Historical Metaphors in the Kano Chronicle Author(S): Murray Last Source: History in Africa, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Historical Metaphors in the Kano Chronicle Author(s): Murray Last Source: History in Africa, Vol. 7 (1980), pp. 161-178 Published by: African Studies Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3171660 . Accessed: 15/10/2013 20:57 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. African Studies Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to History in Africa. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:57:50 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HISTORICALMETAPHORS IN THE KANOCHRONICLE Murray Last University College, London "There is a story that the Prophet appeared to Abdu Rahaman in a dream and said to him, 'Get up and go west and establish Islam.' Abdu Rahaman got up and took a handful of the soil of Medina and put it in a cloth and brought it to Hausaland. When- ever he came to a town, he took a handful of the soil of the country and put it beside that of Medina. If they did not correspond, he passed that town. So he journeyed until he came to Kano. And when he compared the soil of Kano with Medina soil they resembled one another and became as one soil. So he said, 'this is the country that I saw in my dream.'" [xx] I I wish in this paper to treat the Kano Chronicle (henceforth KC) as a document of intellectual history, and not just as a mine from which to dig valuable 'facts.' The aspect of intellectual history I will discuss is the meaning of historical metaphors - or analogical geography - of which the above story is a rather special example. But first I will try and show that the first 'edition' of KC was completed in the mid-seventeenth century and was compiled from materials which had been developed since the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries - thus locating the intellectual history in a specific period. The texts used are discussed in the appendix. In writing this essay I am treading where many have trod before. Abdullahi Smith's work on the Sayfawa and on the origin of the Hausa states and Mervyn Hiskett's publications on the Kano Chronicle and on the Song of Bagauda are the most notable examples. But I am sure most historians of Hausaland have 'had to go' at KC, though fewer seem to have published their conclusions. To underline the tentativeness of my argument I have laid out the paper in the form of nine hypotheses; and as textual criticism is apt to be a very convoluted topic (particularly without the original alongside) I shall simply indicate in brackets the reigns of the Kano kings by the Roman numerals used by Palmer, whose text is much the most readily available.3 HISTORYIN AFRICA 7(1980) This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:57:50 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 162 MURRAYLAST II Hypothesis 1: that KC was not composed reign-by-reign but was put together by one man, at one time, and subsequently brought up to date, several reigns at a time. The evidence for this lies in the inter-connections between reigns (e.g. between Exxvi/xxvii]; Exxviii/xxix];Exxxvi/xxxvi i]) which betray hindsight. Against this are the few contradictions or improbabilities where 'Homer nods,' but they seem to me to be rare enough almost to be evidence for, rather than against, single authorship. One warning, however: Palmer tends to translate away the inconsistencies. Hypothesis 2: that the main edition of KC can be dated to the mid-seventeenth century. The internal evidence for this is the sentence "for a reason I forget"Exxx] ca. 1649, which surely can only imply the author was writing some ten to twenty years (or more) later. Circumstantial evidence is perhaps the near-total consistency in rulers and reign lengths found in KC and Song of Bagauda and Kano kinglist after 1652 Exxxiii]: from that period on, there seems to have been a single authoritative source. But against this, there is the absence of any explicit reference to the Asl al-Wangariyin, written in 1651 (indeed KC contradicts the Asl). Generally, however, one can argue that the seventeenth century was a period when historical writing of this rationalist kind was commonplace, particularly in Borno or Timbuktu/Songhai. The context in which KC was compiled would seem then to be the period of the Kororofa invasions: one can speculate on the motives for historical writing in such circumstances. Hypothesis 3: that KC as composed in the mid-seventeenth century was put together from numerous earlier recrods which were the product of a sudden growth in historical interest and record- keeping in the sixteenth century. These materials, mainly songs or praise-songs but also oral narrative and written kinglists, reveal themselves in KC by (a) the extreme precision of some of the reign lengths after Exxiii, ca. 1565]; (b) mention of Dunki's praise-songs of anyone of any note Exxii] and quotations from several other songs; (c) refernce to a Shicr Barbushe (Exiii]; "Wakar Barbushe") and a Qissat Amina Exv]; (d) the author himself says he is choosing between traditions (e.g. in Exi]) or has a "general belief" (al-mashor) to take into consideration (Eiii] and Ev]). An extant seventeenth-century example of a typical source is Dan Marina's peem on the Borno victory over the Kororofa. It is from this body of traditions that the other Kano sources (Song of Bagauda, Kano Kinglist, and Asl) independently drew their data, and which accounts for their variations. The possible 'slip' in the passage from KC Exx] quoted above, where the compiler refers to cAbd al-Rahman (al-Zaiti) instead of cAbd al-Karim (al-Maghili) may be a product of a rare error in conflation. Hypothesis 4: that there are four historiographical blocs in KC; (a) the 1650-1930 period, based on contemporary or eye-witness accounts; (b) c. 1550-1650 period, for which there is very consider- This content downloaded from 129.128.216.34 on Tue, 15 Oct 2013 20:57:50 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HISTORICALMETAPHORS IN THE KANOCHRONICLE 163 able consistency and precision in the record, due to sources based on living memory of songs and possibly written records; (c) the c. 1450-1550 period, for which the accuracy is patchy, the sources being oral tradition and possibly gleanings from the historical tradition of neighboring states (e.g. Borno); (d) the pre-1450 period: the accounts here are almost wholly legendary, reflecting as much contemporary (that is, seventeenth-century) interests and reality as any historical hearsay; it is the product of seventeenth- century Kano rationalism working on folklore collected both in various quarters of the city and from country people. This division does not, of course, mean that the data in blocs (a) and (b) are a wholly full or accurate record of their periods. The evidence for this schema lies in part in the degree of consistency among the three main sources for names of kings and the lengths of their reigns. Regarding the post-1650 period there is no dispute. Hiskett, however, remarks on the vast discrepancies for the earlier period, but he is, I think, mistaken: for the period between Dauda (Exv], c. 1430) and Soyaki (Exxxiii], 1652) the Song of Bagauda and the Kinglist agree, perhaps fortui- tously, on the numbers of years elapsed (272 years 10 months for SB; 272 years 6 months for the KL), compared with KC's 238 years. Although the individual allocation of years varies widely, the order of the rulers is less erratic, while the total number of rulers is fairly consistent: SB has 14 (Rimfa is an obvious mis- placement), KL has 16 and the KC has 19 (but three rulers included in KC are not in the others because they ruled only one day, seven days and about forty-eight days). Halfway through the Dauda - Soyaki series, reigns start being given in months and days (e.g. Exxiii] Yakufu, c. 1565), and it seems likely that whoever was keeping such details was also able to draw on relatively accurate data for the previous 100 years (i.e. their grand- or great-grandparents' generation), but no uniform, authoritative text had emerged. For the pre-Dauda ([xv], c. 1430) period, the reign lengths are dictated, I suggest, by poetic or conventional requirements. The totals of years elapsed are inconsistent (KC, 452; SB, 580; KL, 329), though the total number of rulers is identical, being seventeen in all three lists. The names of the rulers are common, more or less, to all three lists, but the discrepancies occur most frequently in the middle, between the Bagauda cycle [i-iv] and the Yaji cycle Exi-xiii]. Such a mid-range discrepancy is a common feature in genealogies generally, and should not surpise US. An example of the patterning of reign lengths in KC is Cycle A [i-iii], 66, 33, 40 years; followed by the twins' [iv] 7 and 17 months; Cycle B [v-vii] 60, 55, and 44 years; followed by [viii/ix], 17 and 37 years and then Ex/xi] 7 and 37 years.