria
O. Y. A—— Ogidi Youth Association
O. Y. A. N—–Ogidi Youth Association Nigeria
P. G————President General
R. N. C——–Royal Niger Corporation
S. N. C———Senior Advocate of Nigeria
W. C———–Warrant Chief
xiii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cover Page—————————————————————————————-i
Fly Leaf——————————————————————————————-ii
Title Page—————————————————————————————-iii
Requirements————————————————————————————iv
Certification————————————————————————————–v
Approval Page———————————————————————————–vi
Dedication—————————————————————————————vii
Acknowledgement—————————————————————————–viii
List of Maps—————————————————————————————x
Abbreviations———————————————————————————–xii
Table of Contents——————————————————————————xiii
Abstract—————————————————————————————–xvi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study————————————————————–1
1.2 Statement of the Problem————————————————————–4
1.3 Purpose of the Study——————————————————————-6
1.4 Significant of the Study—————————————————————-7
1.5 Scope of the Study———————————————————————-8
1.6 Methodology—————————————————————————–8
1.7 Definition of Terms———————————————————————9
xiv
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction———————————————————————— – 12
2.2 The Origin of the Igbo—————————————————————12
2.3 Igbo Leadership Governance before Colonization——————————18
2.4 Igbo under Colonial Government————————————————–20
2.5 Emergence of State Recognized Traditional Rulers—————————–24
2.5.1 Igbo (general) ————————————————————– -27
2.5.2 Hereditary——————————————————————–30
2.5.3 Rotational Issue————————————————————-31
2.6 Summary of Literature Review—————————————————-37
CHAPTER THREE: OGIDI AND THE ORIGIN OF CHIEFTAINCY &
KINGSHIP INSTITUTION
3.1 Origin of Ogidi—————————————————————— 40
3.2 Early System of Administration in Ogidi———————————— 42
3.3 Introduction & Administration of Monarchy or Kingship (Igwe) in Ogidi —–46
3.4 The Chieftaincy Constitutions——————————————————–51
3.4.1 Qualification and Selection of Igwe Ogidi———————————53
3.4.2 Election of Igwe Ogidi——————————————————-55
3.5 Power Structure and Competence of Chieftaincy Institution in Ogidi———-57
CHAPTER FOUR: THE CAUSES OF AND EFFECT AT RESOLVING
CHIEFTAINCY TUSSLE IN OGIDI
4.1 Reasons for taking Chieftaincy/Kingship Post in the Society——————-60
4.2 Causes of Tussle———————————————————————–62
xv
4.2.1 General Causes of Tussle———————————————– —-62
4.2.2 Specific Causes of Tussle in Ogidi Community———————— 65
4.3 The Tussle Itself——————————————————————– –68
4.4 The Current Situation and Its Effects——————————————- — 72
4.4.1 General Effect of the Tussle on the Indigenes of Ogidi————– 77
4.4.2 The Effects of the Tussle in Ogidi Community/Infrastructure—— 79
4.5 The Efforts at Resolving the Tussle —————————————————-80
4.6 How to Reduce and Prevent its Re-occurrence (Preventive Measures) —— —-84
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
5.1 Summary———————————————————————————90
5.2 Conclusion——————————————————————————-92
5.3 Recommendations———————————————————————-93
5.4 Suggestion for further research ——————————————————-95
REFERENCES——————————————————————————–97
xvi
ABSTRACT
This research work centers on investigating the factors responsible for Chieftaincy
and Kingship tussle with specific focus on Ogidi community of Anambra State of
Nigeria. It was aimed at exploring the origin, the causes, the effects and the
experiences people encountered during the period of the tussle. The work traces the
origin of Igbo, the pre-colonial and colonial administration as well as the Igbo
leadership after the British era. The Origin of Ogidi, introduction and administration
of monarch. (Kingship) as well as the structure, power, qualification and mode of
election into the office of the Igwe were discussed. Data for the work were collected
using library research, employing both primary and secondary sources, and through
oral interview, which was randomly selected within the scope of the study. The
researcher personally went for the interview and established the content validity of the
interview conducted. In the work also, the tussle itself, the situation as at the time of
the research, the efforts to resolve the issue as well as the approaches for the reduction
of the tussle were handled. Based on the observations, it was discovered that the
causes of the tussle were the monopoly of the governing post and the imposition of
the unwanted candidate.
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
Among the scholars especially the ethnologists and historians of Igbo history, the origin of Igbo
people is still a subject of controversy. The reason borders on the fact that the main stages of
evolution of Igbo history and culture are yet to be explored. Those who are vast in ethnographic
and archaeological discoveries from which Igbo origin and history can be distilled are yet to be
properly collected, collated, analyzed and interpreted.
As the origin of Igbo remains a vexed question among historians, the place of chieftaincy and
kingship institution in Igbo leadership remains an enigmatic aspect of Igbo culture among
scholars, some historians insisted that the Igbo had no kings- Igbo enwe eze, which implies that
kingship, was alien to Igbo culture, introduced and nurtured by outsiders in pre-colonial settings.
While some insist that kingship was and has been part of Igbo culture, Ezedigbo or Ezeadigo
nurtured by Igbo autonomous values and principles. They are of the opinion that Igbo
communities had kings or kingship at varying levels of development in the pre-colonial period,
with accounts of origins, migrations, and settlements among the Igbo.
They assert that each community recognizes and appoints its own Eze who is usually an honest,
wealthy heir in the town. In the East Central States like Anambra, Imo, Abia and Enugu,
kingships is somewhat static. Kingship emerged in response to social and economic pressure in
the various areas occupied by the Igbo. As community developed, the need for leadership whose
jurisdiction went beyond their family or lineage units arose. The advent of British rule changed
the system, legitimacy to kingship was no longer the affair of the respective communities but
that of the Regional government headed by the European. Every selection, appointment, or
2
election to kinship had to be ratified by the Regional government who also had to determine
their pay. Because of this, the traditional ethical values which guided the activities of kings
became increasingly neglected. The unit among the Igbo was bastardized by the colonialist that
enthroned the aristocratic system of government in Igbo culture.
King or monarch, which is popularly called “Igwe” in Ogidi, is a phenomenon that came into
being in the early part of nineteenth century. Before the establishment of Kingship in Ogidi in
1904, the four quarters that make up Ogidi namely Akanano, Uru, Ezinkwo, and Ikenga had
Warrant Chiefs. These Warrant Chiefs (W.C) were called Ezeobodo. The Ezeobodo (Warrant
Chiefs) acted as the village father and headed village meetings and occasions with the help of
other titled-men. Their duties range from settling disputes among the sub-villages to resolving
conflicts between his subjects. The Ogidi Community adopted the title “Igwe” based on 1976,
1991,and 1994 Anambra State Traditional Ruler Edict, signed into law by John Atom kpera,
(Governor of old Anambra State with capital at Enugu), Joseph Abulu and Mike Attah, former
Governors of Anambra State.
The Warrant Chiefs shouldered the responsibilities of their villages and established autonomous
governance. The community was divided and each of them had the power to rule over the affairs
of their respective quarters. This was where the principle of “divide and rule” emerged in Igbo
culture. “Divide and Rule” which was introduced by the British colonialist who invented direct
administration in Igbo culture through establishment of native court, derived her revenue from
indirect taxation. This “Divide and Rule” system of nineteenth century saw the Igbo villages
divided and grouped together and a British District Officer assigned to rule them. Ogidi as other
Igbo before the advent of kingship were egalitarian in outlook. There was nothing like overall
crowned leader. The whole villages meet in the village square to discuss and deliberate on
3
matters affecting them. One person was heading the meeting. He was not to have prerogative
power neither was he superior to other members in the meeting. Each community recognizes
and appoints it own Warrant Chief (Ezeobodo) who was usually a democratically elected
nationalist. When the colonial administration enthroned the rule of Kings, the system was
changed, the centre could not hold any longer and things fell apart.
Again, the Ogidi community, apart from having Warrant Chiefs as their leaders, also had
rulership systems of mmo (masquerades), alusi (deities) Age grade (Otu-ogbo) and titled elders
(Ndi-ichie). Both Ibemesi (1995), and Obi (1996), agreed that the Ezeobodo supervised them
and this continued until the emergence of British Colonial Administration that instituted
Kingship stool in the community about 100 years ago. They assert that each community
recognizes and appoints its own Eze who is usually an honest, wealthy heir in the town. This
was bastardized by the colonials, which enthroned the aristocratic system of government in Igbo
culture.
At the demise of Igwe Walter Amobi 1 in 1925, there was an interregnum in the Igweship
system for 19 years, (1925 -1944). The interregnum lasted because Ogidi people refused to have
repeated performance of the unbearable experiences they had with the first Traditional Ruler,
Igwe Walter Amobi 1.
During the reign of Igwe Amobi 1 in 1904, the community experienced many horrible and
excruciating situations because he was high-handed in his reign. Members of the community
were forced to carry heavy load, work and labour in Igwe’s compound and farmland once every
lunar week (Izu) without any compensation, He married many women mostly from those who
came to sweep the palace and snatched other peoples wives forcefully while other men donated
4
their wives to Igwe so as to get Igwe’s recognition, societal appointment and employment to
alleviate hunger and starvation rampaging the community then.
Whenever he attended the court in Ogidi, which was just a stone throw from his house, four men
would carry him on a Hammoc, rather reminiscent of the way David Livingstone travelled in
East Africa. He had a hand drawn cart for attending other courts. Later on he acquired cars to
enable him get to the more distant courts in time. Indeed, he was a powerful monarch, very
strong and influencial.
The Igwe’s decision was final. He was to be given the fattest yams in one’s barn, most vital
parts of animal killed, collected large expense of land, received tax and was the only one living
in well built and expensive house. He wielded sufficient influence both in Ogidi and many other
neighbouring towns, which he galvanized together, and was ruling and imposing financial
burden on them. There was a regrettable punishment to any one that faltered the orders of the
Igwe and one of them was self-exile. Infact, the whole act was dehumanizing in nature.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Looking down the trend of historical event in Ogidi, one can easily observe that since
monarchical government began in 1903 from the family of Amobi, it has not been ceded to any
other family. Four members of Amobi family have uninterruptedly occupied the Igweship stool
of the town without the interregnum years. The colonial government’s determination to
perpetuate the traditional systems of administration became distasteful to the emergent Ogidi
nationalists. With a few exceptions, most native authorities consisted of illiterate, conservative,
and autocratic chiefs, who were either unwilling to move with the times or incapable of it.
5
Therefore people needed to have a taste of another person’s ability in community democratic
governance.
Sometimes only the family members, friends, supporters and relatives of the incumbent rulers
are advantaged and favoured during revenue allocation, educational opportunities, political
representation, public service employment, political appointment, and chieftaincy coronation.
The younger educated elements of the various communities were in most cases excluded from
membership of the native authorities. Others are marginalized and unjustly maneuvered.
Because the king has the mandate to rule, he exercises his absolute power to the people of the
society. The office of Igwe is democratic, but because power has been allotted to that, it
becomes obvious that such powers are abused especially in settling disputes, neglect of the
marginals and selecting successors and appointing those to be given titles. Other blatant
injustices like levying the public, looting of the community treasury and the king living on the
expense of the people became manifest and steers up quarrel and conflict in the town. Another
problem is that anyone who refuses to accord the Igwe the above “rights” and “opportunities”
will be fined in cash or kind and sometimes, both. Those who thwart or neglect the Igwe’s
orders will be forced to self-exile with their families and those who are working directly under
him will be forced to resign and their stipend terminated forthwith .In this way, a lot of people
migrated and settled in the neighboring communities. Some who were driven away disgracefully
did not return while few others have come back home. Although modernization and new wave
of global learning and technological development have given rise to more maturity and
excellence in governance and in change of certain cultural perception, the Igwe refuses to
relinquish this office to other interested parties who can effect some credible changes in the
community.
6
Again, because the community has been practising hereditary system of leadership, at the
demise of the reigning king, his successor may be inexperienced, or have a questionable
character, unlearned, and generally unaccepted. But because he is aware that the Igweship
position will be inheritably relinquished to him, he does not border or rattle for it. This generates
a lot of conflict from the people. The most common problem is that this situation has
degenerated the tempo of community’s plan of development.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
One of the things the researcher will do is to look at the origin of Igbo, their system of
leadership governance before and during the advent of British colonialist, their influence on Igbo
culture and impact of the State Recognized Traditional Rulers in repositioning the kingship
system in Igboland.
Secondly, to examine the matter bordering on kingship tussle with a view to providing some
positive enlightenment that influences policy on the role of kings or Chiefs in the political
transformation of contemporary Ogidi society. Furthermore, in the survey of moral, political and
social significance or functions of kingship title in Ogidi, the researcher will investigate the
causes, persistent and prevailing problem of kingship especially in Ogidi community. The
researcher will also examine the factors that make people involve themselves in kingship and
taking chieftaincy title. Finally, because of the duration of years this problem has lingered on,
the work will highlight the tussle itself, situation now, efforts applied to get it resolved, and
effects the chieftaincy and kingship tussle have brought on the people, the society and the
cultural traditions and then proffer solutions on how the problem could be prevented or reduced.
7
1.4 Significance of the Study
In the respective Igbo communities, kings are always at the helm of affairs. They become the
principal targets of social and political reforms. They carry out the government functions of
policy making, adjudication of justice, execution of laws and defence of the state. Therefore the
benefits to be derived from this study are in three-folds, which include. –
(1) Identifying and proving the true position and function of kingship institution in the
society. The kings realize that the power and authority given to them are for human and
material development services. To ensure that the need of the people and society must
be prioritized and prerogatized. The call to leadership is that of responsibility and that of
a follower is obedient to the constituted authority.
(2) Making the people realize that conflict and tussle may not necessarily be the best way to
resolving political and social issues. Sometimes when tussle arises it is always to the
detriment of the entire society because, lives are lost, money and time are spent, above
all properties and infrastructures are looted and destroyed as a result of violence,
sometimes the people are always victimized. The developmental strides of the
community are dangerously hampered. Issues are better resolved amicably than
violently.
(3) Demonstrating that many communities are involved in this cultural dilemma, the case of
the community under study will serve as an eye opener to others. They will see both the
positive and negative effects of conflict and proffer solutions when their own case is still
in an incubating stage. Lastly since this issue has to do with socio – economic and
political lives of people, it will give more room for further investigation on the
management and handling of Chieftaincy problems because the king, the people and the
society are affected directly or indirectly.
8
1.5 Scope of the Study
This research work focuses on the effect-nexus of Chieftaincy and Kingship tussle with specific
reference to Ogidi Community in Anambra State Nigeria. Although the Igbo concept of
leadership and governance would be touched, major work of this research paper centres on the
socio-political tussle in Ogidi, the situation now and efforts to resolve them.
1.6 Methodology
In view of the nature of this research work, the researcher made full and efficient use of both the
primary and secondary sources and methods of data collection to achieve the purpose. Data was
collected through: (a) oral interview, and (b) library research. For the primary method, oral
interview was used through encounter with the randomly selected heads of the villages; kindred
and quarters in Akanano, Uru, Ezinkwo and Ikenga were interviewed.
Secondly, in the secondary method the researcher used the official documents of Ogidi
community like the chieftaincy constitution, the historical books of Ogidi and cultural
modification of the town. Anambra State Edict of Traditional Rulers of 1991 and 1994 and
official document from Anambra State Government Official gazette were also used.
Thirdly, the researcher made use of helpful and relevant literatures, journals and materials
available. From both the primary and secondary sources of data collection, the analysis was
based on the findings and reports obtained through the interviews and resource materials used.
The researcher observed that although one family had taken the leadership position of the
community for a long period of years with socio-political achievements, there is need for the
traditional leadership governance to be ceded to another citizen of the community. While on the
other hand, documented materials dealing with the tussle in Ogidi make the kingship position
contestable among the indigenes except the Ire quarters whose responsibility is to crown the
elected king
9
1.7 Definition of Terms
For purposes of clarity and better understanding, some of the key words used in this work are
defined. They include (a) Chieftaincy/ kingship
(b) Tussle/ conflict
Hornby and Wehmeier (2005), say that the word “Chieftain”- from where chieftaincy is derived
means the leader of a people or clan, while chief is the title given to the leader of the
community. Brennus (2007), says that chieftain means the leader or titular head of a people or
similar ethnic group. In definition of king, the former defines it as the male ruler of an
independent state that has a royal family and kingship is the state of being a king; the official
position of a king. While the later (Brennus) defines king (royalty) as a title of a male ruler
vested with authority over a single state, nation, or tribe usually for life and by hereditary
succession. This definition of king (kingship) is synonymous with monarchy which is defined as
the form of government in which one person has the hereditary right to rule as the head of state
during his life time. From this definition a sharp distinction could be made. A chieftain has to do
with one heading a people’s group or clan. This may include female chiefs while chieftaincy is
the title conferred on the recipient of the honor. Animba (2000), says that “the word ‘chief’
remains an appellation which Ndi Nze and their Ndi Ichie in this sub-culture confer on their
subjects and friends of proven ability and achievement in community development and social
welfare” (p. 120). Others in this category are the warrant-chiefs and Ndi Nze na Ozo. So all of
the above is accountable to the king. The kings make the chiefs and he rules the entire
community not part as the case of the chiefs.
Anyanwu (1995), affirms that a “king is the male sovereign (especially one whose position is
hereditary) of an independent state” (p. 67). Such a state is called a kingdom. A ruler of a
10
kingdom is the king. In the Igbo culture, three names are designated to kings, “Eze”, ’Igwe’, and
‘Obi’. The Edict of Traditional Rulers in Anambra State No. 2 of section 21 of 1994 and
authored by Anambra State Government recognizes that the terms “Igwe” and “Obi” be used to
address any government recognized traditional ruler. And that a recognized traditional ruler be
addressed and referred to as, “His Royal Highness”. A town or community shall determine
either in its town constitution; the either “Igwe” or “Obi” by which the community’s recognized
ruler shall be known and addressed.
The word “Eze”, according to Animba (2000), is a derivative from the verb root “Eze” translated
“Traditional Rule” and not chief. This agrees with our earlier definitions of chief. Inyama
(1993), describes “Eze” as “a traditional head acting as the custodian of culture, custom and
tradition and advising the community on them”. (p. 224 – 225). This means that the “Eze” is
sovereign in all traditional issues, example is Eze Nri.
Again, “Obi” according to Uchendu (1965), described as the official title of the king. For
example, Onitsha community uses the word “Obi” and his prime minister called ‘Onowu`. The
right of the “Obi” and his council are regulated by customs. When they exceed their right, the
offended village boycotts the Obi’s palace.
“Igwe” is a general title, which many Igbo communities adopt as official name of their
traditional ruler. The researcher agrees with Waanders (1990), summary of the definitions of
these titles: “Eze”- meaning the king, head, leader, supreme master; “Igwe” – meaning the sky,
the highest traditional rank; and “Obi” title for a traditional ruler. All these titles connote the
word king or kingship is a universal phenomenon with long history.
11
Tussle/ Conflict
Hornby (2005), describes tussle as a short struggle, fight or argument especially in order to get
something: while Sagala and Lorna (2002), said it is a fight, battle, brawl, conflict, contest,
scrap, scuffle and struggle.
As Lorimer and Lechner (1995), define conflict as a war, a struggle between opposing principles
or aims, a clash of feelings or interest. Such a clash as a source of dramatization; Deutsch
(1977), definition is more apt. He views conflict as an action, which prevents, obstructs,
interferes with, injures or renders ineffective another action with which is incompatible. From
the above definition, tussle and conflict connote dispute, disagreement or controversy in ideas or
viewpoints held by two or more individuals/ communities. As tussle involves struggle to obtain
or change something, conflict relates to uncompromised human needs. For the purpose of this
study, these words are co-related to each other, but the researcher preferably chose the word
“conflict” as the best match to the word tussle. Both of them are used interchangeably.
DISCLAIMER: All project works, files and documents posted on this website, UniProjectTopics.com are the property/copyright of their respective owners. They are for research reference/guidance purposes only and some of the works may be crowd-sourced. Please don’t submit someone’s work as your own to avoid plagiarism and its consequences. Use it as a reference/citation/guidance purpose only and not copy the work word for word (verbatim). The paper should be used as a guide or framework for your own paper. The contents of this paper should be able to help you in generating new ideas and thoughts for your own study. UniProjectTopics.com is a repository of research works where works are uploaded for research guidance. Our aim of providing this work is to help you eradicate the stress of going from one school library to another in search of research materials. This is a legal service because all tertiary institutions permit their students to read previous works, projects, books, articles, journals or papers while developing their own works. This is where the need for literature review comes in. “What a good artist understands is that nothing comes from nowhere. All creative work builds on what came before. Nothing is completely original.” - Austin Kleon. The paid subscription on UniProjectTopics.com is a means by which the website is maintained to support Open Education. If you see your work posted here by any means, and you want it to be removed/credited, please contact us with the web address link to the work. We will reply to and honour every request. Please notice it may take up to 24 – 48 hours to process your request.
