阿卜杜拉希·丹·福迪奥和穆罕默德·贝洛关于托罗贝-富拉尼的争论:对西非阿拉伯原始资料的新方法论的案例研究

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION Islamic Africa Pub Date : 2018-05-07 DOI:10.1163/21540993-00901003
Paul Naylor
{"title":"阿卜杜拉希·丹·福迪奥和穆罕默德·贝洛关于托罗贝-富拉尼的争论:对西非阿拉伯原始资料的新方法论的案例研究","authors":"Paul Naylor","doi":"10.1163/21540993-00901003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the conflict between Abdullahi dan Fodio and his nephew, Muhammad Bello, over the origin of their ethnic group, the Torobbe-Fulani. Initially open to his uncle’s theories of an Arabocentric migration narrative, Bello went on to change his views abruptly and undermine his uncle’s work. Through sketching the background to the conflict followed by a close reading of the documents themselves–Abdullahi’s īdāʿ al-nusūkh and Bello’s critical commentary to it, the ḥāshiya –I suggest these documents offer different models for political legitimacy. Prefaced by a critical analysis of the use of the Fodiawa’s Arabic writings in Sokoto historiography, I suggest that future approaches must take into account the political nature of these documents, the specific contexts in which they were produced and the personal relationships of their authors.","PeriodicalId":41507,"journal":{"name":"Islamic Africa","volume":"39 1","pages":"34-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abdullahi dan Fodio and Muhammad Bello’s Debate over the Torobbe-Fulani: Case Study for a New Methodology for Arabic Primary Source Material from West Africa\",\"authors\":\"Paul Naylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/21540993-00901003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explores the conflict between Abdullahi dan Fodio and his nephew, Muhammad Bello, over the origin of their ethnic group, the Torobbe-Fulani. Initially open to his uncle’s theories of an Arabocentric migration narrative, Bello went on to change his views abruptly and undermine his uncle’s work. Through sketching the background to the conflict followed by a close reading of the documents themselves–Abdullahi’s īdāʿ al-nusūkh and Bello’s critical commentary to it, the ḥāshiya –I suggest these documents offer different models for political legitimacy. Prefaced by a critical analysis of the use of the Fodiawa’s Arabic writings in Sokoto historiography, I suggest that future approaches must take into account the political nature of these documents, the specific contexts in which they were produced and the personal relationships of their authors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Islamic Africa\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"34-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Islamic Africa\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/21540993-00901003\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Islamic Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/21540993-00901003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了阿卜杜拉希·丹·福迪奥和他的侄子穆罕默德·贝洛之间关于他们的民族——托罗贝-富拉尼的起源的冲突。最初,贝罗对他叔叔的阿拉伯中心主义移民理论持开放态度,后来他突然改变了观点,破坏了他叔叔的研究。通过概述冲突的背景,然后仔细阅读文件本身——阿卜杜拉希的“手稿al-nusūkh”和贝罗对它的批评评论ḥāshiya——我认为这些文件为政治合法性提供了不同的模式。在对索科托历史编纂中使用Fodiawa的阿拉伯语作品进行批判性分析的序言中,我建议未来的方法必须考虑到这些文件的政治性质,它们产生的具体背景以及它们的作者的个人关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Abdullahi dan Fodio and Muhammad Bello’s Debate over the Torobbe-Fulani: Case Study for a New Methodology for Arabic Primary Source Material from West Africa
This paper explores the conflict between Abdullahi dan Fodio and his nephew, Muhammad Bello, over the origin of their ethnic group, the Torobbe-Fulani. Initially open to his uncle’s theories of an Arabocentric migration narrative, Bello went on to change his views abruptly and undermine his uncle’s work. Through sketching the background to the conflict followed by a close reading of the documents themselves–Abdullahi’s īdāʿ al-nusūkh and Bello’s critical commentary to it, the ḥāshiya –I suggest these documents offer different models for political legitimacy. Prefaced by a critical analysis of the use of the Fodiawa’s Arabic writings in Sokoto historiography, I suggest that future approaches must take into account the political nature of these documents, the specific contexts in which they were produced and the personal relationships of their authors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Islamic Africa
Islamic Africa RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Islamic Africa publishes original research concerning Islam in Africa from the social sciences and the humanities, as well as primary source material and commentary essays related to Islamic Studies in Africa. The journal’s geographic scope includes the entire African continent and adjacent islands.
期刊最新文献
A Short Report on Newly Identified Manuscripts of Miṣbāḥ al-Arwāḥ: A Treatise Authorizing Takfīr in the Early Sokoto Caliphate No Longer ‘Christian’ Education: Ulama Edupreneurship in Ilorin 1995–2022 A History of a Traveling Qurʾān Manuscript in Inhambane, Mozambique Reconsidering the Intellectual Relationship between Muḥammad al-Maghīlī and ʿUthmān b. Fūdī: A Comparative Examination of Ajwiba and Sirāj al-Ikhwān End Times and the Modern World: The Ahmadiyya in Colonial Ghana
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1