CHAPTER 7

THE INTER-DISCIPLINARY APPROACH TO AFRICAN HISTORY IN NIGERIA

E. J. Alagoa, PhD

Introduction

The inter-disciplinary approach was one of the first orthodoxies established in the course of creating African history into an academic discipline. Indeed, it became so easily accepted as a truism that historians have rarely stopped to examine its implications, much less, to attempt to practice it. Rather, it was the practitioners of other disciplines in Africa, who have sometimes used it as a plea for their entry into African history. The first decade of the introduction of African history as an academic discipline was followed by the organisation of seminars, symposia, and international conferences at which various scholarly bodies sought to lay down rules of method and a theoretical framework for the practice of African history.1 These meetings proved an ideal forum for the claims of various disciplines to a place in African historiography. The professional historians were at a relative disadvantage in these discussions since it was so easy to demonstrate the limitations of the archival approach in African history. The position improved only slightly after Vansina placed oral tradition on the agenda as a valid source for the academic historian. Eventually, however, oral tradition itself became a vehicle for the practice of the inter-disciplinary method, since its collection entails the use of field techniques thought to be characteristic of anthropology and sociology, rather than of history, and its interpretation requires cultural and linguistic insights not normally required of the historian. Further, some scholars continued to regard the conclusions and information derived from oral tradition as invalid, at best suspect, unless confirmed by the findings of some other source or discipline.

In Nigeria, the curtain was raised for the academic study of local history by the publication of the books by Kenneth O. Dike (Trade and Politics in the Niger Delta, 1830-1885, Oxford, 1956) and Saburi O. Biobaku (The Egba and their Neighbours, 1842-1872, Oxford, 1957). And in the very first number of the Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria, two research projects based on ideas of inter-disci-plinary study directed by Dike and Biobaku wereannounced3. Thus, the pioneers of Nigerian academic history were believers in the inter-disciplinary approach. Indeed, the announcement for the Benin Scheme considered it “a new departure,” a new technique of historical research, and described its operation as follows: “the principle underlying it is that scholars working on all possibly connected lines of research should actually work together in the field, in continual close contact with each other throughout the period of their research.”4Inspite of the more ambitious and comprehensive tone of the Benin announcement, the list of actual participating disciplines was of the same order in both projects: anthropology, archaeology, art history, history. The announcement for the Benin project mentioned linguistics as one of the "necessary disciplines" for the historian of Africa, but no linguist was included in the team of experts actually engaged.

The results of these first efforts at inter-disciplinary research do not appear to have fulfilled the high hopes placed in them. Some of the individual participants, expatriates in most cases, have carried away the data collected, to be published on their own in separate unco¬ordinated publications. In the Benin study, the historian would appear to have concentrated his efforts almost exclusively on archival sources in foreign lands, while the anthropologist paid some attention to oral tradition) and also carried out the normal cultural studies required by his discipline. 5The archaeological contribution, and especially the art historical contribution, are also now available in substantive publications.6But even so, it is clear that none of the projects achieved proper interaction between the various disciplines involved in research over the same area beyond, perhaps, occasional correspondence between individual participants, or Information from their journal articles. There is no evidence that participants ever came together for sessions of formal discussion and exchange of notes; or worked together in field research.

The Yoruba Historical Scheme has now published the "first in a three-volume series" constituting a report of the results achieved.7The list of subjects and disciplines covered by this first report is impressive, but there is no evidence that the authors formed a co¬ordinated group of researchers, or that some of them were ever members of the scheme at any time. In fact, each contribution is an independent study, and there is little evidence of inter-disciplinary cross-fertilisation.

The Historian and Inter-Disciplinary Research

From the example of the Benin and Yoruba projects, we may consider three possible ways in which the historian cab derive benefit from the insights of several disciplines in the studyof African history. First, the historian could act as effective director of a project in which he assigns definite historical objectives to the participants. That is, each participant is required, in such a project, to seek answers to clearly formulated historical questions, in the light of, and by the methods of his own discipline. It is necessary for the directing historian to formulate questions to which each discipline contributes its part to a composite solution, since each discipline, left to its own researches, would propose different kinds of research questions and produce results that may not necessarily serve the purposes of historical interpretation or reconstruction. We must assume that the directors of the Benin and Yoruba projects formulated historical problems for the participants to solve. In the first report of the Yoruba project, the question posed to each contributor seems to have been: "In what ways can or has, your discipline, contribute or contributed, to tile reconstruction or interpretation of Yoruba history?" Each contribution does make an effort to answer the question. What we do not have is a meeting of minds between the contributors, or any bringing together of the various contributions, or reconciliation of divergent interpretations. In addition, the contributions suggest that the question was not posed to the contributors at the beginning of a research programme but presented to experts in various disciplines to be considered as an academic problem. Accordingly, the report does not represent the results of research in various fields constituting the definitive solutions to be expected from the particular disciplines to a set of problems.

Similarly, the separate publications of the Benin study do not bear the marks of work produced, as the proposal had suggested, by men of different disciplines, "actually working together in the field." Such close collaboration in the field had obviously proved impossible to achieve in practice, and each member had clearly gone his own way and worked at his own pace purely within the canons of his own discipline. The Benin study has, indeed, been unable to attempt a joint publication of problems or results.

The second situation is one in which the historian is not director of a team, but merely one of several experts in various fields working in the same area or on the same problem. That is, each member studies the problem in as comprehensive a manner as his discipline and knowledge can take him, hoping thereby to contribute something of value to the overall understanding or solution of the problem. Thus the historian would need to study the independent work of the experts in other disciplines in order to obtain the answers to his historical questions. His own work would be similarly available to the other experts to be used or not as they wish. This second alternative is what all inter-disciplinary schemes of research in Nigeria have turned out to be in practice, although the majority of them have been presented initially as centrally directed and co-ordinated to solve prescribed problems.

The third way may be named the single-skull approach to inter-disciplinary research. By this approach, the historian himself is supposed to acquire enough expertise in the methods and principles of these other disciplines considered essential to be able to utilise them in his research. That is, the various disciplines represented in the research programme are not constituted by individual persons but are incorporated in the head of a single scholar. We must admit that the number of scholars so ideally equipped to be able to perform as specialist in several disciplines at the same time is very small indeed. The more practical situation would be a combination of the second and third alternatives. That is, that the historian works in a team with experts in other disciplines, or utilises the work of experts in other disciplines, through acquiring sufficient knowledge of those disciplines to be able to study and understand their technical publications. The historian then, is not required to be an expert in those other disciplines he believes relevant to his work but must learn enough of them to be able to hold a dialogue with them and to utilise the results of their work.

A number of advantages to historical scholarship may be expected from historians training in other disciplines. First, they would lose their suspicion of practitioners of those disciplines, and in other cases, cease to think of those disciplines as possessing answers to all their problems. Such training then, would enable historians to acquire a realistic understanding of the possibilities and limitations of other disciplines, and of the services they may be expected to ren.der to history. Second, such training would give historians a broader view of their work, so that they may no longer leave any problem that may arise in the course of their research to be solved by scholars in other disciplines exclusively. Thus, historians of Africa no longer need to leave the detailed study of oral tradition and cultural history to the anthropologists, of language and oral literature to the linguists, or of prehistory exclusively to the archaeologists. To take an example from the most technical of these disciplines, the African historian should be able to work in partnership with the archaeologists in many ways: in locating ancient settlement sites and in reconnaissance, in the cultural analysis of artifacts recovered from excavations, and in the final historical analysis and evaluation of the excavations and excavation reports.

History of the Niger Delta - multi-disciplinary contributions:

Here we may briefly note the contributions made by various schools in Niger Delta studies, and the light their various disciplines have shed on the problems of Niger Delta history.

First in the field was the historian, Dike, in his well-known Trade and Politics in the Niger Delta, 1830-1885. It was essentially a study of the activities of European traders in parts of the Nigerian coast in the nineteenth century and the effect of those activities on local communities. The interpretation of the external documents related to the external relations of the delta states was masterly, but Dike’s attempts to interpret internal history and developments did not prove so successful since a deep enough study could not yet be made of the internal oral traditional data. We may consider only two problems of internal history treated by Dike. First, his reconstruction of the settlement history of the Niger Delta. According to Dike, the Niger Delta was, "practically uninhabited by the tribes of the Nigerian interior before the Portuguese adventure to the Guinea coasts began." 8 And that the tribes of the hinterland "flocked to the coast to do trade" with the Portuguese. That is, that "the rise of Lagos, Accra, Dahomey, and the Delta states must be attributed to the development of maritime commerce." Dike suggested three waves of migration into the Delta. The earliest wave, "that of the Ijos, appears to have preceded the Portuguese advent." But the second and most important wave came, "between 1450 and 1800, and gradually converted the little Ijaw fishing villages into the city-states." Dike postulated this second wave of migration as involving all the hinterland tribes, but dominated by the Igbo, "being numerically superior." This second wave of migration "followed the development of the slave trade." Accordingly, the third wave of migrants into the delta consisted of the slaves incorporated into the Delta city-states as a result of the slave trade.

It may be stated simply that these reconstructions of the early history of the delta have been revised by recent studies based on the detailed comparative analysis of oral traditions,9 combined with the insights of other disciplines. It would seem, in fact, that the communities of the Delta were fully established before the Portuguese advent, and also that they had already established internal trade routes and structures, upon which the overseas trade of the European visitors was engrafted.

Dike also attempted to interpret the causes of political upheavals in the Delta in the nineteenth century. He saw these problems as slave revolts or revolutions in which "the domestic slaves won their freedom entirely by their own struggles in which their power of combination was their strongest weapon." 10A reconsideration of the problems of internal political struggles in the Delta states on purely historical analysis of the evidence suggests contrary conclusions 11 but this subject, as well as that of the development of the institutions of the Delta states are ones on which sociologists and anthropologists have also made contributions.

The Contribution of Sociology and Anthropology

G. I. Jones, Lecturer in Social Anthropology at Cambridge, England, and a former colonial administrative officer made the first sociological analysis of the institutions of the Eastern Delta state in The Trading States of the Oil Rivers. The study is historical in nature but concentrates on the structure and development of political institutions. It deals with developments in the nineteenth century previously covered by Dike's study, as well as the eighteenth and the seventeenth centuries; and makes feeble attempts at reconstructions of earlier times. The focus is on internal historical development, but since the period covered was one of intensive overseas trade, and since greater reliance was placed on external documentary sources, the study tended to give primacy to external factors for change over the internal. Thus, Jones identified as "the principal disturbing factors of the political system, the sudden access of wealth provided by the overseas trade, the recognition by the European traders of their village heads as kings and the association of this office of king with the control and distribution of very large trading dues.”13

Jones explained the nineteenth century political disturbances in the states of the Eastern Nigeria Delta on the basis of his classification of their structures as conforming to types of political system which "pass through successive stages of accretion, segmentation, and fission.”14 Thus, the principal socio-political institution of these states, the House (wan), developed by growth, and then segmentation, each new segment still retaining its political affiliations with the original principal segment. Jones noted that this tendency to grow by division existed also at the level of the central leadership so that a binary structure resulted on every occasion. Accordingly, he discounted the interpretation of slave motivation for the nineteenth century struggles but explained them as a manifestation of the general structural characteristics of the political system. Those of the Delta States which had achieved a balance in the process of binary fission before the nineteenth century, such as Nembe and Okrika, saw no major upheavals; but in Bonny and Elem Kalabari where a balance had not been reached, major cleavages occurred in the nineteenth century.

We may note that in this particular case, the sociological explanation agrees with the historical facts. A slave rising was not a feasible phenomenon in the political system of the Eastern Delta states since it was a central canon of the House organisation, of these states to integrate recruits completely and effectively into the system.

Another social anthropologist, Robin Horton, attempted to provide answers to questions concerning the origin of the peculiar institutions of the Delta states. The questions he posed were the following: (1) "What kind of a community was New Calabar before it embarked upon the Atlantic trade? and (ii) Why did New Calabar make the particular response it did to the challenge of this trade?" Horton was addressing himself to questions raised by the work of Dike and Jones, and still working within the framework of the impact on the Delta states of the Atlantic trade. He, however, attempted to go beyond Jones by postulating a structure of the Delta communities prior to the Atlantic trade. He also postulated a structure different from the segmentary system of the Igbo and Efik-Ibibio which Jones had ascribed to the Delta communities as well. Horton was thus able to account for the difference between the responses of the Delta states and of the Efik state of Calabar to the similar challenge of the Atlantic trade.

Robin Horton chose the typical Eastern Delta fishing village of Soku as the model of a community containing the baseline institutions of the seventeenth to nineteenth century city-state of the Delta. Accordingly, he was able to demonstrate how, under the stimulus of the overseas trade, these fishing village institutions could have been transformed and developed into those of the Eastern Delta states, using those of Elem Kalabari or New Calabar as a model.

An effort has been made to interpret these contributions on a large historical perspective.16In this work of synthesis and reinterpretation; the fishing village of Robin Horton was accepted as a proper model of the baseline structure from which the city-states institutions developed. But the farming-fishing village of the fresh water ecological zone of the Central Delta was postulated the model of the structures from which those of the fishing village of the salt water Eastern Delta were derived. The extension of the time perspective into the past effectively brought into the discussion internal developments and factors completely outside the sphere of the Atlantic trade and of European activity. It was found necessary to consider the significance of oral traditions which derive the founders of the states from homes in the Central Delta: and, accordingly, the possible consequences of moving from the freshwater delta to the salt water delta. One possible consequence was the necessity to trade to the hinterland and other parts of the Delta for agricultural produce impossible to grow in sufficient quantity in the Eastern Delta environment. These considerations seemed to provide sufficient ground for the conclusion that there was prior long distance trade within the Delta and to the hinterland before the arrival of the Portuguese and the beginning of the Atlantic trade, and that profound changes in political and social structures were in progress before these external influences set in.

The Contribution of Linguistics

Most of the contribution in this field has been made by Professor Kay Williamson.17She has touched on several subjects of interest to the historian in her published work, and has, in addition, compiled a great deal of material on reconstructions of proto-Ijo to be published in due course.

Perhaps the most important single area in which Kay's linguistic work in the Delta has provided guidance is that of a tentative chronological perspective on origins, migrations and ethnic relationships. The linguistic evidence greatly extends our time perspective into the matter of Ijo migration and occupation of the Niger Delta. Glotto-chronological determinations give a separation period of five thousand years of Ijo from the neighbouring language communities of Igbo, Edo, and Yoruba, an estimate that correlates with the observation that Ijo is not closely related to any other language" in the immediate geographical region. Similar glotto-chronological calculations in respect of the dialects of Ijo suggest that the first movements from the Central to the Eastern Niger Delta leading to the formation of the Eastern Delta states may have occurred up to a thousand years ago.19

Kay's classification of the languages of the Niger Delta has also assisted in the study of the traditions of origin, migrations, and inter relations of peoples. For example, the identification of Engenni, and Epie-Atissa of the North-eastern Delta as Delta Edo languages confirmed some previously uncertain traditions of their relationship with the Benin kingdom. Similarly, the classification of Ogbia, Abua, and Ogoni as belonging to the Benue-Congo language family along with Ibibio and Efik, suggests that entry into the northern delta from an easterly direction. And finally, the fact of the separation between the Ijo of the Lower Delta and the Igbo of thehinterland by a belt of these Delta Edo and Benue-Congo speakerssuggests that these groups came in from west and east into arelatively empty no-man's land between the Igbo and Ijo.

Within the Ijo area, the comparative study of the oral traditions hassuggested a pattern of migration over the Delta from dispersalcentres in the Central Delta. The first proto-Ijo reconstructionswould seem to identify this area also as the focal point andheartland, contributing a big proportion of ancient forms.

The study of language then, has contributed so far mainly in theinterpretation of traditions of prehistoric relationships betweenpeoples, and in providing tentative time perspectives. Following therecent synthesis of the oral traditional evidence and the indicationsof the linguistic patterns, it has become necessary to seekadditional information from archaeology.

The Contribution of Archaeology

The archaeological survey planned under the general Rivers Research Scheme is conceived as a practical co-operative project by a number of scholars in different disciplines. The scheme has been conceived by a historian and planned to cover places indicated by the oral traditions collected and analysed by the historian. And the historian has been able so far, to take part in the excavations along with the archaeologists, and to study the finds and to attempt to interpret them. There has been a palynologist actively involved in the work as well, and it has been possible to keep in very close touch and even to try to make publications available for mutual discussion and comments. The first preliminary accounts of the first test excavations were, in fact, published together in the same journal, and a First Interim Report has been issued. 22

Only five excavations have been done so far at Onyoma, Ke, Ogoloma, Saikiripagu, and Okochiri, the first two being only test excavations. But the finds have provided material for preliminary re-interpretations of the history of the Eastern Niger Delta. The most important gain so far must b the first radiocarbon dates from charcoal, giving a range of AD 1330-1755 for Onyoma, and AD 715-1555 for Ke. 23 These dates give us a better basis than we have had up to now for discussions on the chronology of settlement in the Niger Delta. The thousand-year estimate from linguistic chronology for settlement in the Eastern Delta seems to be corroborated by the dates for Ke. The Onyoma dates fall short of a thousand years, but clearly refute the suggestion that settlement in this part of the Delta had resulted from the onset of the Atlantic slave trade.

Further excavations planned for the Central Delta, as well as the Eastern Delta and its fringes; should supply dates giving a broader view of the chronology of settlement and of contacts.

In the area of contacts and internal developments, we have recovered a wide range of artifacts whose proper analysis should yield historical information of great value. The material recovered varies from terracotta figurines24 and pottery to bronzes, tuyeres and metal working equipment, clay smoking pipes, manillas and animal and fish shells and bones. At Onyoma, a very few items indeed resulting from possible European contact were found (such as two smoking pipes on the surfaces, and a blue bead associated with aburial dated 1545-1755). The manilas associated with the overseas trade were all found at Ogoloma and Ke, and all close to the surface; and accordingly, to be accounted a comparatively, recent phenomenon: 25Ogoloma was spectacular for the large numbers of smoking pipes recovered, probably the largest yet from a single site in Nigeria.26

The five sites indicate affinities both in the physical conditions of the excavations and in the artifacts recovered. Onyoma and Ogoloma, especially, show obvious similarity in pottery types and in the smoking pipes. These similarities are meaningful in the light of special relationships related in the oral traditions at Ogoloma and Nembe.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we must accept the validity of an inter- disciplinary approach to the study of African history. The problem is to keep within bounds our expectations of what the other disciplines can contribute, and to ensure that the historian does not abdicate his responsibilities.

That is, that the historian embarking on the inter- disciplinary path should possess expertise in one or several of these disciplines (the single-skull approach), or know enough of the methods and procedures of the other disciplines to be able to pose historical problems for solution and to interpret their results (the collaborative approach).

We can acknowledge the fact that some of these other disciplines pose questions in areas of human activity that most historians would not otherwise consider. The result of meeting the challenge of the models of the sociologists, the projections of the linguists, and the artifacts of the archaeologists, is to obtain a historical view and interpretation that is much richer and more sophisticated than would be expected from a study based solely on the insights of one discipline. We must acknowledge also that there are questions that cannot yet be fully answered, even by the inter-disciplinary approach, but it is still important to raise such questions. Further, we still need to work out better ways of organising inter-disciplinary research and of co-coordinating the analysis and publication of the resulting data.

Endnotes

1. See History and ArchaeologyIn Africa.' Report of a Confrence held In July 19$3 at the School ofOriental and African Studies, London, 1955; D. H. Jones (ed.), History and Archaeology in Africa: Secon Co'tfertnce held In July, 1957 at the S.O.A.S., R. A. Oliver and J. N. Faae (ed.), Third Conference on African History and Archaeology 1961, IAH Vol. Ill, No.2, 1962; J. C. Oabel and N. R. Bennet (eds.), Reconstructing African Cultural History, Boston 1967, paper presented at a Northwestern University Symposium of 1962; J. Vansina.. R. Mauny. L.V. Thomas (eds.), The Historian in Tropical Africa, London 1964, report of an international symposium at the University of Dakar, Senegal in 1961; J Dary U Forde, "Tropical African Studies: a report on the Conference organised by the International African Institute in conjunction with the University of Ibadan 5-11 April, 1964," Africa 36, No.l, 1965, 30-97; J. L. Brown and M. Crowder (eds.), The proceedings of the First International Congress in Africa, Accra, December 1962, London 1964; J. T. O. Ranaer (ed.), Emerging Themes on African History, Proceedings of the International Congress of African Historians, Dar-es- Salaam, October 1965, London, 1968.

2. Jan Vansina, Recording the Oral History of the Bakuba" JAHVol. 1 No. l, 1960, 46-53j De 10 tradition orale, Annales du Musee Royal de VA/r/que Centrale, No. 36, Touvuren, 1961j Oral tradition: A Study in Historical Methodology, translated by H.M. Wriaht, Chicqo, 1965.

3. S. O. Biobaku, The Yoruba Historical Research Scheme," JHSN, Vol. 1, No. l, 1956, 59-60j H.F.C. Smith, The Benin Study," Northern History Research Project of the last decade directed by Professor Smith and Thurstan Shaw; and the Eastern Nigeria Historical Research Scheme aborted by the national crisis: the proposed Lagos Research Project and the current Rivers Research Scheme.

4. Smith, The Benin Study," p. 60. Emphasis on all in the original.

5. A.F.C. Ryder, Benin and the Europeans, 1485-1897, Ibadan History Series, Longman, 1969; J. R. E. Bradbury, Benin Studies, edited by Peter Morton-Williams, International African Institute, London, 1973. A collection of journal articles and papers, published posthumously.

6. A.J.H. Godwin (1) a contribution in History and Archaeology in Africa, School of Oriental and African Studies, London 1957, pp. 29-31; (2) Archaeology and Benin Architecture," JHSN, Vol. 1 No.2,1957,65-85. (3) "Walls, paving, water-paths and landmarks," Odu, vi, 1958,45-53; (4) "A bronze snake head and other recent finds in the old' palace at Benin," Man LX EH, 1963, 142-5 (published posthumously by l W. Fage). The later work of Graham Connah was apparently sponsored by the Federal Department of Antiquities, see G. Connah, •• Archaeology in Benin," JAH, XHI, 2, 1972,25-38; The archaeology of Benin. The only art historical work to be associated with the Benin project is the work by Philip J.E. Dark, An introduction to Benin Art and Technology, OUP, 1973.

7. S. O. Biobaku (ed.), Sources of Yoruba History, Oxford, 1973. Chapters are contributed as follows: R.C.C. Law - (1) Contemporary Written Sources, (ii) Traditional History: W. Abimbola - The Literature of the Ifa Cult., Chief J. A. Ayorinde - Oriki, Chief I. O. Delano - Proverbs, Songs, and poems., O. Ogunba - Ceremonies., F. Willet - Archaeology., D. Williams. - Art in Metal, F. K. F. Carrol- Art in Wood., A. Adetugbo - The Yoruba Language in Yoruba History., P. C. Lloyd - Political and social Structure., R. S. Smith - Yoruba Warfare and Weapons.

8. K. O. Dike, Trade and Politics in the Niger Delta,' 1830- 1885, Oxford 1956, chapter 2, "The Delta and its people" especially pages 19-25.

9. E. J. Alagoa, "Ijo origins and migrations," Nig. Mag., No. 91, 1966, 279-288, Nig.Mag., No. 92, 1967, 47-55;"Long distance trade and states in the Niger Delta", Joum. Afr. Hist., Vol. D, No.3, 1970, 319-329; A History of the Niger Delta: an Historical interpretation of/jo oral tration, Ibadan 1972.

10. Dike, Trade and Politics, chapter 8, "The slave revolts,"p. 159.

11. E. J. Alagoa, "Nineteenth century revolutions in the states of the Eastern Niger Delta and Calabar," Journ. Hist, Soc. Nig., Vol. 5, No.4, 1971,565-573.

12. G. I. Jones, The Trading States of the Oil Rivers: a study of Political development in Eastern Nigeria, London, 1963. My references are mainly to chapter 12 pp. 188-205 "Structural Change," summing up the theoretical conclusions of the whole study.

13. Jones, The Trading States, pp. 204-205.

14. Jones, The Trading States, p. 204.

15. Robin Horton, "From fishing village to city-state; a social hlslnf New Calabar," in Mary Douglas and P. M. Kabarry, (eds.) M(~ Africa, London, 1969, pp. 37-58. Horton's "New Calabar" I!I 01 course, Elem Kalahari. He refers to the Efik state of Calabar as Old Calabar.

16. E. J. Alagoa, "Long distance trade and states in the Niger Delta," Joum. Afr. HiS!., Vol. H, No.3, 1970,319-329; "The development of institutions in the states of the Eastern Niger Delta, "Joum. Afri. Hist., Vol. 12, No.2, 1971,269-278.

17. Her contributions include the following: Kay Williamson,

18. A grammar of the Kolokuma dialect of Tjo, CUP, 1965; (with E. Thomas), Delta Edo Wordlists. Ibadan 1967;"Languages of the Niger Delta," /liig. Mag., No. 97, 1968, 124-130; "History through linguistics," Ibadan, Nov. 1963, 10-11; "Some food plant names in the Niger Delta," Int. Joum. Amer. Ling., Vo. 36, No.2, 1970, 156-167; "Ijo," in J. Berry and J. H. Greenberg, Linguistics in Sub-Saharan Africa, Mouton, 1971, pp. 245-306; "The Lower Niger Languages," Oduma, Vol. J, No. J, J973, 32-35.

19. Williamson, 1971,281.

20. Williamson, 1962, 3; E. J. Alagoa, "Dating Ijo Oral Tradition Oduma Vol. 3, No. I, 1976, pp. 19-22.

21. E. J. Alagoa, A History of the Niger Delta.

22. E. J. Alagoa, "Oral tradition and archaeology: the case of On yom a", Oduma, Vol. I, No. I, 1973, pp. 10-12., "Niger Delta archaeological survey" Lagos Notes and Records, "Archaeological Survey" in Rivers Research Scheme: First Interim Report, Ibadan, 1975, pp. 1-20.

23. Oduma, publication of the Rivers State Council for Arts and Culture, Vol. 1 No.l. 1973; Fred Anozie, "Archaeological research in the Rivers State", pp. 4-9; E. J. Alaaoa, "Oral tradition and archaeololY: the cue of Onyoma," pp. 10-12; M. A. Sowunml, itA preliminary palynolOlical study in the Rivera State," pp. 13-14, Rlwrs Ra«zrch ScMml: First Intlrlm RIpon, Institute of African Studies, University of Ibadan,1975.

24. Fred Anozie, "Onyoma and Ke: A preliminary report on archaeoloaical excavations in the Niaer Delta," W. Air. Joum, Arch/., Vol. 6, 1976, pp. 89-99.

25. E. J. Alagoa, "Terracotta from the Niger Delta," Black Orpheus, Vol. 3, No. 2& 31974/75, pp. 29-39.

26. E. J. Aiagoa, "Ke: the history of an old delta community," Oduma, Vol. 2, No. l, 1974,4-10.

27. Fred Anozie, "Excavations in Ogoloma: a preliminary report," Oduma (forthcoming).