Marked: The Evolution and Impact of Tribal Marks in Modern Day Nigeria
Photography Victor Adewale, Courtesy of Naila Media
Dedicated to my Father
In many African societies, tribal marks, also known as scarification, have historically held significant cultural importance, symbolising identity, spirituality, beauty, and social status. In Nigeria, these marks vary across ethnic and tribal lines, each design carrying its own distinct meaning. However, although still somewhat practised today, these practices have come under scrutiny in recent years.
The Nigerian Child Rights Act of 2003 made it illegal to inflict "any ethnic or ritual cuts on the skin which leaves permanent marks," with violators facing a fine of 5,000 naira, imprisonment, or both. This legislation reflects a growing tension between cultural tradition and modern human rights standards, raising questions about the future of these practices in an increasingly Westernised African society. The prohibition of scarification in Nigeria serves as a poignant example of how cultural heritage intersects with evolving societal norms. It highlights the complexities of preserving cultural identity while navigating the demands of a globalised world.
Within the Yoruba ethnic group, tribal marks have long served as a vital means of identification. Each Yoruba individual is born into a patrilineal clan, known as "ìdílé baba," Clan members (omo ilé) are descendants of the same ancestor. They share the same clan names (orílè), poetry (oríkì), taboos (èèwò), and facial stripes (ilà). Ila, tribal marks, are cultural symbols embedded in Yoruba tradition, practised for millennia. Some commentators describe the practice as a form of “history on the move” within an indigenous knowledge system. They are typically inscribed on infants as young as three weeks old, these marks primarily serve to identify lineage, differentiating between ethnic and tribal groups.
By observing an individual's tribal marks, the Yorubas can discern their town, tribe, and family. These marks serve as a form of physical identification and provided security for those who bear them, especially during inter-tribal war. Agreements have existed between Obas stipulating that individuals from certain towns would not be enslaved, and tribal marks were crucial in verifying a person's origins and protecting them from such a fate. During the transatlantic slave trade in the nineteenth century, tribal marks were also a key source of identification in the diaspora.
Interestingly, it was reported that tribal marks became prominent during the Nigerian Civil War of 1967 – 1970, some Yoruba people were said to be saved because of their tribal marks which distinguished them as Yorubas. Whereas some Yorubas who did not have tribal marks were killed because they were said to resemble southeasters.
Aside from having identification purposes, tribal marks are also considered as a form of beautification. This is evidenced in the nicknames for certain tribal marks, such as, Peleyemi, peleyeju, and abajawunmi. Tribal marks are also used for metaphysical and spiritual purposes. Children who are considered àbíkú, for example, are believed to be born, die soon afterwards, and then return to their spiritual àbíkú world only to be reborn repeatedly to the same mother. To break this cycle, the next child born may be given markings to prevent their àbíkú family from accepting them back, effectively rejecting the child from the spiritual world. Such marks may be single stripes arranged horizontally or vertically on each cheek.
The colonial period brought about a series of forced cultural changes to the lives of Africans, for which they erased and replaced the indigenous standpoint. Colonialism not only demonised native practices and values but also imposed Western standards of beauty. Through this, Africans were taught to assimilate to these standards to be deemed attractive or socially acceptable. Colonial masters saw scarification practices as a form of bodily disfigurement and barbarism. This cultural imposition has now led to a widespread rejection of scarification practices, which are often seen as regressive and unattractive, particularly in an increasingly Westernised and global Nigeria. This shift has fundamentally altered the cultural fabric of various ethnic groups, pushing traditional practices to the margins in favour of contemporary beauty ideals.
Contemporary Issues and Stigmatisation
The Child Rights Act of 2003 in Nigeria, which criminalised scarification, serves as a compelling indicator of the nation's evolving shift from scarification. By enacting this law, the Nigerian government unequivocally signals that such traditional practices are incompatible with modern societal norms and human rights principles. Critics may view the legislation as draconian, yet it unmistakably reflects a broader trend of marginalising age-old customs in favour of contemporary and often Eurocentric ideologies.
While ostensibly necessary to protect children's rights and ensure their autonomy over personal appearance, its modern day stigmatisation warrants a more nuanced examination. Viewed through the lens of neo-colonialism, this shift can be seen as an unnecessary marginalisation, and the loss of cultural autonomy under the guise of progressiveness.
Beauty, Neo Colonialism and Stigma
An academic journal challenges the notion that restricting scarification is a form of progressiveness, stating that “The displacement of Indigenous standards of beauty should not be viewed as a derivative of ‘progress’ or the erasure of primitive ‘backwardness’. In other words, the stigmatization of tribal marks is not a symptom of economic modernization.” Tribal marks in modern Nigerian society now bear a lot of social stigma and have been redefined in urban societies to be a mark of ugliness rather than pride and heritage. This shift is a clear subversion of cultural norms and indigenous standards of beauty. The 2003 Child Rights Act can be seen as systematically encouraging the stigmatisation of tribal marks and scarification practices among various ethnic groups.
For many bearers of tribal marks, the consequences of this societal shift are heavy. Many report a profound sense of shame, a diminished sense of self-worth, and recurrent instances of discrimination across social interactions, romantic pursuits, and career prospects. A study found that “members of Nigeria’s Yoruba tribe bearing the stigma of tribal marks struggle to find and maintain gainful employment in the labour market.” These difficulties, however, stem not from the act of scarification per se, but rather from entrenched societal attitudes that marginalise them. Studies have revealed that these experiences are particularly prevalent in urban settings, where beauty standards tend to align more closely with Western-centric or global ideals. In contrast, rural societies exhibit a greater acceptance and reverence for indigenous forms of beauty and identity.
It is said that “Social stigma is thus a sociological phenomenon (Tyler and Slater, 2018) in which dominant colonial culture-frames coerce conformity to the central narrative and simultaneously ‘erase and replace’ the marginalized ‘other.’ The former displaces the latter, imposing its definitions of what it means to be normal.” Indeed, the criminalisation of scarification reflects a legacy of internalised colonial mentality that continues to influence contemporary attitudes toward cultural practices. This legacy perpetuates a narrative where Indigenous customs are side-lined in favour of conforming to Western or globally accepted norms.
Final thoughts
In a previous essay, I argued that cultural practices are inherently fluid, with their survival dependent on their ability to enhance community life. When they cease to serve this purpose, they naturally fade away.
The issue of tribal marks in modern day Nigeria presents a complex phenomenon that encapsulates the intense clash between tradition, beauty politics, and the struggle to preserve indigenous cultural identities amid globalisation and evolving societal attitudes, which in Nigeria's context, lean heavily towards Western ideals.
The practice of scarification among Nigeria's many ethnic groups raises difficult questions. Should these practices be phased out? Should the federal government have the authority to inhibit traditional rites? After all, tradition alone does not justify the perpetuation of a practice.
The practice of scarification, itself may not be inherently wrong. However, contemporary society imposes numerous standards on Africans that make it difficult for such traditions to persist without significant repercussions. Young children and babies are marked without consent, raising ethical concerns. The social and economic hardships that often follow for those bearing tribal marks, due to prevailing stigma, further complicate the issue. Moreover, the social and economic hardships faced by individuals with tribal marks, stemming from pervasive stigma, suggest that moving away from these practices, particularly in urban communities, might be a safer and more beneficial path for children of the modern world. This view, however, does not diminish the cultural significance of scarification but seeks to reconcile tradition with the evolving realities of the modern world which seems to ostracise it.
