Jihād in West Africa during the Age of Revolutions. Paul E. Lovejoy
Fuuta Toro controlled much of the Senegal River valley until 1796, but its territory was reduced thereafter. Fuuta Jalon was confined to the highlands from where the Senegal, Gambia, and Niger Rivers flowed. Political leadership in Fuuta Jalon was fractured among competing dynasties and rival claimants to succession to the position of almami. The regimes of jihād controlled land and concentrated enslaved populations for purposes of production, more so in Fuuta Jalon than in Fuuta Toro. On the other hand, the spread of Islamic education and the consolidation of Muslim societies were important achievements that had a wider impact than in the immediate states of jihād and laid the foundation for the later movement of al-Ḥājj ʿUmar and subsequent leaders who pursued a jihād model of social and political reform.
3
THE JIHĀD OF ʿUTHMĀN DAN FODIO IN THE CENTRAL BILĀD AL-SŪDĀN
The jihād led by ʿUthmān dan Fodio is sometimes called the Fulani jihād because of the predominance of Fulbe in the movement, although the ethnic designation underestimates the importance of Islam. At other times the jihād is referred to as the Sokoto jihād after the capital that was founded on the Rima River in 1809, but again this reference is problematic because Sokoto was often not the seat of government. It is where the tomb of ʿUthmān dan Fodio was located after 1817, but Muhammad Bello actually spent most of his time when he was head of government at his ribāṭ (fortified town) at Wurno, to the north of Sokoto, not in the nominal capital. Sokoto is the current site of the palace of the sultan, the direct descendant of the jihād leadership, as well as the capital of one of the states of modern Nigeria. ʿUthmān dan Fodio as amīr al-Muʾminīn (commander of the faithful), the shehu (Hausa), shaykh (Arabic), sarkin Musulmi (Hausa: leader or commander of the Muslims), and other titles of respect demonstrates that complexity in detail is a feature of the jihād and highlights the centrality of religion. How to do justice to this elaborate nomenclature and a political jurisdiction that included thirty emirates and over fifty subordinate emirates exacerbates the problem. Allegiance was initially focused on ʿUthmān dan Fodio as imām, who delegated authority to specific individuals who were given a flag (tata), although the actual number of flags that were issued is not clear. The plethora of leaders and their retinues can be confusing, which might explain why Murray Last initially designated the state that was established the “Sokoto Caliphate,” a name that was not used at the time.1 Heinrich Barth did refer to the “Empire of Sokoto” in his informative analysis of the 1850s but also referred to the “empire” as “Sudan.”2 Other accounts usually referred to “Sudan” or “Soudan,” as distinct from Borno (Bornu, Bornou), Bagirmi, Wadai, and other sub-Saharan Muslim states.3
The Emergence of the Sokoto Caliphate
The centrality of Sokoto to the jihād movement is undisputed, and the date 1804 is considered a turning point in West African history. In the process of establishing an Islamic state, all the Hausa states were overthrown, Borno lost half its territory, and regions astride the Benue River extending into the mountainous districts beyond the headwaters of the Benue and its tributaries were incorporated, while the Oyo Empire collapsed. These dramatic changes can be seen through a comparison of maps of West Africa dating to around 1800 and around 1836 in which the revolutionary transformations are apparent (map 3.1 and map 3.2). As evident in map 3.1, Oyo dominated most of the coast of the Bight of Benin from Badagry and Porto Novo westward to Ouidah, with Dahomey, moreover, a tributary in this period. In 1800 there was a vibrant trade from the Hausa states and Borno to the south, as well as an east-west trade from the Hausa cities to Asante in the Volta basin in the southwest. By 1837 the area had been transformed as large areas were incorporated into the Sokoto Caliphate. Dahomey asserted its independence from Oyo in 1823, and with Oyo’s final collapse in 1836, several city-states, including Ibadan and Abeokuta, emerged that successfully resisted further caliphate expansion from the north. Moreover, a reform regime under Muhammad al-Kānimī and his successors replaced the ancient Sayfawa dynasty in Borno, which had lost its western provinces and had to rebuild its capital at Kukawa after Birni Ngazargamu was occupied twice and then destroyed in 1810.
The jihād can be examined on the basis of the following chronological benchmarks: first, the initial phase in the Hausa states of Gobir, Zamfara, Kebbi, Kano, Daura, Katsina, and Zaria between 1804 and 1808 that led to the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate; second, the invasion of Borno in 1808 that was repulsed only in 1810; and third, the extension of jihād to Nupe in 1810, with the subsequent civil wars there and the ascendancy of Malam Dendo in 1819.4 For comparative purposes, it should be noted that the outbreak of jihād in 1804 coincided with the emergence of Haiti as an independent state in the midst of the Napoleonic Wars. In 1817, upon ʿUthmān dan Fodio’s death, the jihād entered a new phase that in many ways continued until 1837 and the end of the first generation of leadership. By then, twenty-eight emirates had been established, as well as the twin capitals at Gwandu and Sokoto. Table 3.1 summarizes key events, leadership, and important results up to 1837. The second benchmark of 1817 was significant because it was not only the year in which ʿUthmān dan Fodio died but the year of local rebellions (tawaye) and the uprising at Ilorin. ʿAbd al-Salām, one of the few jihād leaders who was not Fulbe or Fulani, and his supporters staged an uprising in Zamfara during the succession crisis after the shaykh’s death. In crushing the revolt and executing ʿAbd al-Salām, the Sokoto aristocracy became more firmly identified as Fulani, which was further reflected in the leadership of the revolt at Ilorin. The jihād continued for the rest of the century, with the establishment of all the emirates and the many subemirates in Fombina, also known as Adamawa, with a capital at Yola.
MAP 3.1. Bight of Benin and Central Bilād al-Sūdān, 1800.
Source: Henry B. Lovejoy, African Diaspora Maps
MAP 3.2. Sokoto Caliphate, Borno, and Bight of Benin, 1840.
Source: Henry B. Lovejoy, African Diaspora Maps
TABLE 3.1. Selected Events in the History of the Sokoto Caliphate, 1800–1837
The jihād began in 1804 after a period of twenty years of increasing friction betweenʿUthmān dan Fodio and the government of Gobir and indirectly betweenʿUthmān’s followers and the governments of the other Hausa states—Kebbi, Katsina, Daura, Kano, and Zaria. The issues concerned the insistence of dan Fodio on reforms in the treatment of Muslims and the promotion of an Islamic society. Initially, the king of Gobir, Sarkin Gobir Bawa Jan Gwarzo, conceded a number of measures to ʿUthmān dan Fodio at a public confrontation in 1785 at Magami that related to the guarantee of freedom to preach, the treatment of Muslims and prisoners, and taxation. This success resulted in further calls for reform in matters of marriage, inheritance, and other aspects of social relations.5 Dan Fodio toured the upper Sokoto River area between 1788 and 1792 to preach and thereby spread his influence as a reformer. Bawa’s death in 1789–90 and the succession of Bawa’s brother Yakubu as Sarkin Gobir provided the context for dan Fodio’s continuing appeal, but when Yakubu was killed in battle with Katsina in 1794/95, relations with the Gobir government deteriorated rapidly. Yakubu’s successor, Nafata (1794/95–1801), revoked the concessions and instead enacted decrees that declared that no one could convert to Islam, but that everyone had to follow the beliefs of his or her parents. He prohibited the use of turbans and veils for women, and Muslims were not allowed to carry weapons. Nafata’s successor, Yunfa