Noah Echa Attah, Shina Alimi and Yemi Balogun
Introduction
It
is often said that when an academic attains the enviable rank of a professor
especially on the basis of solid academic research and appreciable published
works, such a scholar has achieved some form of earthly immortality (Afigbo,
1999: 32; Ogen, 2006: 115). But when it becomes necessary to understand a
historian's personal philosophy especially with regard to his attitudes to life
and work and his general worldview; as a way of understanding his writings and
appreciating his academic and professional legacies, then such a historian has
become a remarkable intellectual phenomenon and an established school of
historical thought in his own right (Akinrinade, 1998: 224—240; Afolayan, 2002:
3-46; Ogen, 2006: 115). In fact, Carr (1961: 23 & 24) opines that it is
necessary to study the historian before studying his works.
Study the historian
before you begin to study his facts….Before you study the historian, study his
historical and social environments.
The
above scenario appears to be the case with Professor Siyan Oyeweso, a scholar
par excellence and a consummate administrator imbued with a humane heart.
Birth, Early Life and Education
Siyan Oyeweso was born on 1st February, 1961 at Ile
Olojo, Ede, to the family of Kareem Aweda Oyeweso. Siyan spent his early years
with his parents in Ghana before he was brought to Ibadan, Nigeria. He started
his primary education at Wesley Primary School, Elekuro, Ibadan but completed
it at St. Peter Primary School, Sekona-Ede where he received the highest number
of prizes for his outstanding performance in 1972. In 1973, he proceeded to
Oke-Iragbiji Grammar School, Iragbiji-Ikirun, Osun State for his secondary education.
While in primary school, Siyan distinguished himself as a brilliant student. He
was the Prize Winner at the Oyo State Secondary School’s Quiz Competition in
1974 and the Oyo State Secondary Schools Essay Competition in 1976. In his
final year, he served as the Library Prefect as well as the Editor of “The
Mountaineers”, the school magazine. While his academic excellence both at the
primary and the secondary schools proved his academic brilliance and
seriousness, his position as Library Prefect is a testimony of his love for
scholarship and covert training and preparation for the tasks ahead. Siyan was one of the first set of candidates
to be admitted through the Joint Admission Matriculation Board (JAMB) in 1978.
Hence, he got admission to the University of Ife, now Obafemi Awolowo
University (OAU), Ile-Ife.
Significantly, Siyan was privileged to learn at the
feet of great history teachers such as Emeritus Professor I.A. Akinjogbin,
Professors Segun Osoba, O.O. Omosini, Richard Olaniyan, Kola Folayan, B.O.
Oloruntimehin, J. Mulira, Fola Soremekun, E. Ekemode, A.O. Anjorin, Isola
Olomola, Akin Olorunfemi, Biodun Adediran, Toyin Falola and other distinguished
scholars at Ife. These renowned scholars created and sustained the Ife School
of History which is reputable for its scholarship in the realm of several
aspects of Yoruba history. The school was also
instrumental to the creation of critical reflection within the context of
narrative and analytic resolutions in African historiography. In
addition, the efforts of the school at promoting the use of interdisciplinary
approach in the study of history cannot be ignored. In an attempt to enhance
the multidisciplinary approach, most of these scholars learnt and spoke second
language such as French, Arabic, German, Russian and Spanish.
But also vital to the shaping of Siyan Oyeweso’s
philosophy and scholarship are the ideas of history as reflected in E. H.
Carr’s What is History? (1961). He
also benefitted from Rene Albrecht-Carrie’s Diplomatic
History of Europe and A. J. P. Taylor’s Struggle
for the Mastery of Europe and Europe between the Wars. Apart from these
scholars, he is well versed and groomed in classical and contemporary
literatures. He is also a lover of William Shakespeare, Bernard Shaw, Wole Soyinka,
Chinua Achebe, Okot P’itek, Ngugi Wa Thi’ongo, Peter Abrahams, J. F Odunjo, D.
O. Fagunwa, Adebayo Faleti, Akinwumi Isola and Ola Rotimi, among others. After
his first degree, he pursued and obtained his Master and Ph.D. degrees from the
Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife.
Professional Career
Siyan Oyeweso joined Lagos State University in 1985 as
an Assistant Lecturer and became Senior Lecturer in 1992. He attained the rank
of an Associate Professor in 2001 and in 2004, he was promoted full professor.
He was at different times the Head of Department of History and International
Studies, Lagos State University, Dean Faculty of Arts, Lagos State University,
the pioneer Provost, College of Humanities and Culture, Osun State University,
Ikire Campus; and pioneer Chairman, Committee of Provosts, Deans and Directors
of Osun State University from 2007 - 2011.
Siyan Oyeweso is a recipient of various research scholarships and grants
such the Federal Government of Nigeria Scholarship (1988-1991), University of Ife
Post-Graduate Scholar, 1994, Small Grant for Thesis Writing of the Centre for
the Development of Social Science Research in Africa (CODESRIA), Sir Michael
Otedola Research Grant (2002), Research Grant from the Centre for Development
and Democratic Studies (2001) and the Nigeria Conservation Foundation Research
Grant (1995). Siyan Oyeweso has just been elevated to the enviable rank of
Fellow of the Historical Society of Nigeria.
The Growth and Development of
Nigerian Academic Historiography
Since the 1950s when modern Nigerian historiography
began to take shape, historical scholarship has been undergoing several
transformations. The period between 1950 and the early 1970s witnessed the
efforts of the first generation of Nigerian academic historians of the Ibadan
School of History such as K.O Dike, Saburi Biobaku, J.C. Anene, J.F.A. Ajayi, C.C.
Ifemesia, R.A. Adeleye, J.D. Omer-Cooper, Adiele Afigbo and so on. This group
was later joined by other distinguished historians such as Isaac Adeagbo
Akinjogbin and Phillip Igbafe from the then University of Ife. These scholars
challenged the basic tenets of colonial historiography as exemplified in the
works of some British anthropologists and administrators such as C. L. Temple,
H. R. Palmer, P. A. Talbot and C. K. Meek to mention but a few (Adediran,
1986). Their major preoccupation was the reconstruction of Nigerian history
from an African perspective.
Significantly, this first crop of Nigerian academic historians provided
the template to experiment the hitherto neglected but rich African oral
traditions in the reconstruction of the African past. Although, these
historians have been criticized for being too nationalistic, they however
played important role in pioneering authentic African academic historiography. Interestingly,
by the late 1970s and early 1980s, another set of academic historians
came on board, mostly from the Zaria School of History who challenged the
approach and methodology of the former group for being too Western and
patriotic. Included in this group are Abdullahi Smith, Yusuf Bala Usman,
Patrick Wilmot, Temu and Swai, among others (Adeoye: 1992 and Adesina: 2006).
Apart from these two groups of academic historians,
there are others who have charted new courses in historical scholarship. In this
category are Obaro Ikime, G. O. Olusanya, A.B. Aderibigbe, E.A. Ayandele,
Anthony Asiwaju, Tekena Tamuno, Bolanle Awe, Akinjide Osuntokun, Ade Adefuye, R.A.
Olaniyan, O.O. Omosini, T.G.O. Gbadamosi, Biodun Adediran, Toyin Falola, H.O.
Danmole, Ayodeji Olukoju among others, who focused on critical issues that
affect the nation in an effort to make historical scholarship appraise itself
with the problems of nation building in Nigeria. Ikime and Olusanya’s works are
on the challenges of nationalism and nation building, Tamuno on the political
and administrative history of Nigeria, Awe on women and gender related issues
and Asiwaju on Nigeria’s international boundaries. While it is observed that
many academic historians in this period were concerned with the need to make
history a tool for nation building, most of their works were largely rooted in
pre-colonial and colonial history. In this way, contemporary critical issues
affecting the nation were almost left to journalists, political scientists and
sociologists. This tendency was challenged by many historians who pointed out
that historical scholarship must embrace contemporary issues. Among the early
proponents of this position are Segun Osoba, Ehiedu. E. G. Iweriebor, Siyan
Oyeweso, among others.
Today, there is no gainsaying the fact that Siyan
Oyeweso is one of the most influential contemporary historians of modern
Nigeria. The testimonies of his zeal for scholarship are adequately reflected
in his contributions to books, journals, monographs, newspaper articles and
conference proceedings. He is a versatile and well-rounded scholar. His
scholarly energies are particularly devoted to the studies of war, military,
philosophy of history, Yoruba culture and history, Islamic studies,
citizenship, development and identity questions, and political thoughts in
which his authority is well acknowledged. Siyan Oyeweso’s genius and
versatility is also observed in various micro-studies of the peoples of Ede,
Epe, Ibadan, Badagry, Ijesa and Lagos.
Certainly, it will be practically impossible to cover
Oyeweso’s works in this single piece; however an attempt is made here to
reflect on a few of his works. In doing this, we shall examine Oyeweso’s
philosophy of history, his contributions to the effects of the 19th
century Yoruba wars and the Nigerian Civil War on contemporary Nigerian
politics and society, and his discourses on various individual intellectual
thoughts in Africa, Europe and the Islamic world.
Siyan Oyeweso and his Idea of
History
To a lay man, the idea
of history is the story of events that happened in the past, and a historian is
someone who tells stories of these events. This idea of history is a far cry
from that of the professional historians. For E. H. Carr, “history is a
continuous interaction between the historian and his facts, and an unending
dialogue between the past and the present” (Carr: 1961). Meanwhile, as
Akinjogbin pointed out, the concept of history will be broadly agreed to be an
“organised critical study of such past activities of human beings as had
produced significant effects on subsequent course of event or on other human
beings in the course of events”(Akinjogbin: 1977). While it could be said that
Oyeweso’s concept of history is not remarkably different in reality from the
observations of Carr and Akinjogbin, his idea of history appears to have been
defined by certain convictions.
Beyond the general
question of “why” that underlies the methodology of historical enquiry, Siyan
Oyeweso believes that the historian must have a recourse not only to why an
event happened, he should also consider what happened in the past, why it
happened and how it happened, not just through a systematic collation of
beliefs and practices; but also through critical inter and trans-disciplinary
analysis of all other sources and branches of knowledge that are capable of
serving historical ends.
In his perceptive and thought provoking inaugural lecture,
Oyeweso makes cases for the adoption of the concept of organic citizenship which
is accommodative of both settlers and natives and highly integrative. His
position is that organic citizenship where every Nigerian is seen and
treated as a citizen in any part of the country where he is domiciled for a
long period of time is sine-qua-none for Nigerian unity and integration. Aligning
with Mahmood Mamdani’s argument on the settler/indigene issue in contemporary
Africa, Oyeweso posits that colonialism and colonial orientations left a legacy
of ethnic and sectional loyalties in Nigeria and this has been the bane of
achieving true nationhood in Nigeria. His argument is that much can be learned
from the example of Lagos where prominent foreign families had become
indigenized and nativised. Prominent examples of such families in Lagos are Oshodi-Tapa
Dynasty of Epe and Tinubu family of Kakawa Street which historically originated
from Nupeland and Kanuriland respectively (Oyeweso, 2006). His conclusion is
that, in the quest for national unity and integration in Nigeria, ethnic
chauvinism and sectional loyalty must give way to patriotism and national identity.
He argues that the tragedy of the Nigerian
state is three-fold: lack of knowledge of its history; lack of understanding of
that history; and lack of application of the examples and lessons of history
(Oyeweso: 2006). This is what he called the Unholy
Trinity. Because the Nigerian society (comprising, especially the elites
who are supposed to know better), does not understand its history and its
purpose, history becomes for them, the original sin that continued to be held
liable for all Nigerian woes such as the claim of ‘amalgamation of misfits’,
the ‘mistake of 1914’, among others. To this end, history has been blamed for a
failed project and has been attacked from all directions. The attack involves
the conscious attempt to stop the study of history in primary and post-primary
schools across the nation.
Nigeria’s and indeed Africa’s historical past, for
Oyeweso, is a burden to all historians and students of the society and a deep
knowledge and understanding of that past is the only sure way of emancipating
the society from it. The present, for Oyeweso, is not a new beginning but a
continuation of the past. As such the past must be understood in the light of
the present. In spite of this, Oyeweso did not believe that the historian must
bury himself in the distant past when contemporary and critical issues are
affecting the society and are in need of explanation and solution. He therefore
pointed out that:
History is the study of the past,
only to the extent that the past exists up to the last micro-second. The goal
of historical scholarship is to make the present more comprehensible and the
past not an unfathomable mirage. Thus, history is a wedlock of the past, the
present and the future. In the unending dialogue among the trinity, the
initiative lies with the present; how we introspect, construct and shape it to
make the future more meaningful and the past better appreciated (Oyeweso:
2006).
Oyeweso’s Reflections on War and
Strategic Thought
That Siyan Oyeweso is a leading expert in the field of
strategic thought in Nigeria is to state the obvious. A testimony of this could
be found in several volumes of scholarly literatures he has produced on
pre-colonial and post-colonial warfare in Nigeria, including prominent war actors.
There is no gainsaying the fact that Oyeweso’s work on the Nigerian Civil war
is one of the most authoritative and often cited in discourses on war history
and strategic studies in Nigeria. It is in this light that his contributions to
the historiography of the 19th century Yoruba wars and the Nigerian
civil war are examined.
One of the
works of Siyan Oyeweso on pre-colonial wars is “Ede-Ibadan Relations in the
19th Century” (Oyeweso: 2004). In this work, Oyeweso established the fact that
Ede and Ibadan had many things in common: they were both important Oyo-speaking
towns; and both were being newly re-established in the period between 1817 and
1820. Similarly, the two towns started as military camps; both were important
refugee centres in the 19th century; and both had strong military
traditions. In spite of these similarities, Oyeweso observes that the
relationship between the two towns in the 19th century was primarily
governed by military and strategic considerations.
In another work, “Ede Participation in the 19th Century Yoruba Wars” Oyeweso
examined the role of Ede in the 19th century Yoruba wars (Akinjogbin: 1998). According to
Oyeweso, Ede was involved in many wars of the 19th century Yoruba
wars. Some of these were the Lasinmi war (1826); Pamo war (1828); Eleduwe
(1838); to mention a few.
Oyeweso further noted that the 19th
century’s wars had various consequences on Ede and its environs. It is however
significant to note that the article “Ede
Participation in the 19th Century Yoruba Wars” by Siyan Oyeweso
is a systematic study of how Yoruba states interacted and survived through war
and diplomacy.
Oyeweso also examined several Yoruba Yoruba war heroes
in his studies of warfare in Yorubaland. Writing on Timi Abibu Lagunju of Ede,
Oyeweso opines that Timi Lagunju was one of the most outstanding personalities and
warrior-kings in 19th century Yorubaland who was well acquainted with the
military class, the royalty, the business class and Muslim leaders of this
epoch making era. Although he was a
king, Oyeweso notes that Timi Lagunju, unlike other kings, was always present
on the battle front. He personally led Ede forces to various wars such as the
Ijaye, Jalumi and Ekitiparapo wars on the side of Ibadan. Timi Lagunju was also a prominent figure
during the peace process in Yorubaland from 1884-1893. Another
prominent military hero that was examined by Oyeweso was Bashorun Oluyole of
Ibadan. In “The Career of Bashorun Oluyole of Ibadan, 1830-1847” (2000),
Oyeweso underscored the significance of Bashorun Oluyole as one of the men who
laid the foundation of Ibadan. Oluyole, according Oyeweso, set two important
goals for Ibadan. One is to checkmate the Fulani menace, and the second was to
make Ibadan the strongest town in Yorubaland To achieve these, Oluyole and
other generals devised various strategies and organized the warriors to harness
their full potentials. Under Oluyole, Ibadan achieved its set goals: she
defeated the Fulani Jihadists in the Osogbo war and became the dominant power
in Yorubaland.
Another
Yoruba war hero examined by Oyeweso was Balogun Kuku of Ijebu. Kuku was a
merchant prince whose trading influence was felt throughout Yorubaland. His
major business interest was arms trading which was vital to the survival of
Ibadan’s war efforts and imperial mission. But incidentally, the trading
activities and interests of Kuku clashed with the Ijebu official policy against
Ibadan. The period coincided with the time when the Ijebu placed embargo on
arms trading with Ibadan. Despite this restriction, Balogun Kuku not only
emerged as the biggest arms dealer for the Ibadan, he was perhaps the most
dependable and trusted. By the end of 1886 Peace Treaty when the people of
Ijebu accused him of supporting Ibadan, the career of Kuku was affected. The
career of Kuku, according to Oyeweso, points to the relationship between the
merchant class and the political class, and between economics and politics.
Oyeweso’s academic exertions on Yoruba pre-colonial war studies
also found expression in a chapter he co-authored with Olasiji Oshin on
“British Conquest and Administration of Yorubaland, 1854 – 1900. According to
the authors, the
British conquest of Yorubaland which started with the bombardment of Lagos was
primarily driven by economic motives rather than by any altruistic intensions..
Breaking New Grounds: Oyeweso on
Nigerian Civil War
Perhaps
the greatest contributions of Siyan Oyeweso to the literature on war and
strategy are his works on the Nigerian Civil war. These works represent courageous attempts to
break the myth that historians should be wary of recent or contemporary
history. Oyeweso derived the inspiration for this thematic focus from the
charge of the likes of Professors J. F. Ade Ajayi and E.U. Emovon. These intellectual icons appealed to Nigerian historians to
shift emphasis from the distant past and focus their studies on contemporary
events.
Thus, one of Oyeweso’s works on the
Nigerian Civil war is a monograph
titled The Post -Gowon Nigerian Account
of the Nigerian Civil War, 1975-1990: A Preliminary Review (Oyeweso: 1992).
This research monograph is a fascinating review of sixteen books on the
Nigerian Civil War written by different authors with different motives and
perspectives. In this work Oyeweso identifies the lacunae in the accounts of
several military officers who participated in the war and submits that the
accounts reflect the geographical divides or ethnic groups of the auth
concludes that these authors are all victims of partisanship and subjectivity
in their selection of facts.
Historiographically,
Oyeweso laments the non-release of official documents relating to the war. He
also notes that the eye witnesses’ accounts like every other source whether
primary or secondary should be well analysed and objectively scrutinized. In
conclusion, Oyeweso presents us with the catalogue of primary and secondary
sources on the Nigerian civil war. Thus, the monograph remains a veritable
compass for future research on the Nigerian Civil War.
In the characteristic manner of his ebullient scholarship,
Oyeweso also concentrates on the major personalities involved in the war. For
instance, in “The Ojukwu Factor in the Outbreak of the Nigerian Civil War,
1967-1970” Oyeweso provides a critical analysis of the involvement of
Chukwuemeka Ojukwu in the war. Contrary to popular views, particularly among
commentators from northern Nigeria that Ojukwu was responsible for the war,
Oyeweso points out that Ojukwu merely acted based on the responsibility placed
on him by history. It is therefore wrong to hold Ojukwu culpable for the civil
war. Oyeweso also argues that the assumption that the Ojukwu led secessionist
movement was a long term plan that antedated his army days cannot sustain
critical analysis and appraisal.
According
to Oyeweso, “Ojukwu’s responsibility was that he merely captured and
articulated the Igbo mood (especially that of the ruling class), a mood not
determined by him, but by the larger Nigerian society and its history”
(Oyeweso: 1987).
In “From Neutrality to Active Involvement:
Awo and the Nigerian Civil War” Oyeweso assesses the role of Chief Obafemi
Awolowo in the Nigerian Civil War. He
criticized the general impression in some quarters that Awolowo gave covert or
overt support to Ojukwu and encouraged him to secession but later backed out.
Based on this observation, Oyeweso gave unassailable evidence which exonerated
Awolowo from any secessionist move or support for Ojukwu. According to him, Awolowo
was part of the members of the National
Conciliation Committee whose last minute effort was aimed at averting a
confrontation between the federal government and the Eastern Region.Oyeweso
concludes that the claim that Awolowo goaded Ojukwu to secede amounts to
inventing a “scape-goat” theory for the war.
Oyeweso
highlights the factors that necessitated Awolowo’s decision to align with the
federal government. One is that he (Awolowo) the courteous treatment of Gowon
after releasing him from incarceration. Second, Awolowo at this time had won
the support of many political leaders in the North who now favoured his federal
system of government and states’ creation idea. To this end, he underscored the
fact that Awolowo contributed a great deal to the sustenance and preservation
of the unity of the country. Oyeweso’s studies on the Nigeria
Civil War also include the roles played by the church and church organizations
in the pre and post-war periods. In his Church,
Church Organisations and the Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970), he observed the shortcomings of the Church in its attempts to stop the
outbreak of the war. The efforts made by
the Church in March and May, 1967 in this regard were considered to be too
feeble as the church leaders were not assertive enough in their quest for
peace. His exact words: The church itself was part of the crises as it felt
aggrieved that its members, especially in eastern Nigeria, were unjustly
treated by the Nigerian society. Christians in politics who ought to act as the
conscience of the society also failed to show significant awareness. It is
because of this situation that Oyeweso said that “church faithfuls did not
place Christian principles above political considerations”.
Moreover, the church in eastern Nigeria was also
polarised. For instance both the Roman Catholic Church and the Anglican Church
supported the Biafra cause, while the Methodist Church stood behind the Federal
Government. Indeed, the church in eastern Nigeria supported Biafra
ideologically and morally.. The church also composed songs such as “we are
Biafrans fighting for our freedom, in the name of Jesus we shall conquer” to
bolster up the courage of the Biafran soldiers. The Catholic Church in
particular encouraged Ojukwu to take the war seriously as it was an opportunity
for the church to produce a Catholic head of state in Ojukwu. This argument,
according to Oyeweso, was used to explain the recognition which Felix Biogny of
Cote D’Ivoire, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia and Omar
Bongo of Gabon gave to the still born Biafra Republic. This lucid contribution of
Oyeweso to Nigerian civil war from the perspective of church historiography is
both illuminating and revealing. From contemporary Nigerian history, the role
of the church in national issues today may not be too different from what
Oyeweso delineated in his Church, Church
Organisations and the Nigerian Civil War, 1967-1970.
Another interesting civil war
literature on by Oyeweso is an edited work entitled Perspectives on the Nigerian Civil War.. Till date, the work remains one of the most
interpretive accounts of the Nigerian civil war. It is the first book in its
category that attracted the attention of several key actors in the civil war
including Odumegwu Ojukwu, Yakubu Gowon and T. Y. Danjuma. In fact, the book
was acknowledged by Edwin Madunagu (http://www.massoblogspot.com)
as one of the most authoritative analyses of the war. According to Madunagu,
the other works are D. J. M. Muffet’s work, Let
the Truth be Told: The Coups d’etat of 1966 and Wole Soyinka’s The Man Died and You Must Set Forth at Dawn.
Indeed, Perspectives on the
Nigerian Civil War can be regarded a courageous attempt to objectively
rewrite the history of the Nigerian civil war. In fact, the chapters were
presented in manners that differ from the near one-sided nature of most works
on the Nigerian civil war. You could tell where most authors on the Nigerian
civil war literature came from after reading some chapters without checking
their names. This is not the situation with the Perspectives on the Nigerian Civil War.
Apart from the assessments of Ojukwu, Awolowo and Gowon,
he also examined the pre-civil and civil war roles of Majors Kaduna Nzeogwu,
Emmanuel Ifeajuna, Adewale Ademoyega, Colonel Victor Banjo and General Aguiyi
Ironsi among other soldiers in the 1966 coups and the attendant civil war.
In addition to the examination of these soldiers,
Oyeweso also observed that the attitudes and responses of some foreign
governments constituted crucial factors in the outbreak and prosecution of the
Nigerian civil war. In his essay, The
Role of Foreign Powers in the Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970) (1993), Oyeweso noted that many countries such
as the Republic of Benin, Tanzania, Zambia, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Britain,
Israel, Spain, Portugal, South Africa, to mention but a few, were divided in
their responses to the war. While some of them supported the Biafran side,
others supported the federal side. Many others, however, remained neutral.
According to Oyeweso, the responses of these foreign governments in Nigeria
were informed by the interests of their various leaders. Oyeweso also casts a
glance at the involvement of mercenaries in Nigerian civil war. In the Mercenary Involvement in the Nigerian Civil
War (1967-1970), Oyeweso attempted
to explain the use of what “soldiers of
fortune” by both the Biafran and the Federal governments in the civil war. He gave some explanations for the involvement
of mercenaries in the Nigerian civil war. The first was that Nigerian
post-independence military lacked competent professionals to handle
sophisticated equipment. This shortcoming also necessitated the recruitment of
mercenaries to pilot military aircraft.
Ojukwu also
nursed a feeling of suspicion and fear of some of the senior Biafran soldiers,
he therefore decided to employ foreign mercenaries so as not to be overthrown
by senior Biafran soldiers. In another publication, Oyeweso examined the role
of international organizations such as the Organization of African Unity-OAU
(now African Union- AU) in peace and conflict situations in Africa. Using the
Nigerian example in OAU and Conflict
Resolution: A Case Study of the Nigerian Civil War – 1970 (Oyeweso, 1977).
He observes that the OAU as constituted was not in a position to maintain peace
in conflict zones across Africa because of
the principle of non-interference which was upheld by member states. The
principle precludes member states from interfering in the internal affairs of a
state (even when there is threat to peace and security) unless the state
requires the intervention. Oyeweso went
ahead to underscore that the principle of inviolability of African borders and
the frustrating impacts of interference of selfish imperialist powers in
African affairs are other factors that rendered the involvement of OAU in
conflict situations almost useless. It is, however, important to underscore
that the principles of non-interference has been reviewed in the wake of the
transformation of the OAU to AU. As constituted, the AU could interfere in the
internal affairs of states in cases of gross violation of human rights abuse
and other humanitarian grounds.
More than forty years after the end of the Nigerian
Civil War, Oyeweso reflected on the post-independence crises and the challenges
of the war in The Post-Independence
Crisis and the Nigerian Civil War (Oyeweso, 2011), he noted that at
independence, it was obvious that Nigeria had serious socio-economic and
political challenges that were created by the colonial system. While the
legacies of the colonial system were mostly held responsible for the attendant
break-down of government in the first decade of independence, Oyeweso pointed
out that the same alibi cannot be sustained after almost fifty years of
independence. On this score, Oyeweso argued that one of the greatest challenges
affecting the Nigerian nation in recent time is the attitude of the ruling
elites who continue to play ethnic and religious politics in order to advance
their selfish ambitions.
Finally, Oyeweso’s conclusion on the
Nigerian civil war and the place of Ojukwu in Nigerian history is that the
Nigeria civil war was the product of forces which went beyond the alleged
political ambition of Odumegwu Ojukwu. While it is true that Ojukwu and his
lieutenants gave leadership to the Biafran movement, it should be recognized
that they could not be held responsible for the socio-economic and political
situations that provided ground for secession and consequent outbreak of the
civil war. Therefore, rather than castigate or paint Odumewgu Ojukwu in black
colours in Nigerian history, Oyeweso argues that what is important is to
emphasize the historical lessons of the civil war for the prevention of a reoccurrence
of such ugly event. According to him, the civil war should teach Nigerians the
lessons of the need for good governance, security of lives and property,
national loyalty and patriotism, responsive and responsible government, free
and fair elections, provision of basic infrastructures and so on. It should
also teach the undesirability of divisive forces like ethnicity and ethnic
cleansing, sectionalism, religious crisis, election and census manipulations,
insecurity of lives and property, marginalization, and so on. It is only in
emphasising the positive impact of the civil war that the nation derives
historical lessons from it and it becomes instruments of nation building and
national development.
Oyeweso
on Some Aspects of Philosophy and Theory
The
Political Philosophy and Historical Theory of St. Augustine
(2006) is one of Siyan Oyeweso’s
works that portrayed him as a sound theorist and philosopher. In this work,
Oyeweso identifies Augustianism as the body of theological and philosophical
doctrines developed by St Augustine and examined some of his works especially
the one titled the City of God where
he identifies two cities: the heavenly and the earthly cities.
Oyeweso went ahead to
explain the implications of St. Augustine theory as enunciated in the City of God. According to him, Augustine
assumes that the church is supreme over the state. Second, the principle of
individual conscience is mentioned especially for Christians. Christians are
members of two societies - the state and church. They must be loyal to both
which is quite problematic. Oyeweso finally notes that St. Augustine cannot be
credited for propounding these ideals because he was virtually interpreting the
concepts of natural law from a Christian point of view. The theory about the
supremacy of the church was later developed to the concept of “papal plenitude”
of power which means that absolute power belongs to the pope. Above all,
Oyeweso concludes that St. Augustine was a bad historian because his ideas were
theoretically biased. The Bible was his major source of authority and because
he was a Christian, his theories and ideals were too subjective.
Oyeweso in another work, Introduction to Existentialist Philosophy (1997) agrees with the
notion that “existentialism is the contemporary school of thought which
declares that the object of philosophy is not the exposition of a rational
system of thought, but the clarification of the nature of man’s existence”. It
is a personal expression and impression of life that will guide one to find
answers to questions like: “what is man and what is the significance of life”?
Is there a purpose of human existence and who or what is the determiner of that
purpose?” According to Oyeweso, existentialism can be traced to Sorer
Kierkegaard (1813-1855), but its modern current can be traced to the writings
of Fredrick Nietzsche who declared that “God is dead”. Also regarded as the
“father of modern existentialist philosophy,” Kierkegaard’s main thesis, as
observed by Oyeweso “was on the theory of the subjectivity of truth, which has
become the cornerstone of the entire existentialist approach”. Its emphasis is
on man as a living being who is absolutely responsible for his own essence.
Oyeweso examined other philosophers such as Karl Jasper who according to him
shows a remarkable influence on Kierkegaard and Emmanuel Kant. Meanwhile Jasper
discussed on the phenomenon of individual and cultural crisis but could not
provide a satisfactory explanation behind the phenomenon of his essence.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) was another existentialist philosopher
discussed by Oyeweso. He observes that Nietzsche was clearly against organized
religions particularly Christianity and Buddhism. The argument put forward by
Nietzsche for his rejection is that religion caused the acceptance of what is
regarded as ‘share mentality” and went ahead to declare that “God is dead”.
Meanwhile, Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) another philosopher discussed by
Oyeweso brings out a description of man’s everyday existence which he claims
was not real. Heidegger however provides ways of how man can come to an
authentic state of life or existence. Oyeweso also discussed Jean Paul Sartre
(1905-1980) who was of the opinion that “Marxism and existentialism go hand in
hand in their appraisal of social institutions and in the quest to promote
freedom in the context of political liberty”.
In addition, he mentioned Albert Camus (1913-1960) who pointed out that
“it is difficult to find importance in the world because for him the world
lacks reason”. Camus further pointed out that “all reason for existing
disappears at the end of the day one finds out that it is unbearably absurd to
live without meaning”. Human life can only be meaningful if man revolts against
this absurdity of existence.
The “Conquest of Violence: The Philosophy of
Mohandas Karamched Gandhi and Martin Luther King (Jnr.) Revisited” (1997) is
another work by Siyan Oyeweso and Charles Alade. The work attempts an analysis
of the philosophy of Mohandas Karamched Gandhi, “who helped to shape the
strategy of anti-colonialism through his ideas of non-violence or passive
resistance” and Martin Luther King (Jnr.), the African-American who is referred
to as the “modern Moses” who fought for social justice and equality for blacks
in America. According to the authors, these men were important and worthy of
study because despite being violated, repressed, brutalized, segregated, they
were non-violent in their confrontations with their oppressors. Gandhi,
according to the authors, was not a politician, but a seeker after truth, and
had developed the conviction that “truth” can be reached only through non-violence.
The authors emphasized the fact that for Gandhi, non-violence does not amount
to weakness or cowardice. He inaugurated the non-cooperation attitude as a
means to fight colonialism. He boycotted foreign cloth; went on hungry
protests; and called on Indians to demonstrate their nationalist feelings
against imperialism. This movement was resisted vigorously by the colonial
government and many nationalist leaders were arrested. While many newspapers
were suppressed, Gandhi himself was imprisoned for six years but released after
two years due to health reasons.
Martin Luther King (Jnr.) on the other hand is
referred to as the prophet who gave hope to blacks, who fought for social
justice and equality. To White Americans, King built a bridge of communication
between races. According to the authors, King adhered to the belief of
non-violence as a tool to achieve his goals. A detailed review of the biography
of Martin Luther King (Jnr.) was discussed by the authors while his
philosophical thought was traced to his first sermon at the Baptist Church
titled, “Evil is not driven out but crowded out”. Furthermore, King’s
activities under the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)
established to fight discrimination in public places was also discussed by the
authors. In 1964, Martin Luther King received the Nobel Peace Prize for his
non-violent leadership.
Oyeweso began his paper on “The Concepts of Free Will and
Determinism in History” (1997) by stating that the topic is one of the areas of
disagreement among philosophers and philosophers of history. He quoted Isaiah
Berlin’s definition of determinism as “…the view that everything is
predetermined, what happens is not affected by what people do or the choices
they make”. From this definition, Oyeweso notes that four points could be
deduced. First, the outcome of historical process is predetermined in
accordance with certain laws over which the historical actors have no control
whatever. Second, that determinism implies necessity, compulsion, fatalism and
predestination. Third, that there is a dichotomy between free will and
determinism. Fourth, that by explaining human actions in causal terms, it
implies a denial of human free will and this encourages historians to evade
their supposed obligation to pass moral judgments on historical actors i.e. to
castigate the Napoleons, Charlemagnes, Stalins, Hitlers, and Abachas of
history.
Oyeweso further reviewed the works of scholars like
May Brodbeck and E.H Carr. According to Oyeweso, the views of May Brodbeck and
Carr appear to conform to a large extent with what regular historians speak
ofas “inevitable”. In his view, this can be called watered-down determinism as
opposed to fixed determinism by Karl Popper and Isaiah Berlin. Oyeweso thus
noted that events do not just happen and that event in human society, just as
in the world of nature, is related to one another within a frame work of laws
and regularities. He therefore stated that “nothing in history is inevitable
because for it to have happened otherwise, the antecedent cause would have to
be different. Similarly, he observes the fact that human actions are both free
and determined. Quoting the words of Rousseau; “man is born free yet everywhere
he is in chains”, Oyeweso noted that man is free because he has his will and
reason to choose his actions. He is in chains because he cannot use his will
discriminately.
He condemns Berlin’s assumption that historical
actors are free agents because Berlin ignores the contribution of social
psychology to the understanding of how individual members of the society can
act not in accordance with their own wishes but that of their manipulator.
Another weakness is that Berlin’s notion of moral responsibility of historical
actors also ignores the contribution of psycho-analysis to the understanding of
people’s behaviour. In the case of madness, humans cannot be made responsible
for actions made. So also in the case of actions made while under the influence
of drug, alcohol, torture and so on.
In
addition, Oyeweso examined some Islamic philosophers of the medieval era who
contributed significantly to Muslim historiography. Among these was Al-Kindi
(801-873 A.D.) who was heavily influenced by Quranic and rational study and was
generally regarded as a leading Muslim philosopher. Others include Al- Farabi
(870-950 A.D.), Ibn Sina (980-1037), Ibn Tufayl and Ibn Rushd (Averroes
1126-1198). Building on the Greek philosophy of Aristotle, Al-Kindi introduced
the Arabs to deep historical thinking through many of his publications. His
works traversed many fields from philosophy to astronomy and from dialectics to
epistemology. For Kindi, philosophy is the knowledge of truth and reality.
Kindi’s philosophy was thus the first bold attempt at synthesizing religion and
philosophy, thereby creating a convergence between the two.
.
Oyeweso
noted that Al-Farabi harmonised political philosophy with Islam drawing from
Plato and Aristotle’s ideas. He recognised Plato as the authority on political
philosophy and divine laws. His acknowledgement of Plato is an indication that
he was building on the existing scholarship of the Greek, thereby deriving his
source from the early works rather than conjectural knowledge. His contribution
to logic was making accessible Aristotelian logic to an Arab audience and he
laid the basis for the quinary division of reasoning. He maintained that human
reasoning is superior to religious faith whereby philosophers relies on
reasoning and non-philosophers invokes
the revealed religion or divine explanation for the course of history. In sum,
Al-Farabi’s political philosophy became a very strong influence on many Islamic
scholars including Al-Masudi and Ikhwan al-Safa.
Also,
Oyeweso observes that Ibn Sina’s (980-1037) was pre-occupied with universal
problems. Based on Aristotelian and Plotinus interpretation, he developed his
theory of creation by emanation. According to Oyeweso, his ideas influenced the
thinking of Thomas Aquinas albeit with modifications and further development.
Though trained in medicine, he made the most contribution in the field of
philosophy.
On
Ibn Rushd (1126-1198), Oyeweso is of the view that Ibn Rushd came from a
background which had much interest in law. His sentiment for legal profession
brought him to prominence as the Chief Justice of Cordova. His understanding in
making simple the Aristotelian ideas earned him the title “Commentator of
Aristotle” and he was well known in medieval Europe as Averroes. His
philosophies were a sharp tradition away from the religious mind. This explains
his unpopularity with the Arabs. He is by every standard a philosopher with
great ideas about truth.
Oyeweso
on African Political Thought
Oyeweso’s contribution on African political thought
is also significant. For instance, he has to his credit a number of works on
selected Nigerian statesmen and political elites. One of these is “The
Political and Social ideas of Dr Nnamdi Azikwe: A Reconsideration” (1991). In
this work, Oyeweso acknowledges the nationalism and statesmanship of Azikiwe
and underscored his personality as one of the leading elites in Africa and
founding fathers of Nigeria. As an historian, however, Oyeweso’s concern with
Azikiwe is to re-examine his intellectual ideas for historical objectivity.
According to him, there has been an attempt to create a pantheon of national
heroes with many accounts and interpretation tending to distort historical
fact. The danger for the historian, according to him, is the tendency to accept
such interpretations as valid. On this score, Oyeweso identifies some of the
contradicting and conflicting issues in the political ideas of Azikwe. Some of
these include Zik’s assumption of imperialism as an inevitable and progressive
phenomenon for weak nations like African states. According to Oyeweso,
colonialism is neither historically progressive, development centred or of a
moral character in terms of power. Oyeweso also highlights Azikiwe’s lack of
consistence and allegiance to his thought on issues like federalism,
egalitarianism, capitalism, socialism and so on. He notes, for instance, that
thrice in his life, Azikiwe committed an ideological apostasy. He once
conceived the idea of Marxian socialism in his work, Renascent Africa (1937) which was later changed to ‘African
Socialism’ and to ‘neo-welfarism’.
In addition, Oyeweso criticizes the attempt by many
people to indict Zik’s followers and dissidents for interpreting Azikiwe’s
ideas out of his own context. He went further to point out that there is no
reason to create a dichotomy between the ideas of Azikiwe when he was a youth
and when he was older and more experienced. Such attempt, according to him,
would only lead to dualization of human thought. It would also seek to
exonerate Azikiwe from failing to match his ideas with practice. These
attempts, for Oyeweso, are ahistorical. Therefore, while Oyeweso concludes that
Azikiwe was grossly inconsistent in his thought and highly rhetorical in
practice, he nevertheless points out that Azikiwe was a symbol of Nigerian
nationalism and the most combative campaigner against British imperialism in
Nigeria.
Meanwhile, with the exception of his work on Dr.
Nnamdi Azikiwe, Oyeweso’s discourses on intellectual ideas and political
thought were not with the mainstream political elites like Leopold Senghor,
Kwame Nkrumah, Modibo Keita, Sekou Toure, etc., that have attracted so much
scholarly publications and public commentary. His major concern has been on the
little known (according to Segun Osoba, the “Oppositional Counter Elites”) who
however contributed significantly to the nation building process of Nigeria.
His seminal work on “The Political
Thought of Mokwugo Okoye Since 1950” (1995),
which is also his doctoral thesis, is the first systematic, critical and
original work on the life and socio-political ideas of Mokwugo Okoye, a radical
Nigerian nationalist, socialist, philosopher and one of the acknowledged
leaders of the Zikist Movement.
Indeed, Oyeweso’s treatise did not only offer a
profile of Okoye’s life and his intellectual ideas, it also shows how social experience, a lived experience and
idealism can interface and find meaning in political practice. Oyeweso’s views
on intellectual ideas agrees with the observation that the thoughts of an
individual and the society cannot be understood without the social milieu in
which they exist. To this end, his argument on Okoye’s thoughts is that
colonial alienation and degradation was central to the development of his
world-view. In him, however, there is an ideal African intellectual. He was a
man who reflects and yet did not allow his reflection to encumber him from
social action. He is also a man whose social action was meticulously guided by
thought. To Okoye, the role of the intellectual and the political activist is
closely intertwined. Commitment to him is not an end in itself. It must have
practical relevance to the just and democratic struggles of the masses. In
short, the essence of commitment and social praxis in Okoye's thought is the
liberation of man, particularly the underclass, the exploited and voiceless
classes.
Also in the book Mokwugo
Okoye: Struggle for National Liberation and Social Justice (2006), Oyeweso provides unassailable evidence
that establishes Mokwugo Okoye as an unremitting critic of the status quo, a
scholar-politician who pursued creative ideas and a committed ideologist who
made significant contributions to the philosophy of governance and African
political historiography. The work is a profile of a man who devoted his entire
life to the emancipation of the oppressed people of Nigeria and who never compromised
the principles he stood for. To date, it is significant to note that Oyeweso’s
discourse on Mokwugo Okoye stands out as one of the pioneering contributions to
the growing literature on African political thought.
Oyeweso’s
treatise shows that the leading figures in the national liberation movement
were not the only group that deserves historical attention and documentation.
There are many unsung heroes who actually contributed to the intellectual
growth and the attainment of independence who have either been neglected or
were not properly documented in the prevailing nationalist historiography.
Apart
from Okoye, Oyeweso has also worked on the social and political aspects of the
thoughts of Aminu Kano” Oyeweso was attracted by the
ideas of Aminu Kano which had some measure of relevance to the historical
situation in which he found himself and the significant influence it has on the
attitude and behaviour of a great number of people. He observes that
Aminu Kano did not produce any major political treatise in his life time, he
however has many speeches, addresses and official memoranda in which his
thoughts could be gleaned. Meanwhile, Oyeweso closely examined some of the
connecting threads in Amini Kano’s speeches with a view to finding some order and
continuity in the development of his political ideas. In any case, he observes
that Aminu Kano was more of a political activist than a theorist and he was
interested in putting his political ideas into practice. One of the features
that stand him out among his compeers was his devotion to the cause of the poor
and the downtrodden. He led a humble life and he has been
described by many as the ‘conscience of the nation’.
Oyeweso’s
work on African political thought also extends to the social and political ideas
of Adegoke Oduola Adelabu, the diminutive stormy petrel of Ibadan politics in
his work entitled “Essential Adegoke Adelabu” (2000). The picture of Adelabu
that emerges from this study is that of a grass root politician, a detribalised
Nigerian, a statesman, the lion of the West and a counter opposition elite
within the context of Yoruba politics. Adelabu is a man who believes in popular
democracy where every individual, irrespective of sex, creed, religion, age and
education can live freely. He is described as a man of the people who was also
passionately devoted to their plight. This factor made Oyeweso to refer to him
as Africa’s first Fanonist for he was involved in the liberation struggle of
the peasantry.
Oyeweso
observes that throughout his life time, Adelabu remained committed to the
liberation struggle of the country from the vestiges of colonialism. He
therefore concludes that Adelabu was Ibadan’s greatest contribution to
Nigeria’s nationalist movement and the most charismatic leader to have emerged
for the town.
Conclusion
This chapter has provided a background analysis to
the intellectual activities of Professor Siyan Oyeweso. It provides a detailed
analysis of his thoughts on the nature of history and historiography as well
his perspectives on war, warfare and strategic studies. Without mincing words,
Oyeweso, through his perceptive analyses of issues and concepts in
historiography and warfare over the years, stands out as a leading Nigerian
expert in strategic studies. Also, he has shown his worth as a reputable
historical philosopher and thinker of contemporary Nigeria as reflected in the
number of his works on political thoughts and views on some eminent Nigerians.
As indicated earlier, Siyan Oyeweso is one of
the first Nigerian historians to employ interdisciplinary and
trans-disciplinary approach to historical scholarship. Perhaps one of the
landmark contributions of Oyeweso to the development of historical scholarship
and discipline in Nigeria was the nomenclature and curricula/syllabi change in
the Department of History of the Lagos State University (LASU). This took place
during the 1996/1997 academic session when the name of the Department of
History which started as Department of Religions and History at the inception
of LASU in October 1984 was changed to Department of History and International
Studies. This trail-blazing and historic revolution took place under the
headship of Dr. Olakunle Lawal with the collaboration of Ife and Ibadan trained
scholars like Late Professor Deji Ogunremi, Charles Alade, Abolade Adeniji,
Dele Adeoti, Modupe M. Faseke, Bayo Adeogun and other notable members of
academic staff. In furthering this disciplinary transformation, the Department
reviewed its curriculum and created a new and unique trans-disciplinary
orientation for historical training at LASU. This led to what Oyeweso called
the birth of “LASU School of History”. What is significant here is that he was
part of the team that carried out this transformation at LASU which has since
been emulated by several Departments of History across most Nigerian
universities. Today, virtually all the departments of history in Nigerian
universities have replicated the LASU initiative. In sum, Oyeweso remains a
historian of note and a scholar of repute who has written his name in gold in
academic scholarship in modern Nigeria.
References
Akinjogbin, A. I., (1977) History and Nation Building Inaugural
Lecture Series 26, Ile-Ife: University of Ife Press
Akinjogbin, A. I. (1980) Topics on Nigeria’s Social and Economic
History (Ife History Series) (Ile-Ife: University of Ife Press)
Adeoye, A. O., (1992) “Understanding
the Crisis in Modern Nigerian Historiography”, History in Africa, Vol. 19, and Adesina, C. Olutayo, (2006).
“Teaching History in Twentieth Century Nigeria: The Challenges of Change,” History in Africa, Vol. 33
Adediran, Biodun (1984) The Frontier States of Western Yorubaland,
1800-1889. Ibadan:
Institut Français de Recherche en Afrique, 1994
Adediran, Biodun (1986) “The Growth
of Nigerian Historiography: A Preliminary Survey” Africa: Revista de Centro de Estudos Africanos da US P 9.
Afigbo,
A.E., (1999) History as Statecraft:
Nigeria National Merit Award Winners Lecture. Okigwe: Whytem.
Afolayan,
Funso, " Exploring Uncharted Frontiers in African Studies: Toyin Falola
and His Works". In Adebayo Oyebade (eds) (2002) The Transformation of Nigeria: Essays in Honour of Toyin Falola.
Trenton: AWP
Akinrinade,
Olusola, "Akinjogbin: The Man and His Works" in Deji Ogunremi and
Biodun Adediran (eds) (1998) Culture and
Society in Yorubaland. Ibadan: Rex Charles
Carr, E. H, (1961) What is History, London Macmillan Press
Edwin Madunagu, “Settling Questions
in Nigerian History”, Movement of Sovereign State of Biafra, http://massob.blogspot.com/ (Accessed 08 January
2012)
Falola, Toyin, (1984), The Political Economy of a Pre-colonial
African State: Ibadan, 1830-1900, Ile-Ife, University of Ife Press
Folayan, Kola
(1983) “The Arab Factor in African History” Inaugural
Lecture Series (Ile-Ife: University of Ife Press)
Folayan, Kola
(1979) Tripoli during the Reign of Pasha Qaramanli (Ife History Series 1)
(Ile-Ife: University of Ife)
Olatunji B. Oloruntimehin, History and Society Inaugural Lecture
Series 18 (Ile-Ife: University of Ife Press, 1976)
Obafemi Awolowo,
Awo on the Nigerian Civil War,
(Ikeja-Lagos: John West Publications Ltd., 1982)
Ogen, Olukoya (2006) "The Ethnic Factor
in Contemporary Nigerian Politics: S.O. Arifalo and His Works" in Akin
Alao (ed.) The Nigerian State: Language
of its Politics. Ibadan: Rex Charles and Collins.
Oyeweso, Siyan (1986), “Causal
Factors in the Nigerian Civil War: A Critical and Comparative Analysis of Some
Nigerian Published Accounts”, M. A. History Dissertation, Department of
History, University of Ife, Ile-Ife
Oyeweso, Siyan (1987), “The Ojukwu
Factor in the Outbreak of the Nigerian Civil War” Journal of Humanities, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 49 - 67.
Oyeweso,
Siyan (1988), “From Neutrality to
Active Involvement: Awo and the Nigerian Civil War” in Toyin Falola et al
(eds.), Obafemi Awolowo: the End of an
Era? (Ile-Ife: Obafemi Awolowo University Press), pp. 681 – 664
Oyeweso, Siyan (1988), “The Value
and Limitations of Early Arabic Accounts in the Reconstruction of Nigerian
History” in Islamic Culture, Vol.
LXII, No. 1, pp. 49-67
Oyeweso, Siyan (ed.), (1989), “The
Church, Church Organisations and the Nigerian Civil War” in S.A. Adewale Christianity and Social Struggles in Nigeria,
(Ibadan: NACS), pp. 398-421
Oyeweso, Siyan (1991), “The
Political and Social Ideas of Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe: A Reconsideration”, Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 2, No.
1, 1991, pp.121 – 133
Oyeweso, Siyan (1990), “The 1996
Coups and the Nigerian Civil War” in Segun Johnson (ed.) Readings in Selected Nigerian Problems (Lagos: Kolaserve Press),
pp. 77-108.
Oyeweso, Siyan
(ed.) (1992), Perspectives on the Nigerian Civil War, (Lagos: O A P Publications)
Oyeweso, Siyan (1992) The Post -Gowon Nigerian Account of The
Nigerian Civil War 1975-1990, A Preliminary Review (Lagos: African Peace
Research Institute).
Oyeweso,
Siyan (1993), “The Role of Foreign Powers in the Nigerian Civil War, 1967 -
1970” on Journal of Religions and
History; Vol. 1, No.1, 1993, pp.34 – 49
Oyeweso, Siyan, (1995), Aspects of
the Social and Political Thought of Mallam Aminu Kano, Silk Leadership
Monograph Series, Lagos
Oyeweso, Siyan, (1995), “The
Political Thought of Mokwugo Okoye since 1950”, Ph.D Thesis Obafemi Awolowo
University, Ile-Ife
Oyeweso, Siyan & Sarumi Debo
(1997), “Introduction to Existentialist Philosophy”, in A. O.K Noah (ed).
Fundamentals of General Studies, Lagos: LASU
Oyeweso, Siyan (1997), “Conquest of
Violence: The Philosophy of Mohandas Karamched Gandhi & Martin Luther King
(Jnr.) Revisited’. Ibid pp.495-504
Oyeweso, Siyan (1997), “The Concept
of Freewill and Determinism in History” ibid,
pp.537-540
Oyeweso, Siyan (1997), OAU and Conflict Resolution: A Case Study
of the Nigerian Civil War. (Lagos:
International Politics Association)
Oyeweso, Siyan (1998), “Ede
Participation in the 19th century Yoruba Wars” in I.A. Akinjogbin (ed.), War and Peace in Yorubaland, 1796 - 1886,
(Ibadan: Heinemann), pp.65-75
Oyeweso, Siyan
(1998), “British Conquest and Administration of Yorubaland 1854 - 951” in G.O.
Ogunremi and Biodun Adediran (eds.) Culture
and Society in Yorubaland, Ibadan: Rex Charles), pp.39-50
Oyeweso, Siyan (2000), “Essential
Adegoke Adelabu” in G.O. Ogunremi (ed) Ibadan,
Lagos: Modelor Press
Oyeweso, Siyan (2000), “The Career
of Bashorun Oluyole of Ibadan” in G.O. Ogunremi (ed) Ibadan, (Lagos: Modelor Press), pp. 130-142
Oyeweso, Siyan
(2001), “Balogun Kuku, Merchant Prince, Military Brass and Ijebu Muslim Leader”
in Odu: Journal of West African Studies.
No. 42, (August - Dec. 2001), pp.84-99
Oyeweso, Siyan (2004), “Ede-Ibadan
Relations in the 19th Century” Nigeria
Journal of History and International Studies, Vol. 4 Jan - March, 2004, pp.
42-60.
Oyeweso Siyan (2004), “The Political
Ideas of Mallam Raji Abdallah” in The
Journal of Politics” Vol. 6, Nos. 1 & 2, pp.28-36
Oyeweso, Siyan (2005), “Some
Medieval Islamic Philosophers”, in Dapo Asaju (ed.) Introduction to Philosophy and Logic. (Lagos: Lagos State
University Press)
Oyeweso, Siyan, (2006),”The
Undertakers, The Python’s Eye and Footsteps of the Ant: The Historian’s
Burden”, 22nd Inaugural Lecture, Lagos State University, (Lagos
State University Press)
Oyeweso, Siyan (2006), “The
Political Philosophy & Historical Theory of St-Augustine” in Akin Alao
(ed.) Introduction to Philosophy of
History, (Lagos: Printechique), pp. 48-62
Oyeweso, Siyan (2006), “Western Historiography
from the Renaissance Period to Karl Marx”, in Akin Alao, Introduction to Philosophy of History, (Lagos: Printechique),
pp.84-102
Oyeweso, Siyan (2006), Mokwugo Okoye: Struggle for National
Liberation and Social Justice, Lagos: Multivision
Oyeweso, Siyan (2011), “The
Post-Independent Crisis and the Nigerian Civil War”, (Lagos: The Sun Publishing
Co.)
No comments:
Post a Comment