Kano documentary

(50)
some of the principal interests that created and shaped the Chronicle. It
assigns such offices as Galadima, Barwa, Madawaki, Magayaki, Makama,
Barde, Jarumai and Dawaki to the very earliest reigns, when clearly those
offices clid not then exist. loo Of Gijimasu (1095-1134) we are told that
"He ruled all the country as far as the lands of Sarkin Gano, Sarkin Dab,
Sarkin Debbi, Sarkin Ringim, Dan Bakonyaki.. Santolo alone stood out
against him, for his peop-le were many and pagans. No one was able to rule
over them. The Sarkis (chiefs) of Gano, Dab and Debbi came to Hausaland
(sic) nine years before Bagauda. But Buram, Isa, Baba, Kududufi, pJhassan
and others of the Kano chiefs, men of the princely clan came with Bagauda."
The footnote reads, "For this reason all their descendants were called after
these, their forefathers, and the names have remained as titles of princes
to this day. Such titles as Dan Buram, Dan Isa or Dan Baba, Dan Akasan,
Dan Kududufi and others like Dan Dermai and Dan Goriba."l 0 I
Detailed comparison of the information on Rausa Kano in the Chronicle
with the- fullest reconstruction I was able to achieve on the basis of t.~e
available oral and written information for Kano in Alwali's dayshowed first
that the Chronicle contains within it more information essential for the
accurate reconstruction and valid understanding of the Hausa chiefdom in its
final phases than we can expect to find elsewhere; and secondly, that it
neatly and convincingly relates the processes through which the Hausa state
and government emerged and developed, territorially and structurally.
Though the Chro1}:£cle is incomplete and erratic in its coverage, it seems less
so than alternative sources for that period. Anachronisms such as those
noted above are rather innocent and easy to identify and correct. What is
really irreplaceable if lost or abandoned is the Chronicle's oblique but
sustained account of the evolution of the political structure of Kano from
its earliest beginnings in the conflict between the immigrants under Bagauda
and the autochthonous people who rejected them as ritual or social equals,
thereby defining the terms and outcomes of this basically ethnic conflict, to
the centuries that followed the arrival of Islam and Kana's successive sub-
jugations to Borno, Songhai and Kebbi, with their curious, unacknowledged
consequences for the throne, illustrated perhaps by the brief anomalous
reigns of Dakauta (1 day) andAtuma his son (7 days) in 1452 A.D., imme-
diately after Kana accepted Barno's suzerainty under Abdullahi Burja (1438-
1452), eleven years before the accession of Muhammad Rumfa.
The Chronicle also shows how the Rausa chiefdom survived two civil wars
over the succession in 1565 and 1652, both fortunately brief and restricted
in scale, together with a number of revolts, beginning with the Sarkin Gaya
Farin Dutse in the reign of Muhammadu Dadi (1670-1703) and continuing
thereafter with revolts at Kim, Dutse and elsewhere,l 02 some of which, such
as the revolt of Ada Gwauro, the Fulani Sarkin Ringim during the reign of
Muhamman Kumbari/ 03 are omitted from the record, much as later

(44)
for Alwali II. Such data do not illustrate the "near-total consistency in rulers
and! eign lengths" of these various king lists which Last leads us to expect
after .' 652, and on which most of his critical comments on the Chronicle
depend. Moreover it is clear from the details of these last 11 Hausa reigns
that riv\~ king lists consulted by Mallam Adamu did not include either the
Kano Chronicle, Baikie's king list or the Song of Bagauda. In effect the diver-
sity of opinion about the lengths of the various reigns" from Soyaki to Mu-hammadu Alwali II is even greater than we would suspect, had we restricted
our attention to Baikie's list, the Kana Chronicle and the Song of Bagauda.
Detailed comparison of the rulers listed, the order in which they are listed,
and the lengths of their .respective reigns as given in the Chronicle, in Baike's
list in the Song of Bagauda and in Mallam Adamu's unpublished collation for
the first 15 reigns from Bagauda to and including Dauda (1421-1437) yields
an equivalent level of disagreement as to the reign lengths, compounded by
certain differences in the names and order of the chiefs listed in the various
texts. E\"idently there are at least t\','o distinct traditions and lists of Kano
chiefs before the reign of Yaji(1349-1338"5 A.D.).
In Mallam Adamu's history of Yaji's precessor Zamnagawa (1343-1349
A.D.) is said to be the son of Randamasu (Tsamiya) and Kumaimaya. His
nickname was 'Gafe-Gakuma', who is listed in the Song of Bagauda as the
19th chief who reigned for 60 years. 76 According to Mallam Adamu, Zamn-
agawa as chid killed many men; presumably this, rather than the story relat-
ed in the Chronicle, led to his nickname. Between Yaji who followed Zamna-
gawa and Soyaki, i.e. from c.1349 A.D. to 1652, the Chronicle lists 22
reigns of Dakauta and Atuma in 1452 A.D. and conflates the two reigns of
~hllam Kukuna which the Chronicle correctly separates, as Soyaki ruled for
three months between them. According to the Chronicle the interval be-
tween Yaj i's ac~essi;~ and Soyaki's is 303 Muslim years. On Mallam
Adamu '5" reckoning it is either 316 or 326, since his sourc~s credit Kut~mbi's
son Alhaji with either 10 or 20 years on the throne, presumably due to an
error in copying; or it might be 356 or 366, if Da'ud, listed in some texts as
reigning 40 years, is included, despite Mallam Adamu's decision not to do so.
Notably Mallam Adamu's" account indicates no disagreements between the:
five king lists he consulted for any reigns between Zamnagawa and Sheshere.
Different estimates of reign length are first reported for Muhamman Zaki
and then for Alhaji, the son of Kutumbi. Beyond Soyaki's reign the
incidence of such disagreements increases sharply, as noted above. In other
words, Mallam Adamu's collation supports the view that from Yaji to
Abubakar Kado (1565-1572 A.D.) there is fq.f greater agreement on the
sequence and reign lengths of Hausa chiefs of Kano than before or after,
until 1807. Despite its omission of Dakauta and Atuma, and its displace-
ment of Yakubu and Dauda Abasama, Mallam Adamu's account agrees with
the Chronicle that the reigns from Yaji to Abubakar Kao total 228 Muslim

(42)
Finding a "near-total consistency in rulers and reign lengths after
1652" between these three sources, Last regards this as strong evidence
in support of his principal thesis;' i and interprets the remark that Alhaji
the son of Kutumbi was removed '''for a reason I forget' as internal evidence.. which can surely only imply the author was ""Titing some I 0 to 20 years
later.';69
These arguments are hardly persuasive; for first, if the chronicler had
really forgotten why or how Alhaji lost the throne ten to twen ty years
'earlier, he could surely have found that out by asking surviving officials who
either took part in the event or had some direct knowledge of it. It would be
curious for such a diligent researcher as the chronicler appears to have been
to have failed to follow this up. It is in truth far more likely that the writer
did not know how or why Alhaji lost the throne in the first place, and could
not find out; for since Alhaji's capture by the Katsina army70 was un-
precedented in Kano history and transparently implied the treachery of his
senior officials, free and slave, the state councillors, instead of announcing
his capture and thus compromising them:selves, simply declared that he had
been deposed and sent to live away from Kano, but gave no reason for his
deposition, as they dared not reaveal the truth. Moreover, by thus 'deposing'
Alhaji and appointing Shekarau, the state councillors simultaneously pre-
cluded Alhaji's return to the chiefship, and put themselves in a position to
make a peace with Katsina, while appearing to disassociate themselves from
warmaking policies of Kumbari and Alhaji.
As regards Murray Last's claim to find a 'near-total consistency of rulers
and reign lengths . after 1652" 1 between the Kana Chronicle, Baikie's king
list and the Song of Bagauada, my study of these three lists yields different
conclusions. For example, for the period stretching from Soyaki (1062
A.H.; 1652 A.D.) to Alwali's death in 1222 A.H.; 1807 A.D., the Chronicle
list 11 rulers inclusive, whose reigns together total 160 Moslem years or 157
Christians ones. As printed, Dr. Baikie lists .10 rulers between Soyaki and
Alwali but places Kukuna (Kakana) ahead of Soyaki, omits Dauda Abasama
(1776-1781), Alwali's predecessor, credits Baba Zaki with 78 years on the
throne instead of 8 as given in the Chronicle, and names Taukari instead
of Alhaji Kaboe (1743-1753 A.D.) as Kumbari!s immediate successor.72
Altogether Baikie's list for this period, including the reigns of Kukuna and
Alwali, gives a total of 203 Moslem years and 10 months as against the
Chronicle's 160. The Song of Bagauda differs even more widely from the
Chronicle for this period. Though agreeing fully with the Chronicle's list
of rulers, the Song credits them with a total of 313 Moslem years as against
the Chronicle's 160. Evidently, whether sung or unsung, local king lists may
differ as widely in deail after 1652 as before.
We are particularly fortunate in being able to check these conflicting
interpretations of reign lengths in the Chronicle, the Song and Baikie's list

(41)
In a blilliant recent discussion of the Chronicle, ~l'1urray Last obliquely
suggests that it is best regarded as a rather free compilation of local legends
and traditions drafted in the miJ-scventeenth century by a humorous
Muslim rationalist who almost seems to have studied under Levi-Strauss. 6 6
There arc a number of cross-cutting binary sets in the "analogical geo-
graphies" the Chronicle apparently reveals, but more triangles with opposi-
tions and mediators a la Levi-Strauss. Yet surely even if structuralism des-
cribes the universally valid pattern of human thought, this would not
dispense ,'\lith the ordinary Cliteria and aims of historicity. Though Last
does not conclude that the Chronicle is poor history, many might readily
assume that this is implied, from the style and organization of his discourse.
His paper itself does not support such a view, however, despite its analysis
of the differing traditions recorded in the first ten reigns of the Chronicle,
during which the immigrants led by Bagauda struggled to dominate and
destroy the native community of Kano. All this is of the greatest value.
Together those reigns cover the period from 389 A.H. or 999 A.D. to 743
A.H. and] 343 A.D. - that is, the legendary first three and a half centuries
of Kano's history, following the arrival of Bagauda and his 'host'. While the
events and symbols recorded in the Chronicle to express the opposition of
immigrants and natives are· all probably in some sense 'untrue', the nature·
and intensity of that opposition cannot be gainsaid a priori or on available
records. The immigrants were determined to conquer and rule the ace-
phalous peoples of Kana, just as the latter, called Abagiyawa, were deter-
mined to resist as best they could. It might of course be argued that there
was no such invasion of Kano by 'Bagauda' or others at this period; but there,
is sufficient evidence of cum~lative population movements within and
around this region between the 7th and 11th centuries A.D. to suggest that
such a flat, fertile and attractive country as Kana would be very likely to
receive sub~tantial immigration from the north and east.
Concluding that the original draft of the Chronicle was made not long
after 1650 A.D., Murray Last distinguishes three preceding periods in its
account of Kano history that differ significantly in the sources, status and
reliability or the data on which they are based. For the period before 1450
A.D. he has little confidence in the Chroniclc's historicity; and he questions
its accuracy for the following century, 1450-1550 A.D. From 1550 onwards,
despite reservations, he has increasing confidence in the document's validity;
and from 1650 A.D. he is satisfied. 6 7
Last supports this evaluation of the Chronicle by comparing the numbers
of rulers and lengths of reigns it records 'with similar data from the Song
of Bagauda and Dr. Baikje's king list for the periods before 1430 (i.e. before
Dawuda), between 1430 and Soyaki's accession in 1652, and since then.