WAS FULANI HISTORY TRULY BLOODY?





"War makes states and states make war" according to Charles Tilly.
State formation is necessarily bloody because one entity has to prove its sovereignty over a certain territory.
So the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate was bloody, and so were the establishment of any political realm" (GorkoSusaay)


The Fulani ethnic group is the most demonized ethnic group in Nigeria, especially by Nigerians of Southern extraction. Some South-westerners and most South-Easterners believe Fulani to be a bloody or born to rule race, may be due to the frequent clashes between the Fulani herdsmen and Farmers on one hand and the history of the Fulani conquests of the 18-19th centuries on the other.


Throughout their history the Fulani fought wars and conquered territories not because they are blood tasty or wanted to rule and dominate, but because they wanted to bring a positive change in their societies; and this they did after they came to power. They brought peace and developments especially in terms of education and economy to their domains. A former colonial officer in Nigeria Mr. H. A. S. Johnston has the following to say about the Fulani rule in Northern Nigeria in his book titled “The Fulani Empire of Sokoto”
(Quote)



The Fulani gave Hausaland a greater measure of peace than it had ever previously enjoyed. To this can be added the fact that their government was based on principle and not on mere power. No man, however mighty, was above the law. No man, however lowly, was beneath it. Every man had rights that the law defined and protected. In a continent still largely dominated by war and anarchy, the gift of peace and justice was no small thing.


Secondly, it can be said that the structure of society was well integrated and not inhumane. At the base of the pyramid, it is true, there were the slaves, but even they had their rights. In fact, they were generally better treated than slaves in other parts of the world including the United States, and for the most part they led tolerable lives. Next came the peasants. As they were free men, enjoying rights in the soil of which no one could deprive them, their standing was higher than that of the serfs who were still to be found in many parts of Europe. Then there were the craftsmen and traders of the towns: they were sufficiently numerous and affluent to constitute the beginnings of that most important component in any society — a middle class. Finally, there was the ruling caste. Its members, though authoritarian, were generally just and beneficent. In short, though tyranny and injustice were not unknown, they were probably less prevalent than in many countries of Europe and the Americas which had greater pretensions to being considered as civilized.


Thirdly, it can be said that the society of the Empire was a reasonably cultivated one. Trade and agriculture flourished so that the majority of the people were able to enjoy some simple luxuries over and above the bare necessities of life. Similarly, education was not the monopoly of the ruling caste but was common among the middle class and not unknown among the peasantry and slaves. Among all classes, moreover, scholars and divines were held in the very highest esteem. Finally, there was the all-pervading influence of religion. Its disciplines were the cement of society, its teachings gave purpose and dignity to life, and its consolations reconciled men to the injustices of an imperfect world.


The civilization of the Sokoto Empire was the product of the union between two very different strains, the Fulani and the Hausa. The contribution of the Fulani lay mainly in the arts of government, scholarship, and religion, that of the Hausas in the fields of agriculture, industry, and trade. The two peoples were complementary to one another and between them they evolved a society which was probably more advanced than any other hitherto produced in black Africa. At the turn of the century that society was engulfed by world forces that were too strong for it. Now, fittingly enough, it has been reborn as the nucleus of a new and powerful nation.
(End of Quote)



Apart from the Fulani (Tukolur) empire of Alh. Umar Tall, all other Fulani empires from the Imamates of Fuuta Jalon (in present day Guinea) and Fuuta Tooro (in present day Senegal) to the empires of Sokoto and Maasina (in present day Mali) were a product of revolutions carried out in order to topple a bad leadership and established a good one and to a large extent they succeeded in creating a good leadership after the success of their struggles as examplified in the above quote.



By nature Fulani are brilliant and intelligent like most west-African tribes but they tend to have more zeal and the will to execute their plans and face obstacles collectively than most tribes. The Fulani love peace more than anything that is why they tend to be very shy and mostly live away from cities but they are never afraid to fight if the need arises. That is why in most of their conflicts they rarely were the ones “that fire the first shot”. But it’s true their retaliation was always complete and thorough.



In conclusion, saying that, the Fulani history is bloody is but an injustice to them, because they fought and established empires at a time when fighting was the order of the day not only in West-Africa but in most parts of the world. Around that time the Oyo Empire was fighting to expand its influence likewise the Kanembu Empire though by that time the once powerful Jukun (kwararafa) Kingdom’s power has waned. So just because the Fulani fought with more zeal and singleness of purpose, conquered more lands in different locations (within West-Africa) than other Nigerian tribes; that does not make their history bloody, It meant they were the most wide spread, shrewder, more tactical, more organized and more ambitious tribe of that Era.


So if Fulani history is truly bloody then most Nigerian tribes history is also bloody, that would be the case for all Nigerian tribes that once established Kingdoms or empires for themselves within or without Nigeria of today.


Yours sincerely.

This is a Rhetoric Question, Bro!

Of course it was bloody!
And is still bloody.....

"War makes states and states make war" according to Charles Tilly.
State formation is necessarily bloody because one entity has to prove its sovereignty over a certain territory.
So the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate was bloody, and so were the establishment of any political realm. But as you implied, there were regular wars between the City-states before the Caliphate. Yunfa, the Sarkin Gobir was trying to quell the Dan Fodio uprising but at the same time he was wary of rebellion in Zamfara and an attack from Katsina. The Sultans of Sokoto never had to have such fears

It's a misnomer to say that "Fulani history is bloody" though. What do we mean by Fulani history? The last 300 years? Or the mythical days where women bathed with cowmilk and men worshipped Geno Dundaari?
It all depends on what we mean and which historical period we aim to study.
Yorubaland for example, saw an endless series of war between the death of Alaafin Abiodun and the British colonisation of Nigeria. But there's much more to the history of Yorubas than that century of blood.
Such is also the case with the History of Borno and Kanuri. Borno which was the most important realm in Northern Nigeria in the 1700s collapsed during the last 20 years of the 19th century, due to succession quarrels and the invasion of Rabih Zubayr.

In the end, it is the monopoly of violence that is the basis on which all states thrive.

YourNemesis:
Of course it was bloody!
And is still bloody.....

Support your claim.

GorkoSusaay:
"War makes states and states make war" according to Charles Tilly.
State formation is necessarily bloody because one entity has to prove its sovereignty over a certain territory.
So the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate was bloody, and so were the establishment of any political realm. But as you implied, there were regular wars between the City-states before the Caliphate. Yunfa, the Sarkin Gobir was trying to quell the Dan Fodio uprising but at the same time he was wary of rebellion in Zamfara and an attack from Katsina. The Sultans of Sokoto never had to have such fears

It's a misnomer to say that "Fulani history is bloody" though. What do we mean by Fulani history? The last 300 years? Or the mythical days where women bathed with cowmilk and men worshipped Geno Dundaari?
It all depends on what we mean and which historical period we aim to study.
Yorubaland for example, saw an endless series of war between the death of Alaafin Abiodun and the British colonisation of Nigeria. But there's much more to the history of Yorubas than that century of blood.
Such is also the case with the History of Borno and Kanuri. Borno which was the most important realm in Northern Nigeria in the 1700s collapsed during the last 20 years of the 19th century, due to succession quarrels and the invasion of Rabih Zubayr.

In the end, it is the monopoly of violence that is the basis on which all states thrive.

I modify my post by quoting your captivating words, thanks for the powerful words.

Baaballiyo:
WAS FULANI HISTORY TRULY BLOODY?





"War makes states and states make war" according to Charles Tilly.
State formation is necessarily bloody because one entity has to prove its sovereignty over a certain territory.
So the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate was bloody, and so were the establishment of any political realm" (GorkoSusaay)


The Fulani ethnic group is the most demonized ethnic group in Nigeria, especially by Nigerians of Southern extraction. Some South-westerners and most South-Easterners believe Fulani to be a bloody or born to rule race, may be due to the frequent clashes between the Fulani herdsmen and Farmers on one hand and the history of the Fulani conquests of the 18-19th centuries on the other.


Throughout their history the Fulani fought wars and conquered territories not because they are blood tasty or wanted to rule and dominate, but because they wanted to bring a positive change in their societies; and this they did after they came to power. They brought peace and developments especially in terms of education and economy to their domains. A former colonial officer in Nigeria Mr. H. A. S. Johnston has the following to say about the Fulani rule in Northern Nigeria in his book titled “The Fulani Empire of Sokoto”
(Quote)



The Fulani gave Hausaland a greater measure of peace than it had ever previously enjoyed. To this can be added the fact that their government was based on principle and not on mere power. No man, however mighty, was above the law. No man, however lowly, was beneath it. Every man had rights that the law defined and protected. In a continent still largely dominated by war and anarchy, the gift of peace and justice was no small thing.


Secondly, it can be said that the structure of society was well integrated and not inhumane. At the base of the pyramid, it is true, there were the slaves, but even they had their rights. In fact, they were generally better treated than slaves in other parts of the world including the United States, and for the most part they led tolerable lives. Next came the peasants. As they were free men, enjoying rights in the soil of which no one could deprive them, their standing was higher than that of the serfs who were still to be found in many parts of Europe. Then there were the craftsmen and traders of the towns: they were sufficiently numerous and affluent to constitute the beginnings of that most important component in any society — a middle class. Finally, there was the ruling caste. Its members, though authoritarian, were generally just and beneficent. In short, though tyranny and injustice were not unknown, they were probably less prevalent than in many countries of Europe and the Americas which had greater pretensions to being considered as civilized.


Thirdly, it can be said that the society of the Empire was a reasonably cultivated one. Trade and agriculture flourished so that the majority of the people were able to enjoy some simple luxuries over and above the bare necessities of life. Similarly, education was not the monopoly of the ruling caste but was common among the middle class and not unknown among the peasantry and slaves. Among all classes, moreover, scholars and divines were held in the very highest esteem. Finally, there was the all-pervading influence of religion. Its disciplines were the cement of society, its teachings gave purpose and dignity to life, and its consolations reconciled men to the injustices of an imperfect world.


The civilization of the Sokoto Empire was the product of the union between two very different strains, the Fulani and the Hausa. The contribution of the Fulani lay mainly in the arts of government, scholarship, and religion, that of the Hausas in the fields of agriculture, industry, and trade. The two peoples were complementary to one another and between them they evolved a society which was probably more advanced than any other hitherto produced in black Africa. At the turn of the century that society was engulfed by world forces that were too strong for it. Now, fittingly enough, it has been reborn as the nucleus of a new and powerful nation.
(End of Quote)



Apart from the Fulani (Tukolur) empire of Alh. Umar Tall, all other Fulani empires from the Imamates of Fuuta Jalon (in present day Guinea) and Fuuta Tooro (in present day Senegal) to the empires of Sokoto and Maasina (in present day Mali) were a product of revolutions carried out in order to topple a bad leadership and established a good one and to a large extent they succeeded in creating a good leadership after the success of their struggles as examplified in the above quote.



By nature Fulani are brilliant and intelligent like most west-African tribes but they tend to have more zeal and the will to execute their plans and face obstacles collectively than most tribes. The Fulani love peace more than anything that is why they tend to be very shy and mostly live away from cities but they are never afraid to fight if the need arises. That is why in most of their conflicts they rarely were the ones “that fire the first shot”. But it’s true their retaliation was always complete and thorough.



In conclusion, saying that, the Fulani history is bloody is but an injustice to them, because they fought and established empires at a time when fighting was the order of the day not only in West-Africa but in most parts of the world. Around that time the Oyo Empire was fighting to expand its influence likewise the Kanembu Empire though by that time the once powerful Jukun (kwararafa) Kingdom’s power has waned. So just because the Fulani fought with more zeal and singleness of purpose, conquered more lands in different locations (within West-Africa) than other Nigerian tribes; that does not make their history bloody, It meant they were the most wide spread, shrewder, more tactical, more organized and more ambitious tribe of that Era.


So if Fulani history is truly bloody then most Nigerian tribes history is also bloody, that would be the case for all Nigerian tribes that once established Kingdoms or empires for themselves within or without Nigeria of today.


Yours sincerely.

Is this a joke?

What positive change does a cattle rearer with no regard for human life want to bring.

You better apply sense and sympathy if you want to praise your "demonic" tribe.

mtcheww

There is a stark distinction between the territorial wars fought by Yoruba, when compared with the Fulani wars.

In many instances other kingdoms signed a treaty of peace with Yoruba for protection against other ambitious Empires.

Our wars were involutary, provoked by an Empire hostile to one of our allies or with direct assault on our own territory. We expanded our domain through conquests.

Fulani on the other hand fought a voluntary war to raid and pillage for slave trade and also to force faith and convert from disbelief to the religious character of your myth which you fraudulently tagged Islam.

ImperialYoruba:
There is a stark distinction between the territorial wars fought by Yoruba, when compared with the Fulani wars.

In many instances other kingdoms signed a treaty of peace with Yoruba for protection against other ambitious Empires.

Our wars were involutary, provoked by an Empire hostile to one of our allies or with direct assault on our own territory. We expanded our domain through conquests.

Fulani on the other hand fought a voluntary war to raid and pillage for slave trade and also to force faith and convert from disbelief to the religious character of your myth which you fraudulently tagged Islam.

all those who fulani fought have already have islam,stop bringing religions to it,the whiteman that gave you christianity did worst.

abdelrahman:
all those who fulani fought have already have islam,stop bringing religions to it,the whiteman that gave you christianity did worst.

Please focus on the topic and contribute intelligently.

Uthman dan Fodio did not fight an imperial war to subjugate territories, he campaigned for and led a religious jihad to convert disbelievers into what he fraudulently called Islam. This is a point of historical accuracy.


One has to wonder why he waged jihad against moslems in Hausaland. More troubling, why he attacked Kanuri with his campaign of Islamization when Borno was already an Islamic State ages before Fulani knew about Islam.

There has to be some underlying reasons for this jihad, hiding under the pretext of Islam is not going to cut it.

The Fulani were the fierce Assyrians of the bible era;the guys who chased the original Israelites,the Ga -Adangbe out of ancient Canaan.

The Ga-Adangbe inhabit Accra,Ghana and parts of Togo. They lived in Israel til the 6th century when expelled by the African Assyrian,many consider to be todays Fulani people

The Fulani,a pastoral people inhabit the whole of W Africa as far as W Ethiopia.

http://karanjazplace..co.ke/2014/10/zioilluminati-not-yet-outbut-definitely.html

So,OP,especially looking at their doings today,yes you could say their history is on the bloody side.

darkhorizon:



Is this a joke?

What positive change does a cattle rearer with no regard for human life want to bring.

You better apply sense and sympathy if you want to praise your "demonic" tribe.

mtcheww

Tell me your own Angelic tribe and we can discuss further.

ImperialYoruba:


Please focus on the topic and contribute intelligently.

Uthman dan Fodio did not fight an imperial war to subjugate territories, he campaigned for and led a religious jihad to convert disbelievers into what he fraudulently called Islam. This is a point of historical accuracy.


One has to wonder why he waged jihad against moslems in Hausaland. More troubling, why he attacked Kanuri with his campaign of Islamization when Borno was already an Islamic State ages before Fulani knew about Islam.

There has to be some underlying reasons for this jihad, hiding under the pretext of Islam is not going to cut it.

You seemed confused, first u accused bn Fodio of fighting to convert disbelievers and you later you wonder why he waged Jihad on Hausa Muslims. So please u need to differentiate btw the two before u point accusing fingers. Besides Shehu never in his life time claimed that he is making jihad upon Hausaland. He considered his movement "An Islamic renaissance movement". It was only when the Empire started to expand into pagan and Animist territories that the Empire bcms a Jihadists Empire and that was after the death of Shehu. Later historians and writers are those that ascribed "Jihad" to Shehu's Earlier Movement.

Moreover the Kanembu (Borno) Empire was not an Islamic empire, it only became so after Muhammad Elkanemi overthrew the Sayfawa dynasty and that was after the Fulani Islamic state has already established itself. Besides u can't claim the Kanuri new about Islam before the Fulani.

ImperialYoruba:
There is a stark distinction between the territorial wars fought by Yoruba, when compared with the Fulani wars.

In many instances other kingdoms signed a treaty of peace with Yoruba for protection against other ambitious Empires.

Our wars were involutary, provoked by an Empire hostile to one of our allies or with direct assault on our own territory. We expanded our domain through conquests.

Fulani on the other hand fought a voluntary war to raid and pillage for slave trade and also to force faith and convert from disbelief to the religious character of your myth which you fraudulently tagged Islam.

Another confusing piece, U said your wars were involuntary and jst after few words u said " you expanded your domain through conquests". These are conflicting statements.

Baaballiyo:


You seemed confused, first u accused bn Fodio of fighting to convert disbelievers and you later you wonder why he waged Jihad on Hausa Muslims. So please u need to differentiate btw the two before u point accusing fingers. Besides Shehu never in his life time claimed that he is making jihad upon Hausaland. He considered his movement "An Islamic renaissance movement". It was only when the Empire started to expand into pagan and Animist territories that the Empire bcms a Jihadists Empire and that was after the death of Shehu. Later historians and writers are those that ascribed "Jihad" to Shehu's Earlier Movement.

Moreover the Kanembu (Borno) Empire was not an Islamic empire, it only became so after Muhammad Elkanemi overthrew the Sayfawa dynasty and that was after the Fulani Islamic state has already established itself. Besides u can't claim the Kanuri new about Islam before the Fulani.

It appears you are unable to recognise rhetorical questions when you see one.

The question "one wonders why fulani took jihad to kanuri", is a followup on the already presented case....and a rhetoric. Learn ftom this.

Conquest is a victory won by overpowering, no more no less. Conquest can be achieved in a voluntary war or an involuntary war.
Learn from this.


The topic is not specific to Shehu and non-Shehu, it addresses fulani. Those who succeeded Shehu and waged jihad war into Islamic State of Borno were they fulani?
Learn from this.


You do agree that many of your history of conquests were embellished and presented with falsehood.

Example: raiding villages, burning down communities and rayping women and holding captives to be sold to Arab slavers, then documenting them as jihad to convert disbelievers.



Did Allah appoint you as his soldiers or did you appoint yourself as agents of Allah?

Baaballiyo:


Tell me your own Angelic tribe and we can discuss further.

No matter what flaw you want to spot in my tribe, my tribesmen are not cold blooded killers like yours.

ImperialYoruba:


It appears you are unable to recognise rhetorical questions when you see one.

The question "one wonders why fulani took jihad to kanuri", is a followup on the already presented case....and a rhetoric. Learn ftom this.

Conquest is a victory won by overpowering, no more no less. Conquest can be achieved in a voluntary war or an involuntary war.
Learn from this.


The topic is not specific to Shehu and non-Shehu, it addresses fulani. Those who succeeded Shehu and waged jihad war into Islamic State of Borno were they fulani?
Learn from this.


You do agree that many of your history of conquests were embellished and presented with falsehood.

Example: raiding villages, burning down communities and rayping women and holding captives to be sold to Arab slavers, then documenting them as jihad to convert disbelievers.



Did Allah appoint you as his soldiers or did you appoint yourself as agents of Allah?

Your rhetorical question does not absolved you from confusion, bc by putting forward the question you showed that you are oblivious of what really took place.

Well, can you tell me where you got your definition of the word "Conquest". Though a word may has many meanings, but a word always have a popular and basic meaning, and I do not see where the meaning of Conquest included "overpowering" without the use of force. So direct me to where u find ur meaning so that I would learn from it.

I am personally absolving Shehu not the generation that followed him, bc it's an injustice to him to say what u said about him. The fight with Borno (which started during the life time of Shehu) was also not a Jihad but a struggle btw two powerful Empires. And it started as a result of Borno helping and arming pagan tribes against the Fulani. And whoever helped a non Muslim against his Muslim brother has performed a despicable act and therefore fighting him also bcm permissible. Learn from this.

As for your last paragraph you need to give real proofs that falsehoods where written, not hearsays.


No one will fight in the Name of Allah and bcm successful (like the Fulani bcm) without having Allah's mandate. If you fight in the name of Allah and failed then you don't have Allah's mandate. For the army of Allah will always be successful. Learn from this.

darkhorizon:


No matter what flaw you want to spot in my tribe, my tribesmen are not cold blooded killers like yours.

Yes, that's why I called your tribe Angelic. But it seems like u are not willing to let us know. Dont you want us to learn from you ?

Baaballiyo:



Your rhetorical question does not absolved you from confusion, bc by putting forward the question you showed that you are oblivious of what really took place.

Well, can you tell me where you got your definition of the word "Conquest". Though a word may has many meanings, but a word always have a popular and basic meaning, and I do not see where the meaning of Conquest included "overpowering" without the use of force. So direct me to where u find ur meaning so that I would learn from it.

I am personally absolving Shehu not the generation that followed him, bc it's an injustice to him to say what u said about him. The fight with Borno (which started during the life time of Shehu) was also not a Jihad but a struggle btw two powerful Empires. And it started as a result of Borno helping and arming pagan tribes against the Fulani. And whoever helped a non Muslim against his Muslim brother has performed a despicable act and therefore fighting him also bcm permissible. Learn from this.

As for your last paragraph you need to give real proofs that falsehoods where written, not hearsays.


No one will fight in the Name of Allah and bcm successful (like the Fulani bcm) without having Allah's mandate. If you fight in the name of Allah and failed then you don't have Allah's mandate. For the army of Allah will always be successful. Learn from this.

Is it by force to show you know English?


Speakeasy, all these semantics should be reserved as enamores to wow and daze your fellow fulani, it makes no mark with this Yoruba son.

First, the word confusion is overused in nairaland. Find a replacement for the curveball.


Your inability to connect my rhetoric with the mainstay shows gap in your appreciation for prose in language art. The question does not challenge the preceeding point but rather pricks thoughts and reflections....it is a hook, offered to engage the audience! Penmanship is an art!


Contention on the application of conquest.... How else do you hope to overpower an opposition army beside the use of force? What, you want to play the melody of your flute to persuade them to lay down weapon and concede defeat? . You are immature!


Its an injustice to the victims of fulani that were killed refusing to believe in the falsehood you propagate as Islam.


Yorubas are by far better practitioners of Islamic doctrines than Fulani, and we have never shed blood to win converts for Allah. Look at Yoruba society and compare with yours if you want to harp on favors of Allah to those who obey him. How has Allah favored you for shedding blood? Like I said you are immatured to even admit that you earn reward from Allah by killing unbelievers or those that protect them.

Was the Arabman not one that introduced Islam to you? How come he does not have almajiri on his streets? Is that part of Islam or another of your scam to retain power and keep slavery intact in your society?


Why does Arabman not kidnap 10yr old girls in his country and force into marriage? Is that Islam or your perversion at full throttle?

Does Quran endorse homosexuality? Why is this everywhere in your society?

Come clean dude, fulani is a kafir! Your hands are soiled and your hearts are impure!

ImperialYoruba:





Is it by force to show you know English?


Speakeasy, all these semantics should be reserved as enamores to wow and daze your fellow fulani, it makes no mark with this Yoruba son.

First, the word confusion is overused in nairaland. Find a replacement for the curveball.


Your inability to connect my rhetoric with the mainstay shows gap in your appreciation for prose in language art. The question does not challenge the preceeding point but rather pricks thoughts and reflections....it is a hook, offered to engage the audience! Penmanship is an art!


Contention on the application of conquest.... How else do you hope to overpower an opposition army beside the use of force? What, you want to play the melody of your flute to persuade them to lay down weapon and concede defeat? . You are immature!


Its an injustice to the victims of fulani that were killed refusing to believe in the falsehood you propagate as Islam.


Yorubas are by far better practitioners of Islamic doctrines than Fulani, and we have never shed blood to win converts for Allah. Look at Yoruba society and compare with yours if you want to harp on favors of Allah to those who obey him. How has Allah favored you for shedding blood? Like I said you are immatured to even admit that you earn reward from Allah by killing unbelievers or those that protect them.

Was the Arabman not one that introduced Islam to you? How come he does not have almajiri on his streets? Is that part of Islam or another of your scam to retain power and keep slavery intact in your society?


Why does Arabman not kidnap 10yr old girls in his country and force into marriage? Is that Islam or your perversion at full throttle?

Does Quran endorse homosexuality? Why is this everywhere in your society?

Come clean dude, fulani is a kafir! Your hands are soiled and your hearts are impure!

Hmm, this one is getting angry and unreasonable, Instead of responding to the issues I raised you choose to add to your list of accusations and try turning the issue into Yoruba Muslims vs Fulani. No where in my response did I said Allah has favoured Fulani over anyone. . Sorry I don't do Tribal-bigotry. BesidesYoruba Muslims are my brothers/sisters in religion, the rest of the Yorubas are also my brothers/sisters in that we belong to thesame Nation.

Baaballiyo:


Hmm, this one is getting angry and unreasonable, Instead of responding to the issues I raised you choose to add to your list of accusations and try turning the issue into Yoruba Muslims vs Fulani. No where in my response did I said Allah has favoured Fulani over anyone. . Sorry I don't do Tribal-bigotry. BesidesYoruba Muslims are my brothers/sisters in religion, the rest of the Yorubas are also my brothers/sisters in that we belong to thesame Nation.

You are not getting it. Read the topic. Nigerians are not happy with you.

Every tribe can personalize the topic to address its issues with Fulani and youd see a commonality in the accusations.

Of course everyone is your brother and sister and soon as they let down their guard you are in their village razing down properties and rayping the women you call sisters and beheading the men you call your brothers.

Which other African tribe do you know that raypes women, married or unmarried, as an agenda for domination?


Which tribe in Africa have you seen go massacre a whole village in name of jihad?


Your hands are soiled, your hearts are impure. Come clean.

I would say not abnormally so. There were many Fulani nobles that were artists, merchants, aristocrats, scholars (Timbuktu), clerics, etc. Like other parts of History, Fulani history has its good and not so good. However as a whole, the Fulani ethnic group is one of the most renowned in Africa for a reason.

Baaballiyo:
WAS FULANI HISTORY TRULY BLOODY?





"War makes states and states make war" according to Charles Tilly.
State formation is necessarily bloody because one entity has to prove its sovereignty over a certain territory.
So the formation of the Sokoto Caliphate was bloody, and so were the establishment of any political realm" (GorkoSusaay)


The Fulani ethnic group is the most demonized ethnic group in Nigeria, especially by Nigerians of Southern extraction. Some South-westerners and most South-Easterners believe Fulani to be a bloody or born to rule race, may be due to the frequent clashes between the Fulani herdsmen and Farmers on one hand and the history of the Fulani conquests of the 18-19th centuries on the other.


Throughout their history the Fulani fought wars and conquered territories not because they are blood tasty or wanted to rule and dominate, but because they wanted to bring a positive change in their societies; and this they did after they came to power. They brought peace and developments especially in terms of education and economy to their domains. A former colonial officer in Nigeria Mr. H. A. S. Johnston has the following to say about the Fulani rule in Northern Nigeria in his book titled “The Fulani Empire of Sokoto”
(Quote)



The Fulani gave Hausaland a greater measure of peace than it had ever previously enjoyed. To this can be added the fact that their government was based on principle and not on mere power. No man, however mighty, was above the law. No man, however lowly, was beneath it. Every man had rights that the law defined and protected. In a continent still largely dominated by war and anarchy, the gift of peace and justice was no small thing.


Secondly, it can be said that the structure of society was well integrated and not inhumane. At the base of the pyramid, it is true, there were the slaves, but even they had their rights. In fact, they were generally better treated than slaves in other parts of the world including the United States, and for the most part they led tolerable lives. Next came the peasants. As they were free men, enjoying rights in the soil of which no one could deprive them, their standing was higher than that of the serfs who were still to be found in many parts of Europe. Then there were the craftsmen and traders of the towns: they were sufficiently numerous and affluent to constitute the beginnings of that most important component in any society — a middle class. Finally, there was the ruling caste. Its members, though authoritarian, were generally just and beneficent. In short, though tyranny and injustice were not unknown, they were probably less prevalent than in many countries of Europe and the Americas which had greater pretensions to being considered as civilized.


Thirdly, it can be said that the society of the Empire was a reasonably cultivated one. Trade and agriculture flourished so that the majority of the people were able to enjoy some simple luxuries over and above the bare necessities of life. Similarly, education was not the monopoly of the ruling caste but was common among the middle class and not unknown among the peasantry and slaves. Among all classes, moreover, scholars and divines were held in the very highest esteem. Finally, there was the all-pervading influence of religion. Its disciplines were the cement of society, its teachings gave purpose and dignity to life, and its consolations reconciled men to the injustices of an imperfect world.


The civilization of the Sokoto Empire was the product of the union between two very different strains, the Fulani and the Hausa. The contribution of the Fulani lay mainly in the arts of government, scholarship, and religion, that of the Hausas in the fields of agriculture, industry, and trade. The two peoples were complementary to one another and between them they evolved a society which was probably more advanced than any other hitherto produced in black Africa. At the turn of the century that society was engulfed by world forces that were too strong for it. Now, fittingly enough, it has been reborn as the nucleus of a new and powerful nation.
(End of Quote)



Apart from the Fulani (Tukolur) empire of Alh. Umar Tall, all other Fulani empires from the Imamates of Fuuta Jalon (in present day Guinea) and Fuuta Tooro (in present day Senegal) to the empires of Sokoto and Maasina (in present day Mali) were a product of revolutions carried out in order to topple a bad leadership and established a good one and to a large extent they succeeded in creating a good leadership after the success of their struggles as examplified in the above quote.



By nature Fulani are brilliant and intelligent like most west-African tribes but they tend to have more zeal and the will to execute their plans and face obstacles collectively than most tribes. The Fulani love peace more than anything that is why they tend to be very shy and mostly live away from cities but they are never afraid to fight if the need arises. That is why in most of their conflicts they rarely were the ones “that fire the first shot”. But it’s true their retaliation was always complete and thorough.



In conclusion, saying that, the Fulani history is bloody is but an injustice to them, because they fought and established empires at a time when fighting was the order of the day not only in West-Africa but in most parts of the world. Around that time the Oyo Empire was fighting to expand its influence likewise the Kanembu Empire though by that time the once powerful Jukun (kwararafa) Kingdom’s power has waned. So just because the Fulani fought with more zeal and singleness of purpose, conquered more lands in different locations (within West-Africa) than other Nigerian tribes; that does not make their history bloody, It meant they were the most wide spread, shrewder, more tactical, more organized and more ambitious tribe of that Era.


So if Fulani history is truly bloody then most Nigerian tribes history is also bloody, that would be the case for all Nigerian tribes that once established Kingdoms or empires for themselves within or without Nigeria of today.


Yours sincerely.

They were the undisputed Champions of the slave trade. But to be honest most Nigerian tribes were aggressive before Colonisation the slave trade created unnecessary bloody conflicts everywhere.

Fulaman198:
I would say not abnormally so. There were many Fulani nobles that were artists, merchants, aristocrats, scholars (Timbuktu), clerics, etc. Like other parts of History, Fulani history has its good and not so good. However as a whole, the Fulani ethnic group is one of the most renowned in Africa for a reason.

Yep, blood shed.

Y0ruba:



Yep, blood shed.

That's your opinion. It's not the reason however. Fulani are very widespread and found in every West African country and some Central African countries that of course we would be known.

Fulaman198:


That's your opinion. It's not the reason however. Fulani are very widespread and found in every West African country and some Central African countries that of course we would be known.

And minority in Nigeria

angels09:

And minority in Nigeria

4th largest ethnic group in Nigeria.

Fulaman198:
I would say not abnormally so. There were many Fulani nobles that were artists, merchants, aristocrats, scholars (Timbuktu), clerics, etc. Like other parts of History, Fulani history has its good and not so good. However as a whole, the Fulani ethnic group is one of the most renowned in Africa for a reason.

Using the topic of this thread as a backdrop, reference of scope, what is your brand of notoriety in Africa?

MetaPhysical:


Using the topic of this thread as a backdrop, reference of scope, what is your brand of notoriety in Africa?

I wouldn't refer to it as notoriety. Many True Africans in other countries would certainly disagree.

Fulaman198:


I wouldn't refer to it as notoriety. Many True Africans in other countries would certainly disagree.

Are there any you regard as "fake" Africans, and can you identify them?

Ofcause it's bloody,

Human history is bloody, The Chinese, The white ,Ancient Egyptians , Christians, I Muslims , Songhai, Buzaye, Igbo, Yoruba, Hausa, I every human history is bloody.

All that matters is, is it for good cause or it's just not.

I don't know the history of Fulani from other part of the world but for Nigeria it's was bloody, I before the Islamic jahad in Hausaland , Hausa kindoms were fighting with each other and blood in was shed, Then Dan fodio lead the jahad in Hausaland tO defend himself and his da'awa movement for Hausa Kings with the exception of zazzau were trying to kill him, I Zazzau and alots of people from different states join the movement. In doing so alot of people from Hausaland had lost their lives , that's for good cause.

Muslims go to war when touched to protect their right to life, religion , a Fulani man lead the jahad therefore I fulani history in Nigeria was bloody like everyone tribe history was.

MetaPhysical:


Are there any you regard as "fake" Africans, and can you identify them?

I only regard fake Africans as those that do not have in-depth knowledge of Africa as a whole.

For instance, I may be Fulani, but I am also versed at Southern African History, East African History, North African history and other parts of West Africa, from ethnic group to group.

Every ethnic group as aforementioned has its good and bad parts of it pertaining to history. However, there are many pretenders on this site that try to make it seem as if one group is the end all be all of all other groups.