The Tradition of Playful Banters between Kanuri and Fulani
Public criticism is an essential tool for individuals to express their opinions and hold institutions accountable. However, the efficacy of such criticisms is only possible when it’s informed and grounded in relevant facts.
Criticizing institutions or individuals in the public sphere without proper knowledge and data doesn’t only harm the reputation of the criticizer but highlights the problem of ignorance and misinformation circulating within our society’s discourse.
One of the primary reasons for the rise of misinformation is the accessibility of technology and social media. Today, anyone can publish their thoughts and opinions on the internet. Unfortunately, often such opinions are formed on the basis of incomplete facts, personal bias, or sometimes just plain ignorance. The reach of social media platforms makes it easy for such misinformation to reach millions of people, leading to confusion and sometimes even harm.
Another problem with public criticism without proper facts is the risk of spreading propaganda. False allegations and unverified claims can lead to unwarranted hatred against individuals and institutions. In turn, people stop trusting such institutions, and the adverse effects may last for years even after the truth is revealed. Besides, criticism without proper facts doesn’t offer the opportunity for constructive dialogue or positive change. If the ultimate aim of criticism is to improve situations, it’s essential to base it on solid facts and provide constructive solutions.
The folly of attempting public criticism without adequate facts is obvious. It does not work. It may cause more harm than good and slow the process of change. Before criticizing individuals or institutions in the public sphere, it’s essential to consolidate relevant and verified facts. This practice ensures that public discourse is not lost in the sea of uninformed opinions and propagandas.
This obviously is the dangerous in which one Festus Adedayo, a self-acclaimed Ibadan based journalist was caught when he attempted a rude interference in the relationship between the Kanuri and the Fulani from an obvious weak point of view. Adedayo, in a disjointed piece of writing captioned above, after making some blab blobs about some Yoruba “ogbon”, and “ago”, made an embarrassing misadventure into a totally unknown terrain, at least to him.
He unintelligibly criticized Vice President Kashim Shettima’s harmless jab at the Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar following the Presidential Elections Petition Tribunal ruling that favoured President Bola Tinubu and his Vice, Shettima.
Shettima, in the spirit of the the age-old tradition of exchanging playful banters between the Kanuri and the Fulani, remarked that “We are not going to retire Atiku to Dubai or Morocco. I’d retire him to Fombina. I’d buy him goats, broilers and layers, so that he can spend his days rearing cows and broilers.” As harmless as just that.
Seizing the opportunity to make mischief, Adedayo attempted to shamelessly rewrite and falsify history by asking if Shettima was trying to “cast aspersion on Fulani rule, the Kanuris’ historic clash with Uthman Fodio’s Fulani nomads and all they represent? Was it a referencing of today’s “conquest” by Kanuris, manifest in his vice presidency, of the progenies of Fodio, almost two hundred years after Fodio’s hijra and jihad on the animist Kanuris of Bornu?”
Where Adedayo got this warped version of history is anybody’s guess, but there is historical evidence that the Kanuri people never engaged in direct conflict with the Fulani jihadists led by Sheikh Usman Dan Fodio. While there were certainly tentions among those groups, particularly over issues of land and political power, there is little to suggest that these disputes ever escalated into full-scale military confrontation.
Rather, the Kanuri rulers tended to adopt a more conciliatory approach, seeking to negotiate with the Fulani leaders and avoid outright violence whenever possible. This approach allowed the Kanuri to maintain a degree of autonomy and political independence, even as they grappled with the influence of external forces like the Fulani jihadists.
Al Kanemi waged his war against Sokoto not with weapons but with letters as he desired to thwart dan Fodio’s jihad with the same ideological weapons. He carried on a series of theological, legal and political debates by letter with the Sheikh Usman Dan Fodio, and later with his son, Muhammed Bello.
As the expansion of Sokoto was predicated upon a struggle against paganism, apostasy, and misrule, Al-Kanemi challenged the right of his neighbours to strike at a state which had been Muslim for at least 800 years.
Not done, Adedayo deliberately misquoted Shettima’s harmless banter at Atiku to suggest that he threatened to buy Atiku cows, so that he could return to the traditional profession of his kith and kin, and mischievously asked if Shettima was making tribal denigration or affirming ethnic ascendancy or supremacy.
This immediately exposed Adedayo’s ignorance that for centuries, the Kanuri and Fulani tribes have engaged in the age-old tradition of exchanging playful banters. This cultural practice is deeply ingrained in their way of life and reflects the long-standing relationship between the two tribes. These playful jabs are often witty, humorous, and lighthearted, and serve to strengthen the bonds of friendship between individuals and communities.
The Kanuri and Fulani are both predominantly Muslim and share many cultural and linguistic similarities. Their playful banter is a form of communication that is unique to their cultures and is often seen as a display of intelligence, humour, and wit. The exchanges are typically initiated through conversations, songs, or storytelling sessions within the communities.
During these playful banter sessions, individuals from both tribes take turns teasing each other in a friendly manner. The conversations are often filled with jokes aimed at the other person’s tribe, culture, or beliefs. It is a form of verbal sparring that both parties engage in with the aim of showcasing their intelligence and humour.
One of the distinctive features of this age-old tradition is that it is not meant to harm or offend anyone. The exchange of playful banter is a way of expressing mutual respect and affection between the tribes. It is a celebration of their cultural heritage and an expression of social harmony.
In the modern age, this age-old tradition continues to thrive. It is a practice that has been passed down from generation to generation and continues to play an important role in the social fabric of the Kanuri and Fulani communities. This tradition has become so deeply ingrained in the culture of both tribes that it has become a defining characteristic of their identity.
The playful banter tradition between Kanuri and Fulani communities is a unique and fascinating aspect of their cultures. It represents the deep bonds of friendship between the two tribes and is an expression of their mutual respect and affection. This tradition is a reminder of the importance of culture in shaping our identities and maintaining social harmony, and should be cherished and preserved for future generations.
This culture of exchanging playful banters, in Hausa language, is as well a long-standing tradition among people of Kano and Zazzau. This cultural practice involves the exchange of light-hearted insults between individuals or groups in a playful manner.
Although it may appear as if they are being hostile or arguing aggressively, in actual fact, Kano and Zazzau people delight in this form of banter and consider it as part of their cultural heritage.
The origins of this tradition can be traced back to the historic rivalry between the ancient Kano and Zazzau empires. The two kingdoms, which were once rivals, traded jabs as a way to de-stress and maintain a good relationship while also showing their wit and cunningness.
Today, this culture has become an integral part of daily life in Kano and Zazzau. From marketplace gatherings to family get-togethers, people engage in this practice as a way to lighten the mood and add humour to everyday life. The goal is not to hurt or insult someone else, but to showcase one’s cleverness and quick thinking.
This cultural practice goes beyond mere entertainment; the Kano and Zazzau people believe that playful banter helps to build strong relationships. They believe that if two people can engage in friendly banters, they can overcome disagreements and maintain a healthy relationship. In addition, assists in building the confidence and self-esteem of individuals as it requires individuals to be quick-witted and adept in the use of language.
Through this culture, Kano and Zazzau peoples’ ancestors found a way to foster relationships and keep life light-hearted while also showcasing their wit and intelligence. With this tradition, the Kano and Zazzau people keep their cultural heritage alive and demonstrate their ability to reminisce the past while living in the present.
Similarly, for quite a long time, it has been a common tradition for the people of Katsina and Nupe, to exchange playful banters with each other. This cultural practice was deeply rooted in the history of the two tribes and was a way to show respect, build relationships, and foster good humor.
The people of Katsina and Nupe would often gather at festivals and social events to engage in verbal sparring matches that were both witty and humorous. These banters would cover a wide range of topics, from politics and culture to religion and everyday life.
The art of playful bantering was not limited to men only; women also participated in these sessions, showcasing their intelligence, creativity, and humor. It was a way for women to assert their presence and show that they too were capable of holding their own in intellectual discourse.
Over time, this cultural practice evolved and became an integral part of the tribes’ identity and a way to strengthen the bond between tribes, foster social cohesion, and preserve their cultural heritage.
Today, the tradition of exchanging playful banters still lives on among the people of Katsina and Nupe. It is a testament to the resilience of these tribes and a reminder of the rich cultural heritage they possess.
Adedayo should by now learn the tribe he hailed from, in which even the slightest of jokes is turned into an avenue for bloodshed, Atiku Abubakar and other cultured Fulani stock have for long learned that it was important to have a sense of humour, to embrace different cultures, and to work together towards a common goal.
And so, Atiku Abubakar and Kashim Shettima while throwing harmless banters at each, shall also continue to thrive, united by their love for Nigeria and the unique traditions that made it great.
(Abdul-Azeez, a journalist, writes from Abuja)
