Koro and Gbagyi Intergroup Relations in Central Nigeria

Filaba and Gojeh, KORO AND GBAGYI SUBGROUP RELATIONS


KORO AND GBAGYI SUBGROUP RELATIONS IN CENTRAL NIGERIA

BY

DR. MAILAFIYA ARUWA FILABA [email protected]

Assoc. Prof. Department of History, Jimma University, Ethiopia.

AND

DR. LAWRENCE ABRAHAM GOJEH [email protected]

Asst. Prof. Department of Information Studies, Jimma University, Ethiopia.

2008

mailto:[email protected]


KORO AND GBAGYI SUBGROUP RELATIONS

First published in Ethiopia 2008

Copyright © by Filaba and Gojeh 2008

All Rights Reserved. Apart from fear dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the copyright Act 1988, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the Publishers. Enquiries should be sent to the authors through the following E-mails: [email protected] and [email protected] ISBN 978-99944-809-3-1 Cover Design: MAF Typeset in 12 Book Antiqua

iv

mailto:[email protected]


TABLE OF CONTENT Plate 1: Dogon Kurmi (Uner) in Kagarko………….7 Map 1 Locations of the Koro and Gbagyi peoples

in their States of origins …………………….5 MAP 2: Where the Gbagyi and Koro People

Were found in the 15th Century …...61 Title page……………………………………………..iii Table of Content……………………………………..v Acknowledgement...……………………………….vii CHAPTER ONE: Introduction Background ……………………………….………….1 Location And the Life-zone The Location ………………………………………….4 The Life-zone ………………………………………...6 CHAPTER TWO: Perspectives of Intergroup

Relations Religious, Ethnic and Racial Conflicts …………...13 Trade Perspective …………………………………..30 Coexistence, Mutual Relations Perspective ……...32 Conclusion …………………………………………..34 CHAPTER THREE: Common Historical

Experience as the Beginning of Koro-Gbagyi Intergroup Relations

Origins of Koro Peoples...………………………….35 Origins of Gbagyi People ………………………….44 Common Historical Experience Encouraging

Subgroup Relations ………………...55 CHAPTER FOUR: Koro and Gbagyi Cultural Values, Social Psychology and Subgroup Relation

v


Influence of the Natural Environment on Inter- relations, Share of Natural Resource & Trade .. 65 Similar Cultural Practices ……………………....... 78 CHAPTER FIVE: Conclusion ……………………..91 REFERENCES ………………………………...…….94

vi


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Access to some libraries immensely contributed to the success of this work. We are grateful to the permission of Arewa House Kaduna (National Archives Kaduna NAK), Ibrahim Kashim Library (KIL) Ahmadu Bello University Zaria, Nasarawa State Library and Northern History Research Scheme (NHRS) Department of History A.B.U. Zaria, to access archival records, theses and secondary sources, which enabled recovery of facts. We are also greatly indebted to Mr. Daniel J. Magaji of Niger State for scouting for some published works on the people for us.

vii


BACKGROUND

Koro and Gbagyi people are linguistically two distinct groups, but known for contiguous abodes, unshakeable peace and unflinching tolerance even with other distinct neighbours interspersed among them. Koro and Gbagyi ideal life and aspiration are tolerance and respect for others, which they believe are indispensable for survival and productivity. Although their languages are completely different, they always identify themselves as having common historical experience, abode and culture. They claim that their forefathers migrated together from their ancestral home Borno and still living together in central Nigeria. There are instances whereby other groups interspersed amongst them interact with them at various levels. This puzzle of Koro and Gbagyi social psychology attracts scholarly interest to examine the binding forces.

In the larger inter-group relations in heterogeneous settlements, other groups are most comfortable with Gbagyi for their humour, human relations, accessibility peace and docility. In their ranking they are: Koro, Kadara, Bassankomu, Gade, Ganagana-Nupe, Kurama, Hausa (Maguzawa), Zuru and Kamberi. They identify with the Gbagyi through joking relation, common facial marks, sharing of foods, traditional/cult

1


consultations, moving together in the market or social occasion, and sometimes forging common origin although they have different primogenitures. Those who identify closest to Koro in their ranking are Gbagyi, Kadara, Hausa/Fulani, Ganagana, Yeskwa, Gwandara and Jaba. This book is mainly on Koro and Gbagyi subgroup idiosyncrasy, which the authors believe is a desideratum.

Co-existence and tolerance are very expensive commodities in any given situation, and very much a desideratum for the survival and corporate existence of a plural and secular Republic of Nigeria now bedeviled by conflicts of all sorts. No amount of energy and resources are too much for studying how the Koro and Gbagyi and their neighbours have lived contiguously in harmony, sustained and perpetuated their cultures, coexistence and tolerate each other since centuries, from which to borrow a leaf. Politicians and academicians may want to know the forces that attract and sustain the Koro and Gbagyi subgroup coexistence and tolerance even during the dispensation of political craft of outwitting neighbours.

There may be some meanings beyond the purvey of the two groups in their relations and superficial claims, which should be studied. How they relate and influence each other and other neighbours are the issues of this work. In this

2


endeavour the book is organized as follow: Chapter One focuses on the introduction, locations and sizes of the Koro and Gbagyi in central Nigeria, and the relative impact of the physical geography on the life-zone. Chapter Two considers the various perspectives of intergroup relations in the Middle Belt in order to know the nature of Koro and Gbagyi subgroup interrelations. Chapter Three focuses on their alleged common history and experiences as the beginning of Koro and Gbagyi sub-group relations. It also critically assesses their legend of origins. Chapter Four identifies the various arenas of Koro and Gbagyi sub-group relations, cultural values and social psychology. Chapter Five is the conclusion.

LOCATION AND THE LIFE-ZONE

The location

Koro and Gbagyi subgroup are found in Nasarawa State, Federal Capital Territory Abuja (FCT), Niger and Kaduna States. In Kaduna State, they live together in Kagarko Local Government Area (LGA) in Koro and Jere Chiefdoms. In Niger State, they live together in Kuta, Chanchaga and Suleija. In the FCT, they live together in the whole of Bwari and Abuja Municipal Area Council (AMAC).

3


The region of Koro in central Nigeria is in Kaduna, Niger and Nasarawa States and the FCT Abuja. However, the Koro of Kaduna State is located in Kachia, Kagarko and Jaba LGAs. Their population was given by Barret in 1972 was 45, 000 (Gordon, 2005). There was no estimate for the Koro of Nasarawa State in Panda, Karu, Keffi LGAs where they live very contiguous with the Gbagyi. The Koro of Lafia are about 50,000 as at 1985 (Gordon, 2005). Large number of Koro live in Niger State but their population for the same period was not available. In the FCT, the live in the northern part, particularly in Ija, Zuba, Wuse, Abuchi, Tuchi, Dogon Kurmi, Dusten Alhaji, Kawu and Bwari. No estimated population was available for them for the same period.

The Gbagyi are found in all the LGAs in Niger State. In Kaduna State, they are in Birnin Gwari, Chikun, Kagarko, Kaduna North, Kaduna South, Igabi and Kauru LGAs. In Nasarawa State, they are found in Keffi, Nasarwa, Toto and Karu LGAs. They are spread across the whole FCT. The Gbagyi have two dialects the Gbagyi and Gbawyi/Gbari, and Gordon (2005) estimated their population to 700, 000 and 350,000 respectively by the year 2000. Prof. Paden estimated population of all the Gbagyi in Nigeria in 1985 to be between 4 – 5 million (Paden, 1986:319; Bawa, 1999:62).

Map 1 shows Nigeria with the present 4


location of Koro and Gbagyi people in central Nigeria and their States of origin.

MAP1: LOCATION OF THE KORO AND GBAGYI PEOPLE AND THEIR STATES OF ORIGIN

5

Sokoto State Kebbi Zamfara Katsina Jigawa Yobe Borno Kano State State State State State State State Kaduna Bauchi Gombe Niger State State State State Kwara Adamawa Plateau State State FCT Nasarawa State State Kogi Tara ba State Benue State State Lagos Koro country Gbagyi country


Life-zone

People here derive their livelihood from the environment in similar ways from the environmental wealth and thus have strong cultural affinities. The most conspicuous physical characteristics of the area are the topography and drainage with ranges of hills of base granite outcroppings (inselbergs) with Kurape hill the highest 2,666 ft - 1,422m high (compared to Zuma rock 2,362 ft – 1,260m) on high lands of about 16,000 ft above sea level in Abuja-Nigeria.

The hills protrude through Abuja but cut off with plains making it becoming dotted down to the confluence of Kogi State. These hills serve as the water-heads for rivers Gurara and Uke in Kaduna and Nasarawa States respectively. Although the life zone is in the Guinea Savannah, there are many patches of densely thick forests of several square kilometers, some of them running along the banks of rivers. Because of such features, some of the Koro villages are nicknamed “Dogonkurmi” (Gojeh, Jatau & Mamman, 1998:22-23). Plate 1 shows a typical forest of Dogonkurmi (Uner) of Kagarko LGA of Kaduna State:

6


PLATE 1: DOGONKURMI (UNER) KAGARKO LGA

The area is further blessed with numerous streams with local names some of which are tributaries of rivers Uke, Gurara, Tafa and Sosugun. The natural environment and the weather opportunities and challenges have been greatly influencing human habitation of the region and evolution of their technology, mythology, inter-relations and so on. In fact, many scholarly works have demonstrated the extent of the influence and significance of natural environment on man and historical changes in Nigeria (Ukwedeh, 1987:69). The conducive weather and the physical environment here supported life since time immemorial. In the life zone, the pattern of settlement, some socio-cultural, economic and political transformation occurred in a peculiar way.

Evidence of human existence and sedentary 7


culture in Central Nigeria was provisionally dated back to over 40,000 years Before Present (BP) and characterized with Nok culture, which flourished from about the 6th century BC to the 1st century AD (Jemkur, 1986; Walu, 2005:77-87). Sangoan tools used by the earliest people were found in long abandoned settlements and dated about 40,000 B.C. (Soper, 1965:175 - 194; Shaw, 1978:31-32).

Oral tradition refers to Kurape near old Karshi, Kagarko and other hills as where they originated, while others trace their origins to far away Hausa cities, Borno and beyond. Kurape could be the earliest polity that emerged and controlled the area since time immemorial. There could have been civilizations before Kurape but too remote beyond the retention of oral tradition. The kingdom later splinted and had Jere, Kurudu, Kuta, Karu, Pei and other semi-independent sister kingdoms in the mid 19th century. Similarly in the mid 19th century, the Nupe annexed part of its kingdom to the west, and Igugbaka (later known as Igu and Opanda kingdom) on the confluence rose. Zaria sub-Emirates of Keffi-Nasarawa rose in the east and Abuja kingdom to the north.

Similarly, the new Bassa, Gwandara-Gade, some Koro, Hausa, Fulani and others who came to live among them organized themselves along kinship ties and bounded by tribal cultural ceremonies. Inter-tribal marriage among the groups was very difficult due to early betrothal,

8


marriage by exchange, and different cultural pre-requisites for marriage. This made them to believe they were ‘independent’ chiefdoms under their priests who controlled them wherever they were outside their villages, but without authority over non-tribes/kins. In deed, people occasionally paid homage and attended tribal ceremonies outside the towns/regions they lived and gave more allegiance to their priests than to their town heads, just as the case is among Muslims and Christians.

Topography has been very significant to the life zone here. The plains are between 500 to 600 meters above sea level with some hills as high as 900 meters above the sea level made of older granite and black rocks. The hills attracted human settlements due to the opportunities that they offered as natural resources.

The land has varying proportion of silica, salt, nitrogen and phosphorus. It is alluvial and sticky in the paddy areas and sandy on the up-lands and fertile. They make plants grow well. The nitrogen needed by both plants and animals, and enabled survival since periods beyond reconstruction. The red ore and brown loams have granite, schist and sandstone that develop good humus for the growth of plants (Wall 1978:9-10; Pritchard 1973:37). The boom in agricultural production is related to the fertility of the soils. It is interesting to note here that farming in this region is of great antiquity. The ethnobotanical and

9


archaeological findings suggest that farming dates back to 3,000 BP, and that the cultural styles of the figurines have striking similarities with the hair and dressing styles of the present inhabitants (Clark 1960:19), particularly the Gbagyi pottery (Naibi and Hassan, 1969; Jemkur, 1986; Walu, 2005).

Despite this evidence of fertility and productivity of the soil in this region with ancient farming, some scholars alleged that the soils in the Middle Belt lying between 7.5oN and 10oN of Africa are not as fertile as the soils in the Forest and Sahel belts. They argued that the tropical soils are generally poor, and the whole “African continent was ill situated for cultivators” since “agriculture here did not possess the rich potentialities that belonged to it in other regions.” This Eurocentric speculation led to the conclusion that such plight of Africa was the cause of its poor agricultural method and scanty population (Ohiare, pp.429-432; Filaba, 1994:13-15). It seems they argued so as sadists in attempt to cover the under-pricing and massive export of African products to Europe. This attempt was very apparent when Gunn and Conant emphasized that the Gbagyi were noted for poor farming method which consequence poor harvest, their cotton and groundnuts were of poor quality, and that yam was introduced to them! (Gunn, 1960:90). However, scholars like C. Wringley dismissed such

10


speculations, and argued that the tropics is neither desert nor jungle but savannah with easily worked soils and has rapid vegetation growths which provide a more suitable agricultural environment than the arid sub-tropics or the cold dark forest of the temperate zones (Wringley, 1970:68). This is true because a recent study of the Central Nigeria by J.A. Ohiare referred to many studies and revealing that the region grows more crops than the other belts of Nigeria and most suitable for agriculture than the Forest or Sahel belts.

In deed recent agricultural researches and demonstrations in this area are evident that the area is one of the best zones for Nigerian potential extensive and large-scale agricultural investment (Ohiare, 1987:429-432). The River Basins Developments and the Agricultural Development Projects in Nigeria are concentrated in the Middle Belt. Even the comparatively lower population density of the central Nigeria was caused by the 19th century slave raids of Jihadists (Bingel (1991:24-62).

Furthermore, the climate of this region greatly influences the floral and fauna. The dominant vegetation of this region is guinea savannah. Patches of forest, tall grass with scattered trees and bushes, characterize the vegetation type. The secondary vegetation cover of short trees, shrubs and grass are a result of many centuries’ farming activities, bush burning to hunt

11


the fauna, cutting down of wood for crafts, rafters, fuel, ash water and iron smelting and smiting and so on. The significance of the physical environment to the survival and intergroup relations in the region is elaborately discussed in chapter four here under the influence of natural environment.

Conducive climate and environmental opportunities in this region reveal the possibility of human history and continuity since earliest time beyond oral tradition. Archeological inferences reveal consistent sedentary life since earliest time and the indigenous inhabitants are the direct successors. The glottostatistics further corroborates the millennium old existence of some of the Kwa or Benue-Congo group of languages whose proto-language is spoken there since 6,000 years ago (Obayemi, 1971:201; Hansford et al 1976; Greenberg , 1979 and Armstrong, 1962). These facts help us to dismiss the crafted 1750 A.D. held by the colonial historiography as the earliest date for the peopling of the region.

12


CHAPTER TWO

PERSPECTIVES OF INTER-GROUP RELATIONS

Introduction There are many perspectives of inter-group

relations, as scholars differ in areas of interest for emphasis on relations among distinct tribes or communities and settlements.

Religious, Ethnic and Racial Conflicts Since time immemorial, some politicians,

community and religious leaders and journalists understood inter-group relations to be religious struggle and intolerance. Religious inclination informs many people’s worldview, initiatives and response to issues. The religious understandings of issues often out-burst in violent conflicts and favouratism in the scheme of things, social psychology, phobia, and political ideology (Hackett, 2006).

Undermining other forms of inter-group and subgroup relations, Arab-writers and the colonial historiography created the impression that life in the Central and Western Sudan was merely wars and counter wars between cities and between tribes, super-ordination of ‘superior’ (crafty, imperial and war-like nomads and brutal tribes)

13


over the ‘inferior’ sedentary, productive and non-imperial groups (Usman, 1977). The exaggerations collected from the informants painted their past more grandiose. In deed, oral tradition is predominantly stories of wars and conquests, and this perspective is very clear in documented traditions. For instance, Kano Chroniclers collected traditions, which claimed that when the 15th Sarki of Kano was Dauda Bakon Damisa, Muslim Malamai from Bornu flooded Kano. He introduced guns, trumpets, horses, drums and flags. Kano was rapidly increasing in size. He engaged Zaria in war, and that:

At that time Zaria, under Queen Amina, conquered all the towns as far as Kwararafa and Nupe. Every town paid tribute to her. The Etsu Nupe sent forty Eunuchs and ten thousand kolas to her. She first had eunuchs and cola in Hausaland. Her conquest extended over thirty-four years. In her time the produce of the west were brought to Hausaland (Hodgkin, 1970:106-7) Ohiare reported how central Sudan was

engrossed in predilection of conflicts and informed the complex nature and changing diplomacy cum alliances that characterized inter-relations in the region in the 19th century:

characterized by political instability, social unrest, tenuous relationship

14


between the groups and classes, and economic dissatisfaction. This state of affairs manifested itself in various ways, such as succession disputes. This factionalized the society into antagonistic groups each of which was ever ready to team up with a third force to oust the other, not caring whether such a third force favoured the corporate existence of the state (Ohiare, 1987: 382). Believing that existence and inter-relations

are the struggle of the fittest, and should be purely religious, ethnic and racial, super-ordinate and subordinate relations, some individuals and syndicates acted along such lines, and as proviso for ideology and orientation. For instance, as from the 1st century the Arabs penetrated Africa and Europe and established international network of raiding and empire building with strong religious cum racial discrimination and super-ordination as main intergroup relation (Mosca, 1938:222-243; Okoye, 1968:68-69). Thus, some warriors thought that by right of religion or race, they must force others to submit to their powers. They issued threats and engaged in attacking their victims (Filaba, 2004:3). Mohammed Bello thus threatened the ruler of Opanda (Funda) in 1824:

Ruler of Fundah! Deliver up your country, your riches, your people and your slaves to the beloved of

15


God/Muslim. Mohammed Bello, king of all the Muslims, without reluctance on your part; for if you do not, ... he will shed your blood, and the blood of your children, and the blood of your household; not one shall be left alive....(Lander, 1960:47-55).

Similarly, the Emir of Nassarawa requested for guns from the Royal Niger Company (RNC) with which to fight and capture the ‘pagan’ neighbours, because, according to him his people:

were not tillers of the soil, they did not dig the ground neither did they parter wory or palm the oil like the merchants… no, they were fighting people; they fought the pagans and made slaves of them (MackDonald, 1958:512).

This influenced European scholars to infer that intergroup relation in Africa was but mainly conflicts. The ethnic and religious characters of the raiding parties made the European travelers conclude that the Moslems considered the raids on their neighboring non-Moslems a pleasant and profitable way of spending the dry season (Lander, 1830:47-55; Laird and Oldfield, 1960:90). The raids were characterized by wholesale plunder of the pagan populace and caused absence of social cohesion and “reduced them to a state of complete economic and moral paralysis” (Meek, 1931:257-

16


258 & 287 – 293). Allen and Thompson described the relations between the Fulani and the Nupe as Fulani’s exploitation, as they “had the whole Nupeland [sic.] as their subjects whom they “continually robbed of their agricultural implements, their clothes, their crops, and even their children” and kept them “in a state of constant terror and poverty” (Allen, 1968:90). This brought contempt on the Fulani and were “described as the most barbarous in the world” and “appeared more as spies whose countenances indicated that they were engaged in bad course” (Clapperton and Lander, 1830:314).

The undue emphasis on crises-predilection as the main nature of inter-group relation in the area could be inferred from this excerpt:

About the beginning of the 19th century the Fulani invasion commenced in earnest. .. It was not until about the end of the 18th century that the more Northern District of Nassarawa Province began to suffer from slave-raiders and that parties of Fulani and Habe commenced to settle in them. The first ten years of the 19th century saw certain Fulani and Habe family established in fortified strongholds from whence they raided the surrounding country, and sent northwards long caravans of slaves. They penetrated southwards and even crossed

17


the Benue and raided in the Idah Kingdom. The end of the 19th century saw a complete ruins and depopulation of the Province….

In Nassarawa country, a once fertile and populous province, one can only see the remains and ruins of large and totally deserted town, bearing witness to the desolation rough by hundred years of internecine strife and slave raiding by the Fulani.

The remaining inhabitants of much towns fled to the hills in all directions.; those who approached the Eastern and North-Eastern mountains of the Province, until they learned how to defend themselves, were further raided by the Headhunting tribes who inhabit these hilly localities. Others intermarried with Headhunting tribes and themselves adopted their customs. Such was the state of the Province when the arrival of Sir Freiderichk Lugard put a stop to the slave-raiding and evolved law and order out of chaos and ruin (Sciortinor, 1920:5).

In the same religious and racial vein, the British traders and colonizers further over-stressed differences among Africans along tribal and

18


religious lines with preference for Muslims. Baikie gave a proviso to the British to:

if obliged always give preference to a Mohammedan as a worshipper of God to an Idolater; never pay any respect to Heathen Chiefs or Kings below the Confluence [Lokoja]; with the King of Nupe and Hausa be more particular. Their superior intelligence, civilization, position and influence entitle them to a larger respect and difference (Ohiare, 1987:473).

The British also believed that intergroup relations was violence, and conquered Africa and ruled it by violence and preferred Muslims as trade allies and agents of the colonial conquest and rule. The designated ‘pagan’ communities were subordinated to the Emirates and were denied infrastructures and lucrative appointments (Turaki, 1983; Mohammed, 1987; Filaba, 1994). However, historical reality revealed that the colonial emphasis on religion as the basis for preference was fallacious, as religion was not encouraged by the colonial policies, nor was religion the essence of the colonization. The preference was on the basis of who best pitilessly imposed the colonial repression on the subjects for maximum imperial exploitation (Filaba, 2006:62).

The agents of colonial rule faithfully entrenched the racial and sectarian bias, and Sir

19


Ahmadu Bello’s commitment was exemplary. He proclaimed:

I would very much like not only the Federation of Nigeria, but the whole world, to become Moslem. If it does, many of the complicated problems that face it today will fall away. For example, since Islam does not permit lying and cheating and double-dealing, a country that has Islam as its official religion would infinitely be a better country in which love would be king, in which truth will be the basis of the conducts of all human affairs and in which equal opportunity for all would be granted, not by an act of legislation, but by the call of Islam. I will continue, both in my private and public capacities, to mix religion with politics. To me the two are inseparable (Bello, 1965). Since then the Muslims have been making

frantic effort to ensure that Shari’a is included in the Nigerian Constitution (Usman 1979). To conceive inter-group relations to be mainly the state of rulers and the ruled, heroes and vanquished, super-ordinate and subordinate, the rule of superior groups, and so on, were serious conceptions that informed the colonial government to forge new societies by re-grouping Africans and subordinated the perceived ‘inferior tribes’ under the acclaimed ‘intelligent ones’. The colonial

20


policies vividly describe the repressive measures and the creation and institutionalization of District Heads and their emissaries (Turaki, 1993; Filaba, 2001:47-65); Filaba et al, 2007:35-71).

To intellectually justify subordination of the resisting ‘pagan’ groups to the cooperating Muslims, they documented traditions showing that the ‘pagans’ were always under the Muslims. The cooperating Muslims also misinformed them by claiming that they had always ruled the ‘pagans’. Temple (1960:i) made it clear that anthropologists got their information on legend of ‘pagans’ from non-tribes. That must be why most names of Koro and Gbagyi places and things are in Hausa terms. They used different terms intended to refer to Koro or Gbagyi without using the name Koro or Gbagyi. For Gbagyi, they used Eastern Gwari (Gwarin Gabas), Western Gwari (Gwarin Yamma), Gwarin Hausa, Gwari Kunu, Bataci, Zazi kati, Gbari Bauta, Matai, Matayi, Matali, Vwezhi, Ngenge, Genge, Gyange, Gyen-gyeng, Yemma, Botai, Jezhu, Konge, Kwange, Agbawyi, Wake, Waiki, Wahe, Wi, Genguen, Ganagana, Gayegi, Kange, Gwari, Gwali, Goali, and Guari (Gunn, 1960: 85-86; Nadel, 1942:71; Forde, 1955:20-21; Temple:1965:123-130). They emphasized that the Gbagyi in particular were “peace loving and docile” (Smallwood 1932:3). He further claimed that; when subordinated to the Hausa, Fulani, Gwandara, Nupe and Koro to whom they had always been

21


subservient even when they were still in Borno and came together. As for Koro, they used Koro Funtu (Naked Koro), Koro Nulu, Koro Miya-miya, Koro Ache, Koro Ala, Koro Wachi, Koro Zeni, Koro Ashe, Jakin Doki (mixed identity) and Nene (Gojeh, Jatau & Mamman, 1998:18). The Colonial Assessment Reports were explicit on their annoyance with the continued resistance of the Koro, Gbagyi and Bassa, and the failure of the alien imported District Heads of Fulani and Hausa stock who were believed to be capable,

superior, intelligent and born rulers as paramount chiefs for the Gbagyi (Colonial Report, Annual, 1900-1915:26-27). But for Morgan; to justify the subordination of the Gbagyi to the Muslim Koro in Abuja Emirate, he hocus-pocus that:

in all cases where Gwari and Koro live close together the Gwari acknowledges the superiority of the Koro. The immigration of the two races possibly took place at the same time; or the Gwaris followed the Koro. In their old home [Borno], as here the Gwari are said to have been Talakawa of the Koro (Morgan 1912). Three years later in 1915, the same

administrator reported a contradictory tradition (which certainly reflected the justification of colonial rule and changing policies) that:

22


all the above Gbagyi and Koro villages were independent of each other [before the conquest]… (each Gbagyi village had its separate collector of tributes to Zaria, and paying Keffi gaisuwa but the Koro refused doing either)…. In this tradition may perhaps be found the reason for the fact that in some Koro settlements their authority do not extend over the neighbouring Gwaris as is invariably the case in Abuja division (Morgan 1915:1-2; underlined is our emphasis). The real political situation was that “the

Koro in Gbagyi settlements were under the political control of Gbagyi chiefs and were paying taxes to Gbagyi owners of the land in order to farm unmolested” (Smallwood, 1932:2). Tailor the Resident Officer of Kuta Division revealed that almost all the Koro were under Gbagyi chiefs until “with the advent of the British rule, all the districts in the division became independent with the exception of Koro country, still nominally under the sarakunan Paiko and Fuka” (Tailor, 1910:1-4). Similarly in Karu District where all the Ganagana, Koro, Gwandara and Gade at Wosai (Wuse), Aso, Yanya, Kurunduma, Karo, Sherrati, Kugbaru and Karu, were all under the Gbagyi political control who also appointed their chiefs for them. Because of the preconceived notion that it should be other way round, as if history is static, they exonerated

23


that in Karu District where the Koro were under Gwari was because “the Koro population of this district is small and in many cases the traditional authority of the Koro over Gwari, which is universally recognized between these two tribes has been allowed to lapse in practice” (Karu District Secretary, 1913; Migeod, 1914; 1974:3). It was the same situation in Niger Province and the colonial government wrote:

It is note worthy that where Koro and Gwarin Genge are found in the same community the “Sarauta” always lies with the Koro, but apparently purely on religious grounds. Amongst the villages of the Paiko district, except at Kafi and Kamtarimi, the authority of the Koro Sarki is only recognized by the Gwari as religious” (Min. Prov. 1917:22; Bawa, 1999:68).

Where a paramount chief was appointed for Koro group of villages by the colonial government and the chief failed in the discharge of his duties was instant removal from office. The Koro Zuba chief was given the Union Jack and empowered to lead “over the territory of the former Abuja Emirate and beyond”, he lamentably failed as “the chief of Zuba held the authority so cheap, the traditional overall leadership became cheapened and so lost the authority of the leadership to their refugees from Zaria”(Gojeh, Mmaman and Jatau, 1998:57-

24


60). Mohammed Akanta, a Koro and District Head of Kare, was dismissed for not being able to collect taxes from his subjects (Hook, 1921). Similarly, in Kagarko district in the 1920s, owing to past maladministration of the District Head the Koro people were deprived of their political power. The Hausa and Fulani successfully manipulated the situation and made the Koro to be against each other and hated the leadership of one of them (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, (1998:26-27). An impression, that exists between the rule and the ruled, where the ruled continuously observed the ruler’s faults and capitalize on it for blame. For example, if we view the removal of the chief of Zuba by Lord Lugard for cheapening his office, depicts rumors carried to the colonialist by the ruled. Lord Lugard in his letter to the Chief of Zuba as quoted by Shuaibu (1952) stated that “I tell you that we are the rulers of the world. If a man does naught by night we know of it by morning; if by day, we know of it by night”.

The Koro model political setting they cherish since time immemorial is clan chief-lineage system headed by the eldest/priest in the community. A very lucid explanation of their authority structure was written by Gojeh that since the pre-colonial period, their traditional leaders - Ere-Koro, district Heads, Village Heads, Clan or compound Heads and Family Heads and all the male (adult) members of each lineage headed by

25


the eldest male to settle inter-family issues. These include land, burial arrangement, religious rites, and chieftaincy and sanctification issues. The oldest male also presides over lineage and the sub-clans gatherings. The clan level is the highest authority structure. Each settlement is like independent mini-state, with confederation of clans. All clans are equal and when they meet on any issue, they meet as equals, except the leadership that is traced to the oldest male of the clans. Each clan could relate with other clans or non-Koro neighbours without reference to another clan. Each unit and each village manages its affairs independently by all the adult males of the village headed by the oldest (Gojeh 2004:49ff).

Other independent studies pointed to the fact that to assume that Gbagyi were always under their neighbours is not logical due to the fact that the Gbagyi were never conquered by any of their neighbours (Mohammed, 1987:73), and due to the fact that in all Gbagyi areas the appointment of chiefs remained entirely Gbagyi affairs (Mohammed, 1987:79). Gunn and Conant (1960:9) argued that, to assume that the Gbagyi were subordinates of their neighbours is seriously “misleading” as they instead influenced their neighbours, and purely “exaggerated” and “amplified” notion (Mohammed, 1987:17 & 45). The Koro, Gbagyi and Bassa who kept on

26


resisting “were often described as lawless savages who were not amenable to modern civilization, which the British were trying to introduce.” Dyer sadistically mumbo-jumbo that:

The Gbagyi, apparently, lacks all the essential qualities for a progressive race. He is indifferent to discipline both for himself and others, lacking in enthusiasm, indolent and procrastinating and can watch unmoved his gradual social extinction without making the slightest effort to counteract it. The Gwari mind shows no capacity for ruling” (NAK 115/1910).

Sule Mohammed revealed that the denial of the Gbagyi in the colonial scheme of things had nothing to do with intelligence, but the question of whom could best unleash the colonial repression on the subjects. Since they had consistently resisted, “there was nothing like giving Gbagyi and non-Muslim Koro any chance in the appointment of Paramount Chiefs or District Heads." It was not surprising, therefore, when Dyer reverted to the idea of Independent Pagan Native Authority for the Gbagyi by saying: “I have changed my view on the question of Gwariland for the Gwari (NAK 115/1910). Those scholars like Sule Mohammed, who loved the colonial policies exonerated the subordination with the logic that the Gbagyi were always subordinates of their neighbours by

27


“voluntary acknowledgement” and that “they were not interested in complex politics before their close association with other groups” (Mohammed, 1987:48 & 77). However, Gunn and Conant reported that the subordination was purely the colonial intent and not continuation of history. He reported:

Elsewhere at the present time, only the Gbari of Kuta District, Keffi Emirate, Nassarawa Division, Benue Province, have a hereditary headman of putative Gbari descent of affiliation, in any grouping larger than the village, even in the ancient Gbagyi foundation of Chukum District, Zaria Emirate, in Abuja, in Agaie, Bidda, Koton Karfe, Lapai, and Nassarawa Emirates, and in Karshi, Keffi, and Yeskwa District of Keffi, Gbari are administered according to conventional pattern under alien District Heads either appointed or hereditary and confirmed by Muslim Emirs; similarly, in Wushishi, independent district of Kontagora Division, Niger Province, where however, Gbari may well have normally greater autonomy than in the Emirates (Gunn, 1960:99), underlined is our emphasis.

In order to subordinate the Gbagyi under the Emirates, Smallwood claimed in 1932 that:

There is no evidence to show that the 28


tribe as a whole ever had any central organization. It is split up into innumerable clans occupying a very large area and speaking different dialects. Before the British occupation all Gwari villages were independent of each other (Smallwood, 1932:1). The preconceived notion of Smallwood

became very clear when he continued with his analysis of the Gbagyi settlements as having “bigger villages, each with sub-villages of 5, 7 villages". Thus from the quotations above, the changing version of tradition by the same author was intended to tally with the colonial re-groupings and new intergroup relations. By 1910 the Colonial officers discovered that they had been misinformed that the Gbagyi were under the Fulani suzerain and Koro Zuba Village Area, and the Fulani and Koro there could not rule them even with the colonial support. They then described the ‘alien Fulani rulers on non-Muslims as “cunning as a fox, a consummate liar grasping avaricious with all the insults of a black a man (Tukur, 1979:256), and as “incompetent communities of well known thieves who wanted” to rule others (NAK SPN 10; 571p/1913:8-9). Up to 1932 the Gbagyi were refusing to recognize the “alien District Heads” superimposed on them (Filaba, 1994:345-349). The assessment of the performance of the District Heads “was far from

29


satisfactory and lamentable and disappointing (NAK No.281/1930/5:18-19).” The Residents therefore dismissed most of the District Heads and described them as “unimportant, corrupt and incapable” Fulani chiefs (NAK 138p/10/1918). The alien rulers were soon accused as been “corrupt, oppressive and grossly insufficient” rulers who had “lost their rule”, and convicted of theft and lies, injustices, bribery and embezzlement, some of whom were removed (Filaba, 1994:366). Similarly, the Koro Zuba chief was supported by Lugard and made him chief over a large territory but failed (Gojeh, Mamman and Jatau, 1998:57-60). That may be why the Gbagyi villages had separate collectors of tributes assigned to them by Zaria, and the tributes collected was paid not to the rulers of Keffi and Nassarawa but to Zaria (Mohammed 1987:119; Filaba, 1994:350-353).

The colonial policies further informed people to believe that intergroup relations and the historical process are characterized by wars and inter-ethnic rivalries. Kirk–Green (1971:5) observed the potency of preconceived notion that existence is mainly ethnic struggle in fuelling conflicts as quoted by Eleigwu thus:

In the final analysis the Nigerian tragedy has been bedevilled by a set of oppositions – generalised, stereotyped, not necessarily of the same order and may be imaginary, yet each widening the wound and reducing the

30


hope of healing it: North vs South, Islam vs Christianity. Alleged feudalism vs assumed socialism, federal vs unitary preferences, traditional authority vs achieved elitism, haves vs have-nots, each with sinister undertones of tension, irreconcilability and threatened withdrawal. None was quite entirely accurate. Nevertheless each opposition set had sufficient seeds of truth within it to permit and even fertilise the growth of feared fact from the semi – fiction of its existence (Eleigwu, 1986:7). Many dissertations and theses in our

universities on intergroup relations now abound, but overstressing tribal and ethnic conflicts, particularly in response to European trades since the 15th century, and the various conflicts during and after colonial rule as the main nature of intergroup relations. Borrowing the inference of Disraeli, in such theses, “all the great events have been distorted, most of the important causes concealed, some of the principal characters never appear and all who figure are so misunderstood and misrepresented that the result is a complete mystification” (Swai & Temu, 1983:80). For instance, with the pre-conceived notion that inter-group relation is characterized by super-ordination and subordination, and superior and inferior contacts (Usman, 1977:1), some groups, like the Koro and Gbagyi, Gbagyi and Kadara, Gbagyi and

31


Hausa, Koro and Yeskwa and others, do crack jokes that the other neighbour ‘is slave’ of the other, and they exchange token gifts as ‘reparation.’ That was how the legend of ‘Hausa Bakwai and Banza Bakwai’ evolved and not necessarily based on crises or domination situations.

Trade Perspective Some European traders were concerned more

with trade, which they believed was the main intergroup relation. Allen and Thompson visited Opanda and Koton Karfe in 1841 when the acclaimed jihad and internecine wars were on their peak and were surprised to see that:

The strongest characteristics of the inhabitants of Africa is the love of traffic, it is indeed the ruling passion. Every town has a market, generally once in four days; but the principal feature is the large fairs held at different points of the river, about once a fortnight, for what may be called their foreign trade or intercourse with neighbouring nations. They are professedly held sacred, whatever wars may be in the land; and cheering, indeed, to humanity would it be – in this hot-bed of violence and rapines, where every man’s hand is raised against his fellow, and where everyone tries to enslave his neighbour – to know the existence of such a trave-dieu, devoted to the exercise of

32


peaceful commercial intercourse (Allen and Thompson, 1968:6.)

Of course, the economy, markets, medium of exchange, goods, etc. were neither along-line tribes nor religions. Baikie focused on the production and trade relations even at continental level and wrote:

We have mate on friendly terms with numerous tribes, all endowed by nature with commercial faculty, ready and anxious to trade with us and to supply us from their inexhaustible stores with immense qualities of highly priced articles. We can also indicate a most important outlet for home manufactures as the unclad millions of central Africa must absorb thousands of cargoes of soft goods, eagerly battering their raw cotton, their vegetable oils and their ivory for our calicoes and cloths (Howard & Flint, 1961:529).

Coexistence, Mutual Relations and

Assimilation Perspective

Some cordial and multi-faceted inter-group relations were retold in the legend of origin of Hausa Bakwai (seven) and Banza Bakwai. This legend was intended to show how immigrants from Borno intermingled with the people in Gwari country and Hausa blend of people evolved and

33


formed Hausa cities – Daura, Biram, Kano, Katsina, Rano, Gobir and Zaria, while on the other hand through Gwari the Banza Bakwai evolved namely Gwari, Jukwun, Nupe, Yoruba, Yauri, Zamfara and Kebbi. The legend also points to the fact that there was coexistence, cultural affinities and trade links across ethnic and regional boundaries and were some of the major forms of intergroup relations. Gwari was the name used to refer to other groups that could not speak Hausa but had some cultural affinities with the Gbagyi and either lived in the same region or were neighbours. Some people admired the Muslims at the trading centers and took to Islam not by compulsion. That was how some Gwari the then major ethnic group were integrated and Hausanized.

Some scholars stress that inter-group relations is the interaction between groups of separate identities, with each group contributing to the activities of the others in many areas. These include social, political (war, partisan politics and legal system), economic (trading, labour contract, joint ventures, apprenticeship etc); and cultural (art, dance and music, marriage, customs, language, folklore, technology, world outlook and modes of dressing) as existence entails inter-dependence and share of natural resources (Okibe, 1999:12; Doki, 2005: 164-165).

Indeed, Filaba et al (2007) stressed that all the groups in central Nigeria interrelated one way

34


or the other long before the colonial rule. They had common markets, shared farmlands and neighbourhood, practiced similar cultures and consulted one another for medicine and foretelling, hosted one another during festivals, contracted labour across ethnic bounds, and exchanged articles. Some of them inter-married, some of them raided others, while some had semi-confederal polities, and so on. They were becoming homogeneous in the large towns and Hausa language was the urban and commercial language, and the lingua franca. The colonial new boundaries and forced integration, economy, infrastructural developments, etc, increased inter-group relations and people started feeling belonging to one administrative unit or group of markets. There are also semi-groups or subgroups with their own social psychology preferring to identify more with some particular groups and identify or forge close stories of origins, or intermarriages, etc., apart from that of the larger society’s inter-group relations.

Apart from forced colonial integration and interactions that happen because of no one group can survive without the recognition and cooperation of neighbours. This is particularly when a new group comes among autochthonous ones as attracted by economic opportunities or pushed into the region because of wars or disasters (Nnoli, 1980:8-9).

35


In conclusion, there are many perspectives of the histories and intergroup relation in central Nigeria. Some of the perspectives clearly indicate the biases of the scholars or the informants.

36


CHAPTER THREE

COMMON HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE AS THE BEGINNING OF KORO AND

GBAGYI SUB-GROUP RELATIONS Introduction There exist many versions of origins of the

Koro and Gbagyi. Some primary and secondary sources of oral base; assumed monolithic origin for the Koro, Gbagyi, Kanuri and Hausa tied to waves of migrations from Saudi Arabia through Egypt, Borno and Hausaland, seemingly reflecting migrations and interrelations.

Origins of Koro Peoples Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman (1998:1) stressed

that not all Koro were originally Africans and earliest Central Nigerian people. They further remarked that most of the peoples’ history of origins and traditions are unknown because apart from the Colonial field officers’, not much research works have been done. However, informants to the colonial field officers on the origin of some Koro similarly linked them to Mecca. Gun and Conant (1960) stated that the Koro originated from Yamil, East of Mecca and migrated into Central Nigeria through Borno. Informants of Ruxton (1909), Meek

37


(1931), Hassan and Shuaibu (1952) gave a different origin by claiming that they were scion of the defunct Kwararafa kingdom, which once “conquered the whole of the Hausa land since the seventeenth century” (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, 1998:1). Ruxton (1909) reported that the Koro was the priestly caste, which headed the Jukun power that dominated Kwararafa kingdom.

The most popular legends of the Koro were evidently influenced by the attempt to link their origin to the universal perspective and centers of old civilizations. For instance, one legend claimed that one Koro and his younger brother Jukun were born ‘east of Mecca’, and came, and settled in `Apa’ which became the capital of their Kwararafa kingdom. That Jukun was junior but was blessed with four children named Igala, Nupe and two daughters. Igala in turn begot Alago and Idoma. One of the daughters of Jukun begot Bachama, which the second daughter begot Ankwe (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, 1998:9). From linguistic evidence of some Koro, the legend of Koro and his brother Jukun were not from Mecca. In fact, some Koro, Kanuri, Jukun and Arab do not belong to the same linguistic group as evident in the recent linguistic classification of Gondon (2005). Thus, not all the groups referred to as Koro in our reference area were from the priestly and ruling dynasty in ‘Apa’ the capital of Kwararafa. It might be that some of those called Koro today were at some time

38


under the Kwararafa suzerain but not of common origin. That they were not from Mecca becomes clear when the legend continues to relate that: “the Jukuns are the remnants of the great Kororofa tribe, the priestly cast which dominated the policies of Northern Nigeria before the advent of Usman Danfodio” (Gojeh, Jatau and Maman, 1998:6).

Another tradition indicated that after the Jihad of Othman Danfodio, the Koro people were scattered everywhere in the Northern parts of Nigeria. Presently they are found in Kano, Taraba, Borno, Plateau, Nassarawa, Benue, Kaduna, Niger States and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja. Actually, the Koro have so many dialects among them, which they attribute to “hostile physical environment, particularly the terrain which inhabits communication, wars, hunting expeditions and their farming nature” (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman,1998:13-14). The Koro absence of tribal cohesion or divergent in language and culture as indicated by Gun and Conant and quoted by L.A.Gojeh, C. Jatau and J. Mamman were due largely to the following factors:

the disintegration; wars; hunting; migration and interaction with other (settlers) along their routes of migration. These could have affected their language communication through mixing of words, terms and concepts and spoke entirely language of the

39


new communities, like the Koro Kutumbawa of Kano State who adopted the Hausa culture/Islamic faith (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, 1998:14 &19). The scholars furthermore uncritically

accepted the view of their informants that the Koro with few Gwari were the “original settlers of their area”. While they might have been the ‘first settlers’ of Kagarko and other Koro villages, they could not have been the first inhabitants in the region. In addition, those Koro who trace their origins to the Middle East and Kwararafa may not belong to the groups whose ancestors were responsible for the Nok figurines and ironwork in the area they presently live. They could not have come together or earlier than the Gbagyi there. The separation of the primogeniture of the Koro and Gbagyi may be as old as 3,000 years. Using glottochronological data, scholars established the fact that Ebira language could have separated from her sister languages, which are Igala, Idoma, Gbagyi, Yoruba, Ibo and other KWA and BENUE CONGO groups of languages not later than 2,000 years BP, and from cousin sister Jukun (Platoid), which some Koro claim to belong, some 3,000 BP (Gunn and Conant,1960:8-7; Ohiare, 1988:35).

Linguistic consideration strongly point to the fact that all Koro and Gbagyi could not have one origin nor came together into Central Nigeria, as they do not speak same language. In fact, the

40


difference in dialect from one Koro group to another further points to the fact that they could not have common origin. Greenberg seemed not convinced where to place the Koro and thus remarked, “it is one of the distinctive groups within the central branch of the Niger-Congo family.” Meek quoted by Gojeh, Jatau & Mamman (1998:18) classified it simply as “Nigerian Semi Bantu” with no further refinement. They identified five dialects of the Koro spoken in Kaduna State alone, which are: Miya-miya; Ache or Wachi; Ala or Ashe; Akoti; and Ham of Adong or Jakin Doki (Jakin doki is a nickname denoting unstable or mix identity) . These ones and the other Koros in Niger State, Nasarawa State and the FCT, all speak different languages and as well differ in some cultures.

Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman (1 998:19) explained that the “numerous sub-divisions – [are] vertically as well as horizontally” causing “absence of tribal cohesion or divergence in Language” from each other as they have imbibed the languages of those with whom they came in contact, viz the Ham, Ganagana, Gwandara, Gwari and Yeskwa in the middle belt of Nigeria. Corroborating Gunn and Conant that identified different languages and dialect tagged together under the nomenclature Koro.

Gordon’s (2005) linguistic family tree traces Koro to have originated from among the Niger-

41


Congo group of languages through the, Atlantic-Congo, Volta-Congo, Benue-Congo, Plateau-Western to North-Western Koro. They are known with the dialects Ashe, Gbegbe-Ejar, Koro Panda, Koro Ache, Eja, Tanjili, Adong. The Lijili or Migili, Koro are classified with the Plateau-Southern. The Ija Zuba is said to be unclassified but falls under the Benue-Congo, which may indicate that it is much older than others. Gordon made it very clear that the nomenclature “Koro” is used as a cover term for the several dialectical groups while some of them have alternate names as Koro Eger, Koro Makama, Koro Myamya, Miamia, Miamiya, Ashe, Ache, Ala, Gbegbere Ejar, Mgili, Lijili, Koro Lafiya, and Ija Zuba.

The Europeans ethnographers without in depth empirical survey used the nomenclature Koro on different groups that had similar culture and appearance and assumed that they were of common origin. The groups include- the Koro groups of Zaria province; Abuja Emirate; Keffi Emirate and Lafia Emirate (Gun & Conant, 1960:109). Stories of origin of each of these groups in the works of Hassan & Naibi (1965), as in Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman (1998) point to different origins and not only Mecca or Kwararafa. That may be why “they are widely diffused and divergent in language and culture” (Gun & Conant, 1960:109).

The Uner Koro in Kagarko District of Kaduna State have no story of migration from

42


somewhere else and may be more indigenous, but almost all the other Koro may have got to their present settlements through fleeing from the 19th century jihad attacks. That is why they still maintain distinct culture from their neighbour Gbagyi, but closest to Yeskwa, Jaba, Gwandara, and other southern Zaria languages from among whom they may have separated. Some Jukun might have come from Wukari area and joined them and became assimilated, and might have been the source of linking the name Koro to Kwararafa kingdom. Those of them who became Muslims in order to derive security and to look superior to their ‘pagan’ neighbours and so preferred in the colonial administration might have influenced the claim that they came from among Hausa and Kanuri. It is again most probable that few of the Koro know that they really migrated from among the Jukun, Hausa and other places, but submitted their stories to represent the origin for the rest Koro. While stories of origins of some Koro settlements clearly show that they have been merely changing site like their Gbagyi neighbours in the region (Gojeh et al, 1998:25-68).

Other independent studies (Filaba 1994:53-54; Adamu, 1977:3 – 29; Adamu 1976:3-13) further corroborate the fact that the name ‘Koro’, was used to refer to Yeskwa, Lungu, Jaba, Kagoma, Sambam, Kaje and their neighbours who were also without dresses. That the group now called Koro might

43


have been the proto-southern Kaduna groups that do not have history of migration from outside the region, and which languages are closest to Koro of Kagarko area. However the Kaje tradition traces its origin to Bauchi-Plateau area. Some informants elaborated that Jaba is a Hausa word referring to Dunya family of Hnyam tribe who live in Ankun District in the southern part of Jaba LGA. Hnyam means my language. The nomenclature Jaba was derived from the name of the rat which abode is not known and found both at home and in the bush and frightens other rats. The allegoric name was applied on the Dunyan, Lungu and other dialects of Jaba to metaphorically imply ‘ever-evasive, illusive’ whose number and abode remained a mystery to the jihadists the raiders. The Jaba seemed never finishing and could swiftly disappear into the caves of Yeskwa and Jaba hills. The inability of the jihadists to penetrate the Jaba is remembered in a song` “Jaba maggaggari, komi jirin giya yana da wayo. It means “Jaba the unconquered, no matter how drunk with beer he is still wise.” The major Jaba groups today are Dunyan, Ham (the original) and Kaninkon. They did not have a single name uniting them before the jihad. The Dunya people believe they are the original Jaba and their closest neighbours with linguistic and cultural affinities who live between Nok and Kachia area they call Yam and considered as “younger tribes”. They include the Samba (Shambam), Kagoma/Gong

44


(= plenty), Ngnakpa/Yeskwa, Ikulu and the Koro (also called Jar of Shere or Iche or Lungu - meaning interior in Hausa). It was the colonial rule that created Kwoi town as capital of these groups. Colonial officers instructed them to gather in the centre of their land in order to select their leaders. When the Whiteman asked them of who owned the land where they gathered, they replied: nyiki kon, meaning, “we have just gathered here.” The eldest in the delegates was a man from Sambam and was invariably appointed the leader of the servants of colonialism – Funkwoin, and those who settled there were known as Nngna su fu kon = a group of settlers. In Jabaland by then the eldest was the village-head of Dunya, and by cultural rights, he was already a leader. There was no need for him to contest for delegate ship. However, the Sambam delegates did accomplish their tasks so well that the Whiteman made them overall boss and even accorded the Dunyan with chief-ship. This became an inversion of authority which continuous to date. Kwoi thus became invariably the headquarters of the Jaba and Koro.

The Yeskwa are in the area between Kwoi and Keffi and take Panda (about 50km north of Keffi) as their headquarters. The colonial historiography suggests that they may be related to the Gwandara although they do not claim such relationship. The colonial historiography denies any relationship between the Yeskwa and the

45


larger Jaba-Kaje-Kagoma-Katab group (Sciortinor, 1934:234). This is very unlikely as the oral tradition collected among them suggests that the Yeskwa language is the protolanguage of Jaba Dunya. The Gwandara fled from Jama.an Dororo and Keffi raids to Yeskwa hills where they met with the Yeskwa and Koro. The blend of such mixture is called Gede, or Gede-Chanchala of Ara, or Apoyi (meaning survivors/refugees or cave dwellers), or hybrid Gade-Gwandara-Koro. For the Koro to balance or elude the derogatory name, they reversed that ‘Poyi’ means “people who are saviours at times of wars”, or “natural authority over subservient Gbagyi” (Filaba, 1994:33).

Origins of Gbagyi People Morgan (1912) reported that the Gbagyi and

Koro “claim to have migrated westward, being driven out by the Beriberi in their old home [Borno].” Similarly, N.F. Nadel concluded that the “Gbagyi came originally from Borno and are Beriberi in origin and speak Beriberi” (Nadel, 1936:1). H. F. Backwell similarly emphasized that:

Borno is their [Gbagyi] traditional country of

46


origin, and the Gwari Genge of Abuja claim to be of Egyptian descent and treasure a substance resembling a lapis lazuli which is said to have been brought from Egypt (Backwell, 1932:31).

Some local historians influenced by the colonial historiography uncritically accepted the theories of migrations. Hence, Ishaku Baraje Diko reported:

It is believed that Gbagyi lived in Saudi Arabia and later migrated into Africa. When Islam was brought to Mecca and Medina, many people began to change their religion. But the Gbagyi continued with their idol worshipping. When the Islamic religion spread in the country, the Gbagyi left Saudi Arabia. They crossed into Africa in small groups. They later came to Borno where they settled for many years with the Kanuri - Beriberi - and other ethnic group (Diko 1990:1). Many Gbagyi strongly believe this, and

buttress the argument with the fact that the Gbagyi and Kanuri have common facial marks and other cultural practices. Despite the cultural similarities between the Gbagyi and the Kanuri/Beriberi (Meek 1960:213), their tradition of common origin is not supported by linguistic evidence (Filaba 1994; Gordon 2005). Hence, it is difficult to believe the postulations of Sule Mohammed that ‘alien’ Borno and Hausa conquistadors came and

47


“established themselves as rulers over the Gbagyi”; and that a “Borno Arab” and his Katsina-blood woman came to constitute “the line of chiefs than to the descendants of Gbagyi” (Mohammed 1987:58-62). Similarly, the claim of Naibi and Hassan that the rulers of Diko were descendants of Jarawa and Kanuri tribes while the rest Gbagyi around Abuja migrated from Kano and Zaria Provinces (Naibi and Hassan 1960:1-4). However, the Kanuri and Gbagyi must have had some great contacts, possibly cultural and political when the Gbagyi were still around Lake Chad.

Some Kanuri may have migrated into Gbagyi and became assimilated, as they were long-distance traders. This view gets further support from traditions collected in Hausaland and Borno, which alleged that the Seven Hausa cities were a hybrid of miscegenation of a Cananite who came to Borno and married a princess. He went to Kano and got a sword and came to Daura where a ‘sarki’ (snake? rival king?) prevented people taking water from a well and he killed it. The Queen then married him as his reward. She could not begot children thus he slept with her Gwari slave through whom seven ‘Banza’ (slaves? Subjects?) – Gwari, Nupe, Jukwun, Yoruba, Yauri, Zamfara and Kebbi - were born. Later, the Queen begot Hausas – Biram, Daura, Gobir, Katsina, Kano, Rano and Zaria (Smith, 1967:53-59). This might have been

48


interpretation of the evolution of Hausa along-line the allegory of Prophet Abraham’s family ordeal. It could be tacit acceptance of Gbagyi pre-occupation of the now Hausaland and intergroup relations.

Furthermore, there are traditions among the Hausa around Daura, Katsina and Kano, which believe that the name Gwari was tagged on non-Hausa speaking people, and anybody, the Hausa inclusive, that could trace their origin to the earliest inhabitants of Hausaland and Borno believed to be the actual Gbagyi then called Gwari or Baibai. Thus, Gwari implied the primogeniture, unfoxy, simple, dutiful, trodden upon, undertake tedious tasks, truth-full, etc. Again, since the Gbagyi were taken as slaves, Gwari could imply slave, concubine, subject, and so on. This influenced a wrong notion about all the Gbagyi among their neighbours, as they believed that all the Gbagyi were subjects of the new hybrids. It is unfortunate that when the colonial government started to collect and document traditions of origins of all Nigerians, their informants were the preferred Hausa and Fulani groups, who misinformed the writers that other non-muslin groups were under their suzerains.

There is also the problem of speculation that the whole Central Nigerian area was empty until these groups started occupying it by c.1750 A.D. (Temple 1965). The colonialists speculated dates for such immigrations in order to buttress their

49


arguments in support of such theory of migration from either Middle East or from Borno and Hausaland. Nehemiah Left Zion and Mabogunje believed that such Gbagyi migration happened before 1500 AD when some Gbagyi and other groups came into the land. The problem with this theory is the notion that all the Gbagyi have a monolithic origin. This is very unlikely. Most of the dates claimed for the beginning of the movement come later from the actual period for the peopling of the area. If there is any historicity in this, it might be referring to just a small group, and not the whole Gbagyi, who migrated into Gbagyiland and became assimilated. Archaeological findings agree that the Gbagyi and their crafts are some of the direct continuation of the people and culture of the NOK, which flourished in Central Nigerian area some as from the 6th century BC to the first century A.D. some 2,600 years ago (Walu, 2005:77-87; Jemkur, 1985:26).

Almost all scholars believed that the Niger-Congo speaking groups were pushed away from the north (now Hausaland and Borno) because of the invasion of some Chadic language-speaking people (Zion, 1971:17). Larry and Magaaji (1970:5) believed that the migration was in the 12th century, when some North African migrants forced the Gbagyi away. Nana Fyenu Bmyanyiko similarly wrote that the “Gbagyi migrated from the Chadian region into Borno about 1400 AD. They later

50


migrated southwards from Borno into Kano…They moved further south into …Zaria by 1700 AD” (Bmanyiko, 1979:10). Like the above secondary sources, so many oral accounts claim Borno and Hausaland as the original homes of the Gbagyi. The colonial historiography principally those edited by Temple, Mudock, Gunn and Conant, Ford, and others, were based on these traditions. While it may be true that some Gbagyi were from Borno area, they were not the only Gbagyi. It seemed Gbagyi country started from Borno to Niger-Benue confluence, or that some few migrants from Chad and Bornu found their way into Gbagyi country. All the given dates for the migration were merely guessed as there are no such dates in oral tradition, and the chroniclers could not narrate events going so far.

Shaw (1978:1-9) noted another problem with these traditions, that they do not refer to the true origins of the people, but complete substitution of the indigenous stories of origins for universalistic hamitic hypothesis. Such attitude influenced by the contacts with the Christian and Muslim concepts and universalistic perspectives of monolithic origin for the whole world. Some scholars further clarified that these hamitic and nilotic hypothesis were racist perspectives, which unduly attributed civilizations, technology and political initiatives in Africa to some European-like and shepherd peoples who were assumed to be more intelligent

51


and superior than the Negroes. The supposed superior people with tint of white blood included Arabs, Berbers, Tuaregs, Fulanis, etc., some of who claimed to have come from outside Africa, or from the northern and eastern coasts of Africa (Ogot 1974: 95-97). Hamitic hypothesis gained emphasis from the various works of H.R. Palmer the Lt. Governor of the Northern Province of Nigeria in 1919. This can be clearly seen in his introductory remark to most anthropological works (Meek, 1931). Following on this the colonial Gazetteers amplified the view that Africans that are ‘more intelligent’ were from Middle East, as can be seen in the four volumes of Gazetteers of Northern Provinces and in the works of Meek.

Other scholarly assessments of these traditions seeking for origins of Central Nigerian people from outside, have unfolded that they are recent formulations (Obayemi, 1971:98-99), as some people have the propensity for building up prestigious outside origins to serve the legitimate function of the ruling classes. This is in attempt to define identity in a way that set them apart from the groups over whom they have established authority. Similarly, those who attempted to derive security from the 19th century Jihadists created their stories linking them with centers of Islam (Mohammed, 1978:42-46). Most of the traditions are stereotyped with “the tendency of substituting the origin of the dominant group either culturally,

52


or politically, for that of the whole” (Ohiare, 1987:4). Abdullhi Smith further drew our attention to the fact that there is need for scholars to question the validity, authenticity, reliability and the antiquity of traditions of origins, because those illiterates in Africa, who do not know the details about their remote ancestries, invent myths about celebrated ancestors, in order to justify their present claims to social distinctions. His studies revealed that some educated African Muslims are unscrupulous and can purposely falsify their ancestry in order to deceive (Smith 1987:24). Mohammed (1987:42-46) also noted that such traditions are mere palace accounts which knit their origins to celebrated centers of Islam in order to derive security from 19th century jihadists. Furthermore, it can be argued that local people have been influenced by traditions from outside which tend to look-down on local traditions, which in turn led to the changing nature of the traditions in order to suit universal perspectives (Shaw, 1971:3-9). Such speculations were uncritically accepted by Mohammed (1987:58-62) that ‘alien’ Borno and Hausa conquistadors came and “established themselves as rulers over the Gbagyi”; and that ‘Borno Arab” and his Katsina-blood woman came to constitute “the line of chiefs than to the descendants of Gbagyi.” Similarly, the claim of Naibi and Hassan (1952:2-4) that the rulers of

53


Diko were descendants of Jarawa and Kanuri tribes while the rest Gbagyi around Abuja migrated from Kano and Zaria Provinces should not be accepted at face value.

Another problem is the acceptance of joking relations to mean historical reality. For instance, the Koro, Kadara and Gbagyi joke among themselves referring to each other as ‘bawa’ = ‘slave,’ ‘dan-uwa’ = ‘kin member’, and so on, while they do not have common origin nor subordinate and super-ordinate relations. The joking or artificial relations whereby some tribes or communities referred to each other as ‘servants’ and so on, in which they demanded token fees, was prevalent in the whole Central Sudan. This artificial social relation was misunderstood by the colonialists as true one, or was misinformed. Furthermore, colonialists may have preferred Muslim Gwari, Koro, Gwandara, Hausa and Fulani lackeys vis a vis ‘pagan’ Gbagyi, Bassa and others in their administrative scheme, they merely translated the traditions literally to justify their actions (Backwell, 1932:31; Meek, 1931; Sciortino, 1972:20; Ohiare, 1988:473; Gunn, 1960:99). That must be why Morgan claimed in 1912 that both came from Borno together and “in all cases where Koro and Gbagyi live close together the Gwari acknowledges the superiority of the Koro!” (Morgan 1912). If some Koro and Gbagyi might

54


have come together from Borno, and some of the Gbagyi lead by Koro, it is not clear which Koro, since different alternate names are used for Koro or Gbagyi.

From the unreliable census of some Koro by the colonialists, all (the Koro) of them put together are just about 8% of the Gbagyi. Thus, this reference must be to a particular Koro and Gbagyi settlement, possibly in Kagarko-Ija-Zuba area, and not as from Zaria to Lokoja. Again, the claim that they have always been together is not historical at all. If they had always been together whereby Gbagyi outnumber the Koro in some States, then the Gbagyi would have culturally and linguistically have assimilated the Koro into their group. However, they have since maintained their distinct identities and even belong to different linguistic families.

The stories of common origin may have evolved in the late 19th century, when they organized consortium stratagem to check the jihadists. It is also very likely that the stories of common origins were derived during the colonial rule, as they were regrouped together under same districts and village areas. Since the Koro, Gade, Gwandara, Ebira, Basa, Hausa and Fulani put together are just about 20% of the total population of the area and still maintaining their clean cultures (Mohammed 1987:63-69), each of these groups must have come at different times and not long

55


ago. It has been discovered that people in this region, in fear of losing land, insist that they were the first arrival at a particular spot, particularly when there was no settlement of another tribe at that spot but just a kilometer or more away, and not referring to the whole region.

Filaba (2005:1) inferred that traditions have been politicized as government policies since colonial time influence people to change their traditions in order to outwit others. The Emirs were the informants to the anthropologists and they purposely misinformed them. Temple made this clear when he requested the administrators to document their legends to save them from been endangered, and to inform the administration on how to cheaply administer the vast country. That the sources of information of the ethnographers were “sketchy”, without information from the natives about whom they wrote, as the resisting “natives [were] unwilling to impart information”. He made it clear that their collections “were incorrect [with] many omissions of important facts” (Temple, 1965: i).

Filaba further noted how the colonial government created imagined glorious past for the cooperating chiefs that super-imposed the colonial repressions on the subjects in order to boost their ego, vis-a-vis the resisting groups that were marginalized and had a gloomy history written for them. Since then, lies became political ingredient

56


for preferring some groups. The misrepresentations further informed the tribal cum religious apprehensions and ethnic politics and voting behaviour.

During any democratic dispensation, the politicians portrayed appointments to lucrative posts and the creation of States, LGAs and upgrading of chiefdoms as some of their scarce dividends. Thus, Government functionaries invite memoranda from the groups and communities that demanded for such. As pre-requisite, the requesting group for upgrading showed that it was super-ordinate in the past intergroup relations with its neighbours. Those groups who wished to maintain the statusquo or to outwit others, had to forge glorious past for themselves vis-a-vis others they attempt to sideline (Filaba 2005:1). One of the traditions, which pulled the colonial period to the pre-colonial setting, is reported in Gojeh et. al, 1998:25-27) thus:

The first chief of the Koro chiefdom in Kagarko was Areboku who ruled up to 1821… But Ali (a Koro but called Habe by the Fulani) ruled from 1821. At his death, his son Akoti succeeded him until approximately 1841 when Emir Abdulkarim made a Keffi Muslim Fulani who lived with the Koro people in Kagarko and named Bubu the Sarkin Muslmi of Kagarko… The displaced Koro chief Akoti with the support of the Koro people in 1846

57


asked Muhammadu Sani the Emir of Keffi to give him back the District he had ruled up until the time of Bubu’s arrival in Kagarko. Muhammadu Sani agreed to this and the Koro Villages were divided equally between Bubu and Akoti who were both made responsible for the collection of the taxes of their units. This arrangement appeared to have been in operative up to the times when Sir Frederick Lord Lugard transferred Kagarko District to Nasarawa Province in 1904. Mohamman Sani in 1846 was the Emir of Keffi and was also of the Koro stock from Bornu. During the period that Nasarawa was administering the Kagarko District, on account of the mal-practices of Chief Akoti, he was alienated from the Koro villages he had hitherto been the head of the two Districts, then ruled by Akoti and Bubu were merged together into one again in 1923 to form Kagarko District. This formed the genesis for the present three Chiefdoms in Kagarko Local Government Area. The Koro, Kagarko and Jere Chiefdoms and Kagarko Local Government Area evolved from the then Kagarko District. According to the acting Secretary of Northern Nigeria in 1922 said, “the Koro were deprived of their political power owing to past mal-administration”. The Koro tribe is divided into village areas under principal chiefs in 1923; an arrangement which, though, it may

58


be fairly satisfactory from an administrative point of view and in particular simplifies tax collection by enabling the District Head to deal with a lesser number of village chiefs. But the arrangement destroyed the Chiefdom system of rule of the Koro. According to the memorandum from the Resident of Zaria province to the Secretary of Northern provinces in 1924 on the re-organization of Kagarko District, it said, “the Hausa/Fulani are cunning to set the Koro people against each other thereby making them hate the leadership of one of them”. This therefore, goes to attest how just the Government of Kaduna State on restoring traditional rule of the Koro that was lost in the 19th century due to mal-administration by the colonial administration of the indirect rule in Nigeria.

The anachronism is very clear since it was during the colonial rule that Keffi was empowered to export a District Head to Kagarko area and not during the precolonial period, and the names of the emirs except the last one the incumbent, they are not in Keffi kinglist. Traditions collected around Abuja report that the Koro of Zuba came from around Zaria and settled near Gbagyi people and named their town Nunkoro near Keffi (Adamu 1977:3-29) and from among the Yeskwa and other groups around river

59


Gurara been pushed away by the jihadists and were hosted by the Gbagyi around Zuba and Kuta area, first as hunters and lived in the forests (Abubakar, 1971). They then became associates – abokan wasa.

Apart from their cultural dissimilarity, Mohammed (1987:30-39) also argued that the Koro and Gbagyi could not have come from Borno or Saudi Arabia since neither of them speak Kanuri or Arabic, and the Koro and Gbagyi still maintain distinct culture. It was clearly shown how the Koro and Gbagyi do not belong to the same linguistic group and culture on pages 44-45 here.

Based on the linguistic evidence it can be

argued that the Gbagyi as well as other KWA language groups around the Niger-Benue confluence could not have migrated to their present abode from the Middle East. Linguistic studies (Obayemi, 1970:201; Obayemi 1984: 1984:144-147; Hansford, Samuel, and Stanford, 1976:122-125; Williams, 1987:2–3; Greenberg, 1966:22; Armstrong, 1969:132; Armstrong, 283-290; Gordon 2005) clearly show that Koro, Kanuri and Jukun all belong to different languages which separated many centuries ago. Koro may not have belonged to the KWA group - the Yoruba, Nupe, Igala, Ebira, Idoma, Gade, Arago, Ibo and Gbagyi, which separation period varied between 1,500 – 6,000 years ago. Standford reveal that the Koro

60


and Gbagyi do not belong to the same linguistic classification neither with Kanuri. Gbagyi Language belongs to the KWA group while some Koro belong to the Benue-Congo, and some to the Chadic group. But Gordon (2005) stated that both Koro and Gbagyi belong to the Benue-Congo language group, The Kanuri on the other hand belongs to the Nilo-Sahara/Afro-Asiatic groups. Hence, some Koro and Gbagyi association may not be older than the 19th century after the Fulani jihad (Hassan & Naibi, 1960: 140-44; Filaba 1994). Common Historical Experience Encouraging Subgroup Relations Despite the fact that Koro and Gbagyi do not belong to the same linguistic group, they have common historical experience. They are declining groups since the 15th century. The Kwararafa kingdom and Gbagyi country were raided by the Jihadists and dispersed many of them into forests and hilltops, while some of their people went to far away cities to seek refuge (Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, 1998:5; Filaba 2004). The emirates of Zaria, Jama’an Dororo, Keffi, Nasarawa, Wase, Lafia and Obi, Bida and Abuja Kingdom annexed their territories. Since then the Koro, Gbagyi and their neighbours were seen as GWARI sources of slaves. Since they found new settlements almost at the same period, they capture this in the tradition

61


by saying that they have always been together and came together. Koro and Gbagyi shared borders up to the end of the 19th century with Gbagyi around Zaria and Kororofa comprising of many different tribes bordering Gbagyi country to the East. Gbagyi once lived in the area from southern Lake Chad through Daura-Katsina down to the Niger-Benue Confluence, while interspersed by Koro the primogeniture of the now southern Zaria-Kaduna peoples. They came to have similar culture like tattoos, ways of burials, ceremonies, craft production techniques, housing styles, approaches to diseases and so on. Except in the market centers and cities, almost every settlement was entirely a tribe, while the towns and cities had wards organized along-line tribes before the 19th century violence forced some groups to settle together and form consortium effort to ward off the jihadists. The separate tribal settlement pattern enabled many of the small groups to perpetuate their culture and distinct identities for decades.

The love to protect their cultures and lack agreeable format of settling communal crises made them not to settle at the same spot with different tribes, but some kilometers apart. Few individual Arabs, Kanuri and Kwararafa traders, fishermen and professionals migrated among the Gbagyi, as some of them were in market centers in Hausa cities and were referred to as ‘Bakon Borno’ trading

62


and spreading Islam, and later lost their original identities for the aboriginal ones. The original Koro and the Gbagyi were not from Middle East or Borno or Kwararafa.

Koro and the Gbagyi were some of the peoples in the Kankuma/Kagoma confederation around Zazzau which flourished up to the 14th century when the Tuareg and Chadic groups that evolved Hausa city-states became dominant and power brokers in the now Hausaland and dwarfed the aboriginals there, and as well pushed them away south and westwards (Last, 1988:170). In precolonial days, most of the inhabitants had no clothes, and practiced ‘Dumb Trade’. Whenever long-distance traders were in any village or market, a drum announced their presence. The traders hid in some huts built for the purpose. Then inhabitants came out of their houses and holes/caves with articles they placed on the ground in line. They retired into their holes and the band signalled to the tourists to come and place foreign articles against the piles of goods they liked and retired back into hiding. A band was banged to call back the inhabitants to examine what was placed against their articles. Those satisfied with the articles placed against their goods packed the foreign goods only. Those not satisfied left the goods for second consideration. If the tourist would not add, they simply packed their goods. In those days, Gbagyi were great traders and their

63


neighbours who were the minority were all referred to as Gwari in order to differentiate them from Hausa speaking people (Last, 1988:170-171). In the Karigi Manuscript (Ireland, 1918; Obayemi 1976), Zaria and environs was originally Gwari and their Queen Amina was born by Bakwa who had blood connection with the Karigi, which was founded by the legendary Gunguma (Filaba, 2005:112). Gbagyi and some of their neighbours since then have been changing sites within central Nigeria in the course of hunting and shifting cultivation, and come across each other in the search for farms. Thus, the Gbagyi and Koro love rural settlements to have uninterrupted and unlimited free hand in the bush.

Some Koro and Gbagyi suffered slave raids by the more aggressive Kanuri and Hausa neighbours to the north since the formation of their states in the 15th centuries, by Igbirra and Nupe neighbours to the south and west since the rise of Igugbaka and Bida in the 19th centuries. The Fulani jihadists continued the heavy raid on them and pushed them to the hilltops and forests until the British conquest (Mohammed, 2002; Filaba 2002). These experiences make the Koro and Gbagyi to believe they have common origin. See Maps 3 and 4 showing their locations.

64


MAP 2: WHERE GWARI/GBAGYI AND KORO PEOPLE

WERE FOUND IN THE 15th CENTURY.

KEBAWA

HAUSA AND FULANI KANURI &

BULALA

KILBA & BURA

KAMBERI GWARI BAUCHI BWATE

GWARI YESKWA & KORO MUMUYE

GWARI ARAGO NENE

BASA AFO KWARARAFA

NUPE

EBI RA

OKUN

OKPOTO Where

Gwari & Koro

EDO were spoken

HYBO

Source:Mailafiya A. Filaba, “Slavery and Slave Trade: Ageless and Nebulous

Syndrome of Servitude and Commerce in Central Nigeria.” In Ashok K.

Mohapatra, Alfred J. López and Adetayo Alabi (eds), THE GLOBAL

SOUTH 2.2 (August 2008): Hegemony and Subalterity: Africa in a Global

Age. The Global South at http://inscribe.iupress.org/loi/gso page 25.

65

http://inscribe.iupress.org/loi/gso%20page%2025


In conclusion, the assumption that the Koro, Gbagyi, Gwandara and Yeskwa came to Central Nigeria by 1750 A.D. or about the same time or from common origin (Willis 1934:4) cannot be reliable. It is most probable that internecine wars in response to the slave trade pushed in some people who lived on the northern and eastern borders of the Koro or Gbagyi country since the 18th century. Some of these were still naked and were called Koro or Gbagyi, not that they all had common origin. They were the progenitors of the southern Zaria, southern Kaduna, Kulere-Mama hills encampments westward to Jere. There was also a tribe called Koro who were reported to have been serving the Kwararafa kingdom as priests. Nobody can say for sure that all those groups called Koro today were those dispersed Wukari people. The groups that might claim to have come from among the Kwararafa are the Mighili and Nene Koros who share boundary with the Kwararafa. But there is no linguistic link. Thus, their claim to Kwararafa may merely be referring to the fact that Kwararafa kingdom extended on them, and were sporadically raided by Kwararafa as it did on Hausa cities and Bornu. What can also be very likely is that all those Koro clans who can clearly know their origins are actually from the places and are later arrivals. The origins of the earliest occupants cannot be recalled with such clarity as their origins are too remote for oral recall. If few Jukuns actually migrated into the

66


Koro, they must have become completely assimilated.

It should also be noted that whenever a group alleges that it was the first arrival to the area, it is simply referring to that particular settlement, not the entire area, as there were older settlements some few kilometers away, but in fear of losing traditional right to land, it poses as if it was the earliest arrival.

Historical movements brought the Koro and Gbagyi together, and they ingeniously interrelated in several ways.

67


CHAPTER FOUR

KORO AND GBAGYI CULTURAL VALUES, SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY AND

SUB-GROUP RELATIONS Introduction

Koro and Gbagyi love living close to one another for several reasons, some of which include the following: Historic togetherness; consortium stratagem; contiguous settlements; hosting one another; labour exchange; collective communal efforts; economic relation; share of natural resources; common philosophy and cultural values; and government policies.

Influence of the Natural Environment on Inter-relations, Share of Natural Resource and Trade Links

Scenery of the relief is characterized by dotted hills, gorges, patches of forests, streams, paddy lanes and farms (Gunn & Conant, 1960:89; Filaba 1994:1-9), which over centuries greatly

68


influenced the historical development of the people. The hills attracted human settlements due to the opportunities that they offered. When the jihadists, Nupe and Ebira people intensified raiding the Central Nigerian area, almost all the vulnerable inhabitants ran into forests and hills as natural fortification against enemies (Mortimore, 1970:107). In addition, the mountains were vantage points for locating enemies, like the slave raiders from other communities. Hilltops provided secret training grounds. In fact, hill settlements were the last strongholds of communities practicing traditional religions against Islam. One of the major factors that enabled the Gbagyi and Koro in the area to withstand the Jihadist incursions based at Keffi, Nassarawa, Jama’an Dororro, Lafia, Abuja, Toto and Bida was the forests and hills that were inaccessible (Agwe-lubwui-kpmaG,Ehoi-ghakui-yegunK) to the Jihadists’ cavalry.

Many different groups came across each other and had to live together on the hilltops in order to survive. Hilltops provided secret training grounds. In fact, hill settlements were the last strongholds of communities practicing traditional religions against Islam. One of the major factors that enabled the Koro and Gbagyi in the area to withstand the Jihadist incursions based at Keffi, Nassarawa, Jama’an Dororro, Lafia, Abuja, Toto and Bida was the hills that were inaccessible to the Jihadists’ cavalry. It is however interesting to note

69


that most of the hill settlements in Northern Nigeria were forced to move to the plains by the colonial government in 1920s (Filaba, 1994:1, & 164 –167; Filaba, 2005:1-19).

Other opportunities offered by the hills are perennial springs that enable the people to withstand droughts, available fertile paddy-lands for farming. The hills were areas for manufacture of stone tools as weapons and utensils. Most importantly, some of the hills and inselbergs contain iron ore (Gbekna, Gbakuku, KukuruG, akan-raK TamaH) and cheaply collected on the surface. This influenced the manufacture of implements and the subsequent boost in agriculture, marketing and war techniques. The factor of iron enabled the people to have a tremendous impact on the environment. Also, the use of iron enabled them to become militarily formidable, which had direct impact on the emergence of kingship institutions and intergroup relations in the area. Some Koro came as blacksmiths and hunters, and sold their manufactures to the Gbagyi and vice versa.

Iron industry and cattle rearing influenced agrarian activities, which had been going on in the region. Iron ore was not owned by any particular group as it was freely collected, but involving heavy labour. Similarly, the nomads grazed the green unmolested, and drank from the streams freely. Some Koro who came from Zaria to

70


Maitama were mainly iron smelters and created hoes for farming. Production of iron implements influenced the agriculture. In addition, each group started borrowing ‘new’ farming seeds from neighbouring tribes.

Furthermore, the hills and forests in this region were natural reserves of games hunted for food and for exchange, while the foothills and gorges are very fertile and have been cultivated for many centuries without much decline in the agricultural yields. Hence, the hills and forests naturally attracted settlements. Since hill settlements were the earliest in the region, some clans still burry their diseased chiefs and elders on the hill and forest graves. The worship of great-grandfathers grave-stones is an emblem of historical continuity among kinship groups.

Like the hills and forests, the streams also influenced the pattern of settlements in the region. Many of the villages lived by the banks of the rivers and streams, as there were no wells in those days and to also practice fishing. Hausa fishermen and hunters seasonally come there to fish or hunt. This also encouraged trading and communal fishing, hunting and festivals (AzufiG, EbaK, SuuH) and mass hunting of guinea fowls (EmikupK). Again, fishing and hunting encouraged crafts, as there was need for various instruments and tools for trapping fish and animals. This in turn

71


encouraged trade and intergroup relations. The Ebira have fishing festival called Ohimege. The concepts of water spirits and cults also evolved. The building of canoes for ferry, fishing and other aquatic activities evolved and further encouraged inter regional contacts, trades and migration of more renowned ferry Ebira and Nupe into the region.

The land has varying proportion of silica, salt, nitrogen and phosphorus. It is alluvial, is sticky in the paddy areas and sandy on the up-lands and fertile. They make plants grow well. The nitrogen needed by both plants and animals, and enabled survival since periods beyond reconstruction. The red ore and brown loams have granite, schist and sandstone that develop good humus for the growth of plants (Wall 1978:9-10; Pritchard 1973:37). The boom in agricultural production is related to the fertility of the soils. It is interesting to note here that farming in this region is of great antiquity. The ethno-botanical and archaeological findings suggest that farming dates back to 3,000 BP, and that the cultural styles of the figurines have striking similarities with the hair and dressing styles of the present inhabitants (Clark 1960:19). Despite this evidence of fertility and productivity of the soil in this region with ancient farming, some scholars alleged that the soils in the Middle Belt lying between 7.5oN and 10oN of Africa are not as fertile as the soils in the

72


Forest and Sahel belts. They argued that the tropical soils are generally poor, and the whole “African continent was ill situated for cultivators” since “agriculture here did not possess the rich potentialities that belonged to it in other regions.” This Eurocentric speculation led to the conclusion that such plight of Africa was the cause of its poor agricultural method and scanty population (Ohiare, 1987:429-432; Filaba, 1994:13-15). It seems they argued so as sadists in attempt to cover the under-pricing and massive export of African products to Europe. This attempt was very apparent when Gunn and Conant emphasized that the Gbagyi were noted for poor farming method which consequent poor harvest, their cotton and groundnuts were of poor quality, and yams introduced to them! (Gunn & Conant, 1960:90). However, scholars like C. Wringley dismissed such speculations, and argued that the tropics is neither desert no jungle but savannah with easily worked soils and has rapid vegetation growths which provide a more suitable agricultural environment than the arid sub-tropics or the cold dark forest of the temperate zones (Wringley, 1960:68). This is true because a recent study of the Central Nigeria by Ohiare reveals that the region grows more crops than the other belts of Nigeria and most suitable for agriculture than the Forest or Sahel belts. Some of the recent agricultural research and demonstration in this area revealed the area to be

73


one of the best zones for Nigerian potential extensive and large-scale agricultural investment (Ohiare, 1987:429-432). Of course, the River Basins Developments and the Agricultural Development Projects in Nigeria are concentrated in the Middle Belt. Even the comparatively lower population density of the Central Nigeria was caused by the 19th century slave raids of Jihadists (Bingel (1991:24-62).

However, the low quality of nutrients in soil in some parts of the zone further demonstrates the millennium farming of the area more than in the southern parts where farming is not as old as in the Middle Belt, and thus has forests cleared. However, the gradual exhaustion of soil nutrients had its significance in the historical demography and farming techniques of the area. For instance, whenever farms around settlements became exhausted and characterized by quick growth of weeds and striggers (Ghira-guK, Ofa-naG; wuta-wutaH) and subsequent poor yields, the people abandoned such settlements for nearby virgin lands where they eventually built hamlets. This informed the dispersed settlement patterns of the Koro, Gbagyi and their neighbours in the region. In addition, they developed farming techniques that enabled them cope with exhausting farmlands like fallowing, intercropping, use of certain crops that rejuvenate the soil nutrients and the use of

74


cow dung. Around big settlements, the farms are not left too long enough to rejuvenate.

Koro and Gbagyi are fond of searching for new virgin lands, which may not have much weeds and occasion higher yields. In the search for new farms and hunting, they come across each other in the bush. The region is like games reserve. To hunt some big animals particularly the dangerous and destructive warthogs, buffalos, guinea fowls and so on, need large hunting bands – (Wugwin-NyabK, fazna/bagoG) which comprise villages across tribal bounds. There are also fishing bands – su of similar composition, to enable packing water and trapping fishes. These large activities have title-holders and festivals, like Sarkin Baka/Dawa, Mairuwa, Sarkin Pito, Sarkin Makera, etc. In the olden days, iron smelting and smithing was a tedious work and demanded labour contract to gather the ironstones and hard woods with which to burn and smelt the iron ore. These joint economic efforts must have partly influenced them to speak of common origin, just as the Bassa and Gbagyi do.

The climate of this area is influenced by wind pressure and air mass that bring about rainy and dry seasons. The Northeast Tropical Continental air mass comes from the Sahara desert in October to May is dry and brings harmattan and dry season. From April to November the wind pressure reverses and comes with the Tropical

75


Maritime Air Mass across the Atlantic that is warm and wet bringing rain. Annual rainfall of this region is 100 cm. Oral accounts allege that the quantity of rainfall in this area has gone down that the paddy and marshy areas that by 1960 had never been cultivated are now being farmed. Again, some small streams that used to feed the rivers in the area and the aquatic life are fizzling. The surface temperature ranges between 30o to 35o C but with varying degree from dry to rainy season. The hottest months are March, April, May and October, when mosquitoes breed (Iloje, 1980). Climatic condition significantly influenced the lives of the people in several ways. First, they developed the concepts of time from what they feel and see. Hence, the year is divided into four seasons the dry season (Mikegye:G UruK, KakaH) and the rainy season (VniikoG,IduiK, DaminaH) with their transition period of summer (wyepe-saG,Uhan-narK, zafiH) in April and May, and winter (se-saG,InarK, bazaraH) from November to February. The two major seasons the wet and dry, naturally condition distinct activities. The wet season is the busiest time of the year because farming is the dominant activity. The dry season, too, is the period for preparing seedlings, clearing new farms, building new huts, hunting, fishing and the time for crafts and marketing. Local markets prosper more during the dry season, as there are harvested crops to be disposed of. Hunting and fishing contribute

76


to the improved dietary intake, health and procreation. Dry season is also the best time for recreation and ceremonies especially when been influenced by good harvest, general health and peace of the society. These activities complement agriculture and contribute to the integration of their economies and sedentary life and interrelations.

One of the most important issues is the change in land tenure system. Since agriculture remains the major activity of both the ‘aboriginal’ and new comers. Land question is the most central and sensitive matter, because it has direct bearing on wealth, power and inter-group relations. Land has been the major area of challenge and struggle. Before the coming of new groups, the Gbagyi and Koro used to give out farmlands to person or group that indicated interest. Once the new Gbagyi or Koro comers settle permanently, or agrees to be attending and paying homage to certain cultural practices, they inherit the land given to them, but the original owners of the land harvests the economic trees. The non-Gbagyi and Koro new comers are also not given land unless they agree to be paying some form of tax and homage. Many of the new groups ask for permission to settle temporarily, to rest before proceeding to somewhere else. They could decide to request to settle permanently later whenever they find the settlement good enough. Some of the commonest

77


demands on new comers vary depending on the circumstance. They included yearly gifts of chicken, goats, cows, and slaves, piece of clothes, iron, mat and skins. In the olden days, some land owners preferred having a slave or daughter of the new comer to be given in marriage to a member of the family. Others preferred some labour to be rendered on their farms on yearly basis. In order to be fully accepted by the Gbagyi, the Koro, Gade, Gwandara, Bassa, Yeskwa and Fulani in particular, attended cult sacrifices, and could entrust each other for safe keeping some lands, animals, properties, cultural items, and so on (Smallwood 1932; Bmyanyiko 1979:3; Filaba 1994).

With the coming of new groups while land is fixed, quarrel over land is now frequent. Since agricultural products are becoming more valuable, the Fulani who are always migrating pastoralists’ are settling down to farm where their cattle have manure. Now, the latter arrivals and the Fulani pastoralists are falsifying their traditions of origins with the intent to look older in the area, since to pre-date another group in occupying a piece of land, is a pre-requisite for monopoly and access to land-use. In fact, the internecine wars and community clashes which characterized the 19th century in the whole Nigerian area revolve around acquisition of large territory, because control of large territory meant economic and political

78


superiority derivable from the large population, markets, taxes, minerals, farms and other environmental opportunities. That must have been the influencing factor for the internecine wars and jihadist activities (Filaba 1994).

There have been changes in the sphere of trade too. Arab travelers’ accounts (Last,(n.d ) 157-170; Allen and Thompson, 1968:308; Ohiare, 1987:368-377) point to the fact that this region had trade relations with other parts of the Central Sudan and beyond as far back as the 17th century, when the Wangarawa, Hausa and Kanuri traders penetrated the region down to the confluence area. This occasioned the introduction of North African, European and Asian manufactures into the region. Similarly, slaves, precious stones, medicines and manufactures of this region repatriated outside Africa. The succeeding centuries added impetus with the contact with Europeans along the coast. This further influenced the volume of trade on the Benue and Niger, which fed with goods from interior neighbouring communities. Trade in slaves then became dominant in the 18th and 19th centuries. The various markets among them further unit the Gbagyi and Koro and their neighbours. There are four, 5, or 7 days market week among group of villages in the region and there are market laws initiated by the elders. These laws are mystified. With the growth of markets and

79


motorable paths, Hausa, and other non-tribes patronize villages to collect merchandise. Some of them stay for days in the villages. Some of them have local agents to whom they entrust some money for collection and packaging of farm products. In addition, the use of buses, pick-ups (Akorikura) and machines (achaba) for transportation are some forms of inter-group relations.

Labour relations are some of the most and basic binding forces. Blood relation stressed in order to have access to the labour and support of members. The household is the basic unit of production. Members’ labour and sharing of the house produce is determined by the household-head normally the eldest. Members organised works on the general farm (Ghaman-wukwuriK,fakoG) or personal farm (IjumaK, anugbaG). Labour contracted or exchanged from another house or village. Hence, various forms of labour contracts exist whereby each member of the community or the whole village and group of villages arrange labour contract [WugwinK, Gaiya/GowyiG or ImukK, FadownaG]. In fact, marriage arrangement are liquidated with labour [UchinK, yeyi-fa].

Labour exchange has remained arena of leadership training and motivating the youth. There are labour leaders and they are motivated with their choice of music (ataceG, Iham-wugwinK or

80


BogwonK) during work or festivals. Music like afa-nyaG concert goes on as farming is going on. Indeed, there are various songs for various works to arouse the interest and to energize workers.

Since the farms of the Koro and Gbagyi were interspersed, they exchanged labour. They loved having farms nearby each other to chase away destructive birds, rodents and monkeys through joint security. Their women invited neighbours to assist in harvesting. In this course, both Gbagyi and Koro adapt their neighbours system of farming and harvesting. The Koro were used to making long ridges for yams, pushing down guinea corn and millet stalks before cutting the heads, etc. While their Gbagyi neighbours make bulb heaps for yams, cutting down guinea-corn and millet in lines before harvesting them. Both would cement the flours of their houses and so on. The Gbagyi also employed the Gwandara and Gade/Koro and vis-visa to purify the land before sowing to boost harvest.

Similar Cultural Values, Practices and Hosting Each Other Cultural values are the cherished traditions

and ethos, which are desirable to their society and taken as normative civilization. They are expectations and practices that make life

81


meaningful and anticipation of better tomorrow. The values are ideals making people to be responsible, initiative, conform and orient the younger ones to cherish the attitude. Some of their cherished cultures are discussed in earlier works (Mudock 1958; Naibi and Hassan 1959; Gunn and Conant 1960; Ford 1955; Smallwood 1932; Meek, 1960; Temple, 1960; Nana, 1979; Diko 1989; Filaba 1994; Gojeh, et al 1998; Bawa 1999; Filaba, Gwamna and Shekwo, 2000; Filaba and Daudu, 2000).

One observable cultural value of these people is good mind and behaviour and predisposition to work as demanded. They value submissive character, discipline, pre-disposition to obey orders, and fulfill responsibilities. This is reinforced through organization of age grades; favour for the behaved and punishment for deviants. They thus love organizing their societies with structures authorities some of which are religious and some administrative. As with all rural settlements in Central Nigeria, the unit of authority starts with the household [piuwaG, Ikpun-ghahaK] under its house head [piuwadaG, Ikpun-kiyaK/WuzeaK]. The household heads are answerable to the clan-head [ebe-tukoG, Unokpun-wusepK], or ward head [Sepa-daG, Ihiya-wusepK]. They are also answerable to the Village Head [Ezhi-daG, Ghere-wusep]. All the Village Heads are answerable to the Chief (OsuG, Ghere-GbabinK) who might even be the District Head. The OsuG or Ghere-

82


GbabinK is turbaned like an Emir since colonial rule when the British created Districts and District Heads were to turban Village Area Heads. Since then Hausa-like titles adopted. Title Holders have overlapping roles in the palace, but the most significant ones are the Secretary, the Sarkin Pada, Bochi-zaki (adviser) and Sarkin Dogarai. Koro and Gbagyi had symmetrical religious authority and gods. Everybody had his personal shrine (adobwuiG, WunuigopK), which was propitiated at individuals’ schedule. Each house had its ancestor shrine (azakwoi-kuta/ piwa-shnaG, Wunuigop-wuzeiK). There were also clan shrines (ebe-tukwoG, Onui-goup-GhahaK), town shrine (azhibaG,Wunuigop-wusepK), and individual or town cults and sanctuaries (ashnaG,UkuK) that had festivals (like bwagyiG, golobeG, mwamwaG, kudamiyiG, kakaG, boriG, zokuG, kalemaG; KebereK, NegweziK, Uku-yangaK,Uku-surK, Uku-wudakpaK) and so on.

Many precolonial polities were purely exercising cultural and religious control of tribes while excluding non-tribe even in the same settlement. Thus, individuals and families paid more allegiance to their kins and cultural cum religious heads in far away settlements than to the non-tribe rulers in their settlements. Festivals organized to unite all their kins far and near, and their chief priests regarded as ruler of their tribe only, but without defined territory. That was how the ‘exclusive’ Karshi Gwandara, Gade,

83


Fulani/Hausa Sarkin Musulmi and numerous other ‘chiefdoms’ were conceived. Thus, these tribes give their traditions claiming they had established ’chiefdoms’ (Filaba 2006). However, there were some many Gbagyi polities with non-tribes - Koro, Gwandara, Gade, Hausa, Ganagana, Kadara and others - paying some bribes and homage in order to farm the lands unmolested (Smallwood, 1932:2). Some polities were a group of villages and heterogeneous, with central authorities and had Kings with some dependent tribal kings. The concept of ‘chiefs’ and ‘chiefdom’ – sub-rulers and inferior subordinate territories were British colonial concepts and creations. As kings, their palaces [GalukoG,Wugirga-ghereK] were supreme courts of justice attended by title-holders [Atuko-daG, Gbanir-gabK], who had powers to commit the state to declare a war, or pass capital punishment, or enslave, or seize properties. There were Assembly of Title Holders [Atuko-da BoknuG, Wuhiza-banir-agabK] and Assembly of Elders [Azakwoi-BoknuG, Wuhiza-banokpunK] who advised the king.

Some of the earliest palace titles between the Koro and Gbagyi in the region included: Padawa/SopadaG, Ghere-wugirgaK - chief palace officer; Gaduma/Adogo, Uhiya-ghokuci-adaK - the judge; MugazyiG, Unir-ghokuci-ovur-ghereK (heir apparent and discipline officer. Others titles were: Tulaci/WuziliG, Unir-kwan-ghereK - information and

84


protocol officer; MaadaaciG, UmadaciK - treasurer and custodian of the armory and cavalry; ZhekaadaG, UzikadaK - the treasurer and tax collector. They also included: DanyinyaG, Unir-kwanK - the town crier and messenger; Bochi-ZaciG, Unir-ghotowotuK - the adviser and king maker; BezyeyakoG, Ghere-rikuK - the commander of the archery; Atuwa/ Sarkin numaG, Ghere-wuramK - the judge over land matters and labour planner; Wucili/MianguwaG, Bawocili-ruhaK - the ward heads/representatives and Asu-RuguG, BaduaduK some kings’ ceremonial messengers. The committed leadership attracted the admiration of Arab and European writers and remarked that they were world famous in governance, better than European, Asian, or American systems. A renowned political analyst and historian, Ibn Batuta, observed in Western and Central Sudan in 1352 that:

The Negroes possess some admirable qualities. They are seldom unjust, and have a greater abhorrence of injustice than any other people. Their sultan ruler shows no mercy to any one who is guilty of the least act of it. There is complete security in their country. Neither travellers nor inhabitant in it have anything to fear from robbers or men of violence. They do not confiscate the property of any man... they are careful to observe the hours of prayers.... (Okoye, 1964:72).

85


This reveals how the traditional institution was not corrupt, protected the weak, dealt with criminals particularly armed robbers, and could stop any violent clash. Similarly, European observers noted that African rulers were “perhaps the greatest of them all” in the world, whose kingdoms “could be so disciplined and kept in order” (Rodney, 1972:141 & 144).

However, all the Koro and Gbagyi village units had confederal arrangements for sporadic consortium against invaders. In attempt to account for the semi-independent nature of the Village Groups, some informants simply submitted that they were Kingdoms/Empires independent of external control, and reduced every big settlement into a kingdom. Colonial historians like Kirk-Green, L. Murdock and Naibi and Hassan, FCDA’s chronicles of Garki Village in Time Perspective, uncritically accepted such assumption.

They have highly value the attitude of sharing. This influenced the fact that all members engaged in production, and the elders have no justification to alienate the wealth created by all. Nobody accumulated at the expense of the generality of the society. As such, it is condemned and seen to be necessarily evil. Selfish aggrandizement discouraged by stigmatizing the greedy as a wizard [GuzyenyiG, UdohK). Such members are suspected to be members of secret societies [NuwnaloG,BodohK].

86


The people value joint or cooperative ventures – fadownaG, WugwinK, tara-hannuH, being a form of labour contract. Such can assist the weak and create avenue for criticism, competition, standardization, excellence, courage, and correction. Utilization of natural and human resources is a value. Hence, laziness is condemned, and the immediate natural endowment effectively utilized and transformed into wealth and assets. Every man expected to know some methods of crafts and medicines, while women have ashinwna-baG, IyakunK - fuel wood industry, agnanubaG IjinrunuiK - pot bakery or IjumaK - personal farms. Women also have knitting, brewing, and sylvan produce abilities. Koro and Gbagyi are very hard working and initiative.

Koro and Gbagyi love novelty and designs. Hence, they mark their bodies in peculiar ways. These marks transferred on their manufactures as their Trade Marks/designs – IshiK, asaG. The Koro trademarks are unique on the face and body. Sometimes is a show of strength to withstand hardship and pains, when the inflicted marks made on the victims. There are different tattoos for both Koro and Gbagyi, much of which copied by their neighbours. Arts and creativity signify beauty between the Koro and Gbagyi. It is an attainment of quality and competitiveness. Neighbours like the Afo, Gade, Kadara, Bassa, Dibbo, Dakarkari, Jaba, Hausa Maguzawa and Kanuri have similar

87


facial body tattoos. They sometimes mix them with those known mainly for Fulani.

Festivals and initiations are cherished as avenues of socialization, entertainment, leadership development and demonstration of riches, status symbol and community service. Each family or village is expected to organize a festival of a sort to entertain non-kins and tribes. Most cults have festivals and ceremonies to entertain, initiate and spiritually protect the community. One can demonstrate how much one loves the community by lavishly throwing a ceremony attended by other tribes.

Ceremonies were some of the arenas for hosting neighbouring groups. Some of these ceremonies were Burials, Turbaning, Marriages, Annual Festivals, and cult festivals. The cults that had festivals and celebrated by the Koro were Ghetiri-Nengwezi, Kebere, Ukudogung, Usor, and Ghokonor. The Gbagyi were bwagyi, golobe, mwamwa, kudamiyi, kaka, bori. In the olden days, one of the most popular festivals was Zhiba-je. Zyiba-je are two words ‘zhiba’ = settlement, and ‘je’ = beer/ceremony, put together to mean ‘town festival’, celebrated after harvest of guinea corn and when the first rains have dropped around March and April. Zhibaje among the Gbagyi was also purification of land in preparation for next sowing season. Thus, every Gbagyi settlement organized its Zyibaje Zhiba cult similarly practiced

88


among the Koro; an acquired biggest tree in the town or its outskirt, which habour the spirit of protection. Some people simply erected one and planted other associated plants believed to be medicinal and contained spirit of cure and protection, and a small hut built there where (WuzekuK, adawyiyaG) juju costumes and ancestor spirits housed. This was normally at crossroads. The round-about passing surrounding the cult was yearly changed by the (Ere-kuK) BeiG the chief priest (Palace Officials, 2007). Gbagyi people also had a general harvest/thanksgiving festival Akabwanya-je; sowing preparation festival – Zhiba-je, town sanctification festival – shigbe-je; and whenever there was going to be some community project or special intercession to chase away mosquitoes, ghosts, epidemics, evil people, and so on.

Chastity and moral discipline is a value very much encouraged. It is a disgrace to a clan and the whole community for some of recalcitrant members to engage in pre-marital or extra marital sex. Unfortunately, this has been a major avenue of inter-group relations today, as the youth from different groups seek for partners across groups.

Adherence to religion is part and parcel of Koro and Gbagyi life expressed in their daily verbal communication, sacrifices, enchanting and shrines, cults, etc. They have psychological, political and social lessons. Religion gives courage by believing that forefather spirits provide

89


protection, success, etc., and that deviants can attract bad luck and curses from forefather spirits. Religion is used to control women, make people fear and conform. Religion is an aspect of social and political power, enfranchisement and right to participate in expropriation of labour and surplus value. Religion is a source of authority, laws and all type of codes of conduct. Now the Church join all tribes, but killing their traditional religions. The Gbagyi of Karu started becoming converts and preachers among their neighbours since the Sudan Interior Mission (SIM) established itself there in 1902, and set up Bible School where neighbouring tribes were trained. The Gbagyi preachers attempted to get converts among neighbours, and that since then had encouraged tolerance, co-existence, western philosophy, manpower development and community development projects. Church today has assumed political, spiritual, enlightenment and inter-tribal/regional connections roles. The first three Churches that significantly impacted on the people in the region are ECWA, Roman Catholic, Baptist.

Some Koro had started embracing Islam when Abuja was established there about 1830, while Kagarko people started becoming Muslims when ‘Bubu’ was made a Muslim chief (Sarkin Muslimi) and subsequently made responsible for the collection of taxes from all until 1923 when his power was restricted to a unit of Kagarko District

90


(Gojeh, Jatau and Mamman, 1998). Rulers of Abuja now Suleja occasionally propitiated Zuma rock, while the Muslims of Kagarko appropriated Koro place of worship.

In the whole region, Muslims freely consult traditional priests just as non-Muslims consult Malamai for charms and amulets. The Gbagyi cults of Bori foretelling and medicines for snake bite, spirit possession, malaria, and so on, encouraged intergroup relations (Ohiare, 1987 pp. 429-432; Filaba 1992; Filaba, 1994:13-15; Filaba 2006 b). The establishment of Abuja then Suleja was characterised by assimilating the host communities and vice versa, as rulers of Abuja paid homage to the indigenous groups by propitiating the mystic rock Znumwa-pe (Zuba rock). In fact:

Just before the beginning of the rains, each year the Emir would send a black ox, a black he-goat and a black dog to the villagers of Chachi rock. They were the intermediary who kept others away from the rock and the hidden priests that performed the sacrifices for sacrifice to the fetish (Hassan and Naibi, 1969:86-87). There are now perceived cases of cultism in

the region beyond tribe or settlements, and people consult priests, pastors, malams for prayers and charms that can protect them.

Koro and Gbagyi and Koro highly value

91


personal cleanliness and domestic hygiene. A person with maintenance habit is regarded as a special gift to the family. Thus, every veranda and room is cemented with gravel and sepia.

Passion and concern for non-community members is highly encouraged. Good choice of diction for communicating with non-tribe is encouraged.

Koro and Gbagyi are action oriented. They are sensitive to family and societal problems and act instantly. Each woman must act fast in order to deal with hunger. Every man must be brisk and bring herbs to deal with diseases. Every Koro and Gbagyi must act to save his neighbours from hazards. Leadership by example is a standard. Participation in production by leaders, commitment, truth, justice and fair play are commended.

Koro and Gbagyi burials of elderly people are characterized by music and dances, songs and dirges akannyi/odonyiG, Wujei/GhajaghaK and with particular musical instruments and particular dancing styles for particular dirges. The dirges are inherited poems and personal expressions composed using different figures of speech and sang alongside with drama. This is a field yet documented. After about a year or whenever the family of the diseased deem it fit they occasion Vinngo-luG, GhetiriK the flooring of the grave and

92


saadaka a remembrance celebration. Christians do similar festivals, which host non-tribes.

It should be mention of the fact that be it partriachal or matrilineal society all over Africa, the woman is marginalized in the share of basic amenities and surplus value. Of course, the hitherto gender societies have gender division of labour reserving the difficult porting and unending domestics for woman. This is sanctioned with superstitions, religion and laws, which are powerful authority weapons for suppressing and restricting woman’s access to community wealth and surplus value. There are several taboos, superstitions and incarnated spirits that frighten woman to submission and brings bad omen to her if she contravenes the community-laws. She is severely punished by battering if she is suspected of committing adultery, and there is the omen that her labour during delivering a baby will unnecessarily prolong if she fails to confess. Powerful and intelligent women are stigmatized as witches. Women are seen as part of the community’s wealth to be utilized by men. Women do not inherit the landed properties they had assisted their late husbands to develop, neither can they inherit their children she cater for even after the death of their husbands (Gojeh, 2004; Filaba, 2007). Koro women farm like men. They invite neighbouring Gbagyi women to help them in porting home harvested crops.

93


Intermarriages were very difficult in the olden days because of teenage betrothal. It is these days that intertribal marriages are common, as girls go to school and refuse forced marriage. In the olden days, spinsters closely monitored their engaged lovers, and could physically assault ‘intruders’.

Government policies since colonial conquest encouraged intergroup relations through creation of new administrative boundaries. Koro and Gbagyi were grouped together and had superimposed on them either a Muslim Koro or Muslim Gbagyi or Fulani/Hausa. The colonial government created repressions like taxes, recruited labour for infrastructural development, means of coercion – courts, prisons and police. New administrative centers – the Native Authorities, Native Treasuries, recruitment of labour, etc., encouraged inter-relations.

People started thinking of belonging to one District, Division, Region and Country. Colonial government encouraged cash crop and so on, encouraged inter-group relations. The post independence employment policies, establishment of parastatals, education and partisan politics, are all encouraging intergroup relations. Although large and small-scale investments have remained largely tribal, particularly the Ibo and Yoruba exclusive, hope that the new economic opportunities and joint investments and

94


cooperatives, and transportation, will cut across tribal bounds.

Partisan politics necessarily involves scheming beyond tribal barriers, and strongly encourage intergroup relations. However, some people manipulate tribal and religious sentiments to outwit opponents from other groups.

Hausa language has played immense role in uniting people in this part of the world, and is now their commercial and Church language. It is their lingua franca.

These cultural values have influenced an exceptionally productive, peace loving and docile Koro and Gbagyi society, which their aggressive neighbours, who lack this type of discipline and stamina, misunderstand them as cowardice, unfoxy, labourious, and so on .

95


CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

Koro and Gbagyi have common social psychology and go further to conclude that they have common origin. Some Koro and Gbagyi built prestigious pasts claiming they came from Mecca or Medina or Borno or Hausa cities. Some of them claim they are the remnants of defunct Kwararafa, which may merely be indicating that some individual groups came from there and became completely absorbed into Koro and Gbagyi settlements. The Koro are the primogeniture of the various groups around them with whom they have linguistic affinities. Their country came to have new immigrants particularly in the 19th century. The two groups lived in the territory form Lake Chad to the confluence, but were gradually reduced by centuries of slave raids, while dialectically their relative population added to the rise of Hausa, Kanuri, Ebira, Nupe and Yoruba towns where the slaves were stationed.

Issues of super-ordination and subordination along tribal and religious preference were colonial initiatives in the divide and rule policy, and had not been the dominant forms of intergroup relations of these societies in the

96


precolonial periods. While there were wars, raiding and other forms of crises, they were not the dominant characteristics of the region, as there were trade links, urbanization and cultural ties. Human beings have the tendency to be gregarious and communicating. Agrarian activities (farming, fishing, hunting, crafts production, festivals), trading, wars, diseases, religious desires, and so on, influence inter and sub-group relations.

Koro and Gbagyi subgroup inter-relation is an interesting phenomenon influenced by sharing of natural resources, historical movements and migration, agrarian life, marketing, cultural values and social psychology. Other ones include Christianity, Islam, Hausanization and Government policies.

Koro and Gbagyi came to have common social psychology since the time they became neighbours. The environmental opportunities and challenges encouraged Koro sharing and inter-relations in several ways in the course of search for livelihood, cooperation and survival. Economic pursuits, labour contracts, search for medicine, festivals, trading and religious obligations are dynamics of interrelations. Common historical experience and insecurity in particular informed Koro-Gbagyi subgroup idiosyncrasy that although being interspersed by other tribes, they have the predilection to move together. They develop joking

97


relations, which are mistaken as historical realities in order to outsmart potential political opponents in their sub-group, or in order to ameliorate the fear of losing land and traditional titles.

However, the Koro and Gbagyi social psychology was very much influenced by similar historical experience and common ways of life, tolerance, creativity, neighbourhood, sharing and acceptance of others’ rights and equality to live together, move freely without crimes and apprehension of others. Their society is so disciplined and thus distastes the groups they perceive to be too aggressive, crafty and unscrupulous.

If all communities tolerate and share with their non-kith and kins like Koro and Gbagyi, communal cum religious conflicts would be things of history in Nigeria. Thus, the lessons to learn from them is attempt to respect each other and eschew tribalism and live in peace with whomever is in the neighbourhood irrespective of origin, tribe, language, religion, profession, complexion and interest.

98


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdullahi Smith Centre (1987). A Little new light. Zaria,

Gaskia Corporation. Abubakar, J. (1977). The Coming of Zegizegi and its effects on

Koro/Gwari relationship in the 19th Century. B.A. Dissertation, Department of History A.B.U. Zaria.

Achi, B. (1999). Warfare and Slavery in Zaria Emirate in the 19th

c. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Adamu, M. (1976). The Spread of the Hausa Culture in West

Africa, 1700-1900. SAVANNA 5(1), 3-13. ____ (1977). The Contribution of the Hausa people to the

Ethnic and cultural Transformation in some parts of the Middle Belt of Nigeria to the end of the end of the 18th century. Journal of the Historical Society of Nigeria (JHSN), 3 – 29.

--------- (1988). Zazzau in the 18th and 19th centuries.” In Y. B.

Usman (Ed.) Facts, Values and Nigerian Historiography: In Honour of Prof. Abdullahi Smith. Zaria: Dept. of History, A.B.U.

Adeleye, (1979). Hausa and Borno 1600-1890. In Ajayi A. and

Crowther (Ed.). History of West Africa Vol. 1. Longman. 564-601

Agboola, S.A. (1960). Some Factors of Population Distribution

in the Middle Belt of Nigeria: The Examples of Northern Ilorin and Kabba Provinces.

99


Allen, W. & Thompson. (1968). A Narrative of the Expedition sent by Her Majesty’s Government to the River Niger in 1841. Great Britain: Frank Cass.

Armstrong, R. C. (1962). Glottochronology and African

Linguistics. Journal of African History. 3(2): 283-290 ____ (1965). The Use of Linguistic and Ethnological Data

in the Study of Idoma and Yoruba History.' In Jan Vansina (Ed.). The Historian in Tropical Africa. London:

Backwell, H. F. (1932). [Resident Niger Division] Niger

Province. NAK, 1, 671 vol.1, 3148 Ballard, J. A. (1971). Historical Inferences from the Linguistic

Geography of the Nigerian Middle Belt. AFRICA Vol. 1:4 IAI

Barth, H. (1965). Travels and Discoveries in Northern and

Central Africa 1849-55 (Oxford Uni. Press 1965). Vol. II, 34.

Bawa, S. G. (1999). Gbagyi and the Nigerian Nation. Minna:

Lurad Venture. Bingel, T. B. (1991). Historical Demography of Nigerian Middle

Belt AD 1400-1900: An Explanation of the Role of Historical and Environmental Factors in shaping the Population of Niger Province.” Ph.D. [unpubl.] Thesis, A.B.U. Zaria

Birdsell, J. L. (1975). Human Evolution: An Introduction to Physical Anthropology. Chicago

Blankeney, J. E. N. (1907). Nassarawa Province, Pagan Tribal Laws and Customs. NAK SPN 5316/1907

100


Bmyanyiko, N. F. (1979). Topics on Gbagyi History. Jos: Museum.

Bovill, E. W.ed. (1964). Denham, Clapperton and Oudney, Narrative of Travels and Discoveries in Northern and Central Africa in the Years 1822, 1823, and 1824. Cambridge Uni. Press.

Clark, D. J. (1960). The Pre-historic Origins of African

Culture.” P. J. MacEwan (ed), Africa from the Earliest Time to 1800. London

Cole, J. M. (1968). Archaeology of Early Man. America Crowther and Tailor (1960). The Gospel on the Bank of the Niger:

Journal and Notices of Native Missionaries Accompanying the Niger Expedition of 1857 –1859. London.

Cullen, A. D. (1974). Annual Reports and Returns, Ben.

Province. 110:388902 B1914 David, B. (1970). Historian and the West Africa. In Fagg,

J.D.(Ed). Africa Discovers Her Past. pp. 53-54 Diko, B. (1989). Gbagyi/Gwari Culture. Kaduna: Ebenezer Publ. Doki, A. G. (2005). Towards the Enhancement of Inter-Ethnic

Understanding, Peaceful Co-existence and Harmonious Relationship in Nigeria. The Role of the Theatre. Journal of Faculty of Arts Seminal Series. Vol. 1.

Duff, E. C. (1929). Gazetters of Kontagora Province. London:

Waterloo.

101


Dupigny, C. G. M. (1929). Gazetteers of Nupe Province. London: Waterloo.

Fagg, B. (1970). The Nok Culture in History. In B. David (Ed.)

The African Past. Filaba, M. A. (1992). Ecology and Gbagyi Settlement Pattern. A

paper presented at the International Conference on Ecology, Society and State in Sahara, Sahel and Savannah, Centre for Trans Sahara Studies, Uni. Maiduguri

____ (1994). Karu, Kurape and Kurudu Kingdoms: A Social,

Political and Economic History of the Gbagyi in the Central Nigeria in the 18th and 19th Centuries. M.A. Unpubl. Thesis A.B.U. Zaria.

____ (2001). Intellectual Justification for the Suppression of

the Gbagyi: The Gbagyi in the Colonial Historiography. Gbagyi Journal 1(1): 8-34.

____ (2004 a). Verification of Traditions of Origins in

Central Nigeria with Glottochronology. A Paper for West African Linguistic Society (WALS) 24th West African Languages Congress on GLOBALIZATION AND THE FUTURE OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES, Dept. of Linguistic and African Languages Uni.Ibadan Aug. 1st - 6th.

____ (2004 b). A History of Karu with Emphasis on the

Consequences of the Rapid Urbanization of the FCT Abuja 1976-2002. Ph.D. Thesis A.B. U. Zaria 2005 (unpubl.)

____ (2005 a). Literal and Historical Inferences from Gwari

Legends of Queen Amina of Zaria. Jakadiiya Journal of the Department of Nigerian and African Languages. 23(5): 25-32.

102


____ (2005b). Forged Super-ordinate and Subordinate Intergroup Relations in Keffi, Nassarawa and Suleja Area. Being a paper presented at the National Conference on Intergroup Relations and Emerging Trends in Modern Democracy, Nasarawa State University Keffi, 8th 11th July.

____ (2006 a). Inherent Neighbourhood Crises in Historical Transformation: Neighbourhood Search for Safety and Co-existence. Paper presented at the 51st Annual Conference of the Historical Society of Nigeria at the University of Jos, Mond. 1st May – Fri 5th May.

___ (2006 b). Gbagyi Traditional Diseases Diagnosis and

Treatment: Problems and Prospects. Presented at the Department of History, Nasarawa State University Keffi Second International Conference on the theme ‘Africa’s Indigenous Knowledge, Science and Technology’ at Nasarawa State University Keffi Nigeria, 24th to 27th October.

____ (2006). Grassroots Mobilization for Sustainable

Peace and Community Integration. International

Journal of Humanities, 60-72.

___ (2007) Glottochronology of the Major

Languages in Nasarawa State and Nighbouring

States .” Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

Journal, NSUK pp.83-96

103


____ (2007). Ethnic Nationalities in Nasarawa State .” In

Olayemi Akinwumi, Okpeh O. Okpeh and J.D. Gwamna, Intergroup Relations in Nigeria. Humanities Journal NSUK 35-71

____ (2001). Images of Societies and Polities in the Colonial

Historiography.” ZAHIR (Zaria Historical Research,) (Journal of the Dept. of History ABU Zaria.)1(1): 47-65.

____ (2007). Slavery and Slave Trade: Ageless and

Nebulous Syndrome of Servitude and Commerce

in Central Nigeria. In Ashok K. Mohapatra,

Alfred J. López and Adetayo Alabi (Ed). THE

GLOBAL SOUTH 2.2 August 2007): Hegemony and

Subalterity: Africa in a Global Age. The Global

South at http://inscribe.iupress.org/loi/gso Filaba, M.A. & Shekwo, A. J. (2002). The Declining and

Beleaguered Gbagyi Nation and Culture. Gbagyi Journal 1(2): 19-32.

Forde, D. (1955). West Africa Part X: People of The Niger-Benue

Confluence. London: IAI. Gade Traditional Council (2001). Memorandum Requesting for

Upgrading Gade Chiefdom to 1st Class Status Submitted to the Panel on Creation of New Chiefdoms and the Review of Status of Existing Ones in Nasarawa State.

Gana, J. A. (1978). Rural Settlement. In Oguntoyinbo J. S. O.,

Areoola O. and Filani (Ed). A Geography of Nigerian Development.

104

http://inscribe.iupress.org/loi/gso


Gojeh, L. A. (2004). A Speech on the Culture and Traditions of the Koro People of Kagarko LGA of Kaduna State.

Gojeh, L. A. (2004). The Koro Chiefdom of Kaduna State.

Kaduna: Tereship publishers. Gojeh, L. A.; Jatau, C. & Mamman, J. (1998). The History of

Origin and Tradition of the Koro people. Kaduna: Tereship publishers.

Goodridge, R. A. (1999). Muslims and Non-Muslims: The Issue

of ‘Slavery’ in the Establishment of British Rule in Northern Cameroons to 1927. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Gordon, R.G. Jr. (2005). Ethnologue: Languages of the world.

15th ed. Dallas, Tex.: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com/.

Greenberg, J. H. (1979). The Use of Linguistic and

Ethnographic Data in the Study of Idoma and Yoruba History.” J. Vansina, (Ed). The Historian in Tropical Africa. London.

____ (1977), A New Invitation to Linguistics. Ancho Books. ____ (1966). Languages of West of West

Africa. Hauge. Govt. Printers Lafia (2002). Nasarawa State Programme for the

Official Installation and presentation of Staff of Office to His Royal Highness Alhaji Abdulrahaman Oto The Osu Ajiri as a Second Class Chief by His Excellency Alh. Abdullahi Adamu 1st Exec. Govn. Nasarawa State. Nov. 16 2002 Udege-Mbeki.

105


Gunn, H. & Conant, F.P. (1960). Peoples of the Middle Niger Region.AFRICA vol. X

Habi, Y. (1982). The People called Bassange. Zaria: A.B.U Press. Hackett, R. I. J. (2007). Managing or Manipulating Religious

Conflict in the Nigerian Media. Knoxville: University of Tennessee.

Hansford, K., John, B. S & Ronald, S. (1976). A Provisional

Language Map of Nigeria. SAVANNAH 5(2):115-125 Hassan, A. & Naibi S. (1969). Gwari, Koro and Gade Tribes.

University of Ibadan. ____ (1952) A Chronicle of Abuja. Ibadan: Univ. publ. Hodgkin, T. (1970). The Nigerian Perspectives: An Historical

Anthology. London:Oxford University Press Hogben, J. S., (1930). The Mohammedan Emirate of Nigeria.

London: Oxford Uni. Press. Hook, M. A. (1921). Nasarawa Province Keffi Emirate:

Assessment on. NAK SPN No. 90p/1921 Iloje, N. P. (1980). A New Geography of Nigeria. Longmans. Jemkur, J. F. (1983). The Prehistory of Northern Nigeria. Studies

of Nigerian Culture 1. Zaria: Gaskia Press. ____ (1985). Polished Axes form the Nok Culture Areas. ____ (1986). Recent Results of Thermoliminesce Testson

Nok Terra Cotta and Sherds. West African Journal of Archaeology Vol. 16.

106


Jidde, S. A. S. (1989). The Confrontation between Magaji Dan Yamusa of Keffi and Capt. Moloney and the Eventual Conquest of Hausaland. Unpublished Paper presented at Government Technical College, Keffi, on September 9, 1989.

John (1927). Keffi Nassarawa Division Benue Province:

Report on. SNP 10K/4047 John, C. C. & Chukuka, O. (1969). The Population of Tropical

Africa. Longmans. Johnson, H. A S. (1969). Fulani Empire of Sokoto, Oxford

University Press. Jumare, I. M. (1999). Slave Agricultural Estates in the Sokoto

Caliphate. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Karu District (1975). A MEMO: Karu Traditional District

Headship to Plateau State Government, 16/5/1975 Laird and R. A. K. Oldfield,(1967). Narrative of an Expedition

into the Interior of Africa by the River Niger in 1832, 1833 & 1834, vol. I. London.

Lander, R. (1930, 1960). Records of Capt. Clapperton’s Last

Expedition to Africa. 2 vols. London: Frank Cass. Lady, L. (1960). A Tropical Dependency: An Outline of The

Ancient History of Western Sudan with An Account of the modern settlement of Northern Nigeria

Larry, H.M. & Magaji, D.M. (1970). Essentials of Gbagyi

Grammar. Ibadan University Press. 107


Larrymore, (1913). Nassarawa Province Annual Report for 1913. NAK SPN 10/255/1913

Left-Zion, N. (1971). The Early States of Western Sudan to

`11500 A.D. In Ajayi and Crowther (Ed). History of West Africa Vol.1. Longman.

Lokoja Prof. 785 “Subordinate Native Authorities [Nas] for

pagan Communities in Muslim areas” Lovejoy, P. E. & Jan, S. H. (1997). Slow Death for Slavery: The

Course of Abolition in Northern Nigeria, 1897-1936. Cambridge University Press.

Lugard, L. (1915). Colonial Report, Annual, Northern Nigeria

1900-1915 Mabogune, A. L. (1971). The Land and People of West Africa.

In Ajayi and Crowther (Ed). History of West Africa Vol.1. London: Longman

Mabogunje, A. L. (1977). Ecological Survey of the New Federal

Capital Territory. Vol. 1. Mabogunje and Abumere, S. I. (1981). Population Settlement

and Resettlement in the FCT. University of Ibadan. Mabogunje and Abumere, (1983). Report on Present and Future

Population of the FCT., Abuja. University of Ibadan. MackDonald (1958). Exploration of the Benue. Journal of the

Historical Society of Nigeria (JHSN) 1(3) MacEwan, P.J. (1960). Africa from the Earliest Time to 1800.

London

108


Mahadi, A. (1999). Perpetration of the Concept and Institution of Slavery and other forms of Violence in the name of Islam: The Case of Bilad As Sudan to the end of the 19th c. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Mangvat, M. Y. (1999). Slaves and Slavery on the Jos Plateau in

the 11th century: A Review of Evidence. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Naley, E. (1999). The Stealing of African to the United States and

the perpetuation of European Cultural Hegemony. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Maker, T. (1979). The Relationship Between the Sokoto

Caliphate and the non-Muslim Peoples of the Middle Benue region. In Y. B. Usman, (Ed). Studies in the History of the Sokoto Caliphate. Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press, pp. 450-457.

Meek, C. K. (1931) A Sudanese Kingdom. London: Frank Cass. ____ (1960). The Northern Tribes of Nigeria Vol 1. London:

Frank Cass. Migeod, C. O. (1914). Historical and Ethnological Notes on

the Nasarawa Province. Minna Province (1917). Paiko District Kuta Division

Assessment Report. 109


Mohammed, S. (1978). The Impact of the Colonial Rule on the Gbagyi: A History of Political Change. M.A. Thesis Unpublished, ABU Zaria.

Mohammed, Z. D. (1992). History of Nassarawa Emirate, Abuja:

Garkida Press. Morgan, W. (1912). Assistant Resident, Abuja Division 1912,

Ethnographical and Historical Notes in Resident Nassarawa’s Memorandum N0. 565/N 20/8/1912

____ (1912) NAK, No. 565/N. 1912 NAK K3148, “General

Notes on the Gwari of Keffi Emirate ____ (1915) NAK No.1567/1915 “Karu District –

Assessment Report on.” ____ (1930) NAK No.281/1930/5, pp.18-19 “Annual

Reports and Returns Benue Province 1930” ____ (1932), “General Notes on the Gwari Tribes of Keffi

Emirate”. NAK K3148 Mortimore, M. J. (1970). Settlement Evolution and Land Use.

In M.J. Mortimore (Ed.). Zaria and Its Regions. A.B.U. Press

Mosca, G. (19360). The Ruling Class. New York. NAK, (1922) SNP83K/1922 (1) “Indirect Administration:

Methods of” (2) “Pagan Administration. ____ PC. J.293 Nass. Div. Ass. 1933634; PCJ239 “Ass.

Report on Nass. District.” ____ PCJ760 “Nass. Div. General Correspondences.”

110


Obayemi, A. (1979). The Yoruba and Edo Speaking Peoples and their Neighbours before 1600 AD. In Ajayi and Crowther (Ed). History of West Africa Vol. 1 Longmans.

____ (1984). States and Peoples of the Niger-Benue

Confluence Area. In Obaro Ikime (Ed). Ground Work of Nigerian History, Heinemann. pp.141-147.

Okibe, S. A. (1999). Inter-Group Relations between Agita area

Idomaland and Ngbo Area of Igboland from pre-colonial to the present day. M.A Thesis, Department of History Benue State University.

Okonjo, C. (1968). A Preliminary Medium Estimate of the

1962 mid-year population of Nigeria. In John C. Cadwell and Chukuka Okonjo. (Ed). The Population of Tropical Africa. Longmans. 86-96

Okwudibia, N. (1980). Ethnic Politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Forth

Dimension Publishers Ogot, B. A. (1974). Zamani: A Survey of East African History.

Longman. Ohiare, J. A. (1987). The Kingdom of Igu and Opanda c.1700-

1939: A Study in Intergroup Relations. Ph.D. Unpubl. Thesis ABU Zaria.

Oladipo, E. O. (1991). Climatic History of the Sahel. A paper

presented at the International Workshop on Ecology and Society in the History of Sahel and Savannah, Uni. Maiduguri.

Oyedele, E. (1990). Slavery and Urbanization in Central

Sudan up to 1900 A.D. AREWA HOUSE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SLAVERY

111


Oyedele. E. (1999). Slavery and Urbanization in Central Sudan up to 1900 A.D. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Paden, J. N. (1986). Ahmadu Bello the Sardauna of Sokoto: Values

and Leadership of Nigeria. Zaria: Hudahuda Publ. Co. Philips, J. E. (1999). Slavery and Ribats in the Sokoto

Caliphate especially in Comparison with Slavery in the United States. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Plateau State (1973). Plateau State National Census Office

Historical Committee Report. ____ (1981) Plateau State of Nigeria, Programme for the

Installation of His Royal Highness, the Emir of Keffi. Pritchard, J. M. (1973). Africa: A Study Geography. Longmans Pwiti, G. & Robert, S. (1966). Aspects of African Archaeology.

Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publ. Ruxton, F.N. (1909). Jukun (Kororofa). Northern Nigeria

Historical Notes on certain Emirates and Tribes by Order of Her Excellency. London: Waterlog and sons Ltd.

Sciortinor, R. T., (1920). Resident, Nassarawa, Notes on

Nassarawa Province. In John Ralph Willis and Kirk-Green A. H. M., (Ed). 31st Dec. 1919, Gazetteers of Northern Provinces of Nigeria, Vol. III. Great Britain: Uwin Brothers.

Secretary Northern Provinces (1913). Assessment of

Nasarawa Province. NAK. 112


Shaw, T. (1978). Nigeria: Its Archaeology and Early History. Hudson.

Smallwood, J. M. (1932). General Notes on the Gwari Tribes

Keffi Emirate.” SPNI7/K3148, 1932 AREWA HOUSE Smith, M. G. (1978). The Affairs of Daura: A History of Change

in Hausa State 1000-1800 A.D. Califonia. Soper, P. C. (1965). The Old Stone Age in Nigeria. Journal of

the Historical Society of Nigeria (JHSN) vol.3:2, pp.175-194.

Tailor, S. C. (1910; 1931). NAK 115/1910 Reorganization of

Kuta Division. Min. Prof 115/1910, No.281/1930/5 Makurdi 2/3/1931

___ (1910 b). Table Showing Districts in Kuta Division,

Niger Province. Temple, C. L., Temple, O. (1965). Notes on the Tribes, Provinces,

Emirates and States of the Northern Provinces of Nigeria. 2nd ed. London: Frankcass Publishers.

Trewartha, I. G. T.(n.d). A case For Population Geography.

ANNALS, Assoc. of American Geographers, vol. XLIII

The Federal government of Nigeria (1953). The 1952/53 Census

of Nigeria . Lagos: Govt. Statistics. Turaki, Y., (1982). The institutionalization of inferior status

and socio-political role of the non-Muslim Groups in the Hierarchical Structures of Northern Nigeria. Ph.D. Boston University.

113


Turaki, Y. (1993). The British Colonial Legacy in Northern Nigeria. Jos: Challenge Press.

Ubah, C. N. (1999). Slave Trade in Africa on the Historical

Screen. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

--------- (1999). Slavery and the Emancipation in the Nigerian

Emirates. In Abdullahi, M. (Ed.). AREWA HOUSE, World Conference on Slavery and Society in History 26-30 March, 1990. Kaduna: Arewa House.

Ukwedeh, J. H. (1987). The Igala Kingdom to 1930 with

Special Reference to the Rise of Attah Kingship.” Ph.D. Thesis, A.B.U. Zaria.

Usman, Y. B. (1977). Heinritch Barth in Hausaland 1830-

1833: Assessment of Primary Source. History Research at A. B. U. Vol. 1

Yahaya, A. G. (1993). Emirate Resistance to the Colonial

Conquest of Sokoto Caliphate: The Case of Keffi. Presented at International Conference on Sokoto and the European Conquest 1890-1905: Usman Danfodio University

Walls, J.R.D., (1978). Land Resources Division of the British

Government (LRDBG) Central Africa, Project Team: Land Resources of Central Nigeria Agricultural Development Possibilities. Vol. 5A, The Kaduna Plains. England.

Walu, D. L. (2005). The Gbagyi and the Nok Culture.

Gbagyi Journal, 2(2):77-87.

114


Westernmann and Bryan. (n.d). The Languages of West Africa. London

Williams, K. (1987). Indigenous languages of the Niger-Benue

Confluence Region: Their Classification and its Implications for Pre-history. Paper presented at the conference on Confluence Nigeria, Sept. Oct. at Lokoja.

Willis, J. Kirk-Green & Sciortino. (1920). Gazetteers of

Northern Provinces of Nigeria. (Notes on Nassarawa Province). London: Frank Cass.

Wringley, C. (1960). Speculations on the Economic Pre-

history of Africa.” In MacEwan (Ed). Africa from the Earliest Time to 1800. London

115


INDEX

Abdullhi Smith 50 abokan wasa 56, also see joking relations Ahmadu Bello 19 Abuchi 4 Abuja Municipal Area Council (AMAC) 3 Abuja Emirate 21; 40 academicians 2 agricultural investment

11; ‘alien’ Borno and Hausa

conquistadors 45 alien imported District

Heads of Fulani and Hausa stock 21; 29

Allen and Thompson 31 Animals (fauna) 71 Anthropologists 53

archaeological findings 9; 69 Armstrong 12 Backwell H. F. 44 Baikie B. 18; 32 Barret 4 Bassankomu 1; 8 Bawa 4 Benue river 74

116

Borno 1; 8; 14; 44

migrants 51; 59

Borno and Hausaland 58;

63

British conquest 61 British traders and colonizers 18 ‘Bubu’ 86

Burial of chiefs 68

Bwari 3 Central and Western Sudan 13; 81 Central Nigeria 7; 39; 47;

62; 65; 70; 77 Ceremonies, festivals

and cults 84 Chad and Bornu

migrants 48

Chanchaga 3 ‘chiefdoms’ –

clannish/tribal 79 Chikun 4 Christians 9 Clan or compound Heads and Family Heads 25 Clapperton and Lander

17


Beriberi 44 Bingel T. B. 11 Birnin Gwari 4 colonial historiography 48; 82 Colonial officers; 28; 43; colonial policies 29; colonial government 90 Colonial Report, Annual

21 colonial rule 56 Conflicts 2; Religious,

Ethnic and Racial Conflicts 13; 16; 30

consortium stratagem 52; 59

Cultural values 77 democratic dispensation

54 demography and farming techniques 71 dissertations and theses

30 Dogon Kurmi 4; 6 ‘Dumb Trade’ 59 Dusten Alhaji 4 Dyer 26 Ebira have fishing

117

Climate 71 Church 85

Co-existence 2 ethnic politics and voting behaviour 54 ethnobotanical 9 ethnographers 53 Eurocentric speculation

10; 69 European ethnographers 40 farming and harvesting 77 Federal Capital Territory Abuja (FCT) 3 Music 77 Fishing 73 Foreats 67

Forest and Sahel belts 10; 70

Gade 1; 8 Gaisuwa 22 Ganagana 1 Garki Village in Time Perspective 82 Gazetteers of Northern Provinces 49 Gbagyi migration 45-47 Gbagyi other names in


festival Ohimege 68 Egyptian 44 Eleigwu 29 Emirs 53 Emirates 40; 58; 66 environment and the

weather opportunities 7; 11

government policies 53; 65; 89

grave-stone 68; 88 Greenberg 12; 39 Guinea Savannah 6 Gunn and Conant 10;

27; 37 Gurara 6 Gwandara 8 Habe 17 hamitic and nilotic hypothesis 49 Hausa/Fulani 2 Hausa (Maguzawa) 1 Hausa bakwai 32; 46 Hausanization 92 heterogeneous settlements 1 hills and stone tools 66

118

the colonial historiography 21

Glottostatistics 12 Gojeh, Jatau & Mamman

6; 24; 37; 39; 54 Gordon 4

intertribal marriages 89 Inter-tribal marriage 8 Interior Mission (SIM)

85 Iron tools 66; 71 Islam 19 Jaba 2; Jaba groups

(Dunyan, Ham and Kaninkon) 42; Jabaland 43

Jere Chiefdom 3 8; Jihadist (Fulani and the Nupe) 16 50; 59; 66 joking relation 2; 30; 51 Kadara 1 Kaduna States 3; 4; 6; 56 Kagarko LGA 3; 6; 8; 38;

54 Kamberi 1 Kano 14 Kano Chroniclers 14


hilltops and forests settlements 61; 66 household 78 hunting 73 Ibn Batuta 81 Idah Kingdom 17 Igugbaka (Igu and Opanda kingdom) 8; 61 Ija 4 Ishaku Baraje Diko 44 inter-group relations 13;

32; 86

Koro and Gbagyi neighbours 83 Kurama 1-zone 3 Kurape hill 6; Kurape 8 Kwa and Benue Congo

groups of languages 36; 57

Kwararafa 14; 38; 57; 63 Labour relations 76 Lafia 4 Land tenure 73 Larry and Magaaji 48 legend of ‘Hausa

119

Karigi Manuscript 60 Karshi 8 Karu District 23 Kawu 4 Keffi 8 Keffi Emirate 55 kinship ties 8 Kirk–Green 29 Kogi State 6 Koton Karfe 31 Koro and its dialects 21;

39; 40

Music 77; and dances, songs and dirges 88 Muslim chief (Sarkin Muslimi) 86 Muslims 9; 18; 50 Muslim Malamai from Bornu 14 mystification 30 Mythology 7 Nadel F. N. 44 Nana Fyenu Bmyanyiko

48 Nasarawa State 3; 4; 6;

16 Nassarawa Province 17;

55


Bakwai and Banza Bakwai’ 30; 32; 46

Life lingua franca 90 Linguistic comparison

and affinities 39; 40; 56; 57; 91

Lokoja 18; 52 Lord Lugard 24; 55 MackDonald 16 Marketing 73 Map of Nigeria 5; 61; 62 Middle Belt 3; 10; 11; 91 Middle East 38; 49; 57 Mohammed Akanta 24 Mohammed Bello 15; 18 Morgan 50 Mortimore, 66

Northern parts and States of Nigeria 37 Nupe 1; 8 Obayemi A. 12; 60 Ohiare J. A. 11 15 Opanda 15; 31 Othman Danfodio 37

120

Na’ibi and Suaibu 24; 82 Negroes 81 Niger-Benue confluence

48; 58 Niger river 74 Nigerian Constitution

20 Nilo-Sahara/Afro-Asiatic groups 57 non-Moslems16; 17;

‘pagan’ communities subordinated to the Emirates 19; 56

Nok culture 7; 38

Royal Niger Company (RNC) 16 Nigerian Constitution 20 Sarakunan 23 Sarauta 23 Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina 44 Savannah 10 Shrines and gods 79 Shaw T. 49 slave raids of Jihadists


Paden 4 Palace and title holders

80 Palmer H. R. 49 Plains (land) 974 partriachal or matrilineal society 88 Pastoralists Moslems plural and secular Republic of Nigeria 2 Politicians 2 Politicized traditions 53 precolonial polities 79 Queen Amina 14; 60 Raids (Slave raids) 16;

Headhunting tribes 18; 61; 66; 91

religious authority and gods 78; 85 Resistance to colonial rule 26; 53 River Basins Developments 11 Rivers 6 and streams 68 Rocks 9

Tafa 7 temperate zones 70

121

11 social psychology 1; 3;

77; 91 soils and fertility 69; 71 Sokoto Caliphate 62 Sosugun 7 southern Zaria, southern Kaduna 63 subgroup idiosyncrasy and relations 2; 65 subordination of Gbagyi polities 27 Sule Mohammed, 45 Suleja 3; 86 super-ordination and

subordination along tribal and religious preference 91

taboos, superstitions and incarnated spirits 88

Usman Y. B. 14 Weeds 71 Wizard 82 Woman marginalized 88 Wringley C. 10; 70 Wuse 4 Turaki T. 19


Temple O. 54 title-holders and festivals 71; 77; and courts 80 Trade Marks/designs 83 Trade with Europeans

31; 75 traditional/cult 2 tolerance 2 Tuchi 4 Uke 6; 7 Uner 6 universal perspectives

50

Jabaland 43 Zaria 14; 24; 67; Zaria Province 40 Zuba 4; 24; 27 Zuma rock 6; 86 Zuru 1

122

Koro and Gbagyi Intergroup Relations in Central Nigeria

Documents

Transcript of Koro and Gbagyi Intergroup Relations in Central Nigeria