Kano Chronicle - CIFAS

Kano Chronicle 49
oral data available at Kano, together with reports of explorers, and such
gleanings from the jihadic literature of the conquering Khadiriya as I could
find. This done, my problem was to check the validity of this reconstruction,
to identify its omissions, false reports, anachronisms and other limitations.
and perhaps to enrich its scope and detail, while correcting its errors by
reference to an independent authentic body of precise information with
which these c'omparisons could be systematically made. Whereas elsewhere
independent successor-states of former Rausa chiefdoms overun by the
Shehu's jihad, such as Zango in Daura, Maradi, or Abuja had supplied
information of this kind to control my reconstruction of their pre-jihadic
regimes and allow direct comparison WIth the 19th century Fulanistates,
for Kano I lacked such resources, since the defeated dynasty was never able
to establish a successor-state. Indeed, when I visited the Rausa Sarkin Kano
in January 1959 at Maradi, he was unable to distinguish the traditions
of Kano from those of Rausa Katsina, that still flourished in Maradi.
Fortunately, together with certain' other texts, old and new, the Chronicle
offered an Independent check on the validity and completeness of my tentative
reconstruction of Kano under Alwali that had emerged from the oral
and documentary studies. Being by far the richest continuous account of
Rausa Kano, it was central to this corpus of materials. Naturally to amplify
my account of Kano and to strengthen it, I took note of every credible
source of information on the political history and organization of Rausa
Kana available to me. That done, the significance and distinctions of much
detailed documentation of official personnel and family lines remained
obscure. For clarification and verification the best and often the only
available resource was the Kano Chronicle. This document, though often
anachronistic, illuminated some 'of our central puzzles, and especially those
that concerned the relative status and significanse of titled offices of
different kings present in Alwali's and earlier reigns-('
Nonetheless we should ask why, in every moderately long reign, does the
Chronicle list by name and title so many contemporary officials, warriors
and assistants of the chief? Clearly, given its limited public circulation, such
detail had greater significance than public exposure: From its beginnings
the Chronicle dwells particularly and in detail on the identities and titles of
individuals who figured prominently in the reigns of successive chiefs. Indeed
the Chronicle overwhelms one with such details, which are often juxtaposed
in odd relations. In evaluating the document it is important to consider
what function or purpose its detailed listing of individuals, places, titles, and
the like fulfilled. Palpably these titles, persons and places could not be
fictitious without placing the chronicler at risk of exposure as a fraudulent
historian. While none of these lists pretends to be complete, many are rather
extensive. The structure and content of such catalogues are of special significance,
given the political status and character of this document, and indicate,