Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T13:43:30.497Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eastern Libya, Wadai and the Sanūsīya: A Ṭarīqa and a Trade Route

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2009

Dennis D. Cordell
Dennis D. Cordell
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The caravan route linking Benghazi and Wadai was probably the most important avenue of long-distance trade between the Mediterranean and the eastern Sudan in the late nineteenth century. It remained economically viable well after 1900, after commerce on routes further west had declined.

Beginning with the Mejabra trader from Jālū who first found a direct route from Cyrenaica to Wadai in 1809 or 1810, this article traces the history of the route in the nineteenth century with special reference to the effects of Wadaian policies on trans-Saharan commerce. The important role of the Mejabra and Zūwāyā merchants from Libya is also considered.

Fluctuating fortunes characterized trading activity along the route between its opening and the years after 1850. Beginning in the 1860s, however, commercial prospects improved steadily. Evidence suggests that the Sanūsīya Muslim brotherhood (ṭarīqa) was largely responsible for increased trade and prosperity along the route at this time. Because the order spanned the route's entire length, it solved many of the problems connected with long-distance commerce. It assured regular communication, relatively rapid transport, the creation of bonds of trust, a system of adjudication and arbitration, and an all-embracing structure of authority to maintain order and respect for judicial rulings. It functioned as a trading diaspora, but its members were not all of the same ethnic group. Rather, adherence to a single ṭarāqa bound merchants together and fostered the security necessary for the trade. The article concludes that the relationship between the brotherhood and commerce was symbiotic. The Sanūsīya sheltered commerce; in turn, the caravan trade brought wealth to the order and united its far-flung domains.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of African History , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , January 1977 , pp. 21 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 El-Hechaichi, Muhammad, ‘Chez les Senoussia et les Touareg’, Revue de Paris, viii, 4 (07–08 1901), 681.Google Scholar

2 Slousch, Nahum, ‘A Benghazi’, Revue du Monde Musulman, vi (1908), 266–7.Google Scholar

3 ‘Report for the Year 1895 on the Trade of Bengazi’, Great Britain (hereafter GB), Parliamentary Papers (hereafter PP), Session 1897, vol. 94Google Scholar; ‘Report for the Years 1896 and 1897 on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi’, GB, PP, Session 1898, vol. 99.Google Scholar

4 Baier, Stephen B., ‘African Merchants in the Colonial Period: A History of Commerce in Damagaram (Central Niger), 1880–1960’, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1974, chapter I.Google Scholar

5 ‘Report for the Year 1894 on the Trade of Tripoli’, GB, PP, Session 189s, vol. 101; ‘Report for the Year 1895 on the Trade of Tripoli’, GB, PP, Session 1896, vol. 89; ‘Report for the Year 1899 on the Trade and Commerce of Tripoli’, GB, PP, Session 1900, vol. 96Google Scholar. Recent research indicates that the Tripoli-Kano branch of this route carried a significant volume of commerce into the second decade of the present century. See Johnson, Marion, ‘Calico Caravans: The Tripoli-Kano Trade after 1880’, J. Afr. Hist., xvii, 1 (1976), 95–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Gaden, H., ‘Les états musulmans de l'Afrique centrale et leurs rapports avec la Mecque et Constantinople’, Questions diplomatiques et coloniales, xxiv (1907), 445Google Scholar; Ziadeh, Nicola A., Sanusiyah: A Study of a Revivalist Movement in Islam, (Leiden, 1958), 17.Google Scholar

7 Cohen, Abner, ‘Cultural Strategies in the Organization of Trading Diasporas’, in Meillassoux, Claude, ed., The Development of Indigenous Trade and Markets in West Africa, (London, 1971), 266.Google Scholar

8 Fresnel, F., ‘Mémoire sur le Waday: Notice historique et géographique sur le Waday et les relations de cet empire avec la cête septentrionale de l'Afrique’, Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, 3° série, n° n (1849), 48–67Google Scholar; Nachtigal, Gustav, ‘Voyage dans 1'Afrique Centrale 1869–1874’, Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, 6e série, n° i (1876), 260–1Google Scholar; Tubiana, M. J., ‘Un document inédit sur les sultans du Wadday (Tchad)’, Cahiers d'Etudes africaines, ii (1960), 50Google Scholar. Before this time Kufra does not appear to have been on any north-south trade route. East-west commerce passed through the oasis in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. See Lewicki, T., ‘A propos du nom de l'oasis de Koufra chez les géographes arabes du XIe et du XIIe siècles’, J. Afr. Hist., vi, 3 (1965), 295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Abeche became the capital of Wadai in 1849/50.

9 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV: Wadai and Darfur, Fisher, G. B. and Fisher, H. J., eds. and trans. (Berkeley, 1971), 215–21Google Scholar; Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, 1849, 64–5Google Scholar. Nachtigal and Fresnel disagree on the number of assassinations.

10 Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, 1849, 65–73Google Scholar. There are at least six divergent king lists for Wadai. To date little work has been done to reconcile them. Consequently, it is impossible to date precisely the reigns of the rulers between 1813 and 1835. All accounts record numerous internal conflicts and disruptions in trade during these years. For the lists, see Tubiana, , ‘Un document inédit’, 96–109.Google Scholar

11 Julien, Emile, ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, L'Afrique française, Bulletin du Comité de l'Afrique franéaise: Renseignements coloniaux (hereafter AF-RC), Feb. 1904, 54Google Scholar; Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 49–50.Google Scholar

12 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 220–1.Google Scholar

13 Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, 3e série, n° 13 (1850), 84–6Google Scholar. This is the second of a three-part article.

14 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 223.Google Scholar

15 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 133.Google Scholar

16 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 50, 53, 55Google Scholar; Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, 1850. 354.Google Scholar

17 Boahen, A. Adu, Britain, the Sahara and the Western Sudan 1788–1861, (London, 1964), 110.Google Scholar

18 For a history of these northern migrants, see Cordell, Dennis D., ‘The Awlad Sulayman of Libya and Chad: A Study of Raiding and Power in the Chad Basin in the Nineteenth Century’, unpublished M.A. thesis, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1972.Google Scholar

19 Carbou, Henri, La région du Tchad et du Ouadai, (Paris, 1912), ii, 122–4Google Scholar; Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 57.Google Scholar

20 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 56–7, 68–9.Google Scholar

21 Carbou, , La région du Tchad, ii, 123Google Scholar; Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 128–30.Google Scholar

22 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 56.Google Scholar

23 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 225–6.Google Scholar

24 Boahen, , ‘The Caravan Trade in the Nineteenth Century’, J. Afr. Hist., iii, 2 (1962), 380, 354–5Google Scholar. A similar organization characterized the other important trans-Saharan routes. For example, on the Bornu road the corresponding points were Tripoli, Ghadames, Ghat or Murzuq, and Kukawa.

25 Boahen, , ‘The caravan trade’, 354–5Google Scholar; Boahen, , Britain, the Sahara, 114Google Scholar. Caravans followed the same itinerary for the rest of the century, and the route was still in use after World War I. See Blanc, E., ‘Les routes de 1'Afrique septentrionale au Sahara’, Bulletin de la Société de Géographic de Paris, 7e série, n° 11 (1890), 182–3Google Scholar; Ferrandi, Jean, ‘Les oasis et les nomades du Sahara oriental’, AF-RC, Jan. 1910, 4Google Scholar; Bey, A. M. Hassanein, The Lost Oases, (London, 1925), 93Google Scholar; Forbes, Rosita, The Secret of the Sahara: Kufara, (New York, 1921), 113.Google Scholar

26 Nachtigal, , ‘Voyage dans 1'Afrique Centrale’, 258–9.Google Scholar

27 Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, 1850, 173–7.Google Scholar

28 Evans-Pritchard, E. E., The Sanusi of Cyrenaica, (London, 1949), 16, 21.Google Scholar

29 The date-grain trade is a common phenomenon along the ecological frontier on the northern and southern edges of the desert. The Awlād Sulaymā;n traded in these foodstuffs in the Syrte-Fezzan region in the northern Sahara before 1842. After their migration to the Chad basin they became involved in a similar exchange between Kanem and Borku. See Cordell, , ‘The Awlād Sulaymān of Libya and Chad’, i, 104–7Google Scholar. Baier theorizes that the Ghadamasi, active traders on the Tripoli-Bornu route, became involved in longdistance commerce as a result of participation in the date-grain exchange further west. See Baier, , ‘African Merchants in the Colonial Period’, chapter I.Google Scholar

30 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 50Google Scholar; Hornemann, 's Journal is cited by Fisher in his glossary to Nachtigal, 412.Google Scholar

31 Fresnel, , ‘Mémoire sur le Waday’, 1849, 55, n. 1.Google Scholar

32 Depont, O. and Coppolani, X., Let confréries religieuses musulmanes, (Algiers, 1897), 560.Google Scholar

33 P.R.O., F.O. 101/88, Consul Alvarez (Benghazi) to the Marquess of Salisbury, , 30 Dec. 1898.Google Scholar

34 Ceriani, Ettore, ‘Kufra’, AF-RC, 1922, 79–80.Google Scholar

35 Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 201.Google Scholar

36 Etieéant, , ‘Le commerce tripolitain dans le centre africain’, AF-RC, Sept. 1910, 281Google Scholar; ‘Report for the Years 1896 and 1897 on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi’. Given that 25,000 M.T. dollars equalled £5,000 in Wadai and that goods bought there for this amount could be sold at four times their price on the coast, trade worth c £20,000 should have passed through Benghazi in 1871. But in 1870–1 hostilities between the Ottomans and the Arabs in the interior of Cyrenaica caused all trade to be diverted to Egypt; no exports from the interior went through the port. Even in 1873, the value of such exports totalled only £4,000 (and not £20,000). This continuing discrepancy may be explained by the fact that the Mejabra bought many slaves in the south and took them to Egypt rather than to Benghazi. Additional exports sometimes followed different routes to the coast as well. Thus a record of the exports which passed through Benghazi is not a completely accurate reflection of all traffic on the route. See ‘Report by Vice-Consul Henderson on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi during the Year 1870–1’, GB, PP, Session 1871, vol. 66Google Scholar; ‘Report by Vice-Consul Henderson on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi for the Year 1873’, GB, PP, Session 1874, vol. 67.Google Scholar

37 Boahen, , Britain, the Sahara, 110.Google Scholar

38 Bey, Hassanein, The Lost Oases, 97, 166–7, 179.Google Scholar

39 Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 45–6.Google Scholar

40 Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 10–11, 18, 69, 71.Google Scholar

41 Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 73.Google Scholar

42 Depont, , Les confrégies, 557Google Scholar; Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 18.Google Scholar

43 Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 7, 14–16Google Scholar; Afifi, Hafez, ‘Mon Voyage de Benghazi à Garaboub en compagnie du Grand Senoussi’, Bulletin de la Société Sultanieh de Géographie, viii (1917).Google Scholar

44 Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 49Google Scholar; Boahen, , Britain, the Sahara, 115–6.Google Scholar

45 Duveyrier, Henri, ‘La confrérie musulmane de Sidi Mohammed Ben'Ali es-Senousi et son domaine géographique’, Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Paris, 7e série, n° 5 (1884), 159–60, 189–90.Google Scholar

46 P.R.O., F.O. 101/88, Consul Alvarez (Benghazi) to the Marquess of Salisbury, , 30 Dec. 1898.Google Scholar

47 P.R.O., F.O. 101/88, Consul-General Jago (Tripoli) to the Marquess of Salisbury, , 1 Dec. 1898.Google Scholar

48 Slousch, , ‘Les Senoussiya en Tripolitaine’, Revue du Monde Musuhnan, i (1906), 173 176.Google Scholar

49 Duveyrier, , ‘La confrérie musulmane’, 167Google Scholar; Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 119–20.Google Scholar

50 Duveyrier, , ‘La confrérie musulmane’, 167–8Google Scholar; Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 45Google Scholar.

51 Ceriani, , ‘Kufra’, 78–82.Google Scholar

52 Fisher, Humphrey J. and Virginia Rowland, ‘Firearms in the Central Sudan’, J. Afr. His., xii, 2 (1971), 223.Google Scholar

53 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, AF-RC, 05 1904, 141.Google Scholar

54 Duveyrier, , ‘La confrérie musulmane’, 189.Google Scholar

55 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 56, 61–2.Google Scholar

56 Works, John A. Jr., ‘A Survey of the Islamization of the Central Sudan’, unpublished paper, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1968, 29.Google Scholar

57 Note by Fisher in Nachtigal, , Sahara and Sudan IV, 61, n. 1.Google Scholar

58 Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 120Google Scholar, Bey, Hassanein, The Lost Oases, 98Google Scholar; Duveyrier, , ‘La confrerie musulmane, 155.Google Scholar

59 Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 14–16, 70Google Scholar; Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 113.Google Scholar

60 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 56.Google Scholar

61 Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 58–9, n. 53Google Scholar; Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 15Google Scholar; Forbes, , Kufara, 158–9.Google Scholar

62 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, AF-RC, Apr. 1904, noGoogle Scholar; Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 15Google Scholar; Ferrandi, , ‘Les oasis et les noraades’, 4–8.Google Scholar

63 Trimingham, John S., The Sufi Orders in Islam, (London, 1971), 20–1.Google Scholar

64 Adams, C. C., ‘The Sanusis’, Muslim World, xxxvi, 1 (01, 1946), 32.Google Scholar

65 Duveyrier, , ‘La confrérie musulmane’, 154Google Scholar; Boahen, , Britain, the Sahara, IIIGoogle Scholar; Evans-Pritchard, , The Sanusi, 21.Google Scholar

66 Duveyrier, , ‘La confrére musulmane’, 163Google Scholar; Forbes, , Kufara, 325.Google Scholar

67 Slousch, , ‘Les Senoussiya’, 175Google Scholar; Ziadeh, , Sanusiyah, 114.Google Scholar

68 El-Hechaichi, , ‘Chez les Senoussia’, 678–9Google Scholar; ‘Report for the year 1895 on the Trade of Bengazi’.

69 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, AF-RC, Mar. 1904, 90–1.Google Scholar

70 Bedis, Y., ‘Tales of the Wadai Slave Trade in the Nineties’, Sudan Notes and Records, sail, 1 (1940), 174Google Scholar; Bey, Hassanein, The Lost Oases, 64.Google Scholar

71 Julien, , ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Mar. 1904, 90–1.Google Scholar

72 P.R.O., F.O. 101/92, Consul Alvarez (Benghazi) to the Marquess of Salisbury, , 26 Jan. 1902.Google Scholar

73 Newbury, C. W., ‘North African and Western Sudan Trade in the Nineteenth Century: A Re-Evaluation’, J. Afr. Hist., vii, 2 (1966), 233–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74 Johnson, , ‘Calico Caravans: The Tripoli-Kano Trade after 1880’, 95–117Google Scholar. For trade figures, see ‘Report by Consul Dupuis on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi for the Year 1878’, GB, PP, Session 1878–1879, vol. 70Google Scholar; ‘Report for the year 1886 on the Trade of Bengazi’, GB. PP, Session 1887, vol. 86Google Scholar; ‘Report for the Year 1888 on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi’, GB, PP, 1889, vol. 81Google Scholar; ‘Report for the Year 1880–90 on the Trade of Bengazi’, GB, PP, Session 1890–1891, vol. 88Google Scholar; ‘Report for the Years 1891–2 on the Trade of Bengazi’, GB, PP, Session 1893–1894, vol. 97Google Scholar; ‘Report for the year 1895 on the Trade of Bengazi’; ‘Report for the Years 1896 and 1897 on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi’.

75 Baier, , ‘Trans-Saharan Trade and the Sahel: Damergu, 1870–1930’, below, pp. 39–43.Google Scholar

76 ‘Report for the Years 1893–4 on the Trade of Bengazi’, GB, PP, Session 1895, vol. 101Google Scholar. See also ‘Report for the Years 1896 and 1897 on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi’; Slousch, , ‘A Benghazi’, 266–7Google Scholar; Ceriani, , ‘Kufra’, 81Google Scholar; Fisher, and Rowland, , ‘Firearms in the Central Sudan’, 223–4.Google Scholar

77 P.R.O., F.O. 101/88, Consul Alvarez (Benghazi) to the Marquess of Salisbury, , 30 Dec. 1898Google Scholar. The important role played by cotton goods on the Benghazi-Wadai route in the late nineteenth century is consistent with findings of Johnson for the Tripoli-Kano corridor at the same time. See Johnson, , ‘Calico Caravans: The Tripoli-Kano Trade after 1880’, 95, 100–9.Google Scholar

78 ‘Report for the Years 1893–4 on the Trade of Bengazi’, Calicoes and other cottons figure prominently earlier in the century as well. See ‘Report by Vice-Consul Henderson on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi for the Year 1872’, GB, PP, Session 1873, vol. 65Google Scholar. The trade in firearms was clandestine and import figures are not found in the consular estimates.

79 Feathers also became an important trade item on the Tripoli-Kano route after 1870. See Johnson, , ‘Calico Caravans: The Tripoli-Kano Trade after 1880’, 104–7.Google Scholar

80 ‘Report by Vice-Consul Henderson on the Trade and Commerce of Bengazi for the Year 1872’; Julien, ‘Le Dar-Ouadai’, Feb. 1904, 141Google Scholar; El-Hechaichi, , ‘Chez les Senoussia’, 709.Google Scholar

81 Between 1973 and 1975 the author conducted research and fieldwork in Europe, Chad, and the northern Central African Republic on the history of Dar al-Kuti, a slave-raiding and slave-trading state on the southern fringes of Wadai with its capital at Ndele. This area was among the last to export large numbers of captives to North Africa and the Middle East. Preliminary results of this research suggest that the greatest number of slaves from the Dar al-Kuti region were sent north only after 1900. Forother recent research on the Muslim slave trade between the interior and Libya and Egypt, see Austen, Ralph A., ‘The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade: A Tentative Census’, unpublished paper, the University of Chicago, 1976, tables 2, 3, and 8.Google Scholar

82 See note 74 above.