Siollun, Max. What Britain Did to Nigeria: A Brief History of Conquest and Rule. London, C. Hurst & Co. (Publishers) Ltd., 2021.
This series is sort of a public learning engagement. In fact, I think I am far too ignorant about Nigeria’s history. I am reading about Nigeria to enable me to ask the right or appropriate questions. Yes. I want to be able to ask more appropriate questions by the end of this series. We find more effective solutions by asking the right questions.
Follow-up on the series: Reading Nigeria 2
Dear Fellow,
Quite a ride this has been. I’m trying to keep up. The book currently under review is quite revelatory and informative.
Let’s get into the discussion for the day.
In this episode, we’ll be looking at three points from my reading so far.
The history behind the tag “the Dark Continent”.
Suggestive roots of bribery and corruption in Nigeria.
Imperial exploitation of the ignorance of the pre-Nigerian chiefs.
The Dark Continent
Siollun writes:
Although European ships had called at Africa’s coast many times, they knew little about its inland areas. For many of them, ‘Africa is the mystery of the world . . . for the maps of a century ago had nothing to disclose of its vast interior but blank spaces, as undiscovered as the North Pole.’ This led Europeans to refer to Africa as “the Dark Continent” (pg. 15).
Before the account cited above, I had always thought of the tag (“the Dark Continent”) as a descriptive term for a people of dark intellect, people who are yet to be enlightened, savages to say the least. Except if the term has other connotations beyond what is shared here (such as my own preconception), I don’t think the tag is offensive per se. Well, what more should we consider about the term “the Dark Continent”? Kindly share in the comment.
The Roots of Bribery and Corruption in Nigeria
According to the book, before the British obtained access into the hinterlands of what is now Nigeria, they had to make some financial commitments to trade amicably with the village chiefs or “Big Men” at the borders.
Siollun writes:
Commissions, tipping and other payments for services rendered became deeply embedded in West Africa’s business and trading systems and were pervasive in the 19th century throughout the territory that eventually became Nigeria. . . . In the late 20th century, these ex gratia payments acquired new names: bribery and corruption. When English law was transplanted to West African society, legitimate trade payments that had existed for centuries were suddenly transformed into illegal financial transactions. Nigeria’s modern day bribery is at least partially a descendant of this elaborate system of payments. Contemporary Nigeria is still trying to divest itself of the problem (pg. 49).
The payments offered by the British for trade weren’t standardised, they didn’t have definitive values. Depending on the class of the individual receiving the payment, the value of the commodity used in the payment varied. This means the trade was done without organisation, to the detriment of the natives. More saddening is the impact the “transplanted laws (and some systems today)” have on our nation. What are your thoughts concerning this?
Ignorance Exploited
The Royal Niger Company (RNC) was instrumental in the amalgamation of the various distinct regions which constitute Nigeria today. In the events leading up to the amalgamation in 1914, the RNC became a monopolistic enterprise that championed trade activities in most of Nigeria. To attain this status, overpowering its competitors, the RNC had to endear the native chiefs into signing treaties that would allow the company the liberty to act out freely all its agenda. However, there was a situation:
The treaties were written in Englsih even though many of the chiefs who assented to them were illiterate and could not read, speak, or understand English, allowing them no way of verifying that the written treaty was identical to what they had been told (pg. 88).
While the speech and actions betrayed the content of the written document, the written document remains a trustworthy information source for making judgements. The colonial force also used literacy. Should ignorance of the chiefs take the blame for the terrible implications which followed the signing of the treaties or what should?
Thank you for following the series.
See you next week, Fellow.
Your LetterMan,
Tongjal, W. N.