Thoughts on Les principautés Kotoko: essai sur le caractère sacré de l'autorité

 Les principautés Kotoko: essai sur le caractère sacré de l'autorité by Annie M.D. Lebeuf is rather difficult to "use" for those interested in the relations of the Kotoko states and Kanem-Borno. Despite Lebeuf's (and that of Griaule and her husband) work on both ethnographica and archaeological studies of the Lake Chad Basin, oral traditions are sadly vague on any kind of chronological precision. Consequently, Lebeuf engages in a deep discussion of myths heard in various Kotoko states, seeking to identify the symbolic meanings of these mythic origin tales. Doing so allows some insights into the nature of Kotoko cosmology and socio-political organization in the various principalities or states, like Logone-Birni or Makari. 

Unfortunately, this approach means that one is entering a terrain in which more exact notions of the historical development of the Kotoko states are elusive. The "Sao" period remembered as preceding the states as we know them is recalled through myth. Likewise, the long lists of names of Sao and post-Sao rulers of different Kotoko towns are just that, a list of names. Most, at least as understood by Lebeuf, have little or nothing specifically remembered about them beyond their names. As a result, Kotoko royal genealogies and oral traditions sadly cannot fill in much of the gap in the history of relations between the states of the Sayfawa (Kanem, and then Borno) and the so-called "Sao" or Kotoko principalities. 

Nonetheless, one can glean some useful nuggets of information from Kotoko traditions. The royal families of Makari and Afade, for instance, were said to be of Kanuri Muslim extraction. Indeed, the first Muslim ruler of Afade, Assana or Meskeri Tchigo, was said to be the brother of Ousseini of Makari. To what extent they actually were of Kanuri origin is unclear, but Lebeuf's ethnographic observations often found foreign maternal ancestry among the Kotoko princes of recent times. More intriguing is the claim to Bulala origin of the first Muslim king of Goulfeil. Even if not entirely accurate, it attests to an instance of Bulala interest and possible expansion into this region south of Lake Chad, presumably during the 1300s-1500s.  Likewise, the Babalia ties of Gawi and through them to Yao in the Lake Fitri region is another interesting tradition, although difficult to place chronologically.  One can certainly detect the use of Kanuri titles and influences in some of the Kotoko states, perhaps beginning or expanding after the rise of Muslim dynasties. For instance, the possible Kanuri influence in Makari and Afade was certainly established by the 1500s, although Borno traditions point to contacts by the 1300s (see H.R. Palmer's work for the relevant traditions). This influence even affected Kotoko myth to some extent, with the bull, turtle, and primordial waters story appearing here. But Kotoko traditions remain very ambiguous when it comes to the specific details of relations with their northern neighbors from Kanem and Borno. 

In other respects, there are broadly shared regional commonalities among the Kotoko states, Bagirmi, Wadai, Kanem and Borno. For example, the central role of the nguva, or dendal, is shared between the Kotoko towns and cities of Borno. The centrality of the palace is also important, although in this region the Kotoko masons did not apply brick. Instead, their palace complexes and monumental gudu or guti were made of earth. Nonetheless, the emphasis on monumental architecture that, to Lebeuf at least, symbolized the meeting of the sky and the earth, could match the role of monumental mosques used in Wadai, Borno, and Bagirmi. To what extent moieties and quarter systems seen in Kotoko towns correspond with similar notions in Kanem, Borno, Wadai and Bagirmi is a topic we shall have to explore in the future.

What of the Kotoko states themselves? To Lebeuf, analysis of myths of origin and their symbolism provide the key. The foundation myths often refer to hunters and fishmen, the fusion of distinct populations in one region, and the sacrifice of children by representatives of the two populations. Animal symbolism is also key here, with the varan and serpents or other animals often appearing in tales. The "Sao" are accorded an important place here in these origin stories, often associated with the founders of towns like Makari. Over time, larger towns existed as agglomerations of communities walled their settlements after unifying. The Kotoko princes, to use Lebeuf's vocabulary, were sometimes seen as descendants of outsiders who forged alliances with the local people. This is perhaps why the gumsu was often chosen from among the descendants of the first families of a town or city, to maintain this pact between the dynastic line and the original settlers. Interestingly, however, succession in the Kotoko states usually passed to sons of slave women. Complex age grades were used as well as the moieties or quarter system to organize the people of the towns themselves. 

Over time, some began to increase their power over their neighbors, but the Kotoko states were never unified into a single polity. Instead, 3 broader sub-regions appear, with Makari as the dominant state in Mandague, Mser led by Kousseri, and Lagouane under Logone-Birni domination. This was not always the case, since Houlouf was remembered as once being a powerful state. A close study of references to the Kotoko states in Bagirmi, Bulala, Borno and Mandara traditions and chronicles will undoubtedly shed more light on this.

Overall, Lebeuf's work remains important for attempting to center Kotoko myths, symbolism and ethnographic fieldwork. Undoubtedly, archaeology will remain central for understanding the deep history of this region and the so-called "Sao" often associated with the early period of the Kotoko states. Nonetheless, a thorough examination, comparison and analysis of references to the Kotoko states in the historical traditions of its neighbors can shed more light. Sadly, Lebeuf scarcely attempted this. Except for some more recent history still partly recalled in Kotoko traditions on the expansionist activities of Logone-Birni by the 1760s, little else is remembered in detail.

Yusuf of Katsina?

Part of Landeroin's list of Katsina rulers from Documents scientifiques de la Mission Tilho

Whilst revisiting various sources on relations between Kano and Borno over the last several weeks, our interest in Katsina has been rekindled. However, the inaccessibility of many of the detailed studies of its history has largely limited our readings on its past to Landeroin, Palmer and Yusufu Bala Usman. Dankoussou's Katsina: traditions historiques des Katsinaawaa après la Jihad is also a great resource, drawing upon rich oral traditions. Sadly, his chronology is hard to reconcile with other sources and contains additional problems. This is unfortunate, since Katsina was one of the most important Hausa kingdoms in the centuries before the jihad. 

Part of the problem with even making sense of its history and its connection with Borno is the difficulty of establishing a timeline. Palmer used some Arabic manuscripts listing the kings of Katsina as well as the Kano Chronicle and other sources. Yusufu Bala Usman likewise utilized similar written lists. Others, such as Landeroin and Issaka Dankoussou draw more from oral traditions. Indeed, Dankoussou's list of Katsina kings is similar to that of Landeroin, collected at the beginning of the 1900s. Hunwick has also drawn from some manuscripts to revise our chronology of Katsina kings, but it is less useful for the 1500s. Unfortunately, no manuscripts have come to light from the Fazzan, which could shed light on Katsina's kings since more than once Awlad Muhammad sultan fled to Katsina during troubles with Tripoli. 

But the particular Katsina sarki we are interested in, Yusuf, was given a relatively lengthy reign by Dankoussou and Landeroin. Landeroin reported that Youssoufou reigned 14 years, while Dankoussou also dated his reign 1599-1613. Both concur that Yusuf succeeded Ibrahim Maje and preceded Abdul Kadir (or Abdoul Kerim, in Landeroin's list). Where they disagree most glaringly is in the very long reign Dankoussou assigned to Ibrahim Maje (1531-1599). Landeroin only reported a reign of 18 years. 

When one looks upon Palmer and Yusufu Bala Usman's work, a different picture emerges. Palmer's "History of Katsina" does not even include Yusuf among the list of kings, despite collating different kinglists. Instead, his list jumps from "Maje Ibrahim" (dated 1494-1520) to Abdul Karim and Ashafa. Intriguingly, his list concurs with Landeroin on the exceedingly short reign of Ashafa (8 days to 1 week). Later, Usman's study of Katsina history did include Yusuf, relying on an oral informant for what was supposedly a brief reign. If Usman's dating is correct, Yusuf reigned c. 1562 or 1563 before his deposition or abdication. One cannot help but wonder if Usman's informant was actually mistaking Yusuf for Ashafa. Moreover, Usman also changes the order of succession, having Yusuf succeed Abd al-Karim. 

Ultimately, one may why any of this matters? Well, according to Dankoussou, Borno attacked Katsina during the reign of Yusuf. If this tradition has any merit, one would like to have a better chronology for Yusuf and to determine if it was part of any larger campaigns launched from Borno into Hausaland. One would also be interested in knowing what role, if any, Borno played in the abdication or deposition of Yusuf (assuming that is not a mistaken tradition confusing him with Ashafa). In addition, we also find problematic the dates used by Usman for Muhammad Wari (c. 1575-1587). According to Dankoussou, Kwararafa attacked Katsina during the reign of Muhammad Wari, and his dates (1625-1637) "fit" more evenly with that period of Kwararafa aggression against northern states (mentioned in the Kano Chronicle for the reign of Muhammad Zaki, c. 1582-1618). Until we have a better chronology of Katsina's history that can be corroborated by different texts or oral traditions, much of its history before the jihad will remain elusive.

Montilus's Dieux en diaspora

Guérin Montilus's Dieux en diaspora. Les Loa Haïtiens et les Vaudou du Royaume d'Allada (Bénin) is a short but richly detailed study comparing the Rada Rite in Haitian Vodou with Vodun in Allada. Based on fieldwork in both Haiti and Allada, Montilus is able to trace the origin of various lwa in Haiti and offer a model for why the mythology around many deviated so greatly from source materials in Allada. However, an African sedimentation of the mythology around many lwa persists, as do some of the concepts and larger framework in which these entities operate. But the destructive impact of the slave trade and enslavement in Saint Domingue, as well as contact with Christianity and various other African peoples undoubtedly led to many transformations and shifts in the conception of the Rada Rite. Montilus hints at this when examining the Simbi spirits, for instance, or theorizing how Congo or Petro rites incorporate more Central African ideas of magic. Montilus's main weakness is perhaps not examining the ways in which Vodun in Benin is a living tradition, hence another cause for its differences from Haitian practice. After all, if Haitians were able to develop a radically new mythology in some cases involving Erzilie, Ogou, Agwe, or other lwa, why wouldn't people in Benin have also adapted the spirits to meet their changing world? One can imagine Dahomey's conquest of Allada in 1724, their conquest of Ouidah, the French colonial conquest, and Christianity also had some impact here (perhaps even before colonialism through contacts with the Portuguese?). The diversity of legends and stories about Legba, Chango, and other vodun in Benin is perhaps a remnant of this great diversity in practice and mythology in today's Benin that has deep historical roots. Anyway, we hope to now read a recently published history of Vodou (again, focusing on the connections to the Slave Coast) that investigates more deeply the political factors shaping religion and spirituality in this part of West Africa. 

Muhammad Kisoki and Borno

            The altercation between Borno and Kano during the reign of the latter’s Muhammad Kisoki is an intriguing example of conflict between the two states. Although there are some chronological ambiguities that require attention, Yusufu Bala Usman has connected Kisoki’s raid on Nguru with the Kano campaign of Borno during the time of Idris Alooma. According to Ahmad b. Furtu, a highly biased but contemporary source, Kano had “betrayed” Borno through fortifying towns or sites on their border with Borno and launching attacks. In response, Borno raised an army which destroyed the fortifications or walls and then failed to take Kano itself.[1] Importantly, the opposing side’s perspective can be glimpsed through the Kano Chronicle. Thus, one does not have to rely solely or mainly on Ahmad b. Furtu’s panegyrical text for his patron, unlike the case of most of the other peoples Borno went to war against during the lengthy reign of Idris Alooma. Therefore, this brief article shall examine Borno-Kano relations during the reign of Muhammad Kisoki, focusing on the raids launched from Kano against Borno and the response. This post argues that Muhammad Kisoki’s eastern raids likely correspond to the campaigns described by Ahmad b. Furtu and were autonomous Kano initiatives rather than part of a Kebbi-led regional conflict.

By examining this episode more closely, however, one sees yet again the influence of Maidaki Hauwa (and her brother, Guli) in a confrontation with Borno. Maidaki Hauwa had previously been involved with suppressing a revolt by the Dagachi in Kano, someone descended from the Sayfawa line and very influential. After preventing his rebellion, her son, Abdullahi, returned from a campaign and then faced an invasion from Borno. Undoubtedly linked to the Dagachi’s actions, Kano’s king, accompanied by mallams, had to submit to the mai. Then, once the mai returned to Borno, Abdullahi tricked or deceived the Dagachi and gave his office to a slave.[2] Although taking place several years before the Borno-Kano conflict during Idris Alooma’s reign (1564-1596, according to Lange’s chronology), it is very likely that Kisoki’s influential grandmother and her brother, whose influence at court was extremely powerful, shaped Kano state policy with regard to the frontier with Borno. By taking another look at this critical juncture, one can see just how realpolitik shaped relations between a regional power like Borno and the smaller Hausa states which, depending on one’s view, paid tribute or sent regular “gifts” to the mai.

But can we confidently date Muhammad Kisoki’s attacks on Borno with the reign of Idris Alooma? The two only overlapped, using Lange’s chronology and the dates in the Kano Chronicle, c. 1564-1565. Dierk Lange has suggested that the conflict with Kano occurred early in Idris b. Ali’s reign, perhaps in c. 1564, but other sources suggest the mai went on a pilgrimage to Mecca at this time.[3] Since our dates for Kisoki and Idris Alooma are approximations and other king lists of Kano give Kisoki’s predecessor a slightly longer list, one could possibly make the case for a longer period of overlapping reigns.[4] The other problem with Kisoki’s Borno conflict occurring during the reign of Idris Alooma is the praise song mentioning his grandmother, Hauwa. She could have been alive in the 1560s as a very aged woman, but some may prefer to date this period of conflict to an earlier decade in Kisoki’s lengthy reign.

The other issue with establishing a clearer chronology is the, quite frankly, mess made by previous generations of scholars interested in this part of the world. For instance, M.G. Smith, without a single source to back his speculative reasoning, suggested that Kisoki’s raiding of Borno territory may have been done in conjunction with the Kanta of Kebbi. Without any firm evidence and relying upon later sources and traditions of the power and stature of the Kanta in this part of West Africa, Smith has argued that Kisoki may have been the Kanta’s representative in central Hausaland. Consequently, Kisoki’s raid may be associated with Kebbi’s larger conflict with Borno. Building this possible theory on flimsy foundations, Smith then tentatively dates Kisoki’s attack on Nguru to 1544.[5]

Although Smith is merely suggesting possible regional scenarios to contextualize the wars and raiding between the major states in the Central Sudan, this is hardly supported by the source materials. While Muhammad Bello in the 1800s wrote of Kebbi conquering other Hausa states like Kano in the 1500s, it is very difficult to detect any of this in the Kano Chronicle or the Bornoan records. The Chronicle actually portrays Kisoki as the ruler of all of Hausaland. Indeed, according to this same source, “He waged war on Birnin Unguru because of Agaidam.”[6] This last word brings to mind Geidam in modern Nigeria, to the east of Nguru. This area may have been a source of contention as Borno was facing an extended famine during Abd Allah b. Dunama’s reign (c. 1557-1564).[7] This could have been influenced by the wars between Borno and Kebbi, as well as the distractions Borno faced from the Bulala to the east in Kanem and local revolts by the Sao in Borno and other groups. Seeing an advantageous position to strike, Kisoki (or perhaps his grandmother’s brother, who was extremely influential in the royal court) may have envisioned Kano extending further east. Certainly, booty in horses and textiles were desirable since Kisoki ordered no captives taken from Nguru.

Furthermore, utilizing all the various sources on the Kanta of Kebbi and his negative relations with Borno suggests a large-scale confrontation in which Borno attempted to besiege Surame took place in c. 1561. Traditions referring to this do not reference Kano at all. In fact, it was on Katsina territory the Bornoan forces engaged in combat with the Kanta.[8] This is highly suggestive of Kano’s actions against Borno likely being autonomous responses of the state to Borno and perceived weaknesses on its western borderlands with Kano.

For these aforementioned reasons, one is inclined to agree with Yusufu Bala Usman. Usman, in a largely insightful article on the history of relations between Borno and the Hausa states, correctly identified Kisoki’s raids with the ones described by Ahmad b. Furtu. Moreover, as Furtu writes, these raids were a “betrayal” by the people of Kano. As for the Kano Chronicle, Kano attacked Nguru because “it is the will of God.”[9] Usman’s reasoning here is not entirely clear, but the raids from Kano and the reference to the building of walls or fortifications around various towns in the Kano kingdom  are consistent with the actions of Kisoki. After all, by improving defenses on his eastern frontier, forces from Kano could more safely engage in raids or attacks on western Borno or its vassal provinces, then retreat to secure sites if pursued or followed. Over time, this could have led to a gradual increase in Kano’s influence and possible territorial gains to the east. One suspects the “will of God” as a justification of war was designed to show Kisoki as waging just war against various subject peoples of Borno who were not necessarily Muslims.

Agreeing with Usman also allows one to gain some insight into how both sides viewed their actions. One already knows the Borno perspective, even if Ahmad b. Furtu was not an eyewitness to the Kano campaign. He nonetheless wrote an explanation for the campaign based on Kano and its fortified towns like Kirza, Kalmasan, Majiya, Ukluya, Dulu, Awazaki, Ajiyajiya, Sa’iyya, Galaki and Kay. To Furtu, they not only fortified many settlements, but “resorted to abominable cunning and vile deeds.”[10] The conflict ended with the “many” expeditions launched against Kano, including Majagani. These expeditions led to the destruction of fortifications while the residents fled. Unfortunately, most of these expeditions are not described in detail and after the destruction of Majiya’s fortifications, the Bornoan forces were allegedly able to dismantle the walls and fortresses placed around other towns with little or no resistance. It is very unlikely that the ruler of Kano would have sat idly by, even if the musketry of Borno proved very effective against Majiya’s defenders. Overall, Furtu’s account seems to suggest Kano began this process of fortifying towns and launching raids before the reign of Idris Alooma, especially since the labor and resources necessary to build walls around several towns or cities could hardly have been accomplished in a short amount of time.

The Kano Chronicle, likely written in the late 1800s, lacks this level of detail but understandably highlights the moment of Kisoki’s victory as Borno failed to take Kano city. As previously mentioned, Muhammad Kisoki ordered the raiding of Nguru, a town which was the capital of the powerful galadimas of Borno by the 1600s. Murray Last has read the account of this as symbolic warfare, playing with the idea of the Kanuri word for the Hausa, afuno, and arse-clothes or nudity. After all, Kisoki did not take captives but focused on horses and clothes.[11] However, this symbolic meaning may not be relevant if Kisoki was endeavoring to present himself as a legitimate Muslim ruler not willing to take Muslim captives. Indeed, even Ahmad b. Furtu portrayed his patron similarly. Next, the Chronicle explains how the ruler of Borno then sought to attack Birnin Kano the following year, but failed to take the town. This led to an extended praise song which even included Maidaki Hauwa as the “old lady with swaggering gait, old lady of royal blood, guarded by men-at-arms.”[12] By praising Kisoki as the “physic of Bornu and the Chiratawa,” one can also surmise that Kano’s war with Borno involved Shira. Despite this victory of sorts, or at least the failure of the attempted assault on Kano, Kisoki invited prominent shaykhs from Borno anyway.[13] One may surmise here that Borno was still perceived as a source of reputable Islamic scholars and religious figures, Kano’s rulers were entrenching their own state legitimacy through war and Islam.

Ultimately, both sides could claim some degree of victory. Kano was able to withstand a military attack on its capital from its powerful neighbor. Borno, on the other hand, secured its western frontier by destroying fortifications and weakening Kano’s ability to launch deeper raids into Borno. Doing so inevitably aided the economy through the increased security for traders and travelers. It likewise made it easier for Borno to focus on internal rebellious groups and the Bulala to the east for a number of Kanem expeditions. Kano, meanwhile, was able to protect its capital and, unlike Abdullahi, Kisoki did not have humble himself before the mai. This expresses a growth in the political stature of the sarki who could meet the Sayfawa as a peer. Lastly, an attempt at revisiting the various sources on this encounter does support Kisoki’s raiding activities to the east as likely to be the same as those mentioned by Ahmad b. Furtu. Furtu’s account is too brief and not backed by eyewitness testimony. But based on the scale of operations and the necessary shovels, hoes, and implements to destroy town walls at various sites and then to attack Kano’s capital, the Kano expeditions must have been large and time-consuming.

---

[1] See Dierk Lange, A Sudanic chronicle: the Borno Expeditions of Idrīs Alauma (1564–1576 according to the account of Ahmad b. Furtū. Arabic text, English translation, commentary and geographical gazetteer for a detailed translation of Ahmad b. Furtu’s text.

[2] For an attempt at making sense of the Dagachi and his descendants in Kano and their impact on Kano-Borno relations, see Behique Dunama, “The Dagachi of Kano: Elite Exiles, Political Centralization, and Kano-Borno Relations,” https://thedreamvariation.blogspot.com/2026/03/the-dagachi-of-kano-elite-exiles.html.

[3] See Dierk Lange, A Sudanic Chronicle, 69.

[4] See Paul E. Lovejoy and John Hunwick, “Not Yet the Kano Chronicle,” Sudanic Africa 4 (1993) for different regnal years for Kano’s rulers. One manuscript assigns Abdullahi, Kisoki’s father, a reign of 12 years instead of the 10 in the Kano Chronicle.

[5] M.G. Smith, Government in Kano, 1350-1950, 140-141.

[6] H.R. Palmer, “The Kano Chronicle,” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 38 (1908), 79.

[7] See Dierk Lange, Le dīwān des sultans du (Kānem- )Bornū: chronologie et histoire d'un royaume africain (de la fin du Xe siècle jusqu'à 1808), 80.

[8] For a discussion of the various sources on Kebbi and Borno in the 1500s, see Behique Dunama, “The Kanta of Kebbi and Borno.” https://thedreamvariation.blogspot.com/2025/12/the-kanta-of-kebbi-and-borno.html.

[9] Yusuf Bala Usman, “A Reconsideration of the History of Relations Between Borno and Hausaland Before 1804” in Yusufu Bala Usman & Muhammad Nur Alkali (editors), Studies in the History of Pre-Colonial Borno, 183-184.

[10] Dierk Lange, A Sudanic Chronicle, 66-67.

[11] Murray Last, “From Sultanate to Caliphate: Kano, 1450–1800 A.D.”  in Bawuro M. Barkindo (ed.), Studies in Kano History, 72.

[12] H.R. Palmer, “The Kano Chronicle,” 79.

[13] This may have predated the Kano campaign of Borno.

Pondering the Origins of Maidaki Hauwa (c. 1463-1565)

What were the origins of one of the most powerful women in the annals of Kano history? This question is directly pertinent to questions of marriage alliances, the growing power of queen mothers or royal women, and the relations between Kano and other powers. Indeed, in the case of Maidaki Hauwa, it would go on to shape the reign of no less than 6 kings of Kano. This brief post shall explore the competing theories and defend the Gaya hypothesis for Hauwa’s origins.

According to one Kano chronicler, el-Arabi, Hauwa was the daughter of the ruler of Gaya, Agalfati (or Aganfi).[1] Unable to locate the text of this chronicle, one suspects el-Arabi connected Hauwa to Gaya’s ruler because Agalfati’s name appears in the Kano Chronicle before the reign of Muhammad Rumfa. In addition, some oral traditions associate Muhammad Rumfa with Daura and Gaya. According to Dokaji Alhaji Abubakar, Rumfa allegedly spent time in Gaya before coming to Kano.[2] This may have influenced el-Arabi’s account, perhaps suggesting an important alliance between Gaya and Rumfa. M.G. Smith, on the other hand, proposed a Gaya origin for Muhammad Rumfa’s mother, Fatima.[3]

Whatever the case may have been, the Rumfawa were linked to the powerful rulers of Gaya. Indeed, the Kano Chronicle also connects Agalfati with Machina, an important town whose rulers claimed ties to the Sayfawa.[4] The legendary story of origins for Machina’s kings claims their ancestor was a half-brother to a Sayfawa mai, the son of the first to rule from Gazargamo.[5] Interestingly, the kings of Machina resided in a palace of brick, a symbol of royal authority or status in Kanem and Borno. This suggests that the legend may be accurate in at least identifying an important connection or status with regard to Borno’s ruling dynasty. If the Gaya ruler Agalfati really was a son of the king of Machina, they may also have once been in the orbit of Borno. Much more information is needed to clearly establish this. For example, oral traditions cited by Muhammad Jamilu Abba link Gaya’s foundation to migrants from Jibede in the Dutse Gadawur territory.[6] Either way, traditions associating with Rumfa with Gaya may have influenced el-Arabi’s belief in Hauwa’s Gaya origin. An alliance sealed through marriage with Gaya’s chiefs may have been essential in gaining access to the throne for Rumfa. After all, Gaya had already proven its power through its involvement in the deposition of Umaru (1410-1421).[7]

The other theory, of a Songhay origin, is highly unlikely. Proposed by Murray Last, the only source for this notion is Leo Africanus. Per Africanus, the Askia of Songhay (Askia Muhammad I) supposedly conquered Kano and other parts of Hausaland. After defeating Kano’s ruler, he then made the Kano king marry his daughter.[8] But there are many problems with this theory. First, if one accepts 1493 as the date of Askia Muhammad’s accession to the throne of Songhay and 1499 as the year of Rumfa’s death, it is hard to imagine Maidaki Hauwa and Rumfa would have had a son old enough to become king of Kano in 1499. There’s also the issue of the Kano and Songhay sources making no mention of this at all. The Tarikh al-Sudan does refer to Songhay invasions of Agadez, conflict with Kebbi, and a 1514 raid on Katsina. But these events took place long after the death of Muhammad Rumfa. Furthermore, when Songhay sources do allude to Kano, such as Ali Fulan’s flight there in 1529, there is no mention of Songhay conquest or forcing the payment of tribute.[9] Perhaps the flight of prominent individuals from Songhay to Kano is additional evidence of the lack of any subjugation of the latter by the former.

Moreover, the description of Kano by Leo Africanus is more consistent with the reign of Abdullahi, Rumfa’s son. Africanus accurately noted that Kano had achieved military success against Katsina and Zaria.[10] Thus, the usually accepted chronology as well as the written sources and relevant traditions from West Africa do not support this theory. Consequently, if Leo Africanus is reliable at all, the Askia would have forced Abdullahi to marry his daughter. The “obvious candidate” for the Askia’s daughter would then become Lamis, a remarkable woman who significantly shaped events in the reign of Muhammad Kisoki.

            In addition, some sources from Kano support a Hausa origin for Hauwa. Translated lists of kings from manuscripts even name her father. According to one, he may have been Babari.[11] These lists are hardly conclusive evidence, but they could be interpreted as additional evidence against the Songhay origins theory for Hauwa. Against this must be considered other manuscripts which name Abu Bakar’s mother as Kuyina or Ukin.[12] But the lists do not readily support a Songhay origin or any ties to Askia Muhammad. Even Lamis, whose name is rendered in one manuscript as Lamis Tamajikanna, is difficult to connect with the Songhay.

The queen’s ability to ensure her son succeeded and that her brother began to exert a strong influence on the royal court of her grandson, one which seems to overlap with Gaya and eastern Kano interests, lends some support to the theory of Gaya origins. A pattern in later Kano-Borno relations can be detected across the centuries in the Kano Chronicle. One notes a tendency of Gaya’s ruling family trying to dominate Birnin Kano’s court and the development of policies which favor Gaya or suggest anti-Borno stances. To the extent that one accepts Barkindo’s theory of Rumfa’s caliphal ambitions as a challenge to the primacy of Borno and Songhay, this could have facilitated an alliance between anti-Borno Gaya and Rumfa. Indeed, a later era of Gaya influence in Kano’s court apparently led to the creation of new towns with additional walls, prompting a Borno campaign in the 1730s.[13] This is quite similar, apparently, to what transpired in Muhammad Kisoki’s reign, according to glimpses from Ahmad b. Furtu’s chronicle and the Kano Chronicle.

Perhaps the Gaya origin theory of Hauwa is still missing crucial support in the sources, but it does have a logical basis. Furthermore, it elucidates, or proposes a theory, for why she may have become the first Mai Daki or Babar Daki, with great powers and her own retainers. Her high status in Rumfa’s reign, or at least those of their son and grandson, could have begun through a close alliance with Gaya. Alternatively, she could have come from Dutsi or another powerful chiefly lineage in Kano or another part of Hausaland. But the Gaya theory “fits” best with what historians have been able to reconstruct of the Kano state in this period. The Songhay princess theory has little to no support in the sources or in the usually accepted chronologies.

---

[1] Bawuro M. Barkindo, “Kano Relations with Borno: Early Times to c. 1800,” in Bawuro M. Barkindo (ed.), Kano and Some of Her Neighbours,156.

[2] Dokaji Alhaji Abubakar, Kano ta Dabo cigari, 29.

[3] M.G. Smith, Government in Kano, 1350-1950, 104.

[4] H.R. Palmer, “The Kano Chronicle,” 76.

[5] See C.J. Lethem, “Bornu Province Bornu emirate Marchena District Assessment report by C.J.Lethem” for many details on Machena and the genealogy of its kings.

[6] Muhammad Jamilu Abba, “The Role of the Sarauta institution in Shaping the Spatial Growth and Community Integration in Kano City,” in Abdalla Uba Adamu (ed), Kano in the Second Millennium, 122.

[7] M.G. Smith, Government in Kano, 1350-1950, 104.

[8] Murray Last, “From Sultanate to Caliphate: Kano, 1450-1800,” in Bawuro M. Barkindo (ed.), Studies in the History of Kano, 69. 

[9] John Hunwick, Timbuktu and the Songhay Empire: Al-Saʻdi's Taʼrīkh Al-Sūdān Down to 1613, and Other Contemporary Documents, 113-114, 349.

[10] Ibid., 287.

[11] See Paul E. Lovejoy and John Hunwick, “Not Yet the Kano Chronicle,” Sudanic Africa 4 (1993), 121. In one list, the mother of Abu Bakar Akkadu is named Awwa ta Babari. According to the Kano Chronicle, this sarki was a full brother of Abdullahi. Thus, Hauwa’s father may have been named Babari.

[12] Ibid., 106, 111.

[13] See Behique Dunama, “A Tentative Study of the Reign of Muhammad b. al-Hajj Hamdun (1729-1744),” https://thedreamvariation.blogspot.com/2026/02/a-tentative-study-of-reign-of-muhammad.html.

The Biu Plateau, Borno and Kwararafa

Although we still have not located a copy of an important study of Kwararafa by Webster, reading a thesis by a student of his, John E. Miller, has been informative. Miller's thesis, The Biu Plateau: Establishing a Chronology and the Linkages Between Bura-Babur and Kwararafa, attempts to interpret oral traditions and the few written sources available to contextualize Biu in the larger context of Kwararafa and Bornoan history. In so doing, the author draws from colonial-era reports and collections of traditions by authors like Meek as well as written sources included in works like Palmer's Bornu Sahara and Sudan. Pushing back against attempts to read the earlier phases of Kwararafa as a heavily Jukun-influenced entity, Miller follows Webster in situating Kwararafa's second phase capital at Tagara (after being driven out of Santolo). It is this earlier context which elucidate things like the royal crocodile totem observed by many groups in the Biu region and along the Gongola, not the supposed Jukun influence reaching this area earlier. 

While pushing back against the Jukun readings of Kwararafa, Miller also tries to tentatively date the arrival of Yamta in Biu. Drawing on somewhat contradictory traditions, which also make Yamta a Bornoan prince from Gazargamo who left after some sort of succession dispute, Miller suggets a date of c. 1519-1546 for reign of Yamta in Biu. Citing Palmer, who reported traditions of Ali b. Dunama defeating Kwararafa, Miller argues that Yamta arrived in the region after Kwararafa abandoned the capital at Tagara to move south to cross the Benue. This meant the region was possibly politically divided or in a state of transition, facilitating the establishment of new chiefdoms in the area. But, critically, the previous ruling lineages who were influenced by or part of Kwararafa may have retained some influence as priestly clans or lineages. The evidence for this is still fragmentary, but observing totems, clan and lineage moieties, as well as commonalities between cultures associated with the later Kwararafa phases and those in regions like Biu, Miller thinks his model is plausible. 

Naturally, Miller's chronology and model here relies heavily upon Webster, whose notion of different phases of Kwararafa we have yet to examine. Miller is also assuming that the Sayfawa mai named in the traditions about Yamta, Idris, is Ali b. Dunama's son, who reigned (in Lange's chronology, 1497-1519). A firmer date is provided by Ahmad b. Furtu, whose account of Idris Alooma's wars refers to Yamta's chiefdom aiding in the attack on Amsaka. Using average regnal lengths and the date of Idris b. Ali, Miller has one of the few confident dates in his chronology. He's also assuming that Kwararafa's later capital at Biepi only began after c. 1485 (and with a Kanuri or more likely, Babur, dynasty by the 1520s) and only after the mid-1700s did the Jukun come to dominate Kwararafa. All of this could be plausible, but we need additional data on the Bura, Kilba, Marghi, Chibbuk, and other peoples to adequate test the proposed chronology of Miller. Hopefully future scholars will consult the more recently published studies on this region and try to incorporate more of the written sources from Vatican archives or European reports of the 1600s and 1700s. These could aid in proving or weakening the chronology adopted here...

Marie Pierre Haoussa and Louis Baronnet fils (1792)

 

IC=inconnu

One document we have been thinking about the last few days is a notarized contract from 1792. Establishing a société d'habitation de Marie Pierre Haoussa avec Louis Baronnet fils, the document is interesting for the surname of Marie Pierre: Haoussa. Although most documents in colonial Haiti spell "Hausa" as Aoussa, not Haoussa, we were nonetheless curious about Marie Pierre as a person of possible Hausa extraction. After all, colonial legislation did attempt to push free people to bear African names. Furthermore, people of African origin were sometimes known by a first name and their alleged "nation," too. 

In the case of Marie Pierre Haoussa, however, we could not trace her exact origins. It would appear that she was a free black woman owning land in Aquin, presumably i an area that may be today's la Colline à Mongons. When checking the parish registry, we did come across a Marie Pierre, black Creole, who married her "mulatto" master in 1781. But there is no indication of Marie Pierre's parents' origins in the parish books for Aquin. We were also wondering why she did not use her husband's surname, but he may not have been of legitimate birth either. Either way, Gabriel and this Marie Pierre had a number of children, he married her, and, from what we could gather, the Marie Pierre Haoussa named here could be the same woman.

In terms of her 1792 partnership with a man from Bainet, we were struck by the huge diversity in slaves both brought into their planned coffee farm. Marie Pierre was responsible for bringing 6 slaves, most apparently female. They consist of a mix of Arada, Mandingue, Thiamba, Ibo, Canga and one "nation" we could not decipher in the notary's handwriting (perhaps Aguiam?). Baronnet fils, on the other hand, was responsible for bringing in more slaves who were mostly male. Since the land was apparently held by Marie Pierre Haoussa, he may have been required to supply more of the forced labor. Either way, his enslaved workers were also very diverse in origins. One, whose "nation" looks like Guialuuka, is from a background we could not figure out. But others included Thiamba, Bibi (Ibibio), Biny (possibly Edo, for people from the kingdom of Benin), Congo, Creoles, Ibos, and a Mine. 

Naturally, we will have to conduct further searches in the notarized documents and parish registry to see if we can locate more records of Marie Pierre. But, the fact that she owned land and slaves is consistent with someone who was married to a free "mulatto" landowner for some time in the region. We suspect the "Haoussa" part of her name comes from an African-born father but have to dig deeper into the archives to prove it.