City Planning: Yorùbá City Planning
KeywordsNineteenth Century Colonial Encounter Slum Clearance Sociopolitical Organization Spatial Urban Expansion
The Yorùbá are a finite set of adjacent groups – including the È̩gbá, Òndó, Àwórì, and Ìjè̩bu – who share a mutually intelligible language, myths of origin, religious beliefs, cultural practices, experiences of bondage, and Anglo-Franco colonial heritage. Historians have argued that this ethnic identity coalesced in the nineteenth century, while their historical tendency to settle in large, densely populated cities and towns has pushed them to the forefront of discourse of indigenous urbanism in Africa. In West Africa today, Yorùbá-speaking people can be found split mainly between two countries, with over one million in southern Benin Republic and close to 40 million in southwestern Nigeria. Substantial minor communities are also established in Ghana and Togo.
Established as a confederacy of city-states thriving between the twelfth and the late seventeenth century, historically Yorùbáland maintained its autonomy and power – split between the political capital of Old Ọ̀yọ́ (Ọ̀yọ́-Ilé) and Ilé-Ifẹ̀, the religious center – by virtue of competitive advantages versus its neighbors. These advantages included sociopolitical organization, military alliances, and monopolization of ritual activity and commerce, especially in the light of its geographic position between the savanna plains of the hinterland and the forests close to the Atlantic coast (Usman, 2000).
Yorùbá cities offer a paradox to Western scholars. As Africa had been traditionally considered by them as overwhelmingly rural or semirural at best, such conceptions were tied with other philosophies as the “noble savage” imagery; research on preindustrial cities tended to focus solely on Western cities. In the rare cases where Yorùbá cities where mentioned in urban history works by the 1960s, they were designated as “semi-urban” (Coquery-Vidrovitch, 2005, pp. 12–13). Their markedly different modalities in form and function by comparison to cities in the West were saliently rooted, inter alia, in the use of temporary building materials and the lack of distinct division between urban and agricultural space. As a result, early debates among Western scholars centered on the idea of whether these settlements were cities at all (Sjoberg, 1960). These questions were settled from the 1970s and finally summarized by the basic premise laid by the urbanist Spiro Kostof, arguing that cities are places that are intimately engaged with the countryside and their separation is thoroughly injudicious (1999, p. 38). Since then, new debates about the longevity and morphology of Yorùbá cities have taken center stage.
The origins of Yorùbá cities are obscure, though local traditions, well documented by the Yorùbá-educated elite during the long nineteenth century, trace the origins of all Yorùbá to Ilé-Ifẹ̀. While this spiritual and urban focal point is estimated to date as far back as the ninth century, the circumstances of the original foundation of Ifẹ̀ itself are ambiguous (Law, 1984). The earliest recorded reference to Yorùbá settlements comes however from a Portuguese map in the sixteenth century, with Ìjè̩bu-Òde clearly indicated. Indeed, Yorùbá oral traditions of origins show some Islamic influence regarding geography and anthroponomy (Johnson, 1921; Law, 1984), an influence that is clearly reflected in the configuration and arrangement of historical urban layout (Moughtin, 1985). Surprisingly, no research exists examining the relationship between the oral and built traditions of the Hausa and Yorùbá.
The cities (ìlú) are almost always oval in shape, with the Ọba’s palace (àfin) normally as the focal point where the main roads and paths converge. Scholars point to Iléṣà as the “perfect formal representation” of the ideal spoke-and-wheel pattern of the Yorùbá city (Peel, 2000). Ọ̀yọ́, Òṣogbo, Ilé-Ifẹ̀, and Ọ̀wọ̀ are said to have had two or three concentric walls. Walls were punctuated with gates to control access, often serving as tollgates. In 1825, Lander and Clapperton reported that Old Ọ̀yọ́’s mud wall was 20 ft high, surrounded by a moat with a circumference of 15 or so miles. The nineteenth-century towns, often the hasty product of roaming, desperate refuges, depart quite dramatically from this ideal, most notably as a consequence of the circumstances of their formation. In Ìbàdàn, for instance, this meant an absence of a palace (Mabogunje, 1968), even though the main market (Oja Iba) still constitutes the heart of the old part of the city, now a polycentric and polymorphic conurbation.
The Yorùbá employ a complex urban vocabulary to differentiate between scale, population, and political importance (Ojo, 1966). Historically, a town’s rank was based on a system of classification that privileged the existence of a crowned ruler at its nucleus. Ìlú, or city, refers not only to the town alone but to its political structure. Despite the importance of population and density, the most important factor to these urban inhabitants was its sociopolitical quality. For the Yorùbá, the ìlú or town was both town and polis. Ọ̀yọ́, Abẹ̀òkúta, and Ìjè̩bu have crowned kings whose authority is derived from Ilé-Ifẹ̀; hence, they are known as ìlú aládé. Cities lacking these rulers can be Olu-Ìlú or capital towns, such as Ìbàdàn and Ògbómò̩ṣọ́. The ìlú ọlọja are market towns (e.g., È̩pẹ́ and Ejirin) and ìlú-eréko are dependent, subordinate towns (e.g., central Lagos, which is still known as éko in local parlance, as in the mid-seventeenth century, it became a vassal to Benin city and paid tribute). Finally, there are numerous àgó (war camps), ileto (villages), and abúlé (hamlets) scattered between the major and minor towns. This generic Yorùbá terminology of settlement forms and accompanied imagery has yet to be thoroughly studied, such as other specific toponyms that can teach us much on the spatial implications of the colonial encounter and the influence of global economy. One example is Ìbàdàn’s Gbagi District, which designates the formerly white residential quarter, with gbagi meaning “to peg” in Yorùbá. This is due to a local fascination with the European preoccupation with title to land by pegging their plots, in marked contrast with communal land ownership and other indigenous conceptions regarding the central role of the land in the circle of life and death.
Yorùbá family compounds were most often built on a square plan, with numerous rooms surrounding an enclosed space in the center. The homes were bounded by a mud wall. These compounds were distinguished by size and rank, with their space increasing from half an acre for modest homes to many acres for chiefs, noblemen, and finally the largest space for the àfin (Izomoh, 1994).
While cement-plastered rectangular compounds also characterize Yorùbá architecture, and the corrugated-iron roofing became so popular in dictating the reddish eroded cityscape today, a variety of deviations from traditional patterns also exist (Aradeon, 2012). Many of these changes initially took place during the colonial period and include the micro (residential unit) and macro (spatial urban expansion) levels, such as the filling in of the rectangular courtyard with built units and vertical, peripheral, and polycentric growth.
The first third of the nineteenth century was a time of dramatic upheaval for Yorùbá cities, mostly due to the effect of broken alliances and internecine wars. The emergence of Ìbàdàn and Abẹ̀òkúta in the first third of the nineteenth century showed a radical change in the conception and consolidation of urban Ifẹ̀ for Yorùbá people (Mabogunje, 1968; Smith, 1988). At least three important Yorùbá cities have roots in the wars of the nineteenth century, and these cities emerged from the efforts of refugee populations. These roots account for the ways that their morphologies departed from the ways that cities had been constructed in the past. Ìbàdàn and Abẹ̀òkúta, the most recent of the important cities, were both founded circa 1830. Old Ọ̀yọ́ was also relocated around this time. Owu, one of the largest Yorùbá cities, was destroyed by an Ìjè̩bu-Ifẹ̀ alliance, and the survivors from this city encamped in a deserted village. It was on this site that a new city, Ìbàdàn (roughly “war camp”), was built. Around the same time, È̩gbá refugees fleeing south camped around Olumọ Rock, building Abẹ̀òkúta (meaning “under the rock”). Ìbàdàn was a new sort of Yorùbá town, borne of the circumstances of the fragmented internecine wars that ravaged Yorùbáland. Its population was made up of people from Ifẹ̀, Ọ̀yọ́, and Ìjè̩bu. The quarters and compounds were comprised of what John Peel (2000) termed non-kin affiliates, and there, the compounds no longer corresponded simply to grouped lineages.
Yorùbá cities differed in size and scale. Though no official census figures survive for the nineteenth century, visitors to Yorùbáland recorded several towns with over 10,000 inhabitants, with at least 22 towns numbering over 10,000 residents. Estimates for medium-sized towns like Ìjè̩bu Òde, Lagos, Ògbómọ̀ṣọ́, and Ìjàyè ranged from 20,000 to 40,000 in the 1850s. The larger cities – Abẹ̀òkúta, Ìbàdàn, Òṣogbo, and Ilorin – each numbered over 60,000. In the 1850s, Ìbàdàn’s population was estimated at between 70,000 and 100,000, and estimates of Abẹ̀òkúta’s population were most often set at 60,000, though one observer (Richard Burton) guessed that there were possibly 100,000 residents within the town’s walls in 1861 (Mabogunje, 1968). Today, Nigeria (Africa’s most populous country) accounts for about 18 % of the continent’s total population, and thriving Yorùbá cities such as Lagos are estimated as among the fastest-growing cities in the world. Metropolitan Lagos, for instance, which in the 1950 consisted of only about 290,000 inhabitants, is expected to reach, according to UN HABITAT, to close to 20 million residents by 2025 (2014, p. 103).
- Aderibigbe, A. B. (Ed.). (1975). Lagos: The development of an African city. London: Longman.Google Scholar
- Adelusi-Adeluyi. (2015). dissertation title: Lagoon City: Lagos in the Nineteenth Century Bight of Benin.Google Scholar
- Akinsemoyin, K., & Vaughan-Richards, A. (1976). Building Lagos. Lagos: F. & A. Services.Google Scholar
- Aradeon, D. (2012). Nigerian architecture: Tradition and change. In Udechukwu, O., Okeke-Agulu, C. and Soyinka W. (Eds.), Ezumeezu: Essays on Nigerian Art & Architecture: a Festschrift in Honour of Demas Nwoko. 23–28. Glassboro, NJ, Goldline & Jacobs Pub.Google Scholar
- Bascom, W. (1969). The Yorùbá of southwestern Nigeria. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
- Bigon, L. (2009). A history of urban planning in two West African colonial capitals: Residential segregation in British Lagos and French Dakar (1850–1930). London: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
- Coquery-Vidrovitch, C. (2005). The history of African cities south of the Sahara: From the origins to colonization (M. Baker, Trans.). Princeton: Markus Wiener.Google Scholar
- Izomoh, S. O. (1994). Nigerian traditional architecture. Benin: Aka & Brothers Press.Google Scholar
- Johnson, S. (1921). The history of the Yorubas: From the earliest times to the beginning of the British Protectorate. London: George Routledge & Sons.Google Scholar
- King, A. D. (1995). The bungalow: The production of a global culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Kostof, S. (1999). The city shaped: Urban patterns and meanings through history. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
- Krapf-Askari, E. (1969). Yoruba towns and cities: An enquiry into the nature of urban social phenomena. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
- Lloyd, P. C. (1973). The Yorùbá, an urban people? In A. W. Southall (Ed.), Urban anthropology: Cross-cultural studies of urbanization. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mabogunje, A. L. (1967). The morphology of Ibadan. In P. C. Lloyd, A. L. Mabogunge, & B. Awe (Eds.), The city of Ibadan (pp. 35–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Mabogunje, A. L. (1968). Urbanization in Nigeria. New York: Africana Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
- Mabogunje, A. L. (1969). Urbanization in Nigeria. New York: Africana.Google Scholar
- Mann, K. (2007). Slavery and the birth of an African city: Lagos, 1760–1900. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Marris, P. (1961). Family and social change in an African city: A study of rehousing in Lagos. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
- McIntosh, M. K. (2009). Yorùbá women, work, and social change. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Moughtin, J. C. (1985). Hausa architecture. London: Ethnographica & Nottingham University.Google Scholar
- Njoh, A. (2007). Planning power: Social control and planning in colonial Africa. London/New York: UCL Press.Google Scholar
- Oguntomisin, G. O. (1999). The transformation of a Nigerian lagoon town: Epe 1852–1942. Ibadan: John Archers.Google Scholar
- Ojo, G. A. (1966). Yoruba Culture: A geographical analysis. Ife: University of Ife Press.Google Scholar
- Ojo, A. (1967). Royal palaces: An index of Yoruba traditional culture. Nigeria Magazine, 94, 194–210.Google Scholar
- Peel, J. D. Y. (2000). Religious encounter and the making of the Yorùbá. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Sjoberg, G. (1960). The preindustrial city: Past and present. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, R. S. (1988). Kingdoms of the Yorùbá. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
- UN-Habitat. (2014). The state of African cities, 2014: Re-imagining sustainable urban transitions. Nairobi: UN-Habitat. Also available online: http://mirror.unhabitat.org/pmss/listItemDetails.aspx?publicationID=3528
- Watson, R. (2003). “Civil disorder is the disease of Ibadan”: Chieftaincy and civic culture in a Yorùbá city. Athens: Ohio University Press; Oxford UK: J. Curry; Ibadan: Heinemann.Google Scholar