We have finally read Augustin Holl's important study of the Diwan of Kanem-Borno. Based on the French translation by Lange, Holl offers a very different type of analysis of the document. Instead of interpreting the Diwan as an abbreviated chronicle constituting a political archive that one can gleam for historical data and a clear chronology, Holl prefers to view it as an oral epic of sorts. As a work originally in Arabic but probably based on Kanuri oral literature, values, and performance, it should probably be read in light of other kingslists and oral traditions. Moreover, we here at this blog can agree wholeheartedly with Holl when he points out the the often specious reasoning or problematic assumptions made by several scholars of Kanem-Borno. Their mistakes and misinterpretations have spawned a discourse which further obscures the history of a fascinating African civilization. As Holl writes, "The Diwan deserves better than this selective use, geared to support what each scholar thinks to be the genuine pathway to statehood."
Beginning with an English translation of Lange's French rendering of the Diwan, one supposes the major value of Holl's book can be found in this initial section. For those unable to read French or the original Arabic texts, The Diwan Revisited is indispensable. The rest of the text explores the Diwan from the perspective of oral epic. Thus, Holl breaks down the analysis into rhythm, repetition, sequences and patterns of patronyms, toponyms, kinship or affinity, sense of time, and performance. Later chapters endeavor to use insights from paleoclimatology, symbolism of numbers, external Arabic sources from the medieval era, anthropology, linguistics, and archaeology to make sense of the Diwan. There are definite traces of oral history in the Diwan, even assuming it was initially written or commenced at the end of the 16th century. Moreover, as a work of oral literature or borrowing heavily from it, Holl is probably correct to see the text as work reorganized and updated according to social, ideological, and political circumstances. Indeed, the very circumstances in which Heinrich Barth was provided with two copies of it, and the violent end to the man who had the two copies produced, suggest how important kingslists and genealogies were for political legitimacy. Other kingslists, including a lost one Heinrich Barth recorded a few names from, illustrates how genealogies and Kanuri oral epics were diverse and could differ in significant ways when it came to the history of Kanem-Borno.
One can also appreciate the detailed sequential chronology of the Sayfawa dynasty in Holl's analysis. A Golden Age, Classic Period, First Intermediate Period, and New Kingdom Era actually makes some sense in terms of how the Diwan depicts the history of the Sayfawa. Other scholars have also suggested the Sayfawa state in Borno was more centralized than what had been the arrangement in Kanem, so Holl's analysis is closely following some of the previous narratives. While we are not entirely convinced of 9 descent groups (Banu Duku, Banu Hummay, Banu Salmama, Banu Kaday, Banu Idris, Banu Dawud, and sub-groups of Idrisawa, Umarawa, and Dunamawa), there clearly were cases of rival lineages in the ruling dynasty which led to competing factions and civil wars that nearly destroyed the kingdom with the eventual rise of the Bulala. Perhaps it would be simple-minded to think a single family really could have ruled in Kanem-Borno for around 1000 years, but the ancient roots of the Sayfawa seem to be clear, as indicated by Lange's analysis. Further, other lines of evidence not considered in Holl do suggest some deeper antiquity of the Sayfawa dynasty in pre-Islamic Kanem, which we explored in our post on Lange.
Unfortunately, The Diwan Revisited suffers from excessive typos and spelling errors that occasionally obfuscate sentences or passages. The study doesn't engage with all the external medieval Arabic sources or some of the other kingslists and chronicles from the Central Sudan region. For instance, what insights might Hausa and Tuareg traditions, genealogies, and chronicles have revealed for Kanem-Borno? Recent scholarship on the Agadez Chronicles and other traditions might have strengthened Holl's theory of the Diwan as fundamentally an oral epic, or at least one heavily modified before shown to Barth. Of course, the existence of at least two works attributed to Muhammad Yanbu in the Late Sayfawa Period suggest that local scholars were writing down historical works. Perhaps Shitima Makaremma was not lying to Heinrich Barth at all, and there is good reason to view the Diwan as the primary chronicle or kingslist associated with the Sayfawa themselves?