Eke
Studies
Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike
Abstract
This paper seeks to re - evaluate sources of historical study and underscore its relevance in historical research. This is aimed at re-establishing their relevance and make for a better understanding of their parameters and position in historical research. It is pertinent and unarguable to state that the past which is the subject concern of history cannot be left to mere speculation. Historical accounts are always presented in consistent, coherent and systematic ordered method of historical inquiry. Thus, this paper is built around history as a subject matter and its methodology in historical research. The study is based on qualitative evaluation of dominant approaches to the study of History and it is methodology. It therefore, subsist that history is deeply rooted in historical inquiry to such extent as to determine what actually happened in the past, why it happened and how it happened. It is not just through a systematic collation of beliefs and practices, but also through critical analysis of all other sources and branches of knowledge that are capable of serving historical ends and in this way, adopt a multidisciplinary approach and root explanation on the principle of causation.
Keywords: History, Sources, Methodology, Historical inquiry
DOI: 10.36349/sokotojh.2021.v10i01.001
Introduction
History as a
subject matter engages in inquiry and unraveling of the past. Joseph Brian and Richard Janda reported that the word History originated from Greek word historia, meaning "inquiry, knowledge acquired by investigation"1. According
to them, history
is the study of the past, particularly how it relates to humans and
is an umbrella term that relates to past events as well as the memory, discovery, collection,
organization, presentation, and interpretation of information about these events. In a broader sense, they
maintain that history is a systematic account of the origin and development of the humankind, a record of
the unique events and movements in its life; it is an attempt to recapture
however imperfectly, the past which is, in a sense, lost forever.
Alagoa in this
direction believes that the past as a subject matter of History is often
underrated. He maintained that the past may be dead but cannot be buried. He posits that:
‗There are
some people who are willing to act as undertakers and wish to see the past disposed of for good. There are others who have made it
their business to see that the past
does not completely disappear from our consciousness. I am pleased to count myself among this latter group. But
for the majority of people everywhere, the
past merely lives on in their present without any special effort or
attention. For most people, the past is not a subject of special notice or interest because it is already such
1 Joseph Brian and Richard Janda (ed.). The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Blackwell Publishing, 2008. p.163
a normal fact
of life in the present. The continued life of the past in the present is taken so much for granted that most people
might even deny the fact of its relevance or significance for today. On the
other hand, certain individuals or even
entire communities could come to base claims to present
status on the past achievements of their ancestors. Such persons would then form an
exaggerated regard for the past must
be condemned by those who wish to see the past buried, as well as by those who wish
to see the best of the past live
in the present‘2.
Alagoa further
argued that some people are actually opponents of history as could be gleaned
from the foregoing consideration. Nonetheless, the reason behind why some
persons oppose history and lessons of
the past raises probing question with regard to why responsible thinking people
should wish the past dead and buried.
The major objections to history as cited by Alagoa have been stated very well by the seventeenth century French philosopher and
scientist, Rene Descartes (1596-1650):
‗To live with
men of an earlier age is like traveling in foreign lands. It is useful to know something of the manners of other
peoples in order to judge more impartially of
our own, and not despise and ridicule whatever differs from them, like men who have never been outside their native
country. But those who travel too long end by
being strangers in their own homes, and those who study too curiously
the actions of antiquity are
ignorant of what is done among ourselves today. Moreover, these narratives tell us of things which cannot
have happened as if they had really taken place,
and thus invite us to attempt what is beyond our powers or to hope for what is beyond our powers or to hope for what is
beyond our fate. And even histories, true though
they be, and neither exaggerating nor altering the value of things, omit circumstances of a meaner and less dignified kind in order to become more worthy
of a reader‘s attention – hence the things which they describe
never happened exactly as they describe them‘3.
One cannot
disagree with Alagoa as this statement till today still contains three main
issues that continue to be raised by
historians themselves and problems that they cannot yet say they have solved to the satisfaction of themselves
and problems or of their critics. First, is the criticism or accusation of historical escapism. That
is, that historian‘s lose themselves in the past and become ignorant of the present. Second, is that
of historical pyrrhonism. That is, the problem historians face of falling into a state of total doubt of
skepticism concerning the validity of their accounts of the past. It is to this extent, considering
the foregoing explanations that it is well said that Historians need to show that historical methodology
is able to produce accounts of what really happened in the past4.
It is in the
light of the foregoing, that this paper maintains the stance that the problem
of historical knowledge requires some consideration.
2.
Alagoa J., E.. " The python‘s eye: The past in the living
present:." An Inaugural lecture
series, No. 1;. University of Port Harcourt Press, 1979. pp. 1-2
3.
Alagoa Op.cit pp. 2-3
4.
Alagoa Ibid
History and methodology
of searching the past
Like other
scholars, historians become active when they develop curiosity about something.
Such curiosity should lead to the formulation of questions to which answers
have to be found. The enquiry or search for answers takes the form of a study of documents, which are the evidence of past
human activity. Historical documents or evidence appear to the historian in a
wide variety of forms. They may
appear as written information on paper, papyrus, tablets of clay, on monuments,
or even rock.
In Africa, the
most significant documents may come to the historian in the form of oral
literature or tradition, in
intangible ethnographic practices and customs of communities, in the languages
spoken by present populations, or in
material objects such as artifacts from archaeological excavations or implements used in daily life or ritual.
It is from his documents that the historian makes inferences, draws conclusions,
and reconstructs or reconstitutes the past.
To the historian then, Alagoa reports that it is the product of his inferences from and interpretation of the documents
from the past that constitutes knowledge of the past. He maintains that it constitutes knowledge in two senses.
First, the evidence of the documents satisfies every reasonable person concerning the reality of the
actions or events referred to. Accordingly, where the inferences made from the evidence are such as are
compelling and convincing to the majority of historians presented with the same evidence, it is acceptable as knowledge
of the past5. Secondly, because the
historian brings one piece of evidence into confrontation with another, and as he subjects each one to rigorous examination, he is able to obtain knowledge that is not immediately obvious
as contained in any
one of the pieces of evidence.
From the
foregoing, it is believable that historians are a bit like detectives - using
evidence to find out what happened
and why. This is not an easy job. You must be able to recognise evidence,
decide how useful it is and come to
conclusions based on what you
have found out.
Thus, an
attempt to look at history in its nature as a subject offer makes us to
summarily see and describe history as
an account of what actually happened in the past which has a link to what is happening at present and can help in
planning or projecting for the future. In other words, history is about yesterday, today and tomorrow.
Thus, one could safely assert that we study important
development in human
existence in the past for the development of today.
Accordingly in
a lucid attempt to justify the meaning and relevance of history as a subject
matter, Oyeweso,6 declares
that history is built on the conviction that to understand a people, the
historian must have a recourse to
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 analysis of all other sources
and branches of knowledge
that are capable of serving historical
ends and in this way, adopt
5.
Alagoa Ibid
6
Oyeweso Siyan, "The undertakers, the python‘s
eye and footsteps of the ant: The Historian‘s Burden‘." 22nd inaugural lecture, Lagos State University, Ojo, Lagos, Nigeria, 2006. p.5.-6
a multidisciplinary approach and root explanation on the principle
of causation. It is in this direction, he had maintained that the tragedy
of Nigeria for instance is three-fold: a lack of knowledge
of its history; a lack of understanding of that history and a lack of
application of the examples and
lessons of history. This he called the Unholy Trinity. A trinity of ignorance packaged
as knowledge, falsehood and rumour mongering that should attract
intellectual contempt from the public
in which the Nigerian elite are the guiltiest of the charge. They are educated,
yet they have very little knowledge
or understanding of Nigerian history and the lessons it handed down. Hence, rather than for history to serve an
emancipative role for Nigerians it has become the original sin that is held liable for all of Nigeria‘s woes. Upon this sin as he asserts lies the claim of ―amalgamation of misfits‖, the ―mistake
of
1914‖ and so
on. History
is
being blamed for a failed
project and buffeted from all angles.
To this end,
he posits that the Nigerian past is seen as a burden to all historians and
students of society of which a proper knowledge
and understanding of that past is the only avenue of emancipating ourselves from it. Indeed, the past is the father of the
present. They are forged organically and in an engaging and interlocking
manner7.
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 wedlock
of the past, the present and the future.
Justification for historical
inquiry
It is often said by many Nigerians for instance that history has taught us nothing. It always seems
―people and governments have never learned anything from history or acted on principles deduced
from it‖. Hegel8, at an instance doubted its utility but many
historians have categorically disputed that
view. A Russian historian further posit:
―History, say
those who do not study it but only philosophize about it and therefore scorn it-Hegel-has never taught anyone
anything‖. Even if that were true, it does not
in the least apply to history as a science; flowers are not to blame
that the blind do not see them. But it
is not true; history teaches even those who do not study it; it teaches them a lesson for ignoring and
disdaining it. Those who act without it, or in
spite of it, always ultimately regret their attitude to it. As yet it
teaches not how to live by it, but how to learn from it. ‖ History is power; when it is good to people,
they forget
about it and ascribe their prosperity to themselves; when it becomes bad for them,
they begin to feel its necessity and value it boons9.
Among the
Yoruba, the lessons of history have somehow been preserved in writings,
proverbs and aphorisms. Just as
Oyeweso offered two examples, in Oyo history, Bashorun Gaha was a powerful, tyrannical and blood-sucking prime –
minister who had the unenviable record of raising five Alafins to the throne,
murdered four and was himself
killed by the fifth. His corpse was later
7
Carr Hallet, Edward.
What is History? University of Cambridge and Penguin Books,
1961.
8
Hegel Georg Wilhelm
and Friedrich Hegel
(Eds), Lectures on the Philosophy of World History;
Introduction: Reason in History. Cambridge University Press, 1975.
9
Rakitov, Anatoly, Historical knowledge: Progress Publishers. Progress
Publishers, 1982.
dismembered10. In the aftermath
of his death, the following
saying became popular:
Ronuiku Gahako se rere
―Reflect
upon
Gaha‘s
death and mend
your
ways‖. This
is
a
specific and clear
warning to all aspiring tyrants, usurpers, malevolent characters and dictators.
History is indeed the graveyard of dictators. The thrust of the saying above is to underscore and emphasize the importance of good governance by rulers.
Alagoa further examined History as the past in
the living present. He argued thus:
The past may
be dead, but we cannot bury it. There are some people who are willing to act as undertakers and wish to see
the past disposed of for good. There are others who have made it their business to see that the past does not
completely disappear from our consciousness.11
The above assertion
unravels why the past is important and further underscores why people may want the past buried. It irrevocably
situates the relevance of History. As he opined, it is regrettable that for
most people, the past is not a subject of special notice.
It is however
clear that the past neither repeats itself nor creates a present exactly in its
own image. Nonetheless, a knowledge or consciousness of the past produces in the individual and the community, a sense of perspective
and certain wisdom in action. A proper level
of historical consciousness provides an anchor for the community so that it
does not get blown away by every wind
of change. The past provides a standard for the present as well as a starting
point for forward movement. Also, a
man walking along a path needs to keep his eyes to the ground;
to watch his step. History in this
direction provides the type of knowledge that guides our step, it gives us the patience
and the alertness derived
from experience to deal
with the problems of today.
The nature of historical pathway
It is
pertinent to note that Historical records or accounts are presented in
sequential, coherent, consistent and
systematic order. Logical presentation is an
important ingredient of history but objectivity is the guiding principle.
The historian
tries to present issues, incidents or events concerning people and places in
their unbiased form. He tries to dig
into important areas of interest. The historian goes beyond ‗they said‘ and seeks to find out why and how it
happened. A historian is not usually in a hurry. He takes time to evaluate the necessary information
received. He compares and analyses the information and its sources
so as to come up with a
balanced and acceptable account.
History is an account
because it aims at balanced
information of true places, people and events of the past. It cannot be fabricated to suit the interest of the writer or historian
but seeks to represent the true past into present. History
gives account of real names of people, places, time and incidents that actually took place at the recorded
time. History, therefore, is a recreation of the true picture of important
persons, places, events of the
past for the present and future
generation.
10
Oyeweso op. cit p.12.
11
Alagoa op. cit p. 1.
Nonetheless,
the word ‗history‘ as mentioned earlier was derived from the Greek word
historia – which means inquiry. It is
an important branch of knowledge (discipline) in the study of man and society.
As an academic
discipline, history is the reconstruction, study and explanation of changes
which humanity has undergone. It is
an organised critical study of past activities of human beings that had produced
significant effects on subsequent course of events. It is the study of past human activities
at a particular place over a given period of time so as to record changes
over time. It is the systematic study of
the process, events or motion of
events through the aid of
records or sources.
Thus,
historians are chiefly interested in the past, whether remote or recent. The
business of History is to find out
what exactly happened, how it happened, when it happened and ultimately why it happened.
It then obviously follows to bring to the fore that the subject matter
of history is ‗MAN‘, not as a
biological unit but man in society (social man) who is susceptible to change.
It is the changing activities of man
over time that constitutes the transformation of societies. However, the central
issue in History is Change. There would be no history, if there was no change.
From the
foregoing discussion, it is then clear that the central issue in History is
Change. The above statement is deeply rooted in the belief that the changing
activities of man constitute the transformation of societies as is experienced in
Nigeria.
With regard to
change, Anyakoha in his attempt at
discussing the influence of unbalanced forces
upon bodies, the motion of bodies and laws governing such motions stated
that motion is caused by unbalanced
forces. In this direction, Anyakoha12 enunciated the Newton‘s laws
of motion which states that every
object continues in the state of rest or of uniform motion in a straight line
unless acted upon by an external
force. Thus, this paper tends to juxtapose and import the implications of the Isaac Newton scientific explanations
of the laws of motion to such extent that a body (a society) can be contemplated to be at rest position
until impacted by certain social conditions which causes changes, which is the subject matter of history. Santayana‘sin this direction posit that ―Those who cannot remember the past are condemned
to repeat it‖13. It is
pertinent to highlight that the central thesis
of Santayana‘s argument focuses on the imperative that the past is critical and if our world is ever going to make progress, it needs to remember what it
learned from the past. Thus, this paper follows
in the step of other studies to present the unique lens of Historyas it is
clear that History is not mere story
telling. It is also not a mere fabrication of story but an account of what
actually happened in the past which
has a link to what is happening at present and can help in planning or projecting for the future.
Sources of
history
Describing historical documents or historical sources,
Alagoa declares thus:
Historical sources
or documents are thus the raw materials out of which historians construct
historical accounts by making inferences from them.
12. Anyakoha, M. W, Physics for Senior Secondary Schools
(Based on the New NERDC Curriculum For Senior Secondary Schools. Africana First
Publishers PLC, Onisha,
Nigeria., 2016 edition. p.19
13
Santayana, George, Santayana George,
1863 - 1952; The life of reason;
Reason in Common Sense, Scribner's, 1905,.p.284
Thus, from the footprints on a sandy beach, the reasonable inference
may be drawn that a person had passed that way…14
Thus, sources
of history simply refer to all the materials or sources
which directly reflect and explain historical process and provide
opportunity for us to study the past. They are the basis of any historical investigation. In this
direction it is established that there are two classifications of types of sources; which are – primary15
and secondary16 sources.
Primary source:
This simply
points at sources created by a witness to or participant in an event. It x-rays
sources that have to do with an eye
witness account or account of a direct witness. They can be first hand testimony or evidence created during the
time period that you are studying. Also, primary sources17 that contain materials or information
which is the direct experience or original thought of the writer or the person giving the writer the
information he is recording. Primary sources revolve around oral tradition and testimonies. Hence, may
include diaries, letters, government documents, photographs, poems, plays, drama and music. It however,
depends on the content and form of these sources. That is to say, if they provide first-hand information of a participant
in an event.
Oral Tradition:
as a primary source
Oral traditions18are testimonies of past events transmitted from one generation to another through
the words of mouth. It can be said to be eye witness account. This source has hugely provided lots of
materials in History. It may take the form of myths and legends, songs,
folklores, proverbs and poems and so
on as heighted above.
Limitations of Oral tradition:
It is prone to loss of
details:
One could
infer that oral tradition is transmitted from generation to generation and thus
a lot of details could be loss. This
is because, it relies on the memory that could be imperfect and unreliable store house of information.
It may be
distorted:
Oral account
in this direction is prone to be distorted. To this end, a historical narrative
of a tradition or what happened may
even represent the narrator‘s own view about an episode. Simply put, the chances
of exaggeration and oppression are great.
Lacks a system of precise chronological dating:
As non-
literate societies in Africa then largely lacked an effective system of
chronology of dating because of late arrival
of writing skills.
It provided for a system
of dating which
was defective.
14
Alagoa. E.J. (Ed) Oral Tradition and Oral History
in Africa and the Diaspora:
Theory and Practice, Lagos: CBAAC. pp. 269-273.
15
Mabry Hunter. P., A manual
for researchers and writers. Vol.
49. Bangalore:BTESSC, , 2011. p.90-95
16
Ruth Finnegan. Using Documents, ―Data Collection and Analysis‖, 2nd ed. Edited by Roger Sapsford and Victor Jupp. SAGE, 2006. P.138-140
17
Alagoa op.cit
18
Ibid
Thus, there
was no precise date and that explains why, one could always witness the use of
such words such as ‗once upon a time‘, and ‗a long time ago‘ in periodising events.
There are elements of
contradiction:
There are elements of contradiction in oral traditions. For instance, there is a myth of Oduduwa been the founder of Ile-Ife and the
Youruba Culture. One tradition argues that Oduduwa descended from the sky during the time of creation,
when Oludumare (the High God of the Yoruba) sent him and other emissaries to come and settle on earth. A second
Tradition holds that Oduduwa led other children
of his ancestor in a migration from the East. It was said that the killing of
Lamurudu led to the migration to Ife.
Notwithstanding the foregoing limitations, it is important
to emphasis that the collection and analysis of primary sources is central to
historical studies.
Merits:
1.
Indeed, Oral tradition has merits. It remains the oldest source of
History and was useful in the reconstructing of Pre- Scientific History of societies.
2.
With Oral tradition, historical truth could be established. For instance, despite
the contradictions in the myth
of Oduduwa, both traditions mentioned him as the leader of the Yoruba
Archaeology:
Archaeology as defined by Thurstan Shaw19 is a body of techniques or method used by its practitioners
to derive maximum amount of information from material. These materials may be cultural and physical remains of our
ancestors which have survived for us to identify, recover and study. This is an important source of
History. In this paper, it is hugely considered as a primary source for historian. The most important
source for an archaeologist is an excavation site.Excavated Artifacts are taken to a laboratory where
they are assigned absolute dates using a technique of calibrated Radio
Carbon Dating.
Limitations of Archaeology:
1.
One unique feature of Archaeology is that, it presents information on
man‘s activities in the past and is
typically concerned with the ways of life of an extinct population. Extinct in
the sense that those about whom it supplies
information are no longer living.
2.
The fact should be stressed that a major weakness of this source is
that it informs principally about the makers of objects but not from the makers themselves. Thus, its greatest
shortcoming is that it produces
limited account of the makers
of tools and objects. It does not supply adequate information about
the language spoken by the makers of such objects, their race- that is
whether they are white or black
and their socio-political organisation.
3.
Also, there is a problem of interpreting what objects discovered were
used for. For instance, if
archaeological findings reveal the ruins of a magnificent building in the
centre of a settlement, it is as the house of a chief or a gathering
place or a market. However,
since
19
Thursthan, Shaw, "Those Igbo-Ukwu Radiocarbon Dates:
Facts, Fiction and Probabilities." Journal of African History, xvi, 1975: 503-517.
statements, about the uses of tools and objects
are not from the makers of such objects, we cannot be absolutely be sure that those interpretations by archaeologist are perfectly correct.
Merits of Archaeology as a source:
1.
Archaeological discoveries have
significantly helped in highlighting
the fact that Africa does not lag
behind in cultural attainment. It is from Archaeological works that we learn of great cultures
of Nok, Benin, Ife, Igbo- Ukwu and so on in
Nigeria.
2.
Archaeology has been a very useful ally of history in the area of
dating. One method of dating as earlier mentioned
is carbon dating.
Through this method,
it is possible to determine
when certain great culture existed. The dates, one must mention are not precise.
3.
Also, it has helped to take care of what other sources have not been
able to do. It has enriched our knowledge
of Pre-history people and society.
Secondary sources:
Secondary
sources are those sources of history that offers interpretation or commentary
on primary sources. They include second hand accounts or analysis.
When a
historian consults books written by somebody or persons who was or were not
eye-witness (es) to the incident he
is referring to secondary sources of information. Secondary sources also refer to oral information given out by somebody
or persons who was or were not privileged to have first- hand information on the event. Hence, like primary sources,
secondary sources could be in oral or written
form.
Secondary
sources are materials or works based on primary sources. Examples are written
sources like books, journals, diary, newspapers,
etc.
Limitations of Secondary Sources:
1.
They are not evenly distributed in time and space. They are usually not
relevant to Nigerian history before
the coming of the Europeans. Some of the secondary accounts of Nigerian history by Europeans are sometimes biased.
Some are written to suit political or racial interest and this error may be taken up by later generations as
authentic truth.
2.
Written sources can sometimes be corrupted in the process of
preservation if proper care is not taken.
3.
It can also be easily lost through destruction by fire, rain or insects
if not properly preserved. Some people,
like government officials, sometimes deliberately destroy documents.
Nonetheless, no single sources
can adequately supply information on history. The sources work hand
in hand.
Conclusion:
From the
foregoing, it is discernable that History is a subject matter that engages in
inquiry and unraveling of the past.
However, it is regrettable that unraveling of the past engagement of man in the society is however often underrated. In this direction this paper follows in
the footsteps of Alagoa‘s contemplation as noted previously that the
past may be dead, but cannot be buried.
It is in the
light of the foregoing, that this paper maintains a plausible stance that the
problem of historical knowledge
requires some consideration to such extent that is unarguable to submit that it is it
possible for historians to know
what happened in the past.
This paper,
has demonstrated how historians operate in their search for knowledge of the
past. Like other scholars,
historians become active when they develop curiosity
about something. Such curiosity should
lead to the formulation of questions to which answers
have to be found. The enquiry or search for answers takes the form of a study of documents, which are the evidence of past
human activity. Historical documents or evidence appear to the historian in a
wide variety of forms. They may
appear as written information on paper, papyrus, tablets of clay, on monuments,
or even rock. However, I should
emphasis at this point that there is no historical record that can be considered as entirely objective, as it is
written by someone present at the time of the event and to such extent the historical may carry
personal biases of such informant. As inferred in the foregoing discussion a historian deeply relies on
primary and secondary sources to a very large extent with the aim at maintaining objectivity. It then follows to posit that when anyone does not know the difference
between these sources, such a person may usually get carried away with
misinformation or misinterpretation.
Thus, it is pertinent to highlight that in order to understand a historical
event at any given point, the
historian evokes his or her historian craft to find answers to six questions
that are 5 Ws (what had happened?
when did it happened? where did it take place? why did it happen? who was
it about) and an H (How did it
happen).
These
questions are of prime significance to determine whether they are primary and
secondary sources. In order to
determine the distinction between them, the ‗time factor‘ of authoring that
event plays a prominent role, e.g.
first hand is usually immediately following the event whereas second hand is
conveying the experience and opinion of others
References
Alagoa J., E.. ―The python‘s eye: The past in the living present‖ An Inaugural lecture series, No. 1; University of Port Harcourt Press, 1979.
Alagoa. E.J. (Ed), Oral Tradition
and Oral History in Africa and the Diaspora: Theory and Practice, Lagos: CBAAC.
Anyakoha, M. W, Physics for Senior Secondary Schools (Based on the New NERDC Curriculum for Senior Secondary Schools, Africana First Publishers PLC, Onisha, Nigeria, 2016 edition.
CarrHallet, Edward; What
is History? University of Cambridge
and Penguin Books, 1961
Hegel Georg Wilhelm and Friedrich Hegel
(eds), Lectures on the Philosophy of World History;
Introduction: Reason in History. Cambridge University Press,
1975.
Joseph Brian
and Richard Janda
(ed.). The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Blackwell Publishing,
2008.
Mabry Hunter. P., A manual for researchers and writers.
Vol. 49. Bangalore: BTESSC, 2011. Oyeweso Siyan,
‗The undertakers, the python‟s
eye and footsteps of the ant: The Historian‟s
Burden‟." 22nd Inaugural Lecture,
Lagos State University, Ojo. Lagos, Nigeria,
2006 Rakitov, Anatoly,
‗Historical Knowledge. Progress Publishers, 1982.
Ruth Finnegan, „Using Documents: Data Collection and Analysis‟, 2nd ed. Edited
by Roger Sapsford and Victor Jupp. SAGE,
2006.
Santayana, George.
Santayana George, 1863 - 1952; ‗The life of reason; Reason
in Common Sense‟, Scribner's, 1905
Thursthan, Shaw. ―Those Igbo-Ukwu Radiocarbon Dates: Facts, Fiction and Probabilities‖. Journal of
African History, xvi, 1975.
0 Comments
ENGLISH: You are warmly invited to share your comments or ask questions regarding this post or related topics of interest. Your feedback serves as evidence of your appreciation for our hard work and ongoing efforts to sustain this extensive and informative blog. We value your input and engagement.
HAUSA: Kuna iya rubuto mana tsokaci ko tambayoyi a ƙasa. Tsokacinku game da abubuwan da muke ɗorawa shi zai tabbatar mana cewa mutane suna amfana da wannan ƙoƙari da muke yi na tattaro muku ɗimbin ilimummuka a wannan kafar intanet.