An stone figure in the style of the Akwansih, Nigeria, incl. stand. The Akwanshi Stone Figures of the Cross River: Memory, Material, and Monumentality in West Africa In the forested borderlands of southeastern Nigeria, especially around Ikom in Cross River State, stands one of the most intellectually provocative sculptural traditions in sub-Saharan Africa: the Akwanshi stone figures. These carved basalt monoliths—often referred to more broadly as the Ikom Monoliths—have attracted the attention of archaeologists, art historians, and anthropologists for over a century. Yet they remain, in many respects, enigmatic. Their iconography, social function, and precise chronology continue to be debated, making them fertile ground for scholarly reflection. The term “Akwanshi,” derived from local usage, is often glossed as “dead person in the ground,” a translation that already suggests a funerary or ancestral dimension. The figures are anthropomorphic monoliths, typically cylindrical or slightly tapering, with stylized but recognizable human faces carved in low relief. Eyes, nose, and mouth are carefully delineated; in some cases, elaborate coiffures, necklaces, or chest motifs are also represented. The monoliths vary in height, generally between one and two meters, and are carved from locally available basalt. Their surfaces bear incised linear patterns that some researchers have interpreted as symbolic scripts, clan marks, or indicators of status. Archaeological surveys conducted in the mid- and late twentieth century documented more than 300 monoliths distributed across multiple sites in the Cross River region. Their spatial organization is striking. They are often arranged in circular or semi-circular groupings, suggesting a deliberate monumental landscape rather than isolated commemorative stones. The clustering of monoliths implies collective memory practices rather than purely individual memorialization. In this respect, the Akwanshi figures challenge simplistic assumptions that monumental stone traditions are absent from West Africa. Chronologically, the Akwanshi have proven difficult to date with precision. Estimates have ranged from approximately 200 CE to 1000 CE, though firm stratigraphic contexts are rare. Radiocarbon dating of associated materials has offered broad chronological frames, but the monoliths themselves—being stone—cannot be directly dated by conventional methods. Scholars therefore rely on stylistic comparison, oral traditions, and archaeological association. Many attribute the figures to the ancestors of the Ejagham (Ekoi) peoples, whose contemporary ritual practices include an emphasis on ancestral authority and sculptural representation. However, one must approach such ethnographic analogies cautiously. Cultural continuity over many centuries cannot be assumed without critical examination. The Akwanshi tradition complicates dominant narratives of African art history that have often privileged wood carving over stone. While stone monumentality is widely associated with regions such as Ethiopia or with the megalithic circles of Senegambia, the Cross River monoliths attest to a localized but sophisticated sculptural practice in forested West Africa. Their materiality is significant. Basalt is not an easily worked stone; its selection suggests intentionality and technical competence. The labor investment required to quarry, carve, and transport these stones indicates organized social structures capable of mobilizing communal effort. Iconographically, the monoliths display a restrained but expressive formal vocabulary. The emphasis on the face aligns with broader West and Central African aesthetic principles in which the head is considered the locus of identity and spiritual force. The incised linear motifs on torsos and faces may encode information about lineage, rank, or ritual association. Some researchers have speculated that the markings represent a proto-writing system, though this remains controversial. Without decipherable correspondences, it is more methodologically prudent to describe them as symbolic systems embedded in specific cultural contexts rather than as “scripts” in the strict sense. Functionally, several interpretations coexist. The translation of Akwanshi as “dead person in the ground” supports the hypothesis that these stones served as grave markers or commemorative monuments. Their arrangement in groups, however, suggests that they may have marked collective burial grounds or ritual spaces dedicated to ancestral veneration. Another line of interpretation proposes that the monoliths demarcated territorial claims, asserting lineage rights over land and resources. These interpretations are not mutually exclusive. In many African societies, ancestors are both spiritual mediators and guarantors of territorial legitimacy. A funerary monument can simultaneously be a political statement. Colonial-era documentation of the monoliths is fragmentary and often filtered through ethnocentric assumptions. Early observers sometimes mischaracterized the figures as “primitive idols,” overlooking their embeddedness in complex social systems. Contemporary scholarship has sought to correct these distortions by situating the monoliths within indigenous epistemologies of memory and authority. Oral traditions in the Cross River region frequently link stone, earth, and ancestry in cosmological narratives, reinforcing the idea that the Akwanshi figures are not isolated artworks but components of a broader ritual ecology. Preservation presents ongoing challenges. Environmental weathering, agricultural expansion, and illicit removal have threatened many sites. Efforts by Nigerian heritage authorities and local communities have aimed to safeguard the monoliths, recognizing their importance not only as archaeological artifacts but as living heritage. Their potential nomination for international heritage recognition has periodically been discussed, though comprehensive conservation requires sustained funding and community engagement. From a theoretical perspective, the Akwanshi monoliths invite reflection on monumentality in non-state societies. Monumental art is often associated with centralized states and imperial projects. Yet the Cross River figures demonstrate that durable, large-scale commemorative practices can emerge in decentralized, lineage-based systems. Monumentality here does not signal imperial propaganda but rather distributed ancestral authority. The stones do not glorify a single ruler; they instantiate a network of remembered persons whose presence remains active in the landscape. In sum, the Akwanshi stone figures of the Cross River region stand as enduring witnesses to a sophisticated tradition of sculptural and ritual practice in West Africa. They embody a convergence of memory, material skill, and social organization. Their enigmatic qualities should not be mistaken for opacity; rather, they reflect the partial nature of the archaeological record and the limits of external interpretation. Continued interdisciplinary research—combining archaeology, art history, linguistics, and oral tradition—promises to deepen our understanding of these remarkable monuments. Until then, the Akwanshi remain both grounded in basalt and suspended in scholarly debate: silent, but far from mute. Selected Literature (for further reading) Allison, Philip, African stone sculptures, Lund Humhries, London, 1968 Allsworth-Jones, P. 1991. “The Ikom Monoliths and the Archaeology of the Cross River Region.” Darling, P. 1984. “Monoliths and Megaliths of the Cross River Area.” Nicklin, K. 1974. “Ekoi Stone Monoliths Reconsidered.” Willett, F. 1971. African Art: An Introduction. London: Thames & Hudson. CAB30347