Ellis 1894 as a Source for Yorùbá Folktale

Ten tori for inside dis section come from one book: A. B. Ellis, The Yoruba-Speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast of West Africa, wey dem publish for London for 1894. Na di earliest big collection of Yorùbá folktale narrative wey dis compiler fit get in full, e dey public domain, and e print di tori dem full-length instead of summary. E still be book wey one serving British colonial military officer write, wey di last chapter dey rank West African peoples into different stages of evolutionary progress. Di two things na true, and dis file explain how di corpus handle am.

Wetin di book be

Alfred Burdon Ellis na Lieutenant-Colonel for First Battalion West India Regiment. The Yoruba-Speaking Peoples na di third book for series of three, after di volumes on Tshi-speaking and Ewe-speaking peoples of the Gold Coast and Slave Coast. Chapter XIV, "Folk-Lore Tales," dey from page 243 go reach 274, and dem arrange am into two parts: four tori wey no concern tortoise, then six "Tortoise Stories" wey dem introduce separately for page 258-274 1.

Ellis introduce di tortoise set with one statement wey be documentation on its own:

We now come to those tales which may be called "Tortoise Stories," since the tortoise (awon) always plays a leading part in them. The tortoise has, in these tales, various superhuman powers attributed to him, and, in most, is described as acting craftily or mischievously 1.

After dat, e make di comparison wey still be standard till today: di place wey tortoise hold for di tori dem of Slave Coast na di same place wey spider anansi hold for di tori dem of Gold Coast 1. yoruba-alo record di same comparison from modern scholarship.

Wetin dey usable, and why

Four things make di tori texts dey worth to use despite how dem frame am.

Dem give am in full length. Ellis print continuous narrative with dialogue, no be plot summary. Di reader dey see wetin di characters tok, for di order wey dem take tok am, wey be di raw material wey corpus need, and wey most nineteenth-century sources no dey provide.

Di tori dem carry dia opening formula. Every tori dey start with "My alo is about..." and Ellis record di title of di person wey dey tell di tori separately, akpalo, di professional variant wey be akpalo kpatita, and di fact say e dey use drum 1. Dat one na performance information, no be just text. alo-the-opening-formula-and-the-teller treat am.

Di footnotes preserve language. Ellis explain Yorùbá words as dem dey appear: ekuru and di proverb about visitor wey dey tire person, oka, kekere-ke and how e take come from keke, kayin as ka-iyin, iwin, ado, iyale and iya-iwo, di drums bata, dundun and gangan. Dis explanations na di only Yorùbá for most of di tori dem, and plenty times na dem only dey make person understand wetin dey happen for di story.

E record im own analytic observations as observations. Di greed footnote for page 274, wey dem quote in full for alo-ijapa-and-the-rock-of-yams, na generalisation wey Ellis bring out across im own six tori dem and mark am as im own thinking. Na so too di la tortue / le tortu conjecture wey dem discuss for alo-buje-the-slender, wey e explicitly show say e no completely sure. Collector wey separate wetin dem tell am from wetin e conclude by himself dey more useful pass person wey no do am.

Wetin we must reject

Di evolutionary hierarchy. Di last chapter of Ellis book state im project directly: e try find out "to what extent different conditions of culture led to the modifications of religious conceptions," and e rank di subjects of im three volumes as "three stages of progress, the Tshi being in the lowest stage and the Yoruba in the highest," with di reasoning say di Yorùbá "were once in the social and mental condition in which the Tshi tribes are now" 1. Dis na nineteenth-century cultural evolutionism. Na dis be di organizing frame of di book and dis corpus no adopt am anywhere at all. Nothing for inside di tori texts depend on am.

Generalisations about "the native." Ellis put footnote on Adun wayo answer to di Head say na "the ordinary excuse of a native who has no pretext ready" 1. Anywhere wey dat kind phrasing appear for footnote wey dis corpus dey quote, dem quote am as artifact of di source and label am, as e dey for alo-adun-and-the-borrowed-body.

Etymologies wey dem present without evidence. Ellis bring ajapa from aja, elf, plus pa, to be bald or bare, and translate am as "bald-headed elf" 1. Di corpus report dis one as Ellis own analysis and no endorse am: non-specialist print am without tone marks, and di standard modern forms of di name and im variants dey recorded for owe-tortoise-ijapa-trickster from di proverb collections. Di same carefulness apply to "broken-back," wey e give with "it probably refers to."

Totemism as explanatory frame. Ellis speculate say totemism fit dey at di root of why tortoise popular, then e argue against imself come favour di animal remarkable qualities 1. Di speculation na im own, for di anthropological language of 1894, and di corpus record am as historical position instead of fact wey dem discover.

Wetin dey miss from di record

Ellis no mention any informant name. E no give any date, no place inside Yorùbáland, no age, no sign of who tell am dis tori dem or under which condition, and e no state how dem transcribe or translate dem. E no give any Yorùbá text for any tori. Dem no even state whether e use interpreter work.

Na this one show the sharpest difference with the other collectors wey dey inside this section. Parkinson, wey write fifteen years later, talk say him own tori mostly come from Ọ̀yọ́ people and dem keep am for the way one Yorùbá interpreter take talk am, wey be two facts pass wetin Ellis provide (alo-parkinson-1909-as-a-source). Omolaye, wey write for 2023, put table wey show each informant name, age, gender, town and the date wey dem collect the tori (alo-omolaye-2023-as-a-source). If dem compare am to that standard, Ellis own tori dem no get name, and na why every file inside this section wey use him work carry medium confidence mark.

Another gap dey wey make sense to mention. Ellis record one opening formula say, "My alo is about...," but e never mention the Ààlọ́ o / Ààlọ̀ call-and-response wey yoruba-alo document say na the main signature of the genre. Whether the people wey tell am tori no use am, or dem use am and e feel say e no matter to record am, or say na only wetin follow am e record, person no fit know from the text. The corpus only note say e no dey, e no try to make excuse for am.

The single most valuable thing inside the book

Ellis footnote about long-throat na, as this compiler assess am, the most useful analytic sentence inside the folklore chapter, because na generalization wey person wey hold the whole material for front of am draw from the body of work:

It is to be noted that, whenever he is shown as being over-reached or unsuccessful, the want of success is due to greediness 1.

E come list him evidence across three out of him six tori dem. Modern scholarship reach the same conclusion, as dem record inside yoruba-alo, and e good make person get this kind confirmation from 1894 corpus. E still dey remind us say dem fit assess the tori texts and the framing chapters separately: collector fit dey wrong about how religion take develop and still dey correct about wetin him own tori dem dey do.

Where dem treat the tori dem

Tortoise Stories I to VI: alo-ijapa-singing-drum, alo-ijapa-and-the-dumb-princess, alo-ijapa-rides-the-elephant, alo-adun-and-the-borrowed-body, alo-buje-the-slender, alo-ijapa-and-the-rock-of-yams.

The four non-tortoise tales: alo-the-palm-oil-seller-and-the-goblin, alo-the-poor-woman-and-the-aranran-bird, alo-why-the-ajao-remained-unburied, alo-the-king-and-kini-kini.