October dump, but make it your small wins

The Name “Yoruba”—The Facts, The Fictions, The Reports & The Theses: A Series. 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁-𝟮‼️ In Part-1 of this series, we crushed the fiction which says ‘Yoruba’ comes from ‘Yariba’, etc. In this part, we will crush yet another infamous fiction which is related to the first. Let’s do it! FICTION-2: The term ‘Yariba’, etc. is found in the Hausa language or Fulani language, and it means: ‘cunning’, ‘treacherous’, or ‘usurper’. FACT: The terms ‘Yaruba’, ‘Yaraba’, & ‘Yariba’, etc. do not exist in Hausa language & Fulfulde. Furthermore, the closest to an actual evidence ever cited by the fiction-mongers in relation to this fiction is William Russell Bascom (1969). We will adduce evidence to substantiate this “fact”, and we will consider the relevant lines from William Russell Bascom, (1969), page 5, in the light of the evidence, proof, and reason. Evidence-1: The renowned Fulani scholar and Sultan of Sokoto, M. Bello (born in Hausaland) considered this term ‘Yoruba’* [See footnote*] & its etymology in his geographical & historical treatise, viz. “Infāqu’l-Maysūri”, written, 1824. His etymology of this term (viz. ‘Yoruba’*) has nothing to do with Hausa language & Fulfulde. His etymology links this term (i.e. ‘Yoruba’*) to a Canaanite name — in a Canaanite language. See Frame-1 for Sultan Bello’s actual words. To focus on WHETHER OR NOT the Yoruba as a people indeed migrated from Canaan (where they supposedly lived under a king Yārubu*) is to completely miss the point being made here. The real point being made here is: IF the term ‘Yoruba’, ‘Yaruba’, ‘Yarba’, ‘Yariba’, etc. came from Hausa language or Fulfulde; such a basic information could not possibly escape Sultan M. Bello’s knowledge. He himself is Fulani. He was born and raised in Hausaland, and he is a renowned scholar. He proposed its etymology to be from a non-Fula & non-Hausa language.° In sum, according to a Fulani scholar born and raised in Hausaland, writing in the early 1820s; the term ‘Yoruba’, ‘Yariba’, etc. is unintelligible in Hausa language and Fulfulde, and thus can not possibly mean ‘cunning’, or anything else for that matter in any of these two languages. Evidence-2: Fortunately, Hausa language and Fulfude are still living languages which may be consulted through the published lexicons, etc. The fiction-mongers say the meanings include ‘deceitful, ‘shady’, ‘treacherous’, unreliable’, & ‘cunning’ among others. It is noteworthy that these fiction-mongers generally speak neither language. They literally do not understand ‘go’. Taking ‘cunning’ as example, Frame-2 shows the Hausa & Frame-3 shows the Fulfulde term. References: Charles H. Robinson, Dictionary of the Hausa Language, (1913). archive.org/details/dictiona… Bautista, Andreliz, et al., Dictionnaire De Fulfulde, (1991). archive.org/details/ERIC_ED4… In sum, the term ‘Yariba’, etc. simply does not exist in Hausa & Fulfulde. It could not possibly exist as it is merely a ‘Northern’ pronunciation of the actual & proper term ‘Yoruba’. Cheers! Stay tuned for Part 3‼️✌🏾 —— FOOTNOTES: *Clapperton, et al.’s translation (Frame-1) uses the Northern vocalization (Yarba) he heard on his visit. “Narratives”, Volume 2. 1828, p. 454. Arnett’s translation of same manuscript keeps the actual vocalization/vowelization, ‘Yoruba’. °It makes no difference to the point here if his Canaan etymology is correct or incorrect, it is clear at least, that he doesn’t know this name ‘Yoruba’ to have Hausa or Fulfulde root/origin.

Do you know how crazy it is that some of the tribal identities we are so fixated on were engineered by Oyinbo? Let’s use the “Yoruba peoples” tribal identity as an instance. The Yoruba tribal peoplehood was artificially engineered for easier colonial administration. We were not a monolithic group. The Ẹkiti, Òndó, Ìjẹ̀bú, Ẹgba, Ìjẹ̀ṣà, Ìgbómìnà and others were not always “Yorubas.” If you time-travelled to 1825 and insisted that an Ẹgba person was Yoruba, they might not only be confused — it is likely that they could be offended. Treating Yoruba as an ancient, primordial tribe is anachronistic and historically indefensible. It is well documented that the word “Yoruba” was an exonym — a tag given by outsiders. Ahmad Baba of Timbuktu used “Yariba” around 1613–1615 for the Oyo. Northern traders (Hausa and others) applied it specifically to the Oyo peoples. In fact, there is no evidence of self-use of the word Yoruba by the precolonial Oyo peoples themselves as a broad ethnic label, and none whatsoever among the non-Oyo groups. During the Kiriji Wars (1877–1893), the Ẹkiti-Parapọ alliance (Ẹkiti, Ìjẹ̀ṣà and allies including elements of Ìjẹ̀bú, Ẹgba, Ìgbómìnà and others) fought the Ibadan military state (heir to Oyo imperial power) for autonomy. It was not Yoruba fighting Yoruba — they were independent nations fighting to protect their sovereignty. So how did everyone become Yoruba? The colonialists homogenized all of us by mechanically standardizing the Ọ̀yọ́-Ìbàdàn speech into a uniform, artificial written language called Yorùbá Àjùmọ̀lò. Samuel Ajayi Crowther’s 1843 Vocabulary of the Yoruba Language (and subsequent Bible work) was based on the Oyo dialect. To save money on printing Bibles and schoolbooks, European recategorized distinct languages as “local dialects.” Then, through Lord Lugard’s Native Authority system after the 1914 Amalgamation (formalized in the Native Authority Ordinance of 1916 and later revisions), the British state turned this missionary work into a tool of governance. Our ancestors became stuck in rigid “tribal” census categories, they appointed standardized rulers to collect taxes, and turned sovereign citizens of independent city-states and republics into predictable, manageable colonial subjects. Yes, this identity is real today. But its reality is relatively modern, administrative, and politically charged, not primordial. Many of us mistakenly wear our tribal identity as though it were a sacrosanct, eternal or primordial delineation: it is not. Like the Yoruba tribal categorization, many others are just neat little folders they fostered to organize us. If it was a bond formed for your enemy’s convenience, then it is malleable enough to be reformed for strategic survival, defense, and collective prosperity.

Year 33!!! It feels different this year, calmer and much clearer. The last few years have taught me a lot about patience, showing up even when the work isn’t glamorous, and learning what actually deserves my energy. I’ve made mistakes, adjusted, and kept going. Some seasons felt long and others flew by, but through it all, I’ve grown much more comfortable with who I am and less interested in proving anything to anyone. I’m grateful for my people who have stayed close, supported me through it all, celebrated the small wins, and reminded me every day that life isn’t only about what I build. I’m also grateful for the quiet moments that reset me when the pace gets too high. At 33, I’m choosing consistency, depth, and intentional work, while making more time for the people and things that truly matter. Thank you all for walking with me this far. Alhamdulillah for life and growth. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!