Renaming Nigeria

Renaming Nigeria - A Historical and Contemporary Reflection

In the annals of Nigeria’s history, the question of its name, its origin, meaning, and relevance, has resurfaced with renewed urgency.

This special report delves into the genesis of the name “Nigeria,” its colonial underpinnings, and the contemporary discourse surrounding its possible renaming.

The name “Nigeria” was coined not within the borders of the land it now designates, but in England, by a British journalist named Flora Shaw. On January 8, 1897, Shaw, then the colonial editor of the Financial Times and writer of the column “The Colony,” proposed the name “Nigeria” in reference to the territories around the River Niger, which were under the control of the Royal Niger Company. Her choice was deliberate and calculated. She rejected earlier suggestions such as “Central Sudan,” which she deemed geographically misleading, and “Slave Coast,” which she found derogatory. Instead, she settled on “Nigeria,” derived from “Niger Area,” a term she believed was both geographically accurate and politically neutral.

Flora Shaw’s personal history is intertwined with Nigeria’s colonial narrative. Born in Woolwich, England, she was a prolific writer and analyst of African colonial economies. In 1902, she married Frederick Lugard, the British colonial administrator who would later amalgamate the northern and southern protectorates into what became Nigeria in 1914. 

Interestingly, Shaw coined the name five years before her marriage, debunking the common misconception that it was “Mrs. Lugard” who named the country. 

The union of Shaw and Lugard, both childless, symbolically parallels the political merger of Nigeria’s diverse regions, a union that remains contentious to this day.

Lord Lugard’s role in shaping Nigeria was pivotal. As High Commissioner and later Governor-General, he implemented a policy of indirect rule, leveraging existing native institutions while forbidding practices like slave trading. His administrative reach extended over a vast and culturally diverse territory, which he sought to unify under British control. 

Despite resistance in places like Kano and Sokoto, Lugard’s efforts largely succeeded, laying the foundation for Nigeria’s modern boundaries.

Yet, the legacy of this colonial construction is fraught with challenges. Since gaining independence in 1960, Nigeria has struggled to forge a cohesive national identity.

Ethnic and religious divisions, compounded by systemic corruption and political instability, have plagued the nation. The last century has seen Nigeria oscillate between hope and despair, with democratic experiments often undermined by military interventions and electoral violence.

The call to rename Nigeria is not merely about semantics; it is a symbolic gesture aimed at reclaiming identity and rewriting history. Critics argue that the name “Nigeria” is a colonial relic, imposed without the consent of its people. They contend that a new name could inspire a fresh start, unburdened by the weight of imperial legacy. Supporters of the status quo, however, caution against superficial changes, emphasizing the need for structural reforms over symbolic acts.

Former U.S. President Barack Obama, in a 2015 address to Nigerians, underscored the importance of unity and democratic participation. He praised Nigeria’s progress and urged citizens to reject violence and embrace peaceful elections. His message, though delivered from across the Atlantic, resonated deeply with a nation at a crossroads.

As Nigeria grapples with its identity, the debate over its name serves as a mirror reflecting deeper societal fractures.

Whether the country retains its colonial moniker or adopts a new one, the path forward must be paved with introspection, reform, and a collective commitment to nation-building.