AUTHENTICITY AND GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE HISTORY OF BÓRNU.
The documents upon which the history of Bórnu is based, besides the
scanty information contained in the narratives of recent explorers, are—
1. A chronicle (“diván”), or rather the dry and sterile abridgment of a
chronicle, comprising the whole history of Bórnu, from the earliest time
down to Ibrahím, the last unfortunate offspring of the royal family, who
had just ascended the crumbling throne of the Bórnu empire when the last
English expedition arrived in that country. 6 pp. 4to.[41]
2. Two other still shorter lists of the Bórnu kings.
3. A detailed history of the first twelve years of the reign of the king
Edrís Alawóma, consisting of two parts, in my copy one of 77 and the
other of 145 pages, and written by a contemporary of the above-mentioned
king, the Imám Ahmed, son of Sofíya. Of this very interesting and
important history a copy was forwarded by the late vizier of Bórnu, Háj
Beshír ben Tiráb, at my urgent request,[42] to Her Britannic Majesty’s
Government, and is now in the Foreign Office; another copy I myself have
brought back.
4. A few facts regarding the history of this country, mentioned by Arabic
writers, such as Ebn Sáid (A.D. 1282), Ebn Batúta (A.D. 1353), Ebn
Khaldún (A.D. 1381-2), Makrízí (about A.D. 1400), and Leo Africanus (A.D.
1528).
5. A short document containing information about embassies sent to
Tripoli by some Bórnu kings, and published in the “Bulletin de la Société
Géographique de Paris,” 1849, 252 ff.
I now proceed to inquire into the character of the first of these
documents, which is the only one among them comprising the whole history
of Bórnu, and which therefore forms the basis of our tables. The most
momentous question is,—upon what authority this document rests, and
when it was compiled. As for the first point, I have been assured by
Shitíma Makarémma (a man intimately connected with the old dynasty, who
made the two copies for me, and of whom some notice will be found in my
journal) that it is a mere extract from a more voluminous work, which
he represented as still existing, but which I was unable to procure, as
it is carefully concealed. The whole business of collecting documents
and information relative to the history of the old dynasty was most
difficult, and demanded much discretion, as the new dynasty of the
Kánemíyín endeavours to obliterate as much as possible the memory of
the old Kanúri dynasty, and has assiduously destroyed all its records
wherever they could be laid hold of.
As regards the time when the chronicle, of which the manuscript in
question is a very meagre and incorrect abridgment, was written, it is
stated that the various parts of it were composed at different times,
at the beginning of every new reign; and the question is, when the
Kanúri people, or rather their ʿulama, began to commit to writing the
most important facts of their history. This question we are fortunately
enabled, from Imám Ahmed’s work, to answer satisfactorily; namely, that
there existed no written record whatever of the history of his country
previous to the king Edrís Katakarmábi, whose reign falls in the first
half of the sixteenth century of our era. For when that writer refers to
facts of the older history, he is only able to recite as his authority
oral information received from old men versed in historical tradition;
and he evidently mentions as the oldest author of a written history, the
fákih Masfárma ʿOmár ben ʿOthmán, who wrote the history of the king in
question.
The annals, therefore, of the time preceding the period of this king and
of his predecessor ʿAli Gajidéni, appear to be based entirely upon oral
information, and cannot but be liable to a certain degree of inaccuracy
as to the actions attributed to each king, the length of their respective
reigns, and even the order of succession where it was not dependent on
genealogy or descent. For it would be the extreme of hypercriticism to
deny that the royal family of Bórnu, in the middle of the sixteenth
century, could not or may not justly be supposed to have preserved with
great precision their line of descent for fifteen or twenty generations;
and in this respect the chronicle No. 1 is entirely confirmed and borne
out by Imám Ahmed, who, in the introduction to his History, gives the
pedigree of his master Edrís Alawóma up to his first royal ancestor,
while the difference in the form of the names, and one slight variance
in the order of succession, as given by these two documents, is a plain
proof that they have not been borrowed from each other, but have been
based on independent authorities.
The disagreement in question is certainly a remarkable one; but it is
easily explained. For Makrízí, in harmony with the extract from the
chronicle, names the father of the kings Edrís and Dáúd (whose reign he
places about the year 700 of the Hejra), Ibrahím, while Imám Ahmed calls
them sons of Nikále son of Ibrahím; and this is the general statement
of the natives of the country even at the present time, every educated
man knowing “Dáúd tata Nikálebe,” or Dáúd Nikálemi. The fact is, that
the name Bíri, which the chronicle attributes to the father of Ibrahím
the grandfather of Edrís and Dáúd, being a variation of the form Bíram,
is identical with Ibrahím; whence it appears that Nikále was another
name of Ibrahím the son of Bíri. The same is the case with regard to the
names Ahmed and Dúnama, which are identical, if not with regard to their
meanings, at least with regard to their applications, as well as the
names Sélma or Sélmama and ʿAbd el Jelíl.
This general harmony between the pedigree of the Bórnu kings as given by
the chronicle No. 1 and the Imám Ahmed, a learned and clever man in a
high position, and in constant connection with the court, is, I think,
very satisfactory, and the more so if we take into consideration that,
from a reason which I shall soon mention, and which at the same time is
a strong argument in favour of the authenticity of these two documents,
the pedigree as given by them is not the only one current in Bórnu, but
the line of descent and succession varies greatly in one of the two other
short chronicles which are mentioned in No. 2, while the third one,
which does not appear to make any pretensions to completeness, cannot be
taken into account here. Hence, as far as regards the line of descent
or succession, I have not thought these two lists worthy of attention,
except only with regard to the reign following that of the fifty-eighth
king, if we count the reign of the usurper Sʿaíd ʿAlí, the son of
Háj ʿOmár. For here the chronicle No. 1 has omitted, by mistake or
negligence, the well-established reign of Edrís ben ʿAli, who succeeding
to his father ʿAlí, preceded his younger brother Dúnama ben ʿAlí, and
reigned twenty years.[43]
What I have here said with regard to the authenticity of the chronicle
refers only to the line of descent and succession of the kings mentioned;
but, of course, it is quite another question, if we take into view the
length of time attributed to the reign of each succeeding king. But even
here the dates of the chronicle are confirmed in a most surprising and
satisfactory manner by the history of Imám Ahmed, who, in relating the
successful expedition of Edrís Aʿaishámi to Kánem, states that from the
time when Dáúd Nikálemi was obliged to leave his capital Njímiye, down to
the period when Edrís made his entrance into it, 122 years had elapsed.
Now, according to the dates of the chronicle, between the end of the
reign of Dáúd and the beginning of the reign of Edrís, who is expressly
stated by the historian to have undertaken that expedition in the first
year of his reign, there intervened exactly 121 years. And indeed we
see from the Imám’s account, that most people thought this was the real
length of the period, and not 122 years; so well were the educated
inhabitants of Bórnu at that time acquainted with the history of their
country. Perhaps also Imám Ahmed wishes here to refute Masfárma, the
historian of Edrís Áʿaishámi, who adhered to the general opinion.
Unfortunately, the length of the several reigns is our only guide with
regard to the chronology of this history, as neither the chronicle nor
even Imám Ahmed specifies particular years with reference to any of the
events which they mention. This is indeed a very great defect, not so
apparent in the dry chronicle as in the account of the learned priest;
and it seems almost inconceivable, as he is very particular, not only
with regard to seasons, but even to months and days, mentioning with
great exactness on what day of the month his master did so and so, and
even disputing, in this respect, slight variations of opinion. If he had
only given us the date of a single year, we should be much better off as
to the chronology of the history of Bórnu. As it is, if we put out of
account other chronological data which we are fortunately in possession
of, in order to reduce to chronology the events mentioned by the
chronicle, we can only reckon backwards the number of years attributed
by it to the reign of each successive king, commencing from the death
of Sultan Dúnama, who in the year A.H. 1233 was killed in the battle at
Ngála (written “Ghála” in Arabic, but called “Angala” by the members of
the former expedition).
If we now count together the years attributed to each reign, proceeding
in a backward order, and beginning with the end of the year H. 1233, we
obtain, in an inverse order, the following chronological dates for the
more important periods of the history of Bórnu.
A.H. A.D.
Beginning of the reign of Ayúma 391 1000-1
Beginning of the reign of Humé, the first Moslim
king 479 1086
Reign of Dúnama Díbalámi, the warlike and daring
king who spoiled the talisman of Bórnu 618-658 1221-1259-60
Beginning of the reign of Ibrahím Nikálemi 707 1307
Beginning of the reign of Edrís ben Ibrahím 754 1353
End of the reign of Dáúd, who succumbed to the
Bulála 789 1387
End of the reign of ʿOthmán ben Edrís 795 1392-3
The reign of ʿOmʿar, who abandoned his residence
in Kánem altogether, ceding it to the Bulála 796-799 1393-1396
Beginning of the reign of ʿAlí Dúnamámi 877 1472
Beginning of the reign of Edrís Katarkamábi 911 1505
Beginning of the reign of Edrís Alawóma 980 1572
Beginning of the reign of Háj ʿOmár 1036 1626-7
Beginning of the reign of ʿAli ben Háj ʿOmár 1055 1645
Having obtained these dates, we have first to observe that to fill up
the period from Ayúma to Dhu Yazan, the presumed ancestor of the Séfuwa,
and even known as such to Abú ’l Fedá as well as to Makrízí, and whose
age (as being that of a man who predicted the coming of the prophet)
is fixed beyond all doubt, only six generations are left. This is the
circumstance which I mentioned above as speaking greatly in favour of
the authenticity of this chronicle and its genealogies, even with regard
to the more remote times. For if it had not been necessary to preserve
scrupulously a well-established line of succession, how easy it would
have been to introduce a few more individuals in order to fill up this
blank, as has been done in the other list (_b_), instead of admitting the
palpable nonsense of attributing to the two oldest kings a reign of from
two hundred and fifty to three hundred years. Even Séf and Ibrahím, the
first two princes of the line, are, I think, quite historical persons,
whose existence was so well established that a conscientious chronicler
could not change anything in the number of years attributed to the length
of their reigns.
Following, therefore, the hints given to us by the chronicle itself, we
fix the foundation of the dynasty of the Séfuwa in Kánem about the middle
of the third century after Mohammed, or a little before the year 900 of
our era. We shall afterwards return to this circumstance.
Now we shall first see how triumphantly the authenticity of the chronicle
is confirmed in every respect by the occasional remarks made by Makrízí
and Ebn Batúta with regard to the history of Bórnu.
Unfortunately, the oldest date which Makrízí (on the authority, as it
would seem, of Ebn Sʿaíd) mentioned with regard to Kánem, namely, an
expedition made by its king into the fertile districts of Mábiná in the
year H. 650, cannot be used as a sufficient test of the authenticity of
the chronicle, as the historian does not mention the name of the king;
but the deed itself harmonizes exceedingly well with the warlike and
enterprising character of Dúnama Díbalámi, whose reign, according to our
chronicle, falls between the years 618 and 658. Just the same is to be
said of the fact mentioned by Ebn Khaldún, who, in his valuable history
of the Berbers, which has been recently made accessible to all, relates
the interesting fact that, among other valuable presents, a giraffe was
sent by the King of Kánem (to whom even at that early date he gives
the title of “master of Bórnu”) to Abú ʿAbdallah el Mostánser the king
of Tunis, in the year of the Hejra 655. The same historian, in another
passage of his work, referring to the year 656, mentions again the king
of Kánem as having caused the death of a son of Kárakosh el Ghozzi
el Modáfferi, the well-known adventurous chieftain who had tried to
establish himself in Wadán.
But fortunately we have other data which afford us a very fair test.
According to Makrízí, not long after the close of the seventh century
of the Hejra (fi hedúd sennet sebʿa mayet), the king of Kánem was Háj
Ibrahím; after him reigned his son, el Háj Edrís—the historian does not
say expressly that he immediately succeeded his father; then Dáúd, the
brother of Edrís, and another son of Ibrahím; then ʿOmár, the son of
Dáúd’s elder brother Háj Edrís; and then ʿOthmán, the brother of the
former, and another son of Edrís. Makrízí adds that this last-named king
reigned shortly before A.H. 800; and then he states that the inhabitants
of Kánem revolted against the successors of Ibrahím, and made themselves
independent, but that Bórnu remained their kingdom.
All these dates given by Makrízí, as may be seen from the few most
important events which I have extracted from the chronicle, are in most
surprising harmony with the information conveyed in a dry and sterile but
uncorrupted way by the latter. Notwithstanding the slight discrepancy in
the order of succession of the later kings, whose reign was of very short
duration, and whose relationship is rather perplexing, is it possible to
find a harmony more complete than this, if we take into consideration the
only way in which Makrízí could have obtained his information, that is to
say, from merchants or pilgrims visiting Egypt on their way to Mekka?
We now come to Ebn Batúta; and we again find the same surprising harmony
between the fact regarding Bórnu, as mentioned by him, and the dates of
the chronicle. The famous and enterprising traveller of Tangiers, on
his return-journey from his visit to Western Sudán, left the capital of
Mélle or Máli (that is, Mungo Park’s Jára) the 22nd of Moharrem, 754,
and, proceeding by way of Timbúktu or Túmbutu, and thence down the Ísa
or Niger to Gágho or Gógo, and thence to Tekádda,[44] in speaking about
the copper found in the mines near this town, relates that the bars made
of it were exported to Góber and Rágha (or rather Ragháy), and also to
Bórnu, and then adds the interesting fact that the name of the ruling
king of the latter country was Edrís.
Now if we follow implicitly the dates of the chronicle, Edrís ben Ibrahím
(Nikále) ascended the throne in that very year (753) when, according
to this precious and unimpeachable testimony of the illustrious and
intelligent traveller, he actually occupied the throne.
The very remarkable and really surprising harmony here shown to exist
between the chronicle and the dates which have come to our knowledge from
other sources, will, I hope, give to any unprejudiced mind some degree of
confidence in the authenticity of that document, and will make him aware
of its superiority over the information of a man like Leo Africanus, or
rather Hasen Ebn Mohammed el Wasas, who, though he undoubtedly has, and
will always have, the merit of having given to Europe a clear general
view of the political and linguistic groups of Central Africa, yet, on
account of the manner in which his report was drawn up (merely from
memory, after the lapse of many years), cannot be a decisive authority on
any special circumstance. Hence, when he states that the name of the king
of Bórnu, at the time when he visited the country, was Abraham (Ibrahím),
we may confidently assume that he is wrong, and that he speaks of the
illustrious conqueror ʿAlí ben Dúnama, who restored peace and glory to
that distracted country, and, on account of his warlike character and his
various expeditions, obtained the surname el Gházi. I shall return to
this subject in the chronological table, in speaking of the reign of ʿAlí
ben Dúnama.
As for the document mentioned above as No. 5, it contains a few valuable
dates with regard to those Bórnu kings who reigned near the time when
the author obtained his information in Tripoli, while for the older
times, about which the people could only inform him “_par tradition des
leurs pères_,” his information is of little value. The most important
dates which it contains are those which have reference to the time of
the accession to the throne of the three Bórnu kings, ʿAbdallah ben
Dúnama, Háj ʿOmár, and Háj ʿAlí; and these vary but little from the dates
computed from the chronicle, and serve therefore to confirm its accuracy.
However, it is not my design to vindicate this chronicle from all
possibility of error; but my object is to show that its general
character, dry and meagre as it is, has the strongest claim to
authenticity. Indeed I am sure that it can be fully relied upon,
all uncertainty being reduced to a space of one or two years; I may
therefore be allowed to assert that the chronological table, which I
shall give in the Appendix, is something more than a mere fairy tale.
But in this place, I think it well to offer a few general remarks on the
characteristic features of the history of Bórnu.
I have first to speak of the origin of the Séfuwa or Dúguwa. We have
already seen that the chronology of the Bórnu people, if palpable
absurdities be left out of consideration, does not carry their history
further down than the latter half of the ninth century of our era.
Accordingly there can be no further question as to whether Séf was really
the son of the celebrated Dhu Yazan, and identical with Séf Dhu Yazan,
the last native ruler of the Himyaritic kingdom, who celebrated his
accession to the throne in the famous castle of Gumdán, and with the
assistance of Khosru Parvis liberated Yeman from the dominion of the
Abyssinians. I frankly confess that, while Ibrahím the son of Séf, as
“father of the king” (as he appears to have been entitled occasionally),
seems to me to have a really historical character, I entertain sincere
doubts whether Séf be not a mere imaginary personage, introduced into
the pedigree expressly in order to connect it with Yeman. Indeed, in one
short list of Bórnu kings which I possess, several princes are mentioned
before Séf, whose names, such as Futírmi, Hálar Sukayámi, Halármi,
Bunúmi, Rizálmi, Mairími, have quite a Kanúri character. As the reader
will see, I do not at all doubt of some connection existing between the
ruling family of Bórnu and the Himyaritic or Kushitic stock; but I doubt
its immediate descent from the royal Himyaritic family.
But be this as it may, I think that Leo Africanus, who is a very good
authority for general relations, is right in stating that the kings
of Bórnu originated from the Libyan tribe of the Bardoa, a tribe also
mentioned by Makrízí as Berdʿoa. That there is an ethnological connection
between the names Bérnu or Bórnu, Bórgu, Berdʿoa, Berdáma, Berauni,
Berber, can scarcely be doubted; but to many the Berdʿoa might seem to
have nearer relation with the Tedá or Tébu than with the real Berber or
Mazígh. Sultan Béllo certainly, in the introduction to his history of
the conquests of the Fúlbe, expressly says that the Bórnu dynasty was
of Berber origin; and it is on this account that the Háusa people call
every Bórnu man “ba-Bérberche,” and the Bórnu nation “Bérbere.” This view
of the subject is confirmed by the distinct statement of Makrízí, who
says that that was the common tradition of the people at his time—“it is
said that they are descended from the Berbers,”—and moreover in another
passage informs us that the king of Kánem was a nomade, or wanderer;
although it seems that this statement refers properly to the Bulála
dynasty.
Before the time of Sélma, or Sélmama, the son of Bíkoru, whose reign
began about A.H. 581, the kings are stated by the chronicle to have been
of a red complexion, like the Arabs; and to such an origin from the red
race, the Syrian-Berber stock, is certainly to be referred their custom
of covering the face and never showing the mouth, to which custom Ebn
Batúta adverts in speaking of King Edrís, who ruled in his time. To this
origin is also to be referred the custom, till recently practised, of
putting the new king upon a shield, and raising him up over the heads of
the people, as well as the polity of the empire, which originally was
entirely aristocratical, based upon a council of twelve chiefs, without
whose assent nothing of importance could be undertaken by the king.
We have a very curious statement concerning the Bórnu empire, emanating
from Lucas, the traveller employed by the African Association, and based
on the authority of his Arab informants, principally Ben ʿAlí, who no
doubt was a very clever and intelligent man. He describes the Bórnu
kingdom as an elective monarchy, the privilege of choosing a successor
among the sons of a deceased king, without regard to priority of birth,
being conferred by the nation on three of the most distinguished men of
the country. He does not say whether these belonged to the courtiers,
or whether every private individual might be called upon promiscuously
to fulfil this important duty; but the strict etiquette of the court of
Bórnu makes it probable that the former was the case. Be this as it may,
the choice being made, the three electors proceeded to the apartment of
the sovereign elect, and conducted him in silence to the gloomy place in
which the unburied corpse of his deceased father was deposited; for till
this whole ceremony was gone through the deceased could not be interred.
There, over the corpse of his deceased father, the newly elected king
seems to have entered into some sort of compromise sanctioned by oath,
binding himself that he would respect the ancient institutions, and
employ himself for the glory of the country.
I shall have to mention a similar custom still prevailing at the present
day in the province of Múniyó, which belonged to that part of the empire
called Yerí, while the dynasty of the Múniyóma probably descended from
the Berber race. Every newly elected Múniyóma, still at the present day,
is in duty bound to remain for seven days in a cave hollowed out by
nature, or by the hand of man, in the rock behind the place of sepulchre
of the former Múniyóma, in the ancient town of Gámmasak, although it is
quite deserted at present, and does not contain a living soul.
But that not only the royal family, but even a great part of the whole
nation, or rather one of the nations which were incorporated into the
Bórnu empire, was of Berber origin, is still clear so late as the time
of Edrís Alawóma, that is to say, only two centuries and a half ago; for
in the report of his expeditions, constant mention is made of the Berber
tribes (“kabáíl el Beráber”) as a large component part of his army, and
constantly two parts of this army are distinguished as the Reds, “el
Áhhmar,” and the Blacks, “eʾ Súd.” This part of the population of Bórnu
has separated from the rest, I suspect in consequence of the policy of
ʿAlí, the son and successor of Háj ʿOmár, a very warlike prince, who, in
the second half of the seventeenth century, waged a long war with Ágades.
Viewed in the light thus shed by past history, the continual and
uninterrupted warlike expeditions made by the Tuarek at the present time
against the northern regions of Bórnu and against Kánem assume quite a
new and far more interesting character. Now if it be objected that the
Kanúri or Bórnu language does not appear to contain any Berber elements
(which indeed it does not), I have only to adduce the exactly parallel
example of the Bulála, a brother dynasty of the Bórnu royal family,
descended from the same stock, who, having settled and founded a dynasty
among the tribe of the Kúka, in the territory of Fíttri, still continue
to speak their native language, that is the Kanúri, in the time of
Leo,[45] but have now entirely forgotten it, adopting the language of
the people over whom they ruled; and similar examples are numerous.
A second point which deserves notice is, that the Kanúri even at the
present day call people in general, but principally their kings, always
after the name of their mother, and that the name of the mother’s tribe
is almost continually added in the chronicle as a circumstance of the
greatest importance. Thus the famous king Dúnama ben Selmʿaa is known in
Bórnu generally only under the name of Díbalámi, from the name of his
mother Díbala; and the full form of his royal title is Díbalámi Dúnama
Selmámi, his mother’s name, as the most noble and important, preceding
his individual name, which is followed by the name derived from his
father. It is also evident, even from the dry and jejune report of
the chronicle, what powerful influence the Walíde or “Mágira”—this is
her native title—exercised in the affairs of the kingdom; I need only
mention the examples of Gúmsu (“gúmsu” means the chief wife) Fasámi,
who imprisoned her son Bíri, when already king, for a whole year, and
of Áʿaishad or ʿAisa, the mother of Edrís, who for a number of years
exercised such paramount authority, that in some lists, and even by many
ʿulama at the present time, her name is inserted in the list of the
sovereigns of the country.
These circumstances may be best explained by supposing that a kind of
compromise took place between the strangers—Berbers, or rather Imóshagh
(Mazígh) from the tribe of the Berdʿoa—and the tribe or tribes among whom
they settled, just in the same manner as we have seen that a stipulation
of the same kind was probably made between the conquering Kél-owí and the
ancient inhabitants of Aír of the Góber race; and the same circumstances,
with similar results, are observable in ancient times, in the relations
subsisting between the Grecian colonists and the original inhabitants of
Lycia.
The most important among the indigenous tribes of Kánem are the
Kíye or Beni Kíya, also mentioned in the time of Edrís Alawóma, the
Meghármah, who may possibly be identical with the Ghemármah, the
Temághera (evidently a Berber name), the Débiri, the Kúnkuna, at present
established in Kárgá, and finally the Tébu or Tubu, or rather Tedá.
Of all these the last-named constituted by far the most important and
most numerous tribe. To them belonged the mother of Dúnama ben Humé,
the most powerful of the older kings of Bórnu, who appears to have
thrice performed the pilgrimage to Mekka. Indeed it would seem that the
real talisman which Díbalámi Dúnama Selmámi spoiled consisted in the
friendly relation between the Berauni or Kanúri and the Tébu, which was
so intimate that the name of Berauni, which originally belonged to the
inhabitants of Bórnu, is still at present the common name given by the
Tuarek to the Tébu; or rather, the latter are a race intimately related
to the original stock of the Kanúri, as must become evident to every
unprejudiced mind that investigates their language.
How powerful a tribe the Tedá were, is sufficiently shown by the length
of the war which they carried on with that very king Dúnama Selmámi, and
which is said to have lasted more than seven years. Indeed, it would seem
as if it had been only by the assistance of this powerful tribe that
the successors of Jíl Shikomémi were able to found the powerful dynasty
of the Bulála, and to lay the foundation of the great empire called by
Leo Gaoga, comprehending all the eastern and north-eastern parts of the
old empire of Kánem, and extending at times as far as Dóngola, so that
in the beginning of the sixteenth century it was larger than Bórnu.
Even in the latter half of the sixteenth century, the Tedá appears to
have constituted a large proportion of the military force of the Bulála
in Kánem; and great numbers of them are said, by the historian of the
powerful king Edrís Alawóma, to have emigrated from Kánem into Bórnu, in
consequence of the victories obtained by that prince over the Bulála. At
that time they seem to have settled principally in the territories of the
Koyám, a tribe very often mentioned in the book of Imám Ahmed as forming
part of the Bórnu army, and with whom at present they are completely
intermixed. It is very remarkable, that neither by the chronicle, nor
by the historian of Edrís Alawóma, the large tribe of the Mánga, which
evidently formed a very considerable element in the formation of the
Bórnu nation, is ever once mentioned.
While the tribes above enumerated were more or less absorbed by the
empire of Kánem, and, in the course of time, adopted the Mohammedan
religion professed by its rulers, there was on the other hand a very
numerous indigenous tribe which did not become amalgamated with the
conquering element, but, on the contrary, continued to repel it in a
hostile manner, and for a long time threatened its very existence.
These were the “Soy” or “Só,” a tribe settled originally in the vast
territory enclosed towards the north and north-west by the komádugu
Wáube, erroneously called the Yeou, and towards the east by the Shári,
and divided, as it would seem, into several small kingdoms.
This powerful tribe was not completely subjugated before the time of
Edrís Alawóma, or the latter part of the sixteenth century; and it might
be matter of surprise that they are not mentioned at all by the chronicle
before the middle of the fourteenth century, if it were not that even
circumstances and facts of the very greatest importance are passed over
in silence by this arid piece of nomenclature. It would therefore be
very inconsistent to conclude from this silence, that before the period
mentioned the princes of Kánem had never come into contact with the
tribe of the Soy; the reason why the chronicle, sparing as it is of
information, could not any longer pass them over in silence, was that in
the space of three years they had vanquished and killed four successive
kings. The places mentioned in the list, where the first three of these
princes were slain, cannot be identified with absolute certainty; but as
for Nánighám, where Mohammed ben ʿAbdallah was killed, it certainly lay
close to, and probably in, the territory of the Soy. After this period we
learn nothing with regard to this tribe until the time of Edrís Alawóma,
although it seems probable that Edrís Nikálemi, the successor of Mohammed
ben ʿAbdallah, and the contemporary of Ebn Batúta, had first to gain a
victory over the Soy, before he was able to sit down quietly upon his
throne.
Altogether, in the history of Bórnu we can distinguish the following
epochs. First, the rise of power in Kánem, Njímiye being the capital
of the empire, silent and imperceptible till we see on a sudden, in the
beginning of the twelfth century, the powerful prince Dúnama ben Humé
start forth under the impulse of Islám, wielding the strength of a young
and vigorous empire, and extending his influence as far as Egypt. The
acme, or highest degree of prosperity, of this period coincides with
the reign of Díbalámi Dúnama Selmámi, in the middle of the thirteenth
century, during the prime of the dynasty of the Beni Háfis in Tunis.
But this reign already engendered the germs of decay; for during it the
two cognate elements of which the empire consisted, namely the Tedá
and the Kanúri, were disunited, and it yielded too much influence to
the aristocratical element, which was represented by the twelve great
offices, an institution which seems to deserve particular attention.
The consequence was, that a series of civil wars and regicides ensued,
interrupted only by the more tranquil reign of Ibrahím Nikálemi in the
first half of the fourteenth century, which was followed, however,
by the most unfortunate period of the empire, when the great native
tribe of the Soy burst forth and killed four kings in succession. Then
followed another respite from turmoil, just at the time when Ebn Batúta
visited Negroland; but the son of the very king who in the time of
that distinguished traveller ruled over Bórnu fell the first victim in
the struggle that ensued with a power which had arisen from the same
root, had gained strength during the civil wars of Bórnu, and which now
threatened to swallow it up altogether. This was the dynasty of the
Bulála, which, originating with the fugitive Bórnu prince Jíl Shikomémi,
had established itself in the district of Fíttri over the tribe of the
Kúka, and from thence spread its dominion in every direction till, after
a sanguinary struggle, it conquered Kánem, and forced the Kanúri dynasty
to seek refuge in the western provinces of its empire, about the year
1400 of our era.
The Bórnu empire (if we may give the name of empire to the shattered
host of a belligerent tribe driven from their home and reduced to a few
military encampments) for the next seventy years seemed likely to go
to pieces altogether, till the great king ʿAli Dúnamámi opened another
glorious period; for having at length mastered the aristocratical
element, which had almost overwhelmed the monarchy, he founded as a
central point of government a new capital or “bírni,” Ghasréggomo, the
empire having been without a fixed centre since the abandonment of
Njímiye. It was in his time that Leo Africanus visited Negroland, where
he found the Bulála empire (Gaoga) still in the ascendant: but this
was changed in the beginning of the sixteenth century, even before the
publication of his account; for in the hundred and twenty-second (lunar)
year from the time when ʿOmár was compelled to abandon his royal seat
in Njímiye, ceding the rich country of Kánem, the very nucleus of the
empire, to his rivals, the energetic king Edrís Katakarmábi entered that
capital again with his victorious army, and from that time down to the
beginning of the present century Kánem has remained a province of Bórnu,
although it was not again made the seat of government.
Altogether the sixteenth century is one of the most glorious periods
of the Bórnu empire, adorned as it is by such able princes as the two
Edrís and Mohammed, while in Western Negroland the great Sónghay empire
went to pieces, and was finally subjugated by Mulay Hámed el Mansúr, the
Emperor of Morocco. Then followed a quieter period, and old age seemed
gradually to gain on the kingdom, while pious and peaceful kings occupied
the throne, till in the middle of the last century the energetic and
enterprising king ʿAli ʿOmármi began a violent struggle against that very
nation from which the Bórnu dynasty had sprung, but which had now become
its most fearful enemy—the Imóshagh or Tuarek. He made great exertions in
every direction; but his efforts seem to have resembled the convulsions
of death, and being succeeded by an indolent king, for such was Ahmed,
the fatal hour, which was to accomplish the extinction of the dynasty
of the Séfuwa, rapidly approached. At last, when the very centre of the
empire had already fallen a prey to a new nation which had started forth
on a career of glory, the Fúlbe or Felláta, there arose a stranger,
a nationalized Arab, who, in saving the last remains of the kingdom,
founded a new dynasty, that of the Kánemíyín, which, after having shone
forth very brightly under its founder, was recently reduced by civil
discord, and seems now destined to a premature old age.