The history behind warri and isekiri and ijaw

 “Any person living in Igbudu or any part of Agbassa except an Itsekiri is a tenant”. - Justice Uwaifo (Suit No. W/101/73). On the ownership of Warri there are three parties to it: the Itsekiri, the Urhobo, and the Ijaws. Let's make it as simple as possible by eliminating the Ijaws from the question of ownership of Warri. Warri High Court dated 9/7/1964 barred the Ijaw from contesting ownership of lands in Warri as the Supreme Court had since SC/450/65 laid such matter to rest. Having removed the Ijaws, let's see a review of Warri: A Focus On Itsekiri to debunk the claim of ownership from Urhobo by Professor I.E. Sagay, SAN. All sources of evidence lead to that single conclusion, namely, historical, cultural, judicial, sociological evidence and valid treaties – all point to one direction, Itsekiri ownership of Warri. The history of the Warri kingdom including the 88-year period of the interregnum establishes quite clearly that only the Warri kingdom had the might, organization, the geographical and dominated presence to found Warri. The Warri kingdom was established at about 1480, by a Benin Prince, Ginuwa, who became our first Monarch. Since then, there has been, with the exception of the period of interregnum between 1848 and 1936, an unbroken succession of monarchs over the Warri kingdom. The present Monarch, His Majesty, Ogiame Atuwatse III, is the 21st Olu of Warri.

Warri was a powerful, sovereign, and independent kingdom until 1894, when Governor Nana was defeated in an unjust war levied by the British who were then hell bent on colonizing that very rich part of West Africa, in order to control the trade, commodities, and resources. Ironically, British lust for economic control led to eventual political control. The power and authority of the Kings and the Kingdom were not diminished by the interregnum, 1848–1936. One of our great historians, Mr. J.O.S. Ayomike, makes the following comments on the relationship between Nana and the British: “From 1851, up to the time of Nana’s appointment as Governor, the British Government had appointed Consuls along the Bights of Benin and Biafra to watch over the interests of the British merchants operating along the coast. Because of the British interests, these Consuls had encouraged the appointment of Itsekiri Governors, in the place of Olu (this was the period of interregnum) so that they could have powerful local authority through whom all affairs would be regulated."

The Itsekiri government was on the ground headed effectively by governors in turns. Consuls acted more or less as the ambassadors of Her Majesty’s government. They did not, and were not expected to, control the Itsekiri government. In all respects, the Government in Itsekiri land was sovereign and independent. Then came August 1891, when the Niger Coast Protectorate was inaugurated and Itsekiri country was part of it. This new arrangement ushered in a change: the British take-over of Itsekiri government. The British Government now came into a position where their imperialist policies could be ruthlessly enforced by their functionaries.

The powers of Nana as the Ruler of the Itsekiris and Warri kingdom are legendary. His authority extended not only to the Benin, Warri, Escravos and Forcados Rivers and their adjoining lands, but also all along the Ethiope River and right into Urhobo land. Up till the Nana era, the power and authority of the Ruler of the Warri kingdom, whether king or Governor, was direct, in the sense that the Ruler and the Kingdom controlled resources, mainly slaves and palm oil, and had military might for maintaining the kingdom’s domination of the available resources, the regional economy and general environment. For in the course of trading with Europe over the centuries, the Itsekiri Monarchs and the Governors during the interregnum also acquired and accumulated considerable firearms, including cannons and guns, and therefore had firepower. It is no exaggeration to say that they subdued their own environment and their immediate neighbours. The lingering resentment their sister ethnic groups have against the Itsekiris is not unconnected with the dominance. Quite clearly only the Warri Kingdom was in a position to establish the city of Warri.

Everyone familiar with the works of Professor Obaro Ikime knows the rigour he puts into the examination of historical material. Yet he has had to admit in his book Chief Dogho of Warri that: “It was now possible to station [two] vice-consuls in the Itsekiri country… in 1881, one such vice-consul was stationed at a point now near the UAC premises in Warri. Another was stationed … along the Rivers.” Mr. Ayomike provides another irrefutable proof of Itsekiri ownership of Warri, at page 4 of his work in the following passage: “It is worth pointing out that alongside this definitive description above by Obaro Ikime, there is another cogent one: encircling this Warri vice-consulate area are the Itsekiri communities of Pessu Town to the east (founded in the early nineteenth century), Gbolokposo to the northeast (founded in the mid-eighteenth century), Okere to the north (founded about 1510), and Agbassa Urhobo to the immediate east (settled on the land as per judgment in suit No. 25 of 1926: Ometa v. Chief Dore Numa, by Olu of Warri on Itsekiri land about 1850). And the head chief of Effurun to the north had confirmed Itsekiri ownership of Agbassa land in court in 1926. We are truly at a loss to appreciate the other true parameters outside these that Prof. Ekeh would need to determine the Itsekiri ownership of Warri Township!"

As the respected and renowned Warri/Itsekiri historian has ably documented at pages 5 to 6 of the book, the name Warri is synonymous with Itsekiri and the Warri kingdom. The Writer cites 13 instances in which established historians used variants of the word Warri to describe the Itsekiris and the Kingdom founded by the Itsekiri Royal Dynasty. Some of this evidence needs repeating: