| Abstract
|
:
|
This paper explores the conflict between Abdullahi dan Fodio and his nephew, Muhammad Bello, over the origin of their ethnic group, the Torobbe-Fulani. Initially open to his uncle’s theories of an Arabocentric migration narrative, Bello went on to change his views abruptly and undermine his uncle’s work. Through sketching the background to the conflict followed by a close reading of the documents themselves–Abdullahi’s īdāʿ al-nusūkh and Bello’s critical commentary to it, the ḥāshiya–I suggest these documents offer different models for political legitimacy. Prefaced by a critical analysis of the use of the Fodiawa’s Arabic writings in Sokoto historiography, I suggest that future approaches must take into account the political nature of these documents, the specific contexts in which they were produced and the personal relationships of their authors. This paper explores the conflict between Abdullahi dan Fodio and his nephew, Muhammad Bello, over the origin of their ethnic group, the Torobbe-Fulani. Initially open to his uncle’s theories of an Arabocentric migration narrative, Bello went on to change his views abruptly and undermine his uncle’s work. Through sketching the background to the conflict followed by a close reading of the documents themselves–Abdullahi’s īdāʿ al-nusūkh and Bello’s critical commentary to it, the ḥāshiya–I suggest these documents offer different models for political legitimacy. Prefaced by a critical analysis of the use of the Fodiawa’s Arabic writings in Sokoto historiography, I suggest that future approaches must take into account the political nature of these documents, the specific contexts in which they were produced and the personal relationships of their authors.
|