Les coutumes familiales au Kanem

Alifa Zezerti

Les coutumes familiales au Kanem by Robert Bouillé is a dated colonial-era study of kinship and social organization in Kanem. Sometimes repetitive, the author focuses on the Kanembu, Buduma,  Fulani, Arab, and Tubu groups in Kanem. Each are distinct but similar, especially in terms of a patriarchal family structure in which wives and daughters were treated unequally. Nonetheless, the author believed that the ethnic diversity in Kanem and inter-ethnic antagonisms made French colonial rule more stable. However, as a strong proponent of rational and stable colonial administration, customary law and practices among Kanem's population required a gradual approach for reforming its population. This meant that slavery, or descendants of slaves, were still very much a part of communities while the Haddad remained an outsider group. Sometimes blood vengeance was still carried out by Tubu or Arab populations. However, with the changes introduced by colonial rule, youths were beginning to show more independence from patriarchal authority while some married women became somewhat more autonomous. Nonetheless, the portrait of the various peoples of Kanem is probably at least partially accurate for how the peoples of the region organized their communities in the 1800s and even earlier, in some instances.

In terms of the alifa based on Mao, Les coutumes familiales au Kanem is not the most detailed. Besides recounting how the French first signed a treaty with the alifa and the pacification of the province, hints of its political and economic structure are largely subdued. The current leader at Mao, Zezerti, was said to be from the Zegbada family. They were supposedly part of the Samarous tribe of its founder's name. His family group was closely aligned with the Mustafa family of Zegbadas who had apparently intermarried with them for around 2 centuries. Zezerti's mother was supposedly from this Mustafa family. Nonetheless, when comparing the genealogical information of the alifas from Landeroin's time to Bouillé, the former listed a "jagata Moustapha" who was the father of an alifa who must have resigned in the early 1800s, Ahmadou Kalli. However, there was an earlier alifa, Moutta Kinguimi, whose "proper" name may have been Moustapha. Is it possible that Zezerti and the Mustapha family represented one lineage group which only effectively occupied the throne in the 19th century, when conflicts between Waday and Borno over control of Kanem (and the Alwad Sulayman) rapidly transformed the political landscape of Kanem? Sadly, Landeroin's Notice historique has little to say about the alifas who reigned before the 19th century. A similar question might be raised about the possible religious status and authority of the alifas before the 20th century. Since Zezerti's grandfather had performed the pilgrimage to Mecca and was renowned for his baraka, Bouillé may have retroactively sought to elucidate this alleged religious/spiritual authority of the dynasty before Zezerti's grandfather in its origin. Intriguinly, Landeroin recorded that the father of Dala Afouno, the first alifa of Kanem, was a Mallam of Magoumi descent. Perhaps descent from an illustrious Islamic scholar or religious leader was part of the dynasty's legitimacy since its inception. 

In terms of Kanem before the fall of the Sayfawa, there are a number of possible hints to the influence of Kanuri groups who came to Kanem after the fall of the Bulala. For instance, the alifas appear to have set up a court with officials often using titles of Borno origin (some undoubtedly began when the Sayfawa ruled in Kanem). Their court also used a system of "fiefs" for some dignitaries and officials and relied on tribute of various types. During the period of Bornoan suzerainty, Kanem also had an institution called the Bit el mal, a sort of public fund that produced food for the poor, gifts to mallams, aided foreigners, and paid masons for building or maintaining mosques. Furthermore, a type of mutual aid practiced by farmers in Kanem, the debdou custom, allowed for Kanembus experiencing misfortune to receive presents of animals, clothes, grain, or money to help. The custom also featured dancing and drums. Whether or not this practice of mutual aid predated the period of the alifas in Mao is unclear, but Bouillé emphasized a Borno origin. 

It would be worthwhile to compare the description of Kanembu social and kinship patterns with those of Borno during the same time (or earlier). It may help establish certain patterns or trends which could have begun in Kanem during the medieval period and were maintained by the Kanuri in Borno. Similarly, it may help elucidate patterns of social change in Kanem under the Bulala and alifa rulers. Naturally, Kanem's landscape differed quite significantly from that of Borno and the region's growing aridity led to some parts being occupied mostly by nomadic groups. Nonetheless, a close examination of family structure, marital patterns, customary law, and land tenure systems could provide possible clues for earlier centuries in the annals of Kanem and Borno. For similar reasons, determining the origin of the Haddad and the interactions between Kanembu and Buduma populations may also shed light on how some aspects of the history of both regions diverged. 

The Kanuri of Bornu

Cohen's ethnographic study of the Kanuri people was based on research from the 1950s and 1960s in a village called Magumeri. Focusing on the household unit as the basic building block of Kanuri society, the basis for economic, familial, political, and productive activity, Cohen's The Kanuri of Bornu suggests a certain degree of continuity in Kanuri social structure that may stretch backwards in time for several centuries. Certainly back to the time of the Sefuwa dynasty's relocation to Borno from their Kanem, some of the features of 20th century Kanuri society may have already been in place. Of course, one must be careful using the ethnographic present to inform our understanding of precolonial eras. But, the period of British colonial rule seems to have continued many aspects of local government already in place by the Shehus, who in turn retained multiple aspects of Borno's political administration already established by the Sefuwa mais. Thus, one can reasonably assert that the household with its patriarchal, virilocal structure and emphasis on discipline-respect (for relationships between superiors and subordinates/clients) has probably been a dominant trend in Kanuri culture for at least a few centuries. 

Of course, the long process in which the ancestors of the Kanuri migrated to Borno from Kanem, interacting and intermarrying with other populations and becoming more influenced by Islam since the Islamization of the Sefuwas and their Magumi clan in the late 11th century, makes it difficult to know with certainty how many of the foundational elements of Kanuri society were present in the early days of the Kanem kingdom. Perhaps the early ancestors of the Kanuri during their days in Kanem were more nomadic or semi-nomadic, with less focus on agriculture and probably, as Cohen asserts, very decentralized politically. Nonetheless, the description of the household as observed by Cohen, with its focus on "discipline-respect" and the attraction of clients to wealthy men (or wealth in dependents and redistribution) probably go back several centuries. The organization of craft production on a guild model likely also exceeds far back in time, as does the widespread cottage industry level of production during dry seasons. Perhaps even under the reign of the mais peasants were able to assert some degree of agency through migration and complaints to officials, the representatives of the fief-holders who stayed in the capital of Gazargamu.

Thus, for those curious about how Kanem-Borno may have functioned in pre-19th century eras, Cohen's study offers some fascinating theories and details. Much of how trade operated in the distant past or perhaps the so-called feudal aspects of land tenure and administration in rural areas was likely different. Yet Cohen's ethnography suggests a great degree of continuity still present in the 1960s, albeit penetrated by "modernization" at varying levels. One also gets a glimpse of how the peasantry and artisans may have interacted with the upper classes through social relations filtered through the lens of the household. One weakness of Cohen's study, however, is the omission of urbanization as a historical factor in Kanem-Borno's long history. How did urban centers operate in the precolonial era? To what extent was or is there continuity? What about pre-moden wage laborers and the importance of slavery and the slave trade? Or Borno's complex history of empire and relations with neighbors? What we need next is a detailed history of Borno that integrates anthropological research with what the historical sources tell us...