User talk:Gobirawa

THE MISCONCEPTION OF MAKERAN ASSADA ROCK The history of Makeran Assada Rock as posted in the Wikipedia is palpably incorrect. It is devoid of any serious research and historical relevance. The geography of Assada as a remote and hilly/rocky area far away detached from the Islamic administrative headquarters of Sokoto Caliphate i.e. Kanwuri Sokoto does not require any political economy analyst to tell us that the claim by the writer of the history of Makeran Assada rock is not only spurious but in the actual sense they never participated in the 1804 Jihad. They neither contributed nor were they close or known to the leaders of the Jihad and their disciples-both Muhajirun and Ansaru. We found no where in history was one Muhammadu Andi from Zamfara referred to as “Sarkin Makeran” Sarkin Musulmi Muhammadu Bello. The crux of the matter is that it was Sharif Al-gudana who was settled in that rocky area in those days and up to 1970s the area remained palbably un-attracted for any socio political integration. Apart from the famous Gidan Haki, the area was left with its scanty houses and with no sign of professional nobility or cavalry. In fact, from Gidan Haki one could only see the growth of Garmani up to the river. The writer wanted to re-write history by stigmatizing Makeran Fari He said the Makeran Assada rock who are predominantly Makeran Baki “are the masters of Makeran Fari”. We do not intend to go into the history of superiority complex of Makeran Fari over Makeran Baki but suffice to say that black iron is not and cannot be equivalent to gold and silver in terms of value even to the larger society talkiess to the kings, emperors and palaces. If Sarakin Makeran Assada-Saraki Tatai were alive

(may Allah grant him Jannatu Firdausi) he would have told the author of the history of Makeran Assada that Makeran Fari also possess the sophisticated technological know-how of producing Sulke, swords made of silver, hular ‘yan lihidda and many war equipment. Saraki Tatai would have educated the author more including the position of Makeran Assada in the scheme of things. For the author to think he can re-write history is a great methodological poverty. The Sarauta system is very easy to understand. A full pledged and recognized “Sarkin Makeran” Sarkin Musulmi Muhammadu Bello must be able to posses ganima of Jihad as a participant in the Jihad. We conducted a thorough historical research to establish whether the perceived “Sarkin Makera” had possessed Gandun Sarauta and Gari to administer his followers but to our great surprise we found nothing. For example, it is undisputed fact that Islam allows Ganima to be distributed to those who participated in the Jihad and possession of Gandun Sarauta is such a great symbol in the Sarauta system. The Author did not tell us who Assada was. He only said “Assada was one of the important personalities and a close friend to the Sultan and he used to recieve Sultan’s visitors on behalf of Sultan in his residence at Assada”. Though he did not tell us under which Sultan. Even imagination has its limit. Could it be possible for Sultan’s visitors to pass Wazirin Sokoto’s house, Magajin Gari’s house etc. and to be received by Assada under the rock! The word Assada literarily means connecting one person to another. We all know what Assada was engaged in. But let us leave it to history. Assada, Muhammadu Andi and Ahmad Maigeme were all gentlemen from either Zamfara, Katsina, Nufe or Azbin and throughout their lives they never arrogate to themselves a position high than where Allah put them.

The writer has allowed himself to be boxed into a corner especially where he said there are some makeras who were brought from Alkalawa as “slaves and refugees.” This claim is liable, so the writer of history of Makeran Assada rock should be very careful. Both Mujaddadi Shehu Usmanu Ibn. Fodiyo and Malam Abdullahi Ibn. Fodiyo had repeatedly put a disclaimer to the possession of slaves, see for example wakar Shehu (Shehu’s song) where he said “ni banda bayi, lihidda hakko inyi gari, masu gari su suka tassheku don shagalinsu Wallahi Wallahi” Abdullahi Ibn. Fodiyo was vehement on what he called “we conquered them in the day time and they conquered us in the night time”. People of shallow mind and exposure like the author of the history of Makeran Assada are incapable of understanding what both Mujaddadi Shehu Usmanu and Malam Abdullahi meant. In any case, our investigation into the historical facts reveals the following: i) The name of Muhammadu Andi did not appear in the whole of history of Gobir talkiess of the short period of Nafata’s reign. ii) It was then Gobir’s Chief of defence Staff and overseer of weapon production, army conscription/custodian of war weapons and drums who fiercely quarreled against Nafata’s mischief and disdain towards Mujaddadi Shehu Usmanu in 1795, nine years before the city of Alkalawa was destroyed and its people dispersed by the Jihadists. He quarreled and left Alkalawa and was accompanied by many people in order to join Mujaddadi Shehu Usmanu. He even camped at a place called Duhuwa

Anna in case Nafata would send soldiers to go after him. Nafata never did that. So AbdulKadir the fearless and a highly respected person that he was in Gobir kingdom moved to Mujaddadi’s side as a Muhajirina. The integrated Association of the history of Gobir and Gobirawa is by this write up disputing the history of one Muhammadu Andi and other disparaging remarks made by the author of the fake history of Makeran Assada rock. A law suit against the author cannot be ruled out.

By Abubakar Dangaladima Sabon Birnin Gobir. Integrated Association of History of Gobir and Gobirawa.