Many thanks again first to our Elder and Daddy for his deep insights on the ukwuani nation and then to ukwuani trumpet . I pick it up from where my brother mentioned that we are a much earlier group than the Igbos in terms of historical reference and recognition. I challenged an igbo man earlier today when i told him that before the use in any record of the word igbo about few centuries ago there was the earlier identified Aboh reference. An igbo man cannot then rise up today to suggest a grouping of the relative groups under igbo. Its much like an Australian proposing to group the British, American canadian and himsel under Australian . He is reading his history upside down. The average igbo mans tendencies a lot of times has to do with ego. There is no harm in addressing a relative group with what they are more commonly known as, as an Ibibio will quickly point out to you that that other man is his relative the Efik. But if the average Igbo historian gets to the point where he needs to appropriately apply terms as 'relatives' or 'sister heritage' he chooses the word 'sub group' rather callously . This is why a lot of us had to fight back with our other affiliations with the idu , urhobo affinity etc and i really don't blame anyone reminding them that look we have other affiliations or relatives as well though not as close and that a child does not say his father should bear his name but it should be the other way round. Lets continue till we resolve this identity issue for good. Ishegwari
@@ukwuanitrumpet much gratitude ukwuani trumpet please go ahead. More facts however and I challenge research and validations from any group whatsoever. If any body is looking for an appropriately unifying name , it should be a name like 'Aboh' and then most importantly it should be consensual and not born out of ego. The Abohs first identified and referenced before any mention of 'igbo' had a navy that withstood the British fighting them tooth and nail though later being overwhelmed for almost 3 decades. When the word 'Aboh' was in use nobody knew what was or who was igbo. Even words like Onitsha were first used before Igbo and they are only relatives of the other groups , ikas, ukwuanis, abohs, igbankes etc and not the super group. The second subject matter is about Heritage and the protection , preservation and projection of it as a few of the nobilities conferred on a custodian of an heritage as you and I. This is where the younger ones dancing to the tunes of 'unify igbo' I am afraid are getting it wrong. They unfortunately do not understand what emasculation , the end game of expansionism is. They think all invitations born out of 'brotherhood' can be yielded to. The game of expansionism starts by stalking you to subscribe to another mans heritage in the guise of a false 'oneness' or 'brotherhood'. It means your heritage will be burried eventually and you become an emasculated group subject to your emasculators. Parts of Ireland were first to exit the united kingdom and the scotts are already on their exit. This is because if the scott introduces himself as thus , he is first entertained with questions about the British monarchy, followed by what particular british or english dish or culture he prefers etc. Many also think the scotts are actually english. You dont burry your heritage by your hands on account of false invitations to certain 'oneness'. Your heritage is a signature that accords you your first dignity and identity without a question as to who you are wherever you go. Introduce yourself as Yoruba, Efik, british or Urhobo anywhere and instantly you are recognized. There is no such word as 'Delta Igbo' it was first coined by same egoistic expansionists . What is so difficult in calling a group by what they are more correctly and commonly referred to I ask? I drop it here for now. Ishegwari
