e - CIFAS

10 GOVERNMENT IN ZAZZAU
period of time and with sufficient accuracy the development of an
institutional complex within a single society. The criticisms ofunreliability
which have been leveUed at unrecorded historical data
are especially pertment to the present study, since data on past
political relations and administrative systems must be verba~ and
verbalizations about political administration form a large part of
the very stuff and technique of that activity. As a rule, general
statements about political and administrativepractice and organization
can hardly be regarded as satisfactory evidence in the absence
of fairly detailed and systematic checks. This means that it is inadmissible
to use traditions which do not check one another
systematically or in sufficient detail even though they may be
collected from several sources; likewise, traditions which correspond
systematically and in detail but which are drawn from
related sources, cannot provide an acceptable basis for sound re~
constructions. In the present case, however, a combination of
happy circumstances has by good fortune greatly reduced these
difficulties.
On the Fulani invasion of Zaria in 1804, the Habe ruler fled
southward to Zuba, and, as mentioned above, he and his descend~
ants there established a state known as Abuja, from which they
successfully resisted the Fulani until the British arrived. In two
recent publications, Mallam Hassan, then Barkin Ruwa of Ahuja,
and himself a younger brotherofM. Suleimanu Barau, the present
Emir of Abuja, has given an account of the customs and history
ofthat kingdom flOm Makau's reign down to the year II}44, when
the present Emir succeeded to the throne and suggested that these
traditions should be recorded. l M. Hassan's account, interesting
and valuable in itself, is especiaUy useful in that it extends our
historical knowledge of the sarauta institutions of Zazzau, and
hence of the system of government of which they were the key
institutions, backwards for over 150 years, thereby enabling us to
study changes to which these institutions ofgovernment have been
subject in Zaria since the Fulani conquest.
1 M. HIl8lIUl, Sarkin Ruwa, Ahuja. and Shu'aibu, Mulraddmrio Makamnta,
Bida, Makau, Sarkin Za:uau na Hah (hereafter referred to 81 (I), and TariM
da Al'adtm H~ na Ahuja (hereafter referred to M (:a» pubJishecl by Gaekiya
Corporation. Zaria, 1952. A tranalation of both boob by Frank Heath has since
been published by the Ibadan University Preet for the Abu,ia Native Ad~
minUtration, under thetitle, A ChrotticU6f Abuja. 1952. Mr. Heath'. translation
is sometimes too free for our Purpo8e and m-.y be compared with that of Appendir
A; d. Heath, op. cit., pp. 7z-&4.
INTRODUCTION
Such use of M. Hassan's material involves certain assumptions
.ch must be made explicit at the outset. Our first assumption is
at M. Hassan's account is substantially correct for Abuja as far
it goes. Its author's membership of the royal family and high
cia! rank suggest that all relevant information on the affairs and
ry of the state ha5 hem available to him freely over a period
::-0£ many years, while the fact that the compilation was undertaken
';,.t the Emir of Abuja's request suggests that all reliable sources of
",local infonnation wele also fleely aCce55ible. It is thus of special
'interest that, whatever may be the bias in the narrative of past
'wars, the account of political and administrative customs and
institutions which M. Hassan gives is almost wholly free from
value tenus and assumptioI15 as may be scm by examining the
appendix. It is perhaps of even greater importance to us that M.
Hassan has simply presented a list of the offices of the traditional
Abuja govemmmt, and has detailed their principal characteristics
without indulging in any speculations or recorurtruction himself
(see Appendix A).
Our second assumption is that the Habe of Abuja continued to
adhere to the institutions which were typical of Zazzau before the
Fulani conquest; in effect, thiB means that we can treat M. Hassan's
description of nineteenth~centurygovernment organizationat
Ahuja as a provisiOnal account of the government of Habe Zazzau
in the previous century. No general categorical statement of
equation is made by M. HaSfl3ll in the publications referred to, and
it is clear from a critical study that his compilation was made with~
out reference to these problems. None the less, these accounts
contain numerous references to customs which obtained both at
Zaria and Abuja, while certain diffelences were also noted. Such
references suggest that, unless otherwise qualified, the institutioI15
described are regarded by the author as common to both historical
periods, and this view is borne out by a letter to the present writer
after the first draft ofthis study was completed, inwhich M. Hassan
eays simply that 'nothing was changed in the political system of
the Habe when they moved to Abuja'.
It is reasonable to assume that the Habe who fled from Zaria
to Abuja continued to practise their traditional institutions as far
as the new conditions permitted, if only because the unity 80
essential to the suCt:eSS of their continued resistance to the Fulani
would probably have required such conservatism in their govern~
II