¹ Stewart, Charles, ‘Frontier disputes and problems of legitimation: Sokoto-Masina relations 1817–1837’, J. Afr. Hist., XVII (1976), 497–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The tension is also cited in a consultation which Umar's son, Aḥmad al-Kabīr, sought with one of his counsellors, a scholar named Al-Ḥājj Sa‘īd who had lived much of his life at the Sokoto court. The consultation can be found in the Umarian library held at the Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris, Manuscrits Orientaux, Fonds Arabe (hereafter BNP, MO, FA), vol. 5561, fos. 66–9.

² For a summary of the situation in Masina, see Robinson, David, The Holy War of Umar Tal:The Western Sudan in the Mid-Nineteenth Century (Oxford, 1985)Google Scholar, ch. 8.

³ For the two Futas, see Robinson, , Holy War, 49–65.Google Scholar

⁴ For most of the statements about the Umarian movement and state I am drawing on my book, Holy War.

⁵ Ghali, Noureddine et al. , Inventaire de la Bibliothèque ‘Umarienne de Ségou (Paris, 1985).Google Scholar The text translated below comes from one of the more than 500 volumes of the collection at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, in BNP, MO, FA, 5683, fos. 150–1. The collection is often called the Fonds Archinard, after Colonel Louis Archinard, the leader of the expedition against Segu.

⁶ This mission is articulated clearly in the Pulaar chronicle written at Aḥmad al-Kabīr's court in Segu by Mohammadou Aliou Tyam and published with translation and annotation by Gaden, Henri as La vie d'El Hadj Omar: Qaçida en Poular (Paris, 1935), xiii, 135Google Scholar. It is also clearly present in letters written in 1866 by Tijaniyya scholars resident in Segu to their brothers in Morocco. See Salenc, Jules, ‘La vie d'Al Hadj ‘Omar. Traduction d'un manuscrit arabe de la Zaouia Tidjania de Fez’, Bulletin du Comité d'Etudes Historiques et Scientifiques de l'Afrique Occidentale Française, 1 (1918), 405–31Google Scholar. See also Robinson, , Holy War, 320–9.Google Scholar

⁷ Bina Ali replaced his half-brother, Torokoro Mari, who was reputed to be friendly towards the Umarian cause and was even accused of being a secret Muslim. Robinson, , Holy War, 248.Google Scholar

⁸ See Robinson, Holy War, ch. 7.

⁹ For Dingiray, see Robinson, , Holy War, 125–37, 252–6.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See Saint-Martin, Yves, ‘Un fils d'El Hadj Omar: Aguibou, roi du Dinguiray et du Macina (1843?–1907)’, Cahiers d'Etudes Africaines, VIII, no. 29 (1968), 144–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹ Their revolt is treated in Hanson, John, ‘Umarian Karta (Mali, West Africa) during the late nineteenth century: dissent and revolt among the Futanke after Umar Tal's holy war’ (Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State University, 1989)Google Scholar, chs. 6 and 7.

¹² Gallieni, Joseph, Voyage au Soudan français: Haut-Niger et pays de Ségou, 1879–81 (Paris, 1885), 414–22.Google Scholar

¹³ Some glimpses of Makkī and the Dingiray community emerge in BNP, MO, FA, 5523, fos. 72–6; 5601, fos. 116–17; 5605, fo. 93; 5620, fo. 218; 5633, fos. 82–5; 5684, fos. 150–1; 5723, fos. 22–3.

¹⁴ The Futa Jalonke and Futa Toro troops almost came to blows in Markoya in early 1860. This confrontation is described in a Pulaar text that was probably composed by someone from the Dingiray community. See Robinson, , Holy War, 251–4.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Tyam, Especially, Qaçida, 135Google Scholar, and two sources compiled in Nioro in the late nineteenth century and contained in Adam, M. G., ‘Légendes historiques du pays de Nioro’, Revue Coloniale, III–IV (1903–1904), 118, 233Google Scholar, and Delafosse, Maurice, ‘Traditions historiques et légendaires du Soudan occidental’, Bulletin du Comité d' Afrique Française, Renseignements Coloniaux (1913), 362.Google Scholar It is also mentioned in the consultation cited in n. I and in a compilation made in Futa Toro in the 1920s (see Samb, Amar, ‘La vie d'El Hadji Omar par Cheikh Moussa Kamara’, Bulletin de l' Institut Fondemental d' Afrique Noire, série B, XXXII [1970], 388).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Robinson, , Holy War, 269–72.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Especially a report on the Ḥamdullāhi campaign which Makkī and his cousin, Aḥmad al-Tijānī, sent to Aḥmad in 1862 (BNP, MO, FA, 5457, fos. 1–4), and a letter from Agibu and two other sons to Aḥmad in the same year (5713, fo. 49).

¹⁸ The Umarian forces won a decisive victory at the battle of Kassakeri in 1856. Robinson, , Holy War, 189–90.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Robinson, , Holy War, 262–73.Google Scholar One formulation of Aḥmad III's argument against the Umarian jiḥād is contained in BNP, MO, FA, 5681, fos. 6–11.

²⁰ Contained in BNP, MO, FA, 5605, fos. 2–29. An excellent translation and commentary on this document has been published by Mahibou, Sidi Mohammed and Triaud, Jean-Louis as Voilà ce qui est arrivé: Bayān mā Waqa ‘a d'al-Ḥāǧǧ ‘Umar al-Fūtī (Paris, 1983).Google Scholar

²¹ Not to be confused with the founder of the Tijaniyya brotherhood, for whom he was named.

²² For the Masina events, see Robinson, Holy War, ch. 8.

²³ Tyam, , Qaçida, 187–8Google Scholar; and the consultation cited in n. 1.

²⁴ See, for example, de Loppinot, A., ‘Souvenirs d'Aguibou’, Bulletin du Comité d' Etudes Historiques et Scientifiques de l'Afrique Occidentale Française, 11 (1919), 24–39.Google Scholar An earlier account from Agibu's son Makkī is contained in Archives Nationales du Sénégal, 15G 131, letter of Commandant of Dingiray of 1 Apr. 1894. In this document Makkī Agibu claims that Dingiray was given to Ḥabīb, Nioro to Muṣtafa (a Hausa servant and confidante of Umar), Masina to Makkī, and Segu to Aḥmad.

²⁵ Robinson, , Holy War, 301–2.Google Scholar

²⁶ Robinson, , Holy War, 30–5.Google Scholar

²⁷ Robinson, , Holy War, 311–16.Google Scholar

²⁸ Mage, Eugène, Relation du voyage d' exploration de MM. Mage et Quintin au Soudan occidental (Paris, 1867), 216–17, 223, 439.Google Scholar

²⁹ BNP, MO, FA, 5484, fo. 115. Portions of this document are translated in the Salenc reference cited in n. 6.

³⁰ In a document describing the arrival of a prominent Tijaniyya leader from Fez and the inauguration of Aḥmad's seal. BNP, MO, FA, 5713, fo. 59. I have found no earlier evidence for Aḥmad's use of this title.

³¹ Sow, Alfa Ibrahima, La Femme, la vâche, la foi (Paris, 1966), 11–20Google Scholar, and he Filon du bonheur éternel (Paris, 1971), 11–38.Google Scholar

³² He gave his age as 21 in a document which he copied in 1855–6 (BNP, MO, FA, 5719, fos. 104–6).

³³ The document cited in n. 30. Other references to Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm's role, primarily as a copyist, can be found in vols. 5461, 5669, 5713, 5718–19, 5723.

³⁴ Particularly the Ture or Cerno Wocce brothers—Sa ‘īd, Muṣtafa and ‘Abdullāh. See Robinson, , Holy War, 280, 348.Google Scholar

³⁵ See the reference cited in n. 5.

³⁶ Published in the margins of ‘Harāzim, Ali, Jawāhir al-Ma'āni wa Bulūgh al-Amāni (Cairo, 1927, 1963)Google Scholar. For a commentary on the content of Rimāḥ, see Marquet, Yves, ‘Des Iḥwān al-Ṣafā' à al-Ḥāǧǧ Umar (b. Sa ‘īd Tall) marabout et conquérant toucouleur’, Arabica, XV (1968), 6–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁷ See the sources cited in n. 15.

³⁸ In the sense of the ‘re-oralisation’ of sacred texts suggested by Louis Brenner in ‘“ Religious ” discourses in and about Africa’, in Barber, Karin and de Moraes Farias, P. F.(eds.), Discourse and Its Disguises: The Interpretation of African Oral Texts (Birmingham, 1989), 87–105.Google Scholar

³⁹ It is possible, of course, that founders such as ‘Uthmān, Seku Amadu and ‘Umar might have chosen to communicate their most important commands and desires orally rather than in written form, as was true in the early Islamic community. See Abbott, Nadia, Studies in Arabic Literary Papyri (Chicago, 3 vols., 1959–1972), vol. 1, 6–28Google Scholar, and the discussion of the artificial separation between ‘orality’ and ‘literacy’ in Barber, and Farias, (eds.), Discourse, 3, 34–48.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ The three fullest accounts, based on very limited sources, are Oloruntimehin, B. O., The Segu Tukolor Empire (London, 1972)Google Scholar, and two works by Yves Saint-Martin: L'Empire toucouleur et la France: Un demi-siècle de relations diplomatiques (1846–93) (Dakar, 1966)Google Scholar and L'Empire toucouleur (Paris, 1970).Google Scholar

⁴¹ It is interesting to compare this chronicle with the version of the installation of Almamy Abdul Kader in Futa Toro, as described by Shaykh Musa Kamara on the basis of oral recollections in the 1920s. See Robinson, D.. ‘The Islamic revolution of Futa Toro’, International Journal of African Historical Studies, VIII (1975), 196–7.Google Scholar

⁴² This section is a disquisition upon the centrality of Muhammad as God's mediator with the other prophets, messengers, saints and other parts of the human creation. It uses a great deal of Sufi language which probably goes back to ‘Umar's teaching in Dingiray and Futa Jalon, to his major work (Rimāḥ), and to the large body of Sufi sources on which Rimāḥ draws. See n. 36.

⁴³ From the Hadith. Usually it reads as follows: ‘Adam and all those prophets who come after him will be under my banner at the Day of Judgment’. See Robson, James, (trans, and ed.), Mishkat al-Masabih (Lahore, Pakistan, 4 vols., 1966, 1973), vol. 3, 1234.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ The reference is still to Muḥammad, but the author is here beginning to use language which also evokes the founder of his order, Aḥmad al-Tijānī, his own master, al-ḥājj Umar, and the jihād against ‘paganism’.

⁴⁵ The author passes here from an allusion to the specifically Umarian community, in the evocation of jihād, to the controversial claims of the whole Tijaniyya community to special favor. This brings him to ask for divine blessing upon the founder of the Tijaniyya in the phrase which follows. It was the strong claims of the Tijaniyya which provoked much of Aḥmad al-Bakkay's criticism of the order. For the Tijaniyya order, its doctrine, and critics, see Abun-Nasr, Jamil, The Tijaniyya (Oxford, 1965), 27–57.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Shaykh was the most widely used title for master and mentor within Sufi ranks. Most Umarians, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, refer to Umar as ‘shaykh’ more frequently than ‘al-ḥājj’, ‘the pilgrim’. For most of the rest of the manuscript, ‘shaykh’ refers to Umar.

⁴⁷ Literally ghawth, ‘succour’, which in the Tijaniyya lexicon refers to a spiritual figure comparable in importance to the qutb, or pole, which is used a few lines later. Ghawth and qutb are used frequently in the Umarian materials to refer to Shaykh ‘Umar. See Abun-Nasr, , Tijaniyya, 27–57Google Scholar; Tyam, , Qaçida, 130, 134, 151, 153, 154, 164, 173, 175, 179, 200, 204.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ The use of this term suggests, within the Umarian context, succession both to political authority, over the jihād and the territories conquered, and authority over the Tijaniyya in West Africa. Umar was appointed khalīfa for the order during his stay with Muḥammad al-Ghali in Medine. Robinson, , Holy War, 96–8.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ In Futa Toro the father of Umar is usually called Elimān Sa ‘īd.

⁵⁰ The author makes a pun by putting side—by—side two words from the same Arabic root (s 'd): Sa‘īd, the name of 'Umar's father, and as 'adana, ‘may [God] make us happy’.

⁵¹ Literally al-nūr, ‘the light’. Written in between the lines is jūr or njūr. Umar arrived there in July 1859.

⁵² For disciple the author uses tilmīdh, not ṭullāb or ṭalaba, the word which has often been associated with the core followers of the Umarian movement (in the form of the French derivative, talibe).

⁵³ 7 Nov. 1859.

⁵⁴ Taken from the Arabic root for good and one of the names for Medina. It replaced the old Mandinka name of Tamba, which referred both to the town and the kingdom of which it was the capital. As the site of the first great victory of the jihād, Ṭābata occupied an important place in Umarian tradition and affections. The groups paused here for about a month.

⁵⁵ 26 Dec. 1859.

⁵⁶ An authorized agent for the teaching and dissemination of a Sufi order.

⁵⁷ A Sufi litany, and by extension initiation. A muqaddam for the wird is someone who is authorized to initiate people into the order.

⁵⁸ Abdullay Hausa, as he was called in the Pulaar traditions, was recruited by ‘Umar during his stay in Sokoto and entrusted with a number of important missions during the jihād. He was one of the envoys sent by ‘Umar to bring the Dingiray community into the Segu campaign. See BNP, MO, FA, 5681, fo. I; Robinson, , Holy War, 195, 255, 338.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ The western part of Futa Toro and the area of origin of ‘Umar.

⁶⁰ The villages crossed en route to Kītā are quite difficult to identify. What is most remarkable about the itinerary is that it did not include Kunjān, the fortress which Umar constructed in 1857–8 to link his Dingiray and Karta dominions. Robinson, , Holy War, 215–19.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Ṭạbata/Tamba is on the east bank of the Bafing, the black river referred to here. The group coming from Dingiray would not need to cross. The reference may be to other recruits arriving from Futa Jalon to join the march.

⁶² The Bakhoy, or ‘black river’, which can be forded at Kemetā.

⁶³ By implication, the rather large force needed to provision itself in the Kītā area, one of the few reasonably prosperous zones in the larger region. The difficulty of finding food in the region had been severely aggravated by Alfa ‘Uthmān's campaigns in the area in 1858.

⁶⁴ The capital of Fuladugu, which Alfa ‘Uthmān had captured just a few weeks before the Dingiray force arrived. Bangassi was a fortified centre under the general suzerainty of Segu, and Uthmān's success—after some failures—was a coup for him and the Umarian jihād in general. See Robinson, , Holy War, 252–4, 307.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ The Arabic is Alfāhim.

⁶⁶ This clause, from ‘and in it’ to ‘Uthmān’’, is contained in the left margin of 151r.

⁶⁷ This long passage, beginning with ‘They went on until they arrived at the village of Jūkā’, is contained in a marginal note written on both sides of 151r. It fits best at this point in the narrative, where the armies of Alfa Uthmān and of Dingiray come together. Several of the words are very difficult to read. A village of Diokho can be found on the maps in Tellier, G., Autour de Kita: étude soudanaise (Paris, 1898)Google Scholar, located between Bangassi and Sedian in a dry terrain of steppes and mesa that conforms to this passage.

⁶⁸ Sījān in this text, sījāgh or sījāgha in other Umarian texts. It corresponds to the Sedian of modern maps and is located north of Bangassi and west of Markoya. If the previous marginal passage is correctly located, the joining of the columns of Dingiray and Alfa Uthmān occurred before Sījān, and the author made no correction in the modified text.

⁶⁹ Translations of jund and ‘askari, respectively. The author continues to use these two terms, as well as jaish, ‘army’, to refer to the Umarian military. It is difficult to ascribe a precise meaning to the terms, but jund may refer to the disciples or core of primarily Fulbe followers, while askari refers to the professional soldiers or sofa.

⁷⁰ The Baoule, which runs south to north at this juncture.

⁷¹ More commonly called Beledugu.

⁷² Umar made Markoya his staging area for about four months, from November 1859 to the end of March 1860. For this operations in Markoya, see Robinson, , Holy War, 253–7.Google Scholar

⁷³ 4 Jan. 1860. Tyam, (Qaçida, 134Google Scholar) puts the arrival at 26 Jumādā al-Ūla or 21 Dec. 1859.

⁷⁴ The author uses the plurals (junūd, juyūsh, and ‘asākir) to refer to the Bambara as well as to the Umarian forces. See n. 69.

⁷⁵ The author uses the introduction of ‘Umar to get in a word about the credentials of his son Ahmad.

⁷⁶ This was presumably the battle against the Bambara, which Tyam dates to 26 Jumādā al-Ūla (20 Jan. 1860; Tyam, , Qaçida, 134Google Scholar) but which this text puts six days after 4 Jan., or 10 Jan. 1860.

⁷⁷ The rhetoric of the jihād against paganism and polytheism is very intense in this passage. It matches the rhetoric used throughout the Segu campaign. Robinson, , Holy War, 249–50.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ At this point ‘Umar makes no distinction between his two sons. He wants to give them some of the military experience which they have lacked because of their youth and isolation in Dingiray.

⁷⁹ Or 18 Feb. 1860.

⁸⁰ This passage is a summary of the action which will be described now in detail. ‘Umar apparently concealed his choice of Aḥmad until relatively late in the stay at Markoya. The passive construction, ‘allegiance was sworn [to him]’, was added in the right margin at the very top of 151V. In a footnote Delafosse (in ‘Traditions historiques’, 362) gives the following transcription of the Arabic for the equivalent portion of his narrative: wa bāya ‘a lahu binafsihi, ‘he [‘Umar] personally swore allegiance to him’.

⁸¹ Dating from 26 Jumādā al-Ākhira 1276 or 20 Jan. 1860, this puts Ahmad's birth date at 21 June 1836. The figure of 24 years old at the succession ceremony is confirmed in a tradition from Musa Salif Ndiaye, a griot from Futa Toro who adopted the Umarian cause, and whose information is reported by Shaykh Musa Kamara in his treatise on ‘Umar (Samb, , ‘La vie d'El-Hadji Omar’, 388).Google Scholar

⁸² A very important disciple, not from Hausa but from Awsa, the ‘left bank’ of the Niger Buckle area. The transcriptions for the two terms are, however, the same (ḥawsī). Alfa ‘Umar headed the secretariat in Umarian Masina. Robinson, , Holy War, 301–4.Google Scholar

⁸³ The language suggests again that ‘Umar had not yet revealed his decision.

⁸⁴ The author here turns to the Sufi language used earlier in the text.

⁸⁵ Similar language is attributed by Shaykh Musa Kamara to ‘Umar in Samb, , ‘La vie’, 410Google Scholar, and in the 1866 letter referred to in nn. 6, 29.

⁸⁶ The passage from this point to the end of the paragraph represents the translation of the note in the right margin of 151V.

⁸⁷ Aḥmad al-Kabīr's authority to appoint muqaddam was widely recognized in the late nineteenth century. See Marty, Paul, Etudes sur l' Islam au Soudan (Paris, 4 vols., 1921), vol. 2, 202, 209, and vol. 4, 205, 209Google Scholar; Archives Nationales du Mali, 4E 19, report of the Administrator of Nioro to the Governor of Haut-Sénégal-Niger, 12 June 1913.

⁸⁸ Umar's major work and a major treatise on Tijaniyya doctrine, referred to in the introduction to the document. See n. 36.

⁸⁹ In this passage ‘Umar recognizes—and tries to contain—the rivalry which had emerged between Aḥmad and Makkī.

⁹⁰ bāya’a. This is the most explicitly political reference in the manuscript, and it is identical to the term used in Islamic society to indicate allegiance to a ruler. ‘Those present’ are the leaders, while ‘people’ refers to the large public.

⁹¹ From al-Kadawiyyu, a description often ascribed to Umar. Gede is the most significant town in the area of Halwar, the village of ‘Umar's birth, and it serves to identify the location of the Tal family.

⁹² 18 Feb. 1860.

⁹³ At this point the scribe inserts the date of the year in letters.

⁹⁴ This wording corresponds to the distinctions made in n. 69.

⁹⁵ Literally ‘servants [of God]’.

⁹⁶ The equivalent in many Fulbe communities of mufassir, one who does ‘explanation’ or exegesis of the Qur‘ān. The ‘al-Barbarī’ which precedes it probably refers to something in Labe province.

⁹⁷ The antecedent is ‘Umar or Aḥmad al-Kabīr, and not Aḥmad al-Tijānī, since the author invokes God's blessing on the person in this world as well as the next.