Íhé Ńkètá and Òkè: concepts and practice of indigenous cultural heritage management in the Igbo cultural area of south-eastern Nigeria

Abstract

PurposeThis study explored an alternative understanding of heritage through the lens of the Igbo cultural group in Nigeria. It used the Igbo concept of “Ihe Nketa” or “Oke” to examine the complex relationship between indigeneity, attachment and sustainability in the context of heritage management and conservation.Design/methodology/approachA qualitative approach was used, and ethnographic methods of data collection that include interviews and focus-group discussions (FGD) applied. The interview participants included village chiefs and the elderly (men and women), and the FGD comprised village elders (men and women) and youths. The interview guide contained demographic questions to determine age and occupation, followed by interactive open-ended questions stemming from the study's objectives. The interviews were conducted in the language most preferred by the respondents such as the Igbo language, Nigerian Pidgin English and the English language. The evidence generated was thematically analysed in a descriptive and interpretive manner.FindingsThe study found that while the Igbo understanding of heritage have related meaning with the definitions offered by the United Nations, their approach to heritage conservation takes a different turn through the concepts of “Ihe Nketa” or “Oke,” which recognises the ephemerality of tangible heritage resources with particular focus on the preservation of intangible heritage–knowledge over objects. The Igbo approach describes the framework for the acquisition, use and transfer of heritage resources in the Igbo society.Originality/valueThis study contributes to the understanding of the concept of heritage through the lens of the Igbo of Nigeria. Against the centralised national management approach to heritage, this paper argues that achieving sustainable heritage management in a multi-ethnic country like Nigeria requires the recognition of the principles that conserve(d) and manage(d) heritage among the indigenous/local peoples.

Not all deities were transformed in Igboland: a cultural history of the Api-Opi deity

“…Doing so is often likened to digging up one's buried relative; a crime that angers the gods. Many scholars have noted the role of taboos as one of the various traditional management mechanisms for safeguarding cultural heritage (Onyemechalu and Ugwuanyi, 2021; Poulios, 2014; Peoples and Bailey, 2012; Oriji, 2011; Joffroy, 2005; Ndoro and Pwiti, 2001).…”

“…Doing so is often likened to digging up one's buried relative; a crime that angers the gods. Many scholars have noted the role of taboos as one of the various traditional management mechanisms for safeguarding cultural heritage (Onyemechalu and Ugwuanyi, 2021;Poulios, 2014;Peoples and Bailey, 2012;Oriji, 2011;Joffroy, 2005;Ndoro and Pwiti, 2001). Jianguo et al (2003) observed that for a long time, humans' societies have tried to conserve or protect natural and cultural landscapes for various value-based reasons.…”

Framing Indigenous Perspectives through Emic and Etic Approaches

“…New Zealand is a vibrant country where multiculturalism flourishes. The largest groups consist of White (74% of the population), Maori (15%), and others represented as Pacific, Asian, African, and Middle Eastern (Statistics New Zealand [31], as cited in [30]). There are other relevant cultural concepts prioritizing family.…”

C. Holtorf & A. Högberg (ed.). 2021. Cultural heritage and the future. Oxford: Routledge; 978-1-138-82901-5 paperback £34.99.

“…I believe that futures thinking within critical heritage studies should be inclusive of other experiences, lest it fails to be different from the past—creating ‘difficult futures’. Learning about other (mostly non-Western) cultures’ prioritisation of the preservation of their intangible heritage over the tangible (see Mire 2007; Onyemechalu & Ugwuanyi 2021) affords an opportunity to formulate more inclusive and sustainable plans for cultural heritage futures. Perhaps doing so may help address any worries about limited spatial and conservation resources occasioned by Avrami's ‘unending World Heritage listings’ (Chapter 13).…”