1|P a g e

Probingthetheologicalresourcesofaseventeenth‐centuryTimbuktutārīkh:theTārīkhal‐SūdānandAshʿarīkalām

MohamedShaidMatheeUniversityofJohannesburgsmathee@uj.ac.za

Abstract

The Tārīkh al-Sūdān, the so-called Tarīkh al-fattāsh, and the Notice historique, Timbuktu’s three famous seventeenth-century tārīkhs (chronicles) piqued the interest of Western scholars, travellers and colonial officials since the mid nineteenth-century. The first Western written works began to be produced at the end of the nineteenth century and burgeoned over the twentieth century with several large projects continuing into the present century, as recent as 2015. These works were primarily, though not exclusively, concerned with the authorship, sources, political properties of the tārīkhs, and Timbuktu’s social history. This article is interested in Muslim theology as a resource of the Tārīkh al-Sūdān, one the three tārīkhs. It focuses in particular on the precepts of Ashʿarī kalām (theology) of Sunni Islam as the key resource the author of the Tarīkh al-Sūdān.

In 1853 Heinrich Barth obtained a copy of the Tārīkh al-Sūdān and in 1896 Felix Du Bois1

obtained a few fragments of the Tārīkh al-fattāsh in 1896. Octave Houdas’ editions and

translations of the two tārīkhs into French were published in 1896 and 1913 respectively. 2

Over the next century several large projects burgeoned, in particular that of John Hunwick3

1 Felix Du Bois, Timbuctoo the mysterious, trans Diana White, New York, Longmans, Green, & Co, 1896 2 Octave Houdas (ed. and trans.), Tarikh es-soudan par Abderrahman ben Abdallah ben ‘Imran ben ‘Amir Es-Sa’di , 2 volumes (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1898–1900); Octave Houdas and Maurice Delafosse, eds. and trans., Tarikh el-fettach par Mahmoud Kati et l’un de ses petit fils, 2 volumes (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1913), both reprinted (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1964 and 1981). 3 John Hunwick, “Studies in the Tarīkh al-fattāsh I: its authors and textual history”, Research Bulletin, Centre of Arabic Documentation 5 (1969), 57–65; “Studies in the Tarīkh al-fattāsh II: an alleged charter of privilege issued by Askiya al-ḥājj Muḥammad to the descendants of Mori Hawgāro”, Sudanic Africa 3 (1992), 133–148; Timbuktu and the Songhay Empire: al-Sa‘dī's Tarikh al-Sūdān down to 1613 and other contemporary documents (Leiden: Brill, 1999).

2|P a g e

Nehemia Levtzion,4 Joseph Brun,5 Madina Ly,6 Elias Saad,7 and Nobili & Mathee.8 These

works concerned themselves primarily with the sources, authorship and genesis of the tārīkhs

advancing new theories especially of the so-called Tārīkh al-fattāsh, and Timbuktu’s social

history. Paulo F. de Moraes Farias has more recently drawn attention to the chronicles as

political projects with certain motives. MoraesFariasshowsthatthetarikhauthorswere

intellectualinnovatorsandpolitico‐ideological,notmerelypassiveconduitsof

tradition.9 Their historiography was notmerelyanobjectivenarrationsofeventsbutone

withamotiveaimedatreconcilingbetweenthreeelites.

This article adds a dimension lacking from these previous modern studies. It brings into the

discussion Muslim theology as a resource of the three tārīkhs—Songhay oralcy, Tuāreg

folklore, sorcery accounts, accounts of trustworthy individuals older local written local

histories, classical Muslim historiography, etc. were its other resources. The article looks,

however, only at the Tārīkh al-Sūdān. More specifically, it identifies Ashʿarī kalām

(theology), the main theological expression of Sunni Islam, as the theological resource of the

tārīkh. I argue that the precepts of Ashʿarī kalām are so pivotal a resource of the Tārīkh al-

4 Nehemia Levtzion, “Was Maḥmūd Ka‘tī the author of the Tarīkh al-Fattāsh?” Research Bulletin Centre of Arabic Documentation, University of Ibadan 6–1/2 (1970), 1–12; “A seventeenth century chronicle by Ibn al-Mukhtār: a critical study of the Tarīkh al-fattāsh”, Bulletin of the school of African and oriental studies 34 no. 3 (1971), 571-593. 5 Joseph Brun, “Notes sur le tarikh el-fettach”, Anthropos 9 (1914), 590-596. 6 Madina Ly, “ Quelques remarques sur le Tarikh el-fettach”, Bulletin de l’Institut Fondamental d’Afrique Noire 34 no. 3 (1972), 471–493. 7 Elias Saad, Social history of Timbuktu: the role of Muslim scholars and notables (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). 8Mauro Nobili & Mohamed Mathee, “Towards a new study of the so-called Tārīkh al-fattāsh”, in History in Africa 42 (2015), 37-73. 9 Paulo Fernando Moraes de Farias, Arabic medieval inscriptions from the Republic of Mali: epigraphy, chronicles and Songhay-Tuāreg history (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003). Moraes Farias summarized a section of this work in a book chapter, “Intellectual innovation and reinvention of the Sahel: the seventeenth-century Timbuktu chronicles,” in Shamil Jeppie and Souleymane B. Diagne (eds.), The Meanings of Timbuktu (Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa Press, 2008), 95–107.

3|P a g e

Sūdān that it would be hard to imagine the writing of the tārīkh without them. I argue that

Ashʿarī kalām as a resource of the Tārīkh al-Sūdān effectively allows for one to show the

Timbuktu tārīkhs’ political properties Moraes Farias’ reading identifies. Hence the tārīkhs’

motives of reconciling between three elites is of central concern to this article.

Tārīkhal‐Sūdān

ThisseminalsourceofWestAfrica’spre‐modernhistorypresentsadetailedhistoryof

theSonghayEmpire,itsrulersandinternalworkings,thefoundingofTimbuktuandits

religiousscholars,theMoroccaninvasionof1591,andthepost‐invasiondevelopments.

AsEliasSaadnotes,“Timbuktuneverproducedamonumenttoitsownhistoryequalin

wealthanddetailtoal‐Saʿdī’schronicle”.10InthewordsofJohnHunwick,

TheTārīkhal‐SūdāndeservestoberankedasoneofthegreatAfricanchroniclesandwithoutit,ourknowledgeoftheworkingsofoneofAfrica’sgreatestpre‐modernempireswouldbeconsiderablydiminished…andourunderstandingofanotableIslamiccivilizationmuchimpoverished.Indeed,theexistenceofhisworkhelpsTimbuktutoceasetobeseenasjustalegendaryfantasy,andhelpsittoberecognizedforwhatitreallywas—aspiritualandintellectualjewelinspiredbytheIslamicfaith.11

TheTārīkh’sAuthor

ʿAbdal‐RaḥmānbinʿAbdAllahb.al‐Saʿdī,theauthoroftheTārīkhal‐Sūdān,wasbornin

May,1594CE Ramadan,1001hijrī ,justthreeyearsaftertheMoroccaninvasion.He

wasfromtheclassofnotables,Timbuktu’surbanpatriciate.Hewasareligiousscholar

bytrainingandhailedfromascholarlyfamily.Thushewasarespectedfigure,highly

literate,bothwell‐connectedandwell‐informed,andwellacquaintedwiththeIslamic

10Saad,SocialhistoryofTimbuktu,21.11Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,lxv.

4|P a g e

religioustradition,localhistory,andfolklorewhichheemployedinhischronicle.His

socialstatusallowedhimtoworkasanadministratorintheArmastate‐bureaucracyin

JenneandTimbuktu.In1626/7,hewasappointedtotheimamateoftheSankore

mosqueofJenne.Hediedafter1656,theyearwhoseeventsheterminatedhischronicle

with,althoughtheexactdateofhisdemiseremainsunknown.TheTārīkhal‐Sūdānishis

onlyknownwork.

Scholarsandholymen ʿulamāʾwaawliyāʾ 12

Al‐Saʿdīhadadeepregardforreligionandheldreligiousfiguresinhighesteemas

shownintheprofoundreligioussensibilitywithwhichhewrotehistārīkh.Inthisvain,

al‐Saʿdīdevotedasubstantialpartofhischronicletotheʿulamāʾ scholars of

Timbuktu,JenneandSonghayasawhole.Quiteaptly,MauroNobilisuggeststhatof

Timbuktu’sseventeenth‐centurytārīkhs,theTārīkhal‐Sūdānisthetārīkhofthe

scholars.13HereistheintroductiontohisaccountofTimbuktu’sscholarsandholymen:

ThisisanaccountofsomeofthescholarsandholymenwhodweltinTimbuktugenerationaftergeneration—mayGodMostHighhavemercyonthem,andbepleasedwiththem,andbringusthebenefitoftheirBarakainbothabodes—andofsomeoftheirvirtuesandnoteworthyaccomplishments.Inthisregard,itissufficienttorepeatwhatthetrustworthyshaykhshavesaid,ontheauthorityoftherighteousandvirtuousFriendofGod,locusofmanifestationsofdivinegraceandwondrousacts,thejuristQāḍīMuḥammadal‐Kābarī‐mayGodMostHighhavemercyonhim.Hesaid:“IwasthecontemporaryofrighteousfolkofSankore,whowereequalledintheirrighteousnessonlybytheCompanionsoftheMessengerofGod‐mayGodblesshimandgranthimpeaceandbepleasedwithallofthem.”

Throughoutthetārīkh,al‐Saʿdīenumeratesthespiritual feats,miracles,baraka,divine

graceandclairvoyanceofTimbuktu’sʿulamāʾcumspiritualluminaries.Oneapparently

12HunwickusesthesetermsasheadingsofChapter6 ‘ScholarsandholymenofJenne andChapters9&10 ‘ScholarsandholymenofTimbuktu ofhistranslationoftheTārīkhal‐Sūdān.13Personalcommunication.

5|P a g e

sawGod;thedoortotheProphet’stombopenedbyitselfforone;theyknowthetimeof

theirownandothers’death;theywalkedonwater;theyinterpreteddreamsprophesizing

thefuture;oneforetold,amongotherfutureevents,theimpendingMoroccaninvasionof

1591 on the very day the Moroccan army set forth fromMarrakesh. They promised

Paradise;theyhadhealingpowers,theywereaprotectionagainstcivilstrife,theyhad

bodiesthatwereimmunefromarrowsandfire,theysawangels,andtheyknewwhatwas

in peoples’ hearts andminds.14Even the Prophet’s Companionswere not better than

them,butonlyequaled them,despite thewidespreadSunniMuslimsposition that the

generationoftheCompanionswerethebestMuslimsever.

Inadditiontotheʿulamāʾspiritualstations,al‐Saʿdīpresentsthemasintellectualsofhigh

learningandgenius.Theyhadanintuitiveknowledgeofhumannatureunderstanding

howordinarypeopleactandthink.Theywrotecommentariesonearlierandstandard

Islamiclegalandtheologicalworks,allofwhichshowstheiracademicprowess.

TheSonghaykings, including thegreatal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad, stand inaweof the

scholars,obeytheircommandsandseektheircompanyintheroyalcourts,whichthey

neverthelessalwaysrefuse.EvenSunni/Sii15 ʿAlī,despitehisreportedbadtreatmentof

the ʿulamāʾ, ismadetosay, ‘Wereitnotforthescholars, lifewouldnotbepleasantor

14Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayempire,p.24‐26,32,38‐40,42,43,44,48,49,58,68,73,77,80andpassim.15 Sii is another form of Sunni, the title of the pre-Askiya rulers (from ʿAlī Kulun the founder of the dynasty to the last Sii Ali Ber who ruled from 1468-1493) of the Songhay dynasty used in the Tārīkh al-Sūdān and in modern writing about the dynasty. The Tārīkh al-fattāsh uses the form Sh-y (or Shī) while the Notice historique gives the title as Suʿi or Suʾi; Sõnyi, s-ī, sh-ī are other variant spellings of suʿi and suʾi, Hunwick, Timbuktu and the Songhay Empire, p. 333-334. Throughout this article, I use this translation by John Hunwick of the Tārīkh al-Sūdān to reference my citations from the manuscript of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān l-Saʿdī’s Tārīkh al-Sūdān, ms 681, IHERI-AB.

6|P a g e

agreeable.’16TheSonghayrulersvisitedthemwhentheyweresick.Theyintercededwith

therulersonbehalfofpeopleforofficialpardoning.MembersoftheMoroccanrulingelite

visitedthem.17Theyspokethetruthtopowersuchaswhenal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad

chargedthejuristal‐QāḍīAbūḤafṣUmarwithsowingdiscord,thelatterrespondedthat

theAskiyawastheonesowingdiscordbyappointingaqāḍī inTimbuktuandanother

qāḍī in Yindubuʿu; the jurist then got up angrily and left.18 They are presented as

appearingharshtotherulerswhoareeverhumbletowardtheminreturn.Manyacquire

considerablewealthandgaintemporalpower.19CharlotteBloomandHumphreyFisher

showal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad’sexperimentingrelationshipwiththedifferentidentities

ofʿulamāʾ ofGaoandTimbuktufinallysettlingforthelatter.20

Al‐Saʿdī’spraisingofSonghay’sscholarsmust,however,beappreciatedinthecontextof

hishistoriographicalmotive.Hewasnotgivinganaccountoftheintellectualprowessand

spiritualstationsofthescholarsandholymenmerelyforthesakeofit.Hewasendowing

themwithastatusofpowertoeffectivelyenablereconcilingbetweenthem,theArmaand

16MichaelGomezchallengesthisideaoftheSonghayrulingauthorityshowingsuchobeisanceanddeferencetoTimbuktu’sscholarlyelite.Hequestionswhathecallsthetārīkhauthors’singleperspectiveoftheTimbuktu‐Gaoconnexionthatproducedaparochial,Timbuktu‐centricaccountofrelationsbetweenthetwonuclei,MichaelGomez,“TimbuktuunderimperialSonghay:areconsiderationofautonomy”,JournalofAfricanHistory31 1990 ,5‐24.17Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,75.Thisisanotherexamplethatshowsal‐Saʿdī’spoliticalaimwithhischronicle,inthathenotonlyinsistsonthepoliticalcloutofthescholarsbutalsoshowsagestureofreconciliationintheinvadingMoroccans’visittoTimbuktu’sscholarsasmembersoftheurbanpatriciate.18Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,39–40.19Saad,ThesocialhistoryofTimbuktu.20CharlotteBloom&HumphreyFisher,“Loveforthreeoranges,or,theAskiya’sdilemma:TheAskiya,al‐Maghili,andTimbuktu,c.1500AD”,inTheJournalofAfricanHistory34,1, 1993 ,65‐91.

7|P a g e

theAskiyalineages.However,asMoraesFariaspointsout,thereconciliationaimedonly

atacloser,lessunequalpoliticalintegration.21

Ashʿarīkalām

Thissought‐afterpoliticalintegrationwasconceptualizedinlinewithpreceptsof

Ashʿarīkalām.Theseincludethedivinepredestinationofallhumanaffairs,ageneral

historicaltrajectorytowardsmoraldegeneration,andtheimperativeforbelieversto

submittopoliticalauthorityevendespotic.22TheAshʿarīSchool,foundedbyAbūal‐

Ḥasanal‐Ashʿarī d.936CE/324hijrī ,isthedominanttheologicalarticulationofSunni

IslamincludingamongtheMālikīlegalschoolthatpredominatedinSonghay andstill

does .23As Hunwick points out, the qāḍīs, imams, khaṭībs, and other holymen of Songhay’s

constituted religious estate bonded together by a common faith expressed through the Maliki

law-school, the theology of Ashʿarī, and a broad Ṣūfī mystical understanding.24

Numerous locally‐produced theological treatises25 most still in manuscript form

articulatetheAshʿarīdiscoursewhoseassumptionsstandincontrasttoMuʿtazilī,Shiʿī,or

21Arelationship,asParthaChatterjeeargues,isalwaysmarkedbydomination;thedominantgroups,intheirexerciseofdomination,donotconsumeanddestroydominatedclasses,forthentherewouldbenorelationofpower,andhencenodomination;quotedinShahid,Amin,Alternativehistories:aviewfromIndia Calcutta:SEPHIS‐CSSSC,2002 ,14.22Foradetailedoutline sketch ofthedoctrineoftheAshʿarīSchoolseetheworkofthefounderhimself,Al‐Ashʿarī,Abūal‐Ḥasan,Al‐ibānaʿanuṣūlal‐diyāna,ed.FawqiyyaḤusaynMaḥmūd Cairo:Dāral‐Anṣār,1977 ,20‐25.Thethreecenturiesfollowingal‐AshʿarīsawthedevelopmentofAshʿarīthoughtinmoredetailedandintricateworks.23AccordingtotheAshʿarīhistoriancumtheologian,ibnʿAsākirallMālikīsareAshʿarīs;al‐Ghālī,BulQāsim,AbūManṣūral‐Māturīdī:ḥayātuhuwaarāʾuhual‐ʿͨaqdiyya Tunis:Dāral‐Turkīli‐l‐Nashr,1989 ,15.24Hunwick,,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,lv25Al‐minnafīiʿtiqādahl‐sunnaofal‐MukhtārbinAḥmadbinAbīBakral‐Kuntī d.1811 ;al‐MukhtārbinAḥmadbinAbīBakral‐Kuntī,Al‐shumūshal‐Aḥmadiyyafīal‐aqāʿidal‐Muḥammadīyya,ms8687,IHERI‐AB;Al‐SharīfHimāAllāh,Taḥṣīlal‐bayānwaal‐ifādafīsharḥmātaḍammanathukalimātal‐shahāda;AbūʿAbd‐AllāhibnMaḥmūdBaghayogo,Manẓūmafīal‐tawḥīd,ms3505,IHERI‐AB;Al‐Zaydī,al‐ḤasanbinAghbadī,Tuḥfatal‐ṣibyānfīal‐tawḥīd;al‐Fullānī,Muḥammadal‐Wālī,Manhalal‐adhbfīṣifātasmāʾal‐Rabb;MuḥammadbinAḥmadbinMaḥmūdbinAbīBakral‐Wangharī,Al‐qalāʾidfīʿaqaʾid,ms3274,IHERI‐AB;MuḥammadibnMuḥammadBaghayoghobinMuḥammadGordo,Taḥṣīlḥusnal‐maqāṣidfīsharḥqalāʾidal‐aqaʾid,ms3459,IHERI‐AB.

8|P a g e

Kharijīkalām.Consequently,asareligiousscholar,al‐Saʿdīwouldhavebeentrainedin

theAshʿarī‐Mālikīreligious‐intellectualtraditionthatpredominated,andwastaught,in

Timbuktu.

IntheIntroductionoftheTārīkhal‐Sūdān,al‐SaʿdīpraisesGodinthefollowingwords,

PraisebetoGod,towhomalonebelongsdominion,eternity,powerandpraise,whoencompasseswithHisknowledgeallthings.Heknowswhatwasandwhatwillbe,andifsomethingweretobe,howitwouldbe.Noatom'sweight ofwhatoccurs onearthorinheavenescapesHim.'HegivespowertowhomsoHewishes,andtakes it away fromwhom so Hewishes Unique is He, a powerful,mighty, andvictorious Sovereign, who has mastery over His servants through death andannihilation.HeistheFirst,withouttherebeingabeginning,andtheLast,withouttherebeinganend.

Al‐SaʿdīcarefullyanddeliberatelychosetheattributesofGod’seternity,Hissovereignty,

Hisomnipotence,Hisomniscience,andHisknowledgeofallthathaspassedandareyet

to transpire emphasis mine to highlight human impotence, lack of agency and

temporalityofhumanpower.TheyhintattheAshʿarīnotionofGod’spoweroverand

controlofhumandestiny.Inotherwords,thisopeningcontrastsGodtoSonghaywhodo

notenjoyanyoftheseattributes.Astheabsolutesovereign,onlyGodgrantspowerbut

alsoremovesit,andHeimposesdeathonhiscreation,whetherindividualsorempires

suchasSonghay.26Al‐Saʿdī’saimwastodemonstratethatSonghay’sdefeatatthehands

oftheMoroccanswasthedecreeofGod,howeverunjusttheinvasionmayhavebeen.The

26TheIntroductionoftheTārīkhal‐fattāshinitspraisingofGodsimilarlyreferstoGodwhoinHisomniscienceandomnipotencemakessomekingsandotherssubjects.However,fromtheoutset—andmoreexplicitlythantheTārīkhal‐Sūdān—itlinksthedestructionofworldlyruledirectlytothearroganceandinjusticeofkingsandtheirrejectionofthecounsellingofGod’sprophets;Al‐Qunbīlī,MaḥmūdKaʿtbinal‐Mukhtār,Tārīkhal‐fattāshfīakhbāral‐buldānwaal‐juyūshwaakābiral‐nāsswadhikrwaqāʿiwaaʿāẓimal‐umūrwatafrīqansābal‐ʿabīdminal‐aḥrār,Bamako,InstitutedesHautesEtudesetdeRecherchesIslamiquesAhmedBaba,2015,p.40;ms3927,IHERI‐AB.

9|P a g e

followingtwopassagesdemonstratethattheSaʿdianinvasionandconquestofSonghay

wereintheforeknowledgeofGod,byHiswillandpower.

TheywentbackonitforonlyGodmostHighhadforeknowledgethattheirSonghay’s kingdomwouldwaneandtheirstatedisappear,andnonecanreverseHisdecreeorhinderHisjudgementT hat Moroccanarmy wasamightyarmythatcouldnotbeconfrontedanddefeatedexceptbyoneaidedandsupportedbyGodMostHigh…actingunderthepowerofGodwhosecommandnoonecanreverseandwhosejudgmentnoonecanhinder…divinefavouriswhereverGodplacesit…butGodmostHighsparedthemtheMoroccanarmy fromthisperfidiousplotthroughtheforesightofBaḤasanFirīr…andheinformedthemhowmuchterritoryhisarmywouldsubdue,accordingtocertaindivinatoryprognosticationshehadcomeacross

Astheeleventh‐centuryCEAshʿarīthinkerAbūḤāmidal‐Ghazālī d.1111 says,“Itis

necessarytoknowthatthedivinepresenceencompasseseverythinginexistenceand

thatthereisnothinginexistenceexceptGodandHisactions.”27Howeveral‐Saʿdīwas

nota“pure”theologian;histheologyorratherhisapplicationofAshʿarīkalāmserved

hispoliticalmotiveofhishistoriography.

ThetwopassagesalsoreflecttheAshʿarīnotionoftime.Time,intheAshʿarīview,isnot

anindependentsubstancewithitsownpower,asthatwouldmakeitcomparabletoGod,

which is religiously problematique. It does not frame events, but coexistswith them.

Furthermore, time, or events, is atomized as a series of discontinued moments

interspersedwith non‐being.However, Fakhr al‐Dīn al‐Rāzī d. 1210 CE , the Ashʿarī

mutakallim theologian andphilosopher d.606 heldtheviewthatalthoughtimedid

not change, beingwithin time changed and that time conditions change and not vice

versa.28

27AbūḤāmidAl‐Ghazālī,Iljāmal‐ʿawāmʿanʿilmal‐kalām,12;Kitābal‐arbaʿīnfīuṣūlal‐dīn Jeddah:Dāral‐Bashīr,2003 ,33.28AliMabrook,“Al‐zamanal‐Ashʿarī:minal‐untulujīilāal‐aydiyulujī”,Alif:Journalofcomparativepoetics,9 1989 ,156‐170.

10|P a g e

CoupledtothisAshʿarīpreceptistheAshʿarīnotionoftimeasatrajectorytowardmoral

degeneration.SouleymaneBachirDiagnecitestheTārīkhal‐fattāsh’smentioningofthe

extreme limit of immorality, the worst crimes, the open committing of the most

disagreeabledeedstoGod’ssight,thedisplayoftheugliestdeedsandlinksittoal‐Saʿdī’s

referencetotheQurʾānicphrase,“Innālillāhiwainnāilayhirājiʿūn”,

This Qurʾānic quote by which al‐Saʿdī concludes his lament summarises theunderlyingphilosophyoftimeandhistorypervasiveinhischronicle:thecourseofhumaneventscarrieswithitself,asbysomeimmanentjustice,itsdivinesanction,andtheinobservanceofthelawsofGodinevitablyleadstodeclineandchaos”.29

DiagnethenreadsinTimbuktu’sseventeenth‐centurytārīkhsaphilosophyofhistory,of

chaos anddecline.This is exactly anAshʿarī readingof timeandhistory.ThisAshʿarī

notionoftimeinsofarasitseestheflowoftimei.e.thefutureasamoveawayfromthe

ideal,thebetterstandsinmarkedcontrasttoShiʿīandMuʿtazilīnotionsoftime,history

andthefuture.FortheShiʿīdoctrineoftime,thebest/idealmomentinhistoryhasnotyet

beenachievedabsolutelyashistoryisascendingmovementtowardtheideal,whichisto

beachievedinthefuture.InMuʿtazilīkalām,historyisneitherdeclinenorascentperse,

butanopenhorizon.30

ThisAshʿarī notion of a progressive decline inmorals among humanbeingswith the

passageoftimetowardthefutureisshowninthesecondparagraphoftheIntroduction

29SouleymaneDiagne,“TowardanintellectualhistoryofWestAfrica:themeaningofTimbuktu”,inThemeaningsofTimbuktu,ShamilJeppieandSouleymaneBachirDiagne,eds., CapeTown:HumanSciencesResearchCouncilofSouthAfricaPress,2008 ,22.30AliMabrook,Al‐imāmawaal‐siyāsawaal‐khiṭābal‐tārīkhīfīʿilmal‐ʿaqāʾid, Cairo:Markazal‐QāhiraliḤuqūqal‐Insān,2002 ,12.

11|P a g e

of al‐Saʿdī’s tārīkh. Al‐Saʿdī shows a stark contrast between Timbuktu’s—and

Songhay’s—earlierandlatergenerations.

We understand that our forefathers usedmainly to divert one another in theirassembliesbytalkingoftheCompanionsandthepiousfolk‐mayGodbepleasedwiththem,andhavemercyuponthem.Thentheywouldspeakofthechiefsandkingsoftheirlands,theirlivesanddeaths,theirconduct,theirheroicexploits,andotherhistoricalinformationandtalesrelatingtothem.Thiswaswhattheymostdelighted in telling, andwhat theymostdesired to speakof among themselves.Then thatgenerationpassedaway. In the followinggeneration, therewasnonewhohadanyinterestinthat,norwasthereanyonewhofollowedthepathoftheirdeceasedancestors,noranyonegreatlyconcernedaboutrespectforelders.Iftherewereindeedanysuch,thentheywerefew“andfinallytheonlyfolkremainingwerethosewhosemotivationswerebase,andwhoconcernedthemselveswithhatred,jealousy, back‐biting, tittle‐tattle, scandal‐mongering, and concocting lies aboutpeopleGodpreserveusfromsuchthingsfortheyleadtoevilconsequences.”31

Al‐Saʿdī’s above account appears to contradict the degenerationist notion of history

insofarasitpresentsthepioneergenerationsofTimbuktuasequaltotheCompanionsof

theProphetwhichprecededthembygenerations.Thedegenerationistnotionofhistory

isrootedintheviewthattheearliergeneration theCompanions wasthebest,i.e.better

thanthepioneeringgenerationsofTimbuktuthatcamelongafterit.Thismaysuggest

thatdegeneration isnotentirelyunilinealbutalsohappens incycles.Does it thennot

compromise my claim that the Tārīkh al‐Sūdān employs Ashʿarī kalām? Is it not a

departurefromAshʿarīthoughtormaybejustageneralideathatcanbeinvokedatany

moment in history in relation to relevant generations without indicating a larger

historicalpattern?32

Theobservationiscorrect,butonlyapparentlyandsuperficially.Itisonlycorrectifwe

readal‐Saʿdīasengaging in“pure” theologypassivelyapplyingthepreceptsofAshʿarī

31Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,1‐2.32IthankJosephHillfortheseobservationshemadeinhiseditingofthisarticle.Iincorporatedthemafterreceivingmypenultimatedraftfromhim.

12|P a g e

kalāminhistārīkh.However,al‐Saʿdīwasnotaprimarilyatheologian,butprimarilya

historianwithamotive.HisknowledgeofAshʿarīkalāmallowedhimreadandapplyit,

perhapsevenmanipulatedit,intheserviceofhishistoriographicalaim.AsMoraesFarias

says,hewasanintellectualinnovator,andapolitico‐ideologicaldoer.

Nevertheless, al‐Saʿdī’s point is that unlike the earlier generations, Timbuktu and

Songhay’s latergenerationsdonotvaluehistorynordo theyappreciate the featsand

exploitsoftheancestors.Theylackinterestinhistoryandevenlackrespectforelders.

ThisdescriptionofTimbuktu/Songhay’slatergenerationsreflectstheAshʿarīnotionof

time/history as a retrogressivemovement toward theworse. Al‐Saʿdī then links this

attitudetowardhistoryandthegloryofthepast,amongSonghay’slatergenerationsto

society’sbehaviorandmorals.

Al‐Saʿdī’smentionofbasemotivations,hatred,jealousy,back‐biting,tittle‐tattle,scandal‐

mongering,andliesoflatergenerationsfurthertieinwiththeAshʿarīnotionoftimeas

decline.33AccordingtoAshʿarīkalām,hatred,jealousy,tittle‐tattle,backbiting,scandal‐

mongering,concoctingofliesdenotemorethanjustimpious,trivial,andbanaltraitsof

everyday human behavior. Rather, these traits and acts indicate the Ashʿarī view of

history: the inevitable and pre‐determined degeneration in peoples’ morals and

behaviour. With the progress of time, morals and intellect decline. A well‐known

Prophetictraditionarticulatesthistheology,

Thebest generation ofmyummaismygenerationthenthose ofthegeneration whofollowthemthenthose ofthegeneration whofollowthem.Imranb.Ḥuṣaynsaid,Idonotknowwhetherhesaidafterhisgenerationtwogenerationsorthree.Then hesaid afteryou willcome peoplewhowill eagerly testifythoughnot

33Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,1‐2.

13|P a g e

askedtotestify;theywillbetrayandnotbeentrusted;theywillmakevowsbutnotfulfilthem.Andobesitywillappear.34

Theḥadīthshowsthatmoralretrogressioninbehaviourisagivenforthegenerations

followingthefirstthreegenerationsofMuslims:theProphetwithhisCompanions,the

Companions after the Prophet’s demise with the Successor generation35, and the

Successors after the demise of the last Companion. Thus the best, most sublime

taḥaqquq al‐afḍal was already realizedwith the first three generations ofMuslims.

Later generations do not and cannot enjoy the same status in knowledge, piety,

selflessness,honesty,andothergoodqualitiesasthefirstthreegenerationsofMuslims.36

Everygenerationwillbeworseinbehaviourandlessinfaithandintellectthanearlier

generationsincludingitsimmediateprecedinggeneration.Theretrogressioncontinues

acrossthegenerationsofMuslimfromthefourthgenerationtotheendoftime.37

34Al‐Bukhārī,MuḥammadbinIsmāʿīl,Al‐jāmiʿal‐ṣaḥīḥ,Cairo,Al‐Maktabaal‐Salafiyya,undated,3rdvolume,pg.6,ḥadīthnumber3650.Therearenumeroussimilarnarrations versions ofthisprophetictradition,withslightdifferences/discrepanciesintheirwording.35TheSuccessorgenerationisthegenerationthatimmediatelyfollows tābiʿūn thegenerationoftheCompanions Ṣaḥāba ,butafterthedemiseoftheProphetMuḥammad.TheysawandinteractedwiththeCompanions.36ThisviewofdegenerationinmoralswiththepassageofgenerationsappearsnottobeuniquetoAshʿarī—Sunnitheology.Inherbook,St.Paul:themisunderstoodapostle,KarenArmstrongcitesHoracelamenting,“Ourgrandparentshaveweakerheirs;wehavedegeneratedfurtherandsoonwillbegetoffspringmorewickedyet;andthatwithtimecomescorruption infact,timeisqualified/describedascorrupting thatdiminisheseverything.”KarenArmstrong,StPaul:TheMisunderstoodApostle London:AtlanticBooks,2015 ,101‐102.37Again,al‐Saʿdī’sportrayalofTimbuktupioneergenerationsasequaltotheṢaḥābaisapparentlyatloggerheadswiththeAshʿarīpreceptofcontinualretrogressionofthetrajectoryoftimetowardthefuture.Inotherwords,isal‐Saʿdī’sdescriptionoftheretrogressionofTimbuktu’slatergenerationscontingentandspecifictothattimeperiod,andthathethereforehopedthatsocietycouldgetbetter;thatingeneralmattersdogetworstbutthatalatergenerationcouldfixthingsandcreateabettersociety?Inshort,canweapplyibnKhaldūn’sreadingofhistoryascyclical,i.e.recurringmomentsofpietyandpoliticalstrengththroughouthistory?Thesimpleanswertoallthesepossibilitiesisno.Notbecausethatwasnotthinkableforal‐Saʿdī wecannotruleoutsuchapossibility ,butbecauseal‐Saʿdī’shistoriographicalmotivedoesnotmakeallowanceforsuchapossibility.HisimmediateaimwithwritingahistoryofSonghayatthatmomentwasreconciliationbetweenelitesnotfixingofSonghay’ssocietyorevenhopingforit.Besides,al‐SaʿdīisdescribingtheimmoralitiesofSonghay’ssocietypriortotheMoroccaninvasion,notexactlyhisgeneration.

14|P a g e

My reference toḤadīth shouldnotbe read that I amswitching fromAshʿarīkalām to

Ḥadīth as the resource at work in the Tārīkh al‐Sūdān. Al‐Saʿdī does not even cite

propheticḥadīthsinhistārīkh .Rather,myreferencetotheḥadīthis insofaras it isa

“container”oftheAshʿarīdoctrineoftimeasamoveawayfromtheidealrealityanda

retrogression inhumanbehaviour. ItshowsarelationshipbetweenkalāmandḤadīth

insofar as the formerwas often the raison d’etre of the latter, i.e. ofmany individual

ḥadīthreports.Therelationshipbetweenthescienceofʿilmal‐kalām theology onthe

one hand and Ḥadīth and the other sciences38 of the Muslim religious‐intellectual

traditionontheotherhandisinteresting.ʿ Ilmal‐kalāmenjoyscentralityvis‐à‐vistherest

of the sciences of the Muslim intellectual tradition impacting their final epistemic

characterasAliMabrookshows.39

TheTārīkhal‐Sūdāngivesavividandforcefulportrayalofthedegenerationinthemorals

and behaviour of Songhay’s later generations—coupled to their neglect and non‐

appreciationofhistory.

ThisSaʿdianarmyfoundthelandoftheSudanatthattimetobeoneofthemostfavouredofthelandsofGodMostHighinanydirection,andthemostluxurious,secure,andprosperous,thankstothebarakaofthemostauspicious,thedivinely‐favouredCommanderoftheFaithfulAskiyaal‐ḥājjMuḥammadb.AbīBakr,becauseofhisjusticeandthestrictnessofhisall‐encompassingauthority,whichwasaseffectiveatthebordersofhiskingdomasitwasinhispalace—fromthelimitsofDenditotheendofthelandofal‐Ḥamdiyya,andfromthelimitsofBendugutoTaghāzaandTuwātandwhatlieswithinthem.Allofthischangedthensecurityturnedtofear,luxurywaschangedintoafflictionanddistress,andprosperitybecamewoeandharshness.Peoplebegantoattackoneanother

38Tafsīr,fiqh,uṣūlal‐fiqhandthelinguisticsciences:balāgha,naḥw,ṣarf,39MabrookmakesadistinctionbetweenthechronologicandepistemicpriorityofthesciencesoftheMuslimintellectualtradition.Asciencemaybechronologicallypriortoanother,however,epistemicallysecondtoitcrystallizedpostthischronologicallylaterscience.Thus,forexample,MuslimtheologyasadisciplinelaidtheepistemicfoundationforMuslimlegaltheory ʿilmuṣūlal‐fiqh notwithstandingthatthelatterachieveditsmethodologicalcompletenesspriortoMuslimtheologydoingso,AliMabrook,Markaziyyatʿͨilmal‐tawḥīdfīal‐thaqāfaal‐islāmiyya,unpublishedpaper,20.

15|P a g e

throughoutthelengthandbreadthofthekingdom,raidingandpreyinguponproperty, free personsandslaves.Suchiniquitybecamegeneral,spreading,andbecomingevermoreseriousandscandalous.SincethetimewhentheamīrAskiyaal‐ḥājjMuhammadhadruledthelandofSonghaynoneoftherulersofneighbouringterritorieshadattemptedtoinvadethem,becauseofthestrength,toughness,bravery,courage,andawe‐inspiringnaturethatGodMostHighhadendowedtheSonghaywith.Onthecontrary,itwastheywhosoughtoutotherrulersintheirlands,andGodgavethemvictoryoverthemonmanyanoccasion,ashasbeenrelatedintheirtraditionsandstories.Theycontinuedthisuntilclosetothedemiseoftheirdynasty.Thenastheirkingdomcametoanend,theyexchangedGod'sbountiesforinfidelity,andleftnosinagainstGodMostHighthattheydidnotcommitopenly,suchasdrinkingfermentedliquorsandfornication‐indeed,theyweresogivenovertothislattervicethatitlookedasifitweresomethingnotforbidden.Nothinggavethemsomuchprideorsocialstatusasfornication,tosuchanextentthatsomeofthesonsoftheirsultanswouldcommitincestwiththeirsisters.40

40Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,192‐195.

16|P a g e

ThedegenerationinthemoralsandbehaviourofSonghayledtoachangeinitsfortunes

fromease,security,safety,prosperity,abundance,andbarakainitsearlydaystowoe,

17|P a g e

harshnessfear,hardshipaffliction,anddistress in its laterdaysandeventualcollapse.

Paganssackedandplundereditsoncesecurelands.Songhay’speoplebegantoattackone

another throughout the lengthandbreadthof thekingdom, raidedandseizedothers’

property,laidtowasteland,murderedatwant,andenslavedfreepeople.Tyrannyand

highhandednesspervadedSonghay.41TheTārīkhal‐Sūdān’ssiblingchroniclestoorecord

injustice,inobservanceofGod’slaws,arroganceoftheelite,andcrimebeingpervasivein

Songhay.

ItissexualdebaucheryinSonghaythatal‐Saʿdīhighlightsmost.Sodomyandfornication

weresowidespreadthattheywerenolongerseenasvicesforbiddenbyIslamandeven

socially.Worse,fornicationwasamarkofprideandsocialstatustotheextentthatsome

ofthesonsofSonghay’ssultanswouldcommitincestwiththeirsisters.TheTārīkhal‐

fattāshandtheNoticehistoriqueconcur.Sexualimmoralityreachedsuchextreme

limits;themostdisagreeableactionstoGod’ssightwereopenlycommitted.Anofficer

wasdesignatedtoattendtoissuesofadulterywithadrumspeciallymadeforhim;

differentpartiespresentedtohimtheircasesagainstoneanother.42Thethreetārīkhs

alsoconcurontheseeventsoccurringduringthelastdaysoftheSonghayEmpire,i.e.

thereignofAskiyaIsḥāqII.However,elsewhereal‐SaʿdīdatesthedeclineinSonghay’s

moralstotheendofal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad’srule,longbeforethereignofAskiya

IsḥāqII.

41Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,33.42Ibnal‐Mukhtār,Tārīkhal‐fattāsh,p.205

18|P a g e

Sexualimmoralitywasnotonlyconsensualbutalsobyforce.Freewomenweretakenas

concubinesmeaningtheywereenslavedandcoercedintosex.Infact,al‐Saʿdīshows

thattheviolationofwomenwasnotonlyaproblemofSonghaytowardtheendofits

empire.TheTuāregviolatedwomenwhentheyraidedhomes;Jennefellintothehands

ofSunniʿAlīexactlyatthemomentaseniorarmycommanderofitsarmyabductedthe

wifeofadefencelessman,tookherashisownand,itappears,rapedher.

However,al‐SaʿdīhighlightingofsexualimmoralityinSonghaywasthatofSonghay’s

royalfamilyandrulingeliteonly,notSonghaysocietyasawhole.43Hencehesinglesout

YūsufKoi,asonofthepiousal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuhammadasthefirstonetocommitsexual

debaucheryalreadyduringthelifetimeoftherighteousal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad.

Peoplesaythatthishappenedtowardstheendofthereignofthejustsultan,theCommanderoftheFaithfulAskiyaal‐ḥājjMuhammad,andthatitwashissonYūsuf‐Koiwhofirstcommittedsuchacts.WhenAskiyaMuhammadheardofit,hebecameenraged,andcursedhim,prayingthathismalemembershouldnotaccompanyhimtotheotherworld.GodMostHighansweredhisprayer,forYūsuf’smemberwasdetachedfromhisbodyastheresultofanillness‐mayGodpreservesusfromsuchafate!ThecursepassedontohissonArbinda,fatherofYunkiYaʿqubandhismemberwaslikewisedetachedfromhisbodylateinlifethroughthesameillness.44

MuḥammadBonkana,asonofAskiyaDāwūdisrecordedofhavingmissedamilitary

campaignasaresultoffallingillwithsyphiliticsores.45Hiscontractionofthedisease

suggestsexualpromiscuity.Nevertheless,onhearingofYūsufKoi’ssexualdebaucheries,

al‐ḥājjAskiyaMuhammadcursedYūsufKoiwiththeseveringofhispenis.Butal‐ḥājj

AskiyaMuhammad’scursealsoafflictedYūsufKoi’ssonArbindaanditappearhis

43KarenArmstrongsuggeststhatSt.Paul’slambastingofsexualperversionsinRome thewickedschemingofwomen arguablytargetedtheimperialhousehold.StPaul,102.44Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,192‐195.45Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,154.

19|P a g e

grandsonYunkiYaʿqūb,althoughthesetwoarenotshownasbeingguiltyofsexual

debauchery.Inotherwords,thecursewasperpetual,notconfinedtoYūsufKoi,the

perpetrator.

AccordingtotheTārīkhal‐fattāshandtheNoticehistoriqueal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad

cursedhissonAskiyaMūsāwiththeexposureofhisgenitals.Thishappenedwhen

AskiyaMūsāfellfromhishorseinfrontofhissoldiersexposinghisgenitals.Mūsā

overthrewtheoldAskiya,ejectedhimfromthepalaceandtookhisconcubinesand

slavegirlsforhimself.46ItisnotclearfromtheTārīkhal‐fattāshwordingthatMūsāused

theconcubinesforsex.Itdoes,however,appeartobethecaseaccordingtothewording

oftheNoticehistorique,“Onditmêmequ’ildissimulaplusieursdesfemmesdesonpère

etcohibitaavecelles”endingwiththeQurʾānicquote,“réfugions‐nousauprèsdeDieu”

indicatingdiabolicalness.47TheTārīkhal‐SūdānmentionsthatMūsāonlyremovedthe

oldAskiya.Infact,contrarytotheTārīkhal‐fattāsh,itsaysMūsāstayedinhisown

housewhilethedeposedAskiyaremainedinthepalace;italsomakesnomentionof

slavegirlsandconcubines.48RatheritlistsMūsā’scrimeaskillinghisbrothersafter

assumingpower.

AccordingtotheTārīkḥal‐fattāsh,SunniAliaskedal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammadandUmar

KomadhiakhatokillAskiyaMuḥammadBonkanaonthenightoflatter’sbirth.SunniʿAlī

predictedthatthechildwouldcauseharmtoal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad;hehearda

46Ibnal‐Mukhtār,Tārīkhal‐fattāsh,p.13947NoticehistoriqueattachedtotheOctaveHoudasandMauriceDelafosseFrenchtranslationoftheTārīkhal‐fattāshasdeuxièmeappendice Paris:ErnestleRoux,1913 ,340‐341.48Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,117.

20|P a g e

screamonthenightofAskiyaMuḥammadBonkana’sbirthandthebabywasbornwith

afullsetofteeth.Theydidnot.TheSunni’s“divination”cametopassforonbecoming

Askiya,MuḥammadBonkanaremovedal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammadfromGao,imprisoned

himontheislandofKangāga,forcedtheoldAskiya’sdaughterstouncoverthemselves

infrontofhimandhadagriotesssingthathewasbetterthanahundredsonsofal‐ḥājj

AskiyaMuḥammad.49SunniʿAlī’sdivinationwould,ofcourse,havenoreligious

imperativegivenhispresentationinthetārīkhsasadisbeliever,eviltyrantand

practitionerofwitchcraft.

Why, onemaywonder, did al‐ḥājj AskiyaMuḥammad, the just and righteousMuslim

ruler,curseYūsufKoiratherthanpunishhiminaccordancewiththeIslamicpenalcode

forsexualimpropriety?Acursebestservedal‐Saʿdī’shistoriographicalmotive.YūsufKoi,

hissonandgrandson’s hisoffspring’s penisesareasymbolofthecontinuityoftheroyal

lineageofSonghay.TheirseveredpenisesthereforesymbolizesthedemiseofSonghay.

WithoutapenisSonghaycouldnotproducetheoffspringnecessaryforthecontinuation

of theSonghayEmpire.Al‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad’scurseofYūsufKoicanbeseenas

foretelling the demise of the Songhay Empire. And who better to announce the

destructionoftheEmpirethanitsGod‐fearingandjustruler?Thesexualdebaucheryof

onlyonesonofal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammadwassufficienttowarrantthedestructionofthe

entireEmpire.

ThementionofYūsufKoishowsal‐Saʿdī’spoliticalmotive.Hefeaturesonlyinthe

Tārīkhal‐Sūdān.BoththeTārīkhal‐SūdānandtheTārīkhal‐fattāshgivethenamesof

49Ibnal‐Mukhtār,Tārīkhal‐fattāsh,140;Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,126.

21|P a g e

thirtyfoursonsofal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad,thesamenames,althoughaccordingto

bothal‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammadhadmoresons.Secondly,YūsufKoidoesnotfeature

prominentlyintheintheTārīkhal‐Sūdān,whetherintheSonghaystatebureaucracyor

asoneofthecontendersforthethrone,beforeoraftertheMoroccaninvasion.Onthe

otherhand,theTārīkhal‐fattāshdescribesMūsā’sactionasfickleness,notasimmoral

behaviourperse.50Inotherwords,theTārīkhal‐fattāshdoesnotmakealinkbetween

Mūsā’sundutifulbehaviourandGod’swrathandthedestructionofSonghay.Exposure

ofgenitalsisonlyembarrassmentofanindividual,whiledetachmentofthepenis

denotesthedemiseofanempire.

Thefollowingpropheticḥadīthsonsexualimmoralityasacauseofapocalypse political

collapse arehelpfultoappreciateal‐Saʿdī’semployingofAshʿarīkalāmtoachievea

politicalmotive,

Whenadultery/fornication zinā andusurybecomeapparent amongtheinhabitants ofatownthentheyhavebroughtonthemselvesthewrathandpunishmentofGod.51ThethingImostfearformyumma nation aftermydemiseisthedoing sodomy ofthepeopleof Prophet Lūṭ.Alas,thenletmyummaanticipatethewrathandpunishmentofGod…52Howwillyoufarewhenfivethingsbecomerampant?IseekrefugeinGodthat thefivethings bewithyouoryouencounterthem inyourlifetime .Wheneverobscenityproliferatesamongpeopleandisopenlypracticedamongthem,plagueandcalamitywillafflicttheminamannernotwitnessedbytheirpredecessors.Whenpeoplerefusetopaythezakāh almstax ,theywillhavenorainexcepttherain falling foranimals.Wheneverpeoplecheatinthemeasureandweight whenselling ,theywillbeafflictedwithyearsofhardship,scarcityofsuppliesandthetyrannyoftheruler.Whentheirrulersrulebyotherthanthatwhichhasbeenrevealed intheQur’an ,Godwillimposetheirenemiesonthemsothattheywill

50Ibnal‐Mukhtār,Tārīkhal‐fattāsh,139.51Al‐ḤākimMuḥammadbinʿAbdallāh,Al‐mustadrakʿalāal‐ṣaḥīḥayn,volume1 Beirut:Dāral‐Maʿrifa,1998 .52Aḥmadbinal‐ḤusaynAl‐Bayhaqī,Al‐jāmiʿlishuʿabal‐īmān,volume7 Riyāḍ:Maktabaal‐Rushd,2003 ,273‐274;Abīal‐ḤasanAl‐Ḥanafī,Ḥāshiyaal‐SindīʿalāibnMāja,2volumes Beirut:Dāral‐Jīl,n.d. .

22|P a g e

onlysalvagesomeofwhatisintheirpossession.AndwhentheysuspendtheBookofAllahandtheSunna themoralbehaviour ofHisMessenger Muḥammad ,Godwillmaketheirwrathamongthem.53

TheMoroccaninvasionandconquestofSonghaywasthusGod’spunishmentfor

Songhayroyals’indulgenceinadultery,sodomy,usury,mutualcursing,thedrinkingof

alcoholicdrinks,etc.54Al‐Saʿdīisexplicit:‘HenceGodtheSublimewroughtvengeance

uponthemthroughthisvictoriousexpeditionaryforce,strikingthemwithitfromafar.

Heinflictedseverelossonthem,sotheirrootswerecutoffattheirbase,likethose

mentionedintheaboveexampleandtheirilk.’55

Al‐Saʿdīshowsthattyrannyandotherinjusticeswerelikewisethecauseofthecollapse

ofMali,TuāregruleofTimbuktu,andthefallofthecityofJennetoSunniAli‐—allthree

priortotheSonghayEmpire.Mali’stremendouspowerandextraordinarymight

strengthleditsrulersandarmycommanderstohighhandednessandtheviolationof

people'srights.Godthereforepunishedthemthroughanarmyintheformofhuman

childrenwhodecimatedthemwithinasinglehour.TheTuāregraidedhomesand

draggeditsoccupantsoutbyforce.56

53Aḥmadbinal‐ḤusaynAl‐Bayhaqī,Al‐jāmiʿli‐shuʿabal‐īmān,volume5 Riyāḍ:Maktabatal‐Rushd,2003 ,22‐23.Theḥadīth report isrecordedinotherḤadīthCollectionswithsomedifferencesinthewording.54ThatmisfortuneandcalamityarearesultofsexualperversionisfoundinmanyculturesoftheNearEastformillennia.Forexample,accordingtoLeviticus18,thegoyimwereremovedfromthelandforcommittingsexualabomination;Ham’smerestarringatNoah’snuditybroughtonNoah’scurseofCanaantoperpetualservitude;see,EdwinYamauchi,“ThecurseofHam”,CTR,6,2, 2009 ,45‐60.OnancientMiddle‐Easternsexomens,seeAnnKesslerGuinan,“Auguriesofhegemony:thesexomensofMesopotamia”,Gender&History,9,3 1997 ,462‐479.55Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,194‐5.56Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,15.

23|P a g e

Theisticpre‐determination

AccordingtoAshʿarīkalām,everything,goodorbad,happensbythewillandpowerof

God.HumanbeingsdonothaveanychoiceinthefaceofGod’swill,knowledgeand

power.Godalonedecreesanddeterminesthevicissitudesofhistory.Asthe

fourth/tenth‐centuryAshʿarīscholar,AbūBakral‐Bāqilānīsays,“Allcontingencies in

history arecreatedbyGod:beneficialandharmful,beliefanddisbelief,obedienceand

sin.”Nothingrunsinthisworld,inhistoryexceptbythewillofGod;abelieverbeliefs

andadisbelieverdisbeliefsonlybythewillofGod;noaimescapesHiswish,etc.57

AshʿarīdismissviewsthatdenythatsinsarethecreatedbyGodasthefalsebeliefof

Muʿtazilīsandotherhereticalsects.ZaydīcumMuʿtazilī,58andTwelverShiʿī59scholars

arguethathumanbeingsaretheauthorsoftheiractions.Interestinglythefamous

Ḥasanal‐Baṣrī60,laterclaimedbySunniIslam,inalettertotheUmayyadCaliphͨAbdal‐

Mālikrefutethedoctrineoftheisticpre‐determination.

IndeednumerouspassagesintheTārīkhal‐Sūdānshowthatallthattranspiredwasby

God’spowerandwillandinhisknowledge

WhilstenroutebacktoGurmaatorrentovertookhim thetyrantSunniAli ataplacecalledKuna,bringingabouthisdeath,throughtheagencyoftheMightyandPowerfulOne.GodMostHighmadehis Al‐ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad kingdomprosper,givinghimpowerfulhelp,andgrantinghimsignalconquests.The

57Abūal‐ḤasanAl‐Ashʿarī,Kitābal‐lumaʿfīal‐raddʿalāahlal‐zayghwaal‐bidaʿ Cairo:MaṭbaʿatMiṣrSharikaMusāhamaMiṣriyya,1955 ,69‐79;AbūBakrAl‐Bāqilānī,Al‐inṣāffīmāyajibʿitiqāduhuwalāyajūzal‐jahlbih,3rdedition Cairo:Al‐Maktabaal‐Azharīyyalial‐Turāth,2000 ,41,151‐159;AbūBakral‐Bāqilānī,Kitābtamhīdal‐awāʾilwatalkhīṣal‐dalāʾil Beirut:Muʾassasatal‐Kutubal‐Thaqāfiyya,1987 ,341‐342.58Al‐QāsimAl‐Rasī,“Kitābal‐ʿadlwaal‐tawḥīd:wanafyal‐tashbīhʿanAllāhal‐wāḥidal‐ḥamīd”,inRasāʾilal‐ʿadlwaal‐tawḥīd,ed.MuḥammadʿImāra Cairo:Dāral‐Shurūq,1988 ,130‐148.59Al‐Sharīfal‐Murtaḍā,“Inqādhal‐bashrminal‐jabrwaal‐qadr”,inRasāʾilal‐ʿadlwaal‐tawḥīd,ed.MuḥammadʿImāra Cairo:Dāral‐Shurūq,1988 ,282‐341.60ḤasanAl‐Baṣrī,“Risālafīal‐qadr”,ininRasāʾilal‐ʿadlwaal‐tawḥīd,ed.MuḥammadʿImāra Cairo:Dāral‐Shurūq,1988 ,p.113‐119

24|P a g e

sorcerersaid,'Comeforthtome',andthereemergedfromthewater,bythepowerofGodMostHigh,amanresemblingtheAribanda‐farmainshapeandappearance.Wereitnotthatfatehascompelledme Askiyaal‐ḥājjMuḥammadbinAskiyaDāwūd tositonthisthronetoday,Iwouldnotdoso.Atthatpeoplewereveryafraid,butGoddispersedthatarmythroughhungerandthirst,andtheyscatteredhitherandthither.Theremainderreturnedhome,havingthroughthepoweroftheCreator accomplishednopartof theMoroccansulṭān al‐Manṣūr’splan.MūlāyAḥmadtoldthemthatthatland ofSonghay wouldbeexcisedfromthekingdomoftheSūdān,andheinformedthemhowmuchterritoryhisarmywouldsubdue,accordingtocertaindivinatoryprognosticationshehadcomeacross.ForGodmostHighhadforeknowledgethattheir Songhay kingdomwouldwaneandtheirstatedisappear,andnonecanreverseHisdecreeorhinderHisjudgement.Thatwasamightyarmy theMoroccanarmy thatcouldnotbeconfrontedanddefeatedexceptbyoneaidedandsupportedbyGodMostHigh.ActingunderthepowerofGodwhosecommandnoonecanreverseandwhosejudgmentnoonecanhinder,he AskiyaIsḥāqII madeforTinfiniinthelandoftheGurmapagans.WhentheSonghayfolkoutsidethetentsrealisedwhathadhappened,theyfled,andthoseforwhomGodhaddecreedsafetyescapedandreachedasecureplacewiththeircompanions.Thosewhosehourhadcomesuccumbedtoshotandsword.SublimeisHe,theLiving,theEverlasting,whosereignhasnoendingandtowhosedurationthereisnolimit.GodMostHighgavevictorytoQāʾidal‐Muṣṭafā,andtheTuāregforcesweredefeatedandfled.Godopenedthegatesofmiseryuponit.61

GodthenpredeterminedSonghay’simmoralbehaviourthenpunishedthemfortheir

deeds.Songhayhadnoindependentwillandpowertoact;evensorcery,regardedin

Islamasthethirdmajorsinaftershirkandmurder,islinkedtoGod’spower.God

changedSonghay’sprosperityintomiseryandinsecurityandfinallythedestructionof

theirempireatthehandsoftheMoroccanarmy.

Yetal‐Saʿdī’scarefulanddetailedaccountofSonghay’ssexualimmoralityandotheracts

andthechangeintheirfortunesuggestthatheproportionedthemwithresponsibility.

Thatal‐Saʿdīdoesadmitofhumanagencycanbeseenfromanotheraccountwhen

Hugu‐koray‐koiKamkulisaidtoAskiyaDāwūd,'Istheamirlying?IswearbyGod,itwas

notGodwhoshowedyouthis,butyourself.”AskiyaDāwūdclaimedthatnooneother

thanGodhadshownhimtoappointBukarʿAlīDūduasHiKoi,“Tellthisassembly,I

61Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,100–254

25|P a g e

haveaskedGodMostHighforadecisionastowhomIshouldgivechargeofthepeople

ofDendi”.62

ElsewhereintheTārīkhal‐Sūdān,thejuristKātibMūsā,theimamofTimbuktu’sGrand

Mosque,ascribeshisgoodhealthtoneversleepingintheopenair,alwaysoilinghis

body,alwaystakingawarmbathandnevermissingbreakfast.Thejuristmakesno

referencetoGod’swillorpower;heexplainshisgoodhealthinamannerunderstoodas

justhuman.Al‐Saʿdīmakesthelinkbetweenthejurist’sgoodhealthandGod.Inother

words,evenasal‐SaʿdīpowerfullyevokesGod’sknowledge,powerandwill,heappears

toattributeactualpowertohistoryandtime,i.e.agencytohumanbeingstoshapetheir

politicalandsocialexperienceinhistory.ButdoesthisnotcontradicttheAshʿarīnotion

oftime,thenegationofhumanpowerandfreewill?

TheconundrumofGod’sall‐imposingwillandpoweroverHiscreationontheonehand

andSonghayagency,i.e.time’spotencyshouldbereadthroughal‐Saʿdī’s

historiographicalmotiveandtheAshʿarīdoctrineofkalāmtoeffectchangeontheother

hand.ShowingthatwhattranspiredinSonghaywasaccordingtothewillofGod,inHis

knowledgeandbyHispower,whileassigningagencytohumanbeings,al‐Saʿdīafforded

hismotiveofreconcilingbetweenthethreeelitespalatability.Stabilitywasmuch

neededintheaftermathofthesocial‐politicalupheavalscausedprimarilybythe

Moroccaninvasionfollowedbytheintra‐Armarivalryoverpowerandtheanti‐Arma

62Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,146.

26|P a g e

resistanceoftheAskiyalineages althoughthearmedresistancelasteduntil1613 .In

short,al‐Saʿdīhehadtobe“contradicting”andhewasquiteprobablyawareofit.

WenowconsiderAshʿarīkalām’sal‐kasb doctrineoforacquisition .Kasbliterally

meanstoearn,forexample,ahumanbeingearningherlivelihood.ForAbūal‐Ḥasanal‐

Ashʿarītheessenceofal‐kasbisearningone’sactionsthoughnotcreatingitbecauseofa

forcecreatedorinstilledinthepersonbyGod.

“Thereality/essenceofal‐kasbiswhenamattertranspiresatthehandsoftheearner ofthehappeningofthematter viaapowerinstalledinhim/her.”Inotherwords,humanbeingsarenottheauthorsoftheiractions,however,theyearntheiractions,i.e.theconsequencesoftheiractions.“Totheservant belongs theearning ofanactionfoundedbyGod ;s/heisnotcoerced,buttheearnerofhis/herdeeds,bothobedienceandsin.”63

SomelaterAshʿarīsexplainal‐kasbasnotanegationofthehumanbeing’sabilitytoact,

butthats/heisunabletocreatethatactfromnon‐being al‐ʿadm ,i.e.bringtheactinto

existencefromnon‐existence.Theeffectofthehumanbeing’sagencythenisearning

whatGodhascreatedandbroughtintoexistencefromnon‐being.Humancapabilityand

abilityarethereforelinkedonlytoacontingentexistencethroughearningandnot

creating.64

TheMoroccaninvasionanddefeatofSonghaywereSonghay’searningoftheirsexual

debauchery,raiding,usurpationofpeople’sproperties,sellingoffreepersonsinto

63Abūal‐ḤasanAl‐Ashʿarī,Kitābal‐lumaʿfīal‐raddʿalāahlal‐zayghwaal‐bidaʿ Cairo:MaṭbaʿatMiṣr:1955 ,76;Al‐Bāqilānī,Al‐inṣāf,43.64IbnKamālBāsha,Al‐masāʾilal‐khilāfiyyabaynal‐Ashʿariyyawaal‐Māturīdiyya,unpublishedtreatise,10;al‐Bāqilānī,KitābTamhīd,323‐324;Al‐Ījī,ʿAbdal‐RaḥmānbinAḥmad,Al‐Mawāqiffīʿilmal‐kalāmBeirut:ʿĀlamal‐Kutub,n.d. .

27|P a g e

slaverydecreedbyGod.65Songhay’sroyalshadnochoicenorwillorpowertoavoid

committingthesesins.Muʿtazilī,Shiʿī,orKharijītheologicaldiscoursesandsomeearly

MuslimscholarsrejectanynotionofGodpredestininghumanactionandhumanbeings

nothavingchoice.

But all this may not explain how Songhay—and human beings throughout history—

“earned”theconsequencesoftheirsinsdespitethefactthatGodpre‐determinedtheir

sinfuldeeds.Whatmustbeunderstood,isthatwearedealingwiththeapplicationofa

theologicaldiscoursethataimedatmakingsenseofpoliticalrealities,ofteninwaysthat

arequiteclearlycontradictory.Butpoliticsandlogicdonotalwaysgohandinhand.

RebellionagainsttheArma

Asthenumberofpeoplewoundedbythe Arma musketeersincreased,thenotablescomplainedtothejuristQāḍīAbūḤafṣUmarwhoconsultedmenofsoundjudgementaboutthis.Somecounselledthattheyshouldberepelledbyforce,ifnecessary,whileothersadvisedcautionandrestraint.Meanwhiletheharmthey theArmamusketeers werecausingcontinuedtogetworse.OnenightQāḍīʿUmarsentAmar,thelegalassistanttothecommunalleaderofthoseofmixeddescent,ʿUmaral‐SharīfaskinghimtoannounceatoncethatpeopleshouldnotrisktheirlivesandshouldbewaryoftheArma.UnknowntotheQāḍī,Amarwasoneofthemostiniquitouspeopleinhistime,andhechangedhis theQāḍī’s words,saying,QāḍīʿUmarordersyoutoconductajihādagainstthem.66InSafarofthatyear 1592 thejurist,QāḍīAbūḤafṣʿUmarsentaletterasking thedivinelyfavouredShaykhSidiʿAbdallāhb.Mubārakal‐ʿĀnītoseekpardonforthemfromtheamirMūlāyAḥmadfortherevoltagainstQāʾidal‐Muṣṭafāthattheyhadbeenresponsiblefor.HewasalsodirectedtostatethatitwastheArmawhosetitoff,andthattheywereinobediencetoGodandHisProphet,andthereaftertoMūlāyAhmad.67

65Abūal‐Ḥasanal‐AshʿarīAl‐ibāna,65‐67;AbūJaʿfarAl‐Ṭaḥāwī,Matnal‐ʿaqīdaal‐ṭaḥāwiyya:bayānʿaqīdatahlal‐sunnawaal‐jamāʿa Beirut:DāribnḤazm,1996 ,22;Al‐Juwaynī,ʿAbdal‐Mālik,Kitābal‐irshād Cairo:Maktabatal‐Khānajī,1950 ,189–192.66Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,205.67Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,217.

28|P a g e

TheQāḍī’sinstruction,thedescriptionofʿAmar,andQāḍīʿUmar’sseekingofMūlāy

Aḥmad’spardonindicateanon,infact,anti‐revoltpositioninlinewithAshʿarīkalām.

Elsewhereal‐SaʿdīhasthenotablesofJennerejecttheanti‐Armarebels’demandthat

thepeopleofJennepledgeallegiancetotheAskiyaasbothimpossibleandcontraryto

thesharīʿa.68TheAshʿarīSchoolproscribesrebellionagainstpoliticalauthorityevena

sinfulandunjustMuslimrulerincludingonewhoassumedpowerthroughforceby

overthrowingtheincumbentauthority.Thisaslongastherulerdoesnotpreventthe

performanceofthedailyprayers.69

TheArmarulersofTimbuktuwereunjustandsinnersasal‐Saʿdīclearlyshowsand,in

fact,theirinvasionanddestructionoftheMuslimSonghayauthoritywasunlawful;

however,theydidnotpreventthepeopleofSonghayfrompraying.Al‐Saʿdī’santi‐

revoltwritingwasnotasimplisticapplicationofAshʿarīkalām.Infact,al‐Saʿdīwasnot

concernwiththeologybutprimarilywithpolitics:hispoliticsofreconciliation.

Al‐SaʿdīpresentingQāḍīʿUmarAbūḤafṣasnotsupportingrebellionagainsttheArma

evenastheyoppressedthepeopleofTimbuktu,i.e.al‐Saʿdī’santi‐revoltwritingshould

bejuxtaposedtohimpresentingtheQāḍīasaresistancefigure.Thusal‐Saʿdīpresents

QāḍīʿUmarAbūḤafṣrefusingtomeetwithJawdarPasha,thecommanderofthe

Moroccanforce,whenthelatterrequestedameeting,therebyrefusingtheArma

68Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,210.69Foradetailedaccountonthequestionofrisingupagainstandremovaloftheunjust,sinfulMuslimruler,see,ʿAbdallāhAl‐Dumayjī,Al‐imāmaal‐ʿuẓmaʿindaahlal‐sunnawaal‐jamāʿa Riyad:Dāral‐Ṭība,2009 ,502‐518.Al‐DumayjīdiscussesindetailthediscrepantviewsoftheMuslimtheologiansandjurists.TheoverwhelmingnumberofAhlal‐Sunnascholars,mostlyAshʿarī,wereagainstrebelliondeclaringitnotpermissible.

29|P a g e

hospitality.TheQāḍīsufficedwithsendingthemuezzinYahmatomeetwithJawdar.

AccordingtotheTārīkhal‐fattāsh,JawdarPashametQāḍīAbīḤafṣinthelatter’shouse,

kissedtheQāḍī’sheadandfeetandsethumblyinfrontofhim.70Al‐Saʿdī’swritings

showsaduality:pragmatism reconciliationofthethreeelites andsimultaneouslyhis

resistancetoArmarule.

NumerouspassagesintheTārīkhal‐Sūdānshowpragmatismfromal‐Saʿdī’swritingon

theonehandandresistancefromhiswritingontheotherhand.Forexample,thekhaṭīb

MaḥmūdDarāmīwelcomedJawdar'sforcesandhonouredthemwithamagnificent

banquet;thetwoconversedatlength,andthekhaṭībshowedhimthegreatestrespect

anddeference.71

However,MaḥmūdDarāmīdisapprovedwhentwosonsofAskiyaDāwūdwantedto

swearallegiancetoPashaMaḥmūd;heinstructedthemtoreturnandjointheirbrothers

andpeopleintheanti‐Armaresistance.72Variousotherscholarsdisplayaspiritof

resistance.73

Conclusion

70MaḥmūdKaʿt,Tārīkhal‐fattāsh Bamako:ImprimerieManganeetFils,2015 ,208.71Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,192.72Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,202.73JohnHunwick’stranslationoftheTārīkhal‐SūdānhasasepigraphbyAḥmadBābāal‐SūdānīconveyingsalutationstothepeopleofTimbuktuviatravellersgoingtoGaofromhisexileinMorocco.AḥmadBābāsendinghisgreetingstoTimbuktuviaGaowasanactofresistance.Inotherwords,hecouldhavesentsalutationsdirectlytoTimbuktuaspeopletravelleddirectlytoTimbuktuaswell.HissendinggreetingsviaGao,thepoliticalseatofthedefeatedSonghayEmpire,indicatesAḥmadBābā’scontinuedallegiancetotheSonghayStateandAskiyalineages.Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,vii.

30|P a g e

Foral‐Saʿdī,historywaspraiseworthyandameanstosalvation.Alreadyinthe

introductionofhistārīkh,al‐Saʿdīspeaksaboutitsimportanceandindispensability.He

lamentsSonghay’slatergenerations,includinghisown,fornotappreciatinghistory.

Theirneglectofhistoryscaredal‐Saʿdīandpropelledhimintowritingahistoryof

Songhay.

NowwhenIsawthatbranchoflearningfadingawayanddisappearing,anditscoinagebeingdebased—thoughrecognizingittobeofgreatbenefit,andtocontainmanygemsofwisdom ,sinceitinstructsamanabouthisnativeland,hisancestors,theirdifferinggenerations,theirchronologies,andthedatesoftheirdecease—IsoughtthehelpofGod–SublimeisHe—inrecordingthestoriesandhistoricaltraditionsthathavebeenhandeddownaboutthekingsoftheSūdān,theSonghayfolk,theirconduct,andtheirmilitaryexploits,recountingthefoundationofTimbuktu,thekingswhoruledit,andsomeofthescholarsandpiousfolkwhosettledthere,andsoforth…

ButwritingatārīkhwasnotsimplyaboutnostalgiaforSonghay’sgloriousdaysgoneby

orevenaboutthemorallessonstobelearnedfromthechanges thoughtheremaybe

elementsofallthat .HewroteSonghay’shistoryasatrajectoryofdeclinefroma

gloriouspasttodeclineandmiseryinordertosalvagethepresenthelivedin.Apresent

markedandmarredbysocialandpoliticalupheavalscausedbytheMoroccaninvasion

ofSonghay.Therewasaneedforstabilityamidstthechaosthatpervadedseventeenth‐

centurySonghay.Herelieshismotive.Themotivewaspoliticalmotive;concernedthe

makingofSonghay’shistoryinthetroubledseventeenthcentury.TheKātib’sascribing

ofhisgoodhealthtomundaneeverydaymeasuressuchasbreakfast,oilingofhisbody,

etc.wasaprivateandsocialmattermeaningithadnopoliticalsignificanceandduring

thegoodprosperousdaysofTimbuktuandSonghay.Therewas“noneed”forGod’s

intervention.

Al‐Saʿdīemployed,amongmanyresources,Ashʿarīkalām.Hedidnotdabblein‘pure’

theology;hedidnotwearhistheologyonhissleeves.HewasnotFranzFanon’sinitial

31|P a g e

fatalistcolonizednativewhoremovesallblamefromthe Moroccan oppressorand

attributesthemisfortunes oftheMoroccaninvasion toGod,asGodisFate.74Hisusage

ofAshʿarīpreceptssuchaskasbwastorealizeapoliticalmotiveinhishistoriography,

toreconcilebetweenthethreeelites.ThedefeatofSonghayandMoroccantakeoverand

occupationhadtobeordainedbyGodotherwiseitwouldbeneitherpossible,

permissiblenordesirableforal‐SaʿdītoreconcilebetweentheoldSonghayroyalsand

thenewMoroccanconquerors.

Al‐Saʿdī’sascribingofthedestructionofSonghaytoGod,hisrefusaltorebelagainst

Armarule,thewholeprojectofreconciliationmaybeconstruedashissupportand

sanctionoftheMoroccaninvasionandoccupationofSonghay.Thiswouldbeamistake.

HisdetailedandfavourableaccountofSonghay’sprotractedresistanceagainstthe

Moroccanoccupationupto1613isindicativeofoppositiontotheMoroccaninvasion.75

Hisaccountsofthescholars’responsetotheArmashowresistance.Itwashowever,a

‘passive’resistance.

InlinewithMoraesFarias’suggestionthat‘Thetārīkhwriterswereinfactinventinga

newideaoftheSahelianpast”76,YūsufKoi’ssexualdebaucherycanwithplausibilitybe

viewedasacreationofal‐Saʿdī’shistoriography.Hemayevennothavebeenasonofal‐

ḥājjAskiyaMuḥammad.Iwouldgofurthertosuggestthatthewholenarrativeofthe

74FrantzFanon,Thewretchedoftheearth Paris:GroveWeidenfeld,1973 ,54.75AskiyaMuḥammadGaobeganthemilitaryresistanceagainsttheArma.HisbrotherAskiyaNūḥcontinueditfollowingtheformer’streacherousmurderatthehandsoftheArmaduringpeacetalks.SomeoftheAskiyalineagesacceptedArmarulesuchasSulaymānappointedAskiyaofGaobyPashaMaḥmūdZarqūn;Hunwick,Timbuktu&theSonghayEmpire,p.200‐212.FormoreonSonghay’sresistance,seeLansineKaba“Archers,musketeers,andmosquitoes:theMoroccaninvasionoftheSudanandtheSonghayresistanceI59I‐16I2”,JournalofAfricanhistory22 1981 ,457‐475.76MoraesFarias,Intellectualinnovation,96.

32|P a g e

Songhayroyals’sexualdebaucheryisal‐Saʿdī’sinvention,oratleastanembellished

reconstruction.Oraswiththecarnivoroushorses,YusufKoiandtheSonghayroyals’

sexualdebaucherymayhavebeenaproductofpaganoralcythatal‐Saʿdīreworked.

Timbuktu’sseventeenth‐centuryhistoriansaimedatreinforcingthesymboliccapitalof

theAskiyalineagesdeployingwritingstrategiesthatpreventednarrativebreakswhere

evidencewasmissing.77Al‐SaʿdīwasnotVoltaire’sJesuiticalhistorian,whocouldnever

tellatruetale,muchlesswriteatruehistory.78Heskilfullyandelegantlypracticedthe

historian’scraft.79Premodernhistoriographypracticedtheartoftellingstories.80Al‐

Saʿdīwasastoryteller.

77MoraesFarias,Intellectualinnovationandreinvention,96.78Quotedin,ParthaChatterjee,Theblackholeofempire:historyofaglobalpracticeofpower RanikhetCantt:PermanentBlack,2012 ,44‐45.79Thegoodhistorian,accordingtopre‐modernMuslimhistorianal‐Masʿūdī,islikeawoodpecker.QuotedinKhalidi,Tarif,Islamichistoriography:thehistoriesofMasʻūdī Albany:StateUniversityofNewYourPress,1975 ,5‐6.80MicheldeCerteau,Thepracticeofeverydaylife Berkley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1984 ,81.