We write to formally bring to the attention of your office several long-standing concerns which have been widely discussed among the Mole-Dagomba scholars, traditional authorities, and members of the community.

This letter aims to facilitate an open and objective discussion on the philosophy and rationale of history in our current national curriculum, as well as most history textbooks used by teachers and students.

We trust that this petition will receive the objective consideration it deserves. We do so because the Constitution of Ghana, Article 39 (1), states that “… the State shall take steps to encourage the integration of appropriate customary values into the fabric of national life through formal and informal education and the conscious introduction of cultural dimensions to relevant aspects of national planning.

It further states in clause 2 that “(2) The State shall ensure that appropriate customary and cultural values are adapted and developed as an integral part of the growing needs of the society as a whole; and in particular that traditional practices which are injurious to the health and well-being of the person are abolished.”

Introduction:

Despite the nuanced appreciation of the relevance of studying history, it remains one of the most important subjects that every Ghanaian child must study.

Before the formal introduction of History as a subject, all societies in Africa had their own form of teaching past relevant events to their children.

It was regarded as a way of keeping their identity.

It was one way of ensuring that the cultural and customary practices of every African society were religiously and jealously guarded from extinction.

It was through this informal teaching about the past that the society functionally existed.

Stories learnt from elders and oral historians kept every individual in a position to understand the pride and loyalty with which their ancestors lived. This helped in shaping the society from becoming a dysfunctional and or a malfunctional one.

In some societies, such as the Dagomba, there were, and still are, clans such as drummers (lunsi), fiddlers (Goonji), trumpeters (kikaalananima), flute-blowers (katei pebriba), and other eulogists and narrators who had the tradition of keeping oral archives by word of mouth and or through music.

These clans had their own traditional sacred means by which these narratives could be kept in check from interpolations, misinterpretations, and distortions.

The general society, particularly those who had the passion to learn these narratives, always had the ‘official’ positions of narratives about past important events.

This was the nature of our society before the introduction of the culture of writing down history.

When history became a formal subject in the classrooms, learning about oneself, as well as other groups, became so well structured that one could only wish it well.

Despite the relevance of history, arguments against it can be partially true if history becomes directly or indirectly misapplied, misguided, abused, or irresponsibly handled by historians.

In many instances, a lot of elders, eulogists, chiefs,s and intellectuals have had serious causes to blame history for becoming what George Santayana, a great Spanish-American philosopher, calls “…a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren't there.”

If every historian were that objective, truthful, moral,ral and professional in approach, History as a subject would have no examples of situations where accounts have had tendencies to be untruthful and or sometimes harmful to society.

The danger arises when historical accounts are shaped by subjective, negligent, or unprofessional methods, resulting in pseudo-historical narratives that misinform learners instead ofeducatinge them.

This has a far-reaching, unintended impact on society, sometimes leading to the ascription of wrong identity and behavior to individuals and groups.

This has sometimes led to conflicts in some societies around the world.

Some examples of communal clashes which have been blamed on history include the genocide in Rwanda (1994), the wars in the former Yugoslavia (1991−1995), communal tensions in India (1998−2004), and the 1994 communal clashes involving the Konkomba, the Gonja, the Nanumba, and the Dagomba, etc.

The rationale of teaching history in the classrooms of Ghana is that learners will appreciate the life and sacrifices of our forebears and learn about the interconnectedness among the various ethnic groups to promote national integration, develop national pride and identity (NaCCA, Ministry of Education, 2019, iv).

If the current national curriculum, as well as textbooks, still have issuesthath have the potential to produce undesirable learning outcomes, there is a need to relook at them.

It is not the best to have learners from primary school to senior high school or university learn events and legends unknown to the group referred to, or in some cases, since those legends or events are misrepresented in the curriculum and textbooks used by teachers and lecturers for instruction.

Since learners do have confidence in the teacher, the lecturer, the curriculum, um and the textbooks, they have no option but to keep those written traditions even as they conflict with oral traditions from those they regard as custodians of their history.

How they marry what is regarded as the truth from these custodians with the ‘truth’ in written narratives used as instructional references is probably through magic.

Some elders, teachers, and historians over the years have been cowed into silence. Some others who wish to point out these historical inaccuracies do not seem to know the right channels to use.

On behalf of the Mole-Dagomba community, we wish to outline some of the topics and events which appear to have been distorted in the curriculum and textbooks used by teachers in schools:

(a) Early Settlers of the Savanna Zone:

On page 54 of the current Teachers' History Manual for SHS 1, we read about early settlers who:

According to oral history, the early settlers or the indigenous inhabitants of the Savannah zone were the Vagala, Sisala, Tampulens, and the Guan, who lived along the White Volta.

Others were the Konkomba, the Koma, and the Chamba, who lived east of the White Volta.

While one may not argue so much about some of these groups described as early settlers of the Savanna zone, our researchers and historians question the basis upon which the Mole-Dagomba are not one of the indigenous groups.

Our considered opinion, backed by research, is that the Chad origin referring to Toha Zei - the Red Hunter is an interpolated or misunderstood reality of the Mole-Dagomba history.

The harm with this is that all the Mole-Dagomba groups are treated as latter-day settlers instead of their indigenous status. Consequently, it has bred considerable conflicts with some neighbours of the Mole-Dagomba, such as those mentioned above.

The early written accounts upon which latter-day historians chronicle the migratory route of the Dagomba leave too many unanswered questions.

Aspects of early written accounts,s such as Blair (1930), Tamakloe (1931), Cardinal (1931), Rattray (1932), Gill (n.d), etc., expose inaccuracies that reveal that those accounts utilized Arabic scripts by Hausa Mallams instead of Mole-Dagomba-accrued oral historians and clans mentioned earlier.

Respectfully, Hausa Ajami scripts, or Arabic scripts, have many discrepancies found to be responsible for many interpolated narratives and or misrepresented events in written Mole-Dagomba history.

These scripts have also shown conflicting points about the identity of the Mole-Dagomba, which we need to re-examine.

Some examples are as follows:

Blair (1930:3) wrote in the “Conference of the Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs” that:

“The inhabitants of this State do not form one homogeneous people, but are a collection of tribes, invading Dagomba and Chakosi and the aboriginal Konkomba, Bukimbung, Gbimba, Nafeba, Saboba, Nagboba, Chamba, Dagomba, Bohoru, B’mawba, and Kpariba."emphasis mine.

One question that immediately comes to mind is whether the Dagomba is an invading group or an indigenous group.

In Tamakloe (1931: 1-2), we read about the Dagomba pre-occupation of Dagbon before NNaa Gbewa arrivedin Pusiga c.1300s as:

“There is an almost forgotten tradition among the present Dagbamba people that their country was formerly inhabited by giants whom they call ‘Kondor’ or ‘Tiawomya.’ This extinct race of giants was said to have been of so extraordinary a stature that if hawks swooped down on their chickens, they simply had to rise and snatch them back, -so tall and large were they that their voices when singing to their drums, could be heard some twenty miles off; their armlets were so large that the biggest man of modern times would easily go through them.

It is said that, after the confusion of tongues, the tribe of Ad, who were descended from Ad, the son of Uz, the son of Aram, son of Shem, son of Noah, settled in the Province of Hadhramaut, where their posterity greatly multiplied.

This tribe continued to worship God, but in the process of time, they fell from the worship of the true God into idolatry.

God, seeing this,s sent the prophet Heber to preach and reclaim them.

But when they refused to acknowledge his mission, God sent a hot and suffocating wind which blew seven nights and eight days together and which, entering into their nostrils, passed through their bodies and destroyed them all save the very few who had believed in Heber.

This tribe we learned was of prodigious stature, the tallest of them being said to be a hundred cubits or a hundred and fifty feet in height, and the least of them sixty cubits or ninety feet.

This tribe, it is said, wandered towards the East and the West, settling in uninhabited countries till they arrived in the country which is today called “Dagbon”; and their progeny were called “Dagbamba”.

The first towns built by them were said to be Gunayiri in Karaga District, and Yoggo in Toma or Safulugu District, and those of them who settled beyond the Oti river were the progenitors of the Kpamkpamba (Konkomba) races.

Tradition has it that some of these giants, namely 3 men and women from Yoggo, 7 men and women from Gunayiri, emigrated from their settlements and founded Nanuba and Adele, and others again became the progenitors of the Akebus, Bowiris, etc etc.”

This position that the early Dagomba trace descent to the Tiyawumya giants appears to still be retained in oral archives by some Tindanas and elders among aboriginal clans such as Gbandari, Kpariba, Langori, Machelinima, etc.

All these early Mole-Dagbamba clans seem to have beenlumped togetherp as Dagbamba in narratives describing the founding of the Gbewaa kingdoms.

This uninformed lumping suggests pre-occupation of the Voltaic basin by some other groups before the arrival of the Mole-Dagomba, supposed to be an invading group.

Arguably, these early chronicles about the Gbewaa kingdoms are not only sketchy but depict a cornucopia of the origin and history of just a section of the Mole-Dagomba populace – the ruling Gbewaa clan.

Although it is difficult to identify among the present populace aboriginal Dagbamba who strictly trace both paternal and maternal descent to only the Tiyawumya giants, it is not to obliterate their history and tradition and replace it with that of the ruling clan, who seem to have arrived c.1300 to conquer, assimilate with, and consolidate them into centralized states.

Both the ruling clan and the aboriginal Dagbamba have become a complete amalgam of people, akin to a mixing of water sourced from two rivers.

They are like the Gonja who originally arrived circa 1700 as a Mande band of warriors to conquer and assimilate with the Guan acephalous groups to become the present stock of Gonjas.

The present rulers of both the Gonjaland and Dagbon appear to trace maternal lineages to the hitherto acephalous natives of the Savanna zone, while at the same time descending paternally from Ndewura Jakpa and Naa Gbewaa, respectively.

In giving accounts of the origin of the kings in Dagbon, Tamakloe (1931) seems to make the following point, which appears to contradict his initial position in page 1 and 2, that the progenitors of the Konkomba race were settled beyond the Oti river:

“To avoid this incessant fighting with the Ngbanye, Na Luro deemed it expedient to abandon the capital and to build a new one in the Kpamkpamba country. Na Luro occupied the Kpamkpamba town Chare, the people of which went and built Wangbun on the Demon road. Chare became Yendi from that time.”

While this is the general narrative in almost all documented sources authored by non-Dagomba scholars, the elders, griots, eulogists, Tindaamba, and historians among the Mole-Dagomba are unaware of such a historical event.

The general position is that it was Naa Titugiri, not Naa Luro, who moved the capital to Yendi.

The name “Chare” is unknown among these Dagomba griots, elders,s and historians. Again, it was not due to pressure from Ngbanye that the capital was moved to Yendi by Naa Titugiri.

Historians such as Boahen A. (1966:1975::1977), Fynn et al (1991), Gocking (2005), Lentz (2006), Odamtten et al (2019), Rathbone et al (1980), etc., seem to have overly relied on the account of the kings in the Gbewa States to misrepresent the history of the Dagomba, Nanumba, and Mamprusi.

This position seems to be addressed by contemporary Mole-Dagomba historians such as Mahama (2003), Yakubu (2013), and Motariga (2024). Mahama (2003), for instance, makes the position about the Dagomba as:

“The name Dagbamb, which has been anglicized as Dagom,b a belongs to the commoners. The rulers adopted that name and many aspects of the life of the people they conquered, and established their sovereignty over them. It was also the language of the conquered people that the rulers adopted. Indeed, the culture and customs of the Dagomba, which did not militate against the sovereignty of the conquerors,s were readily adopted by them. Customs that conflicted with their aims and aspirations were modified if not for the whole of the kingdom, om but at least for their line of descent."

"They discarded the existing matrilineal system of inheritance except in some aspects where it was beneficial to them. They intermarried with the local population and placed all the offspring of their marriage in the ruling class. Except in the political and, to some extent, the social hierarchies, the fusion of the two groups is complete. They speak the same language; they are engaged in similar work; they are governed by the same customs and traditions; in physical appearances, there are no distinguishing features; in short, they are all one.”

Motariga (2024:xi) similarly observes that:

“…the people who occupied the territories we occupy today before Naa Gbewaa arrived in Pusiga were the aboriginal Dagbamba. ... the invaders who founded Dagbaŋ, Nanuŋ, Ŋmamprugu and Mossi states were not Dagbamba or Nanumba or Ŋmamprusi or Mossi. … the indigenous people whom the invaders conquered were very peaceful people who resented wars so much that the pre-Gbewaa Dagbamba territories witnessed no shedding of blood. These early Dagbamba,. . ..held certain beliefs about the human being that it was sacrilegious for the blood of a fellow human being to touch the soil.”

These positions, backed by contemporary objective research, point to the Mole-Dagomba being indigenous people rather than settlers.

Although some non-Dagomba historians in universities and colleges may prefer to refer to these contemporary findings as revisionist history, the realities on the ground are so daunting that they cannot be swept under the carpet.

It appears that this crop of historians interprets revisionism as negationism or denialism, although the facts appeal to them for a new paradigm based on facts accepted by the people themselves.

There must certainly be an accommodating room for legitimate revisionism based on facts, especially as told by the people themselves.

Early non-native writers appear to have relied on Arabic or Hausa manuscripts instead of Mole-Dagomba griots, chiefs, elders, and Tindaamba.

Their own accounts even appear to have failed to clearly define the Mole-Dagomba as either invading settlers or aboriginal people.

Terms such as Dagban sabelese by Rattray (1932), aboriginal Dagomba by Tamakloe (1931), Black Dagomba by Staniland (1975), among others, have been used to describe the early people whom the Gbewaa group conquered and established the Gbewaa centralized states.

These terms are not mere historical facts that the MMole-Dagomba, ba such as Nanumba, Dagomba in Dagbon, and Mamprusi, are originally autochthones who peopled the Voltaic basin before the Gbewa group arrived c.1300.

Toha Zei, the Red Hunter Legend: an Interpolation by Hausa Scholars:

The curriculum and most history textbooks present an opinionated account that suggests that all the Mole-Dagomba, whether ruling or non-ruling clan, originated from the east of Lake Chad, from where they moved to Zamfara in Northern Nigeria, to Mali, and finally to Pusiga.

In “History for Basic 4, 5, & 6” published by SMART PUBLICATIONS, the author, based on the curriculum by NACCA, notes on the history of Mamprusi, Dagomba, Nanumb, and Mossi this way:

“They came from a place called East of Lake Ch, a d led by Toha Zei, meaning the RED HUNTER. They first settled at ZAMFARA IN NIGERIA and later moved to their present place in Bawku. They came and met some people, including Sisala, Chamba, Konkomba, Tampulinsi, etc.”

On page 50 of the History Teacher Manual for Year 1, we are told that “The Mole-Dagbani migrated from east of Lake Chad. They moved to Zamfara in northern Nigeria and continued to Melle (Mali). They then moved to Pusiga. They founded kingdoms like Gambaga, Mamprugu, Dagomba, and Nanumba in Ghana.”

While the latter three are existing kingdoms in Ghana, the former, that is “Gambaga”, is not a kingdom but a town within Mamprugu.

As said earlier, the early writers of the Mole-Dagomba history in the early 1900s appear to have depended on the scholarships of the then Chief Imam of Yendi, Mallam Halidu bin Ya’qub, whose Arabic manuscripts were accessioned at the Institute of African Studies, University of Ghana, Legon, the digital archive (African e-Journals Project) of Michigan State University Library, among other institutions.

Imam Halidu bin Ya’qub, in his “Ta’rikh Dagbanbawi”, accessioned at the Institute of African Studies (UG) as IASAR/241, and Ta’rikh Dagbanba accessioned as IASAR/250 at the Institute of African Studies (UG), appear to have first chronicled the Red Hunter legend from the Chad territory. His manuscripts, 3 folios and 2 folios respectively, failed to show the origin of that tradition.

These folios compiled between 1915 and 1935 spread to such a magnitude that it is not only popular in written accounts but also among oral non-drummer narrators who have read about the topic on Google and in history books.

Harold A Blair, in 1930, for instance, made direct contact with Imam Halidu bin Ya’qub.

The Hausa scholar not only gave him his scripts but was a court interpreter during the 1930 Conference of the Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs.

He assisted the colonial officer in compiling the history of the Dagomba attached to the report of the Conference of the Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs.

Blair (1930:36), in translating the scripts provided by Mallam Halid,u notes about his assistance as:

“I am indebted to Mallam Halidu of Yendi for the framework and many of the stories in the outline which I give below. He had explained it all to me on very many occasions, in Dagomba (which he has spoken from childhood), which he has been able to do by reason of not fearing the Tabu upon it, himself being a very cultured Hausa."

"It was told to him in his youth by the chief drummer of Yendi, since whose death he has been at liberty to repeat it. Some of the details of the history I have also learned from having on several occasions listened to the drum history myself, which I could only partially understand, since it is recited in traditional and classical Dagomba, and is often completely drowned by the drumming.”

A critical analysis of the preamble used in APPENDIX III by Blair (1930) to introduce the History of the Dagomba reveals that the Toha Zei legend and many other narratives must have been interpolated or misrepresented.

Though Imam Halidu is quoted above by Blair to have said he learnt that Toha Zei story from a certain unnamed deceased Chief Drummer, he (Blair) seems to have shown no interest in corroborating the story of the hen Chief Drummer (Namo-Naa Mahama).

Which specific Chief drummer can we then credit it to, since “It was told to him in his youth by the chief drummer of Yendi, since whose death he has been at liberty to repeat it?"

What was his age then, and what exact period is being referred to as “…his youth?"

We hold the belief that drummers must continue to know this Toha Zei legend in the narrative about the origin of the Kings, and that his origin must be the Chad or Bornu territory.

What is also obvious is that the business of the Conference of the Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs was to codify rulesabouto chieftaincy (Nam) as well as land boundaries of the kingdom. Although there was also an interest in the history of the Dagomba, it became a latter business after the conference of the Chiefs.

The historical account, attached as APPENDIX III, is therefore credited to Blair and Mallam Halidu with references to other early scholars.

Our research reveals that drummers generally distance themselves from the Toha Zei narrative. The general trend is that the story was never found in the drum chant and must therefore be treated as an interpolation.

We give a practical case where a teacher was rebuked by a chief drummer below:

“Mohammed Abdullai (a.k.a Okoro) was a teacher at Gusheigu Senior High School before his transfer to Dagbon State Senior High Technical School. While at Gusheigu Senior High School, he one day taught the Toha Zei legend to his students. One of the students happened to be the son of the chief drummer of Gusheigu (Darkuga). Darkuga’s son at home was discussing what he learnt from school that day, and Darkuga overheard him and paid attention to their discussion."

"He asked his son to invite his teacher for a discussion. When Mohammed Abdullai got to him, he was shocked to learn that the story was only found in history textbooks, which he used to teach his students. Darkuga remarked about how they were told by their grandfathers about a generation with doctored and interpolated written accounts because the Dagomba history was now being written down. He told Mohammed Abdullai to discard that Toha Zei story and ask the drummers to give hima proper history of the Dagomba chiefs.”

Motariga (2024:47), based on an interview with Alhaji Alhassan Sulemana Iddrisu, observes the following about the popular Toha Zei story:

"As for Tᴐha Ʒei, there are so many narrations about him. I have heard some narrators say he was a hunter who rescued some people from a bush animalthat seized their source of water. I have seen that to be a general history of the West African belt. It is a general epic repeated across the belt of West Africa. It is a myth. It is not true. It is a lie.”

In the early 1970s and 1980s, Prof John Miller Chernoff conducted primary fieldwork and research on Dagbon drumming and history.

He interviewed titled drummers such as Namo-Naa Issahaku, Nanton Lun-Naa Iddrisu, Palo-Naa Issah, Nyolugu Lun-Naa Issahaku Abdulai, Loganbalibu Abukari Neena, Sakpegu Lun-Naa Issah Karim, Lunzoo Naa Abukari, Machendi Abdulai Alidu, Nanton Sampaha Naa Issahaku Iddrisu, Sang Sampaha Naa, Kumbungu Lun-Naa, among others.

Out of the many titled drummers Prof Chernoff interviewed, it appeared that it was only Palo-Naa Issah who narrated about the legend. Chernoff, however, observed that:

“And as Palo-Naa is old, [future Saakpuli Lun-Naa] Issa Tailor also helped Palo-Naa. This Issa is the son of Savelugu Yiwɔɣu-Naa Karimu, and he is the leader of the young men's drummers in Savelugu.”

There is a tendency for the written narrative about Toha Zei to have crept into the narrative credited to Palo Na Issah, since he was old and assisted by Issah Tailor.

Prof Chernoff got perplexed at the marked differences between what is written about Dagomba history and what the oral narratives say.

With reference to the Conference of Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs, and the marked differences, Prof Chernoff was told the following by his co-author, Alhaji Ibrahim Lunga:

“Even the white people who have come here to do the same work you are doing, we know all of them. The one you have been talking about, we know him as YakubuZeei, the Red Yakubu [Harold A. Blair]. During the time he was in Dagbon, it was the time of Naa Abudu, and we were very young boys, but my brother Mumuni was a bit grown. …But even the time when Yakubuʒee was in Dagbon, Yakubuʒee was not the only one who searched for these talks. Many people have written down things about Dagbon. And those who have written about Dagbon, I am not saying that they are only standing on the work of Yakubuʒee."

"But truly, if you look at the books that are written for children to be reading in school, and what they have written about the starting of Dagbon, we drummers take it that the talks are mixed. …According to what you have read to me from the books about Dagbon, some of it is true, but not all of it is inside our drumming talks. Many of those books are following one another's talks, and the talks are now standing like that. As for what Yakubuʒee learned, I don't think he was the only one who was writing about these talks. The government published the book that Yakubuʒee wrote after the conference the British had with the chiefs of Dagbon [1930] during the time of Naa Abudu, and so that one was there a long time ago."

"They didn't have these talks of Tɔhiʒee and the others at that conference. What you have read and told me is that they Naa Zanjina's Samban' luŋa. It was Yakubuʒee who later added the stories to his book. And according to what Yakubuʒee wrote to you, Yakubuʒee also said he had a lot of respect for one of the clerks from the South [Emmanual F. Tamakloe] who had long stayed in Dagbon and who also learned and wrote about these talks. And so to me, there is some confusion about his talks. Truly, I think that Yakubuʒee talked to different people about these talks."

"When you wrote to Yakubuʒee, he told you about his friendship with Gukpe-Naa Iddi when Gukpe-Naa was Mba Duɣu. And Namo-Naa Issahaku also told you that Gukpe-Naa was involved in the talks his father gave Yakubuʒee. And so that one is there. But Yakubuʒee also told you that he had many of his stories from a Hausa maalam in Yendi, Maalam Halidu, and Yakubuʒee said he was standing on that maalam's talks. I was thinking that it was Namo-Naa Mahama who taught him everything, but he mentioned a maalam's name inside. As for us, we only knew that the way he was at Yendi, it was Namɔɣu who would tell him."

"As for a maalam, you only ask him about God's talks, but you don't ask a maalam about chieftaincy. Yakubuʒee said the maalam learned the old talks from a Namo-Naa who was dead, but he did not say which Namo-Naa. If this maalam learned something about it and taught Yakubuʒee, and Namo-Naa also taught him, did he hold Namo-Naa's talk or the maalam's talk? Can you know this? And again, Yakubuʒee told you he consulted with the clerk from the South. And Yakubuʒee said he also had talks with some of his Dagbamba friends and stories from hunters."

"Any time he was hunting or on a trek, he said he talked with hunters and with many people. He wrote and told you all that. And so as for Yakubuʒee, it was not only drummers he was moving with. He was a hunter, and he was moving with the hunters and the typical Dagbamba. And so, according to what you have read to me from what Yakubuʒee wrote, I believe that Yakubuʒee took some of these hunters' stories and mixed them. I am not arguing with Yakubuʒee, but I don't know the way he joined all these talks together in his book."

"As for him, he didn't come to sit with drummers to learn drumming. The way you have followed drummers and asked and got to know about custom, he didn't get inside like that. And so you have to be looking at what you are finding out. On the part of the talks I am talking to you, I am only talking on the part of our Dagbamba drumming, because there are some things from the books you have said that are not inside our drumming.”

(Ref to Chapter II-1: The Forbidden Talks of Drumming, page 14-19).

On page 36 of the Conference of Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs, Harold A. Blair translates the Toha Zei legend by Imam Khalidu ibn Ya’qub as:

“Once upon a time. There came from the country of Zamfara, which he had been driven into, the kingdom of Melle. This man was light in colour, and came bearing a bow and arrows; and before long, he gave such evidence of his hunting prowess that he was named by the Mande people 'Toha-jie', the Red Hunter.”

When we analyse the introduction of the story translated from Tarikh Dagbanbawi, we ask if Imam Halidu bin Ya’qub did not copy a popular Hausa mythology about the ayajjida legend of Kusugu Well or that of the Sundiata legend, both told in the Daura tradition of the Hausaland.

Both the characters and the events so match perfectly that one is inclined to believe this source. You may refer to earlier articles by Abubakari Is-haq Motariga on this:

Episode 1: Toha Zei, The Red Hunter, Is A Myth But Naa Gbewaa Is A Historical Reality

and

Episode 2: Toha Zei, The Red Hunter, Is A Myth But Naa Gbewaa Is A Historical Reality

A question one may ask again is whether this legend could have been named by the Mande people since theMandea language appears to have no words such as “TOHA” for “Hunter” or “JIE” or “ZEI” for RED.

We can therefore summarize that TOHA ZEI or TOHA-JIE are rather Dagbani words for RED HUNTER.

This questions the truth about the legend arriving in Melle (Mali) from Chad or Borno.

While other questions about the primary source are asked, the narrative appears morelike an interpolated mythology than a reality in the Dagomba history.

While this is the case, almost all books on Dagomba history seem to have utilized the primary sources such as IASAR/241, IASAR/250, or the Conference of Dagbamba (Dagomba) Chiefs, or scholarships by colonial anthropologists and officers who had direct or indirect contact with these Hausa scholars.

These accounts became the ‘authorised history’ because they appear as Dagomba-back source, although both the primary and secondary authors were non-natives.

Both the Hausa scholars and the colonial officers had some varying challenges with language and understanding of the complex culture and history of a people stratified into clans.

This Conference, apart from incorporating other scholars’ works, became an 'authorised' document that a lot of historians made copious references to.

It became so because the assumption has been that the chiefs, drummers,s and people of the Dagbamba state participated in the conference and gave the account.

This spread the ‘authorised history’ to such a magnitude that it became the foundation for formal history lessons.

From the middle to late 1900s, Toha Zei lessons became the ‘true’ account of the Dagomba ancestor among non-drummer narrators.

Aside from these weaknesses, it is difficult to understand how a whole ethnic group like the Mole-Dagbani people migrated from Chad through Zamfara, Mali, Burkina Faso, into Pusiga circa 1300 without any linguistic or cultural remnants or traces within the source region.

Professor Adams Bodomo and others seem to have linguistic research works that define the Central Mabia group. Mole-Dagbani people, referred to asthe Central Mabia group by Bodomo et al (2020:10-11) is a people within the Voltaic basin speaking languages such as Kusaal, Dagaare, Dagbane, Buli, Gurunε (Frafra/Farefare).

These languages, including Kparili, Hanga, Kamara, Talni, etc., are so close that one can talk of their linguistic and cultural similarity with Dagbani, Mampurli, Wala, and Moore.

If the Mole-Dagbani group,s such as Dagomba, Mamprusi, Wala, and Mo,ssi were from Chad or Nigeria, and the narrative finds it difficult to situate some of these linguistic groups within the Gbewa descendants, then the theory needs a little bit more interrogation than swallowing it hook, line,ne and sinker.

A popular narrative among drummers about Nyennega (also known as Yentori by some narrators), being a daughter of Naa Gbewaa, says she moved in the north-east direction to marry a Mossi hunter by the name Riale to birth Wedraogo.

This narrative suggests that Mossis predated Nyennega and Naa Gbewaa.

The name RIALE means "not despising anything" in Moore, and the name WEDRAOGO means "stallion" inthe Mooree language.

The population of Mossis in Ghana, Burkina, and Togo (presently about 11 million) also suggests that there were already Mossi clans such as Tengabiisi or Nyonyosi.

If this is the case, and the Moore language is intelligible with Dagbani and the other Mole-Dagbani languages, it suggests that the Mossi, just like the other Mole-Dagomba people, may have lived within the Voltaic territory rather than the popular theory, which says all Mossis descend from Naa Gbewaa, and, for that matter, Toha Zei.

Research has shown that there is a general attitamonge of drummers to evade such topics/subjects.

A researcher is either told by these drummers that they have heard about it narrated by people other than drummers, but that it is difficult to speak about it, or they simply go mute when asked.

Although Nimbu is mentioned as the father or grandfather of Naa Gbewaa, drummers would generally regard any talk beyond Naa Gbewaa as stories.

Even though a few elderly drummers appear to have mentioned Nimbu in drum chant, they appear to have no knowledge of drum chant about Toha Zei.

With this controversy, such a drummer feels safe to start the history of the rulers from Naa Gbewa, his maternal and paternal relations, and his founding of the Gbewaa States.

The general Mole-Dagomba seem to also feel safe to discuss Naa Gbewa from the territories of Bingo (Bieng) in the Fada N’groumah enclaves as the origin of the ruling clan.

If a young drummer were to incorporate such talks as Toha Zei, he would have read or heard about it, though his position is unchanged about Grumahland as the place of the exploits of such a legend.

The Chad story is therefore rejected byelderlyy drummers.

Drummers are referred to for the Red Hunter story because they are a distinguished clan of eulogists from the earliest times recognised to keep appreciable traditions about the Gbewa ruling clan.

The other clans among the Dagomba, such as Tindaamba, blacksmiths (Machelinima), Kpariba, Gbandari, Langori, Goonjinima, Laabansi, etc. Maynot be the best oral historians to source accounts of the rulers from.

Similarly, it was not a good practice to have Hausas from Nigeria or other areas around the Chad being the primary sources of the history of either the ruling clan or any of the other clans among the Mole-Dagomba people.

The population of these groups in Ghana also seems to deny the settler theory.

According to the Ghana Population Census General Report, the Akan group is about 45.7% of Ghana’s population.

Followed by the Mole-Dagomba ethnic group constitutes about 18.5% of Ghana’s population, followed by the Ewe, representing about 12.8% of the population of Ghana.

The Gurma group (which encompasses the Komba, Chamba, Bemoba, and Bassari, among others) is about 6.4% of Ghana’s population.

The major ethnic groups (Akan, Mole-Dagbani, and Ewe) constitute more than three-quarters (that is,s 77%) of the population of Ghana.

It is difficult to understand the magic at plawith the h population growth of the Mole-Dagomba compared with the indigenous Gruma group if the Mole-Dagomba actually migrated from Chad as recently as circa 1300.

The indigenous Guan group also stands at 3.2% compared with the Mole-Dagomba supposed to have migrated from Chad (Source: Page 36 of 2021 Ghana PHC General Report).

This is difficult to explain to students who are curious to know the truth rather than what the curriculum recommends to be taught in schools.

In summary, we wish to respectively appeal that the Red Hunter narrative be expunged from the Mole-Dagomba history.

We also wish that Naa Gbewaa becomes the legend from whom the Gbewaa kingdoms sprung. This is because both drummers and contemporary historians unite on the historical reality of Naa Gbewaa but disagree that a certain Red Hunter is the ancestor of the Mole-Dagomba.

Again, both drummers and contemporary historians disagree that the Mole-Dagomba migrated from Chad to Ghana Circa 1300.

The ancestors of the Mole-Dagomba occupied the Savanna zone thousands of years before 1300. Our research also suggests no pre-occupation of their territories before their ancestors arrived.

They are therefore indigenous to the Savanna zone of Northern Ghana.

The Dagombawere were invaded by the Gonja under Ndewura Jakpa:

It is a very common practice for history teachers to teach students about the Gonja wars with the Dagombas.

This is because the curriculum guides the teacher to teach and assess their students to appreciate these historical events, supposedly involving the Gonja and the Dagomba.

On page 55 of the History Teacher Manual for SHS 1, we are told that “Between 1622 and 1666, the Gonja, led by their new king called Ndewura Jakpa Lanta, invaded Dagomba.”

In History of Ghana for Basic Schools, written by Francis Benjamin Appiah and Henry David Appiah, the authors add that Ndewura Jakpa Lanta “…even fought the Dagomba people, another group nearby, and won the battle, which caused the Dagomba to move their capital to Yendi, which is still their capital today. The Gonja people ruled over the Dagomba people for several years. After a while, the Dagomba gained freedom from the Gonja with the help of a leader called Asigeli.”

In the Conference of the Dagbamba Chiefs, for instance, Blair (1930:47) notes that “…Yenzo died, and Dariziogu reigned, and he was killed fighting against the Gonja at Palari.”

In page 50, Blair further opines that: “... Bungumaga, also known as Asigeli, made great war against the Gonja, and drove them from the parts around Tamale as far as Daboya. And at the death of Zangina at Agbandi, near Sabari, he became Na. It was Na-Bangumanga who killed the great Chief of all the Gonjas, named Golong-Golong-Kumpatia, at Kirizang, near Tamale.”

Nehemia Levtzion, in his 'Muslims and Chiefs in West Africa: A Study of Islam in the Middle Volta Basin in the Pre-Colonial Period’, similarly opines that:

"After expelling the Dagomba from Daboya, the Gonja crossed the White Volta River and defeated the Dagomba not far from their capital [Yendi Dabari]. In this battle, it is said, the Dagomba chief, Na Dariziegu, was killed. His successor, Na Luro, had a victory over the Gonja, but his son and successor, Na Tutugri, faced a more vigorous Gonja attack. He abandoned the old capital, Yendi-Dabari, and moved to the east, where he conquered part of the Konkomba country."

While it is difficult to place the blame on the curriculum unit of the Ghana Education Service, it is prudent to call for a legitimate review of these narratives.

One apparent observation made so far is that, the early documented sources such as Blair (1930:10), Tamakloe (1931: 18, 27, 30-1), Cardinal (1931:262), Rattray (1932: 564), Gill (n.d.:5) and latter-day historians such as Manoukian (1952:14-15), Fage (1959:25), Katanga (n.d: 7), Jones (1962:18-19), Shinnie and Ozanne (1962:88), Wilks (1971:357,362), Ferguson (1973:192), Staniland (1975:5-6), Case (1989:116), etc all appear to have utilised directly or indirectly the Hausa manuscripts discussed earlier.

The Hausa manuscripts discussed earlier seem to have influenced directly or indirectly these past historical written narratives about Gonja wars with Dagombas.

Apart from Mallam Halidu ibn Ya’qub, there were other Hausa scholars such as Mallam Imoro ibn Abubakari (then Chief Imam of Kete Krachi), Alhajj Muhammad bin Al-Mustafa, Mallam Umar Kunandi, Mallam Alhassan Kpabia, Mallam Muhammad Kamaghata,y among others.

These scholars seem to have shared notes with one another, or in some cases depended on sources such as Ta’rikh al-Südān (“History of the Sudan”) and Ta’rikh al-Fatash (“History of the Searcher”) written by Timbuktu scholars.

It istheses bases that these scholars got some of these events wrong (Refer to Wilks, 1986:52).

Profoundly, Kitaabu Gbunja, that is “Chronicles from Gonja”, appears to be the most culpable original document which seems to have misled early scholars alongthe Gonja-Dagomba war trajectory.

According to Wilks (1986:xi), publication of the Gonja texts was first projected by him in 1962.

Thomas Hodgkin, then Director of the Institute of African Studies in Ghana, endorsed the idea with enthusiasm and received so much support from Alhaj Uthman b. Ishaq Boyo, then Research Assistant.

In 1965, Wilks and Levzion cooperated in preparing the corpus of Gonja works for publication.

The efforts of these scholars, including Haight, who later joined the research in 1981, were never without their criticisms. Wilks observed that the Gonja scripts, their compilation, and analysis were not intended tobe thee history of the Gonja but essentially a resource.

The discrepancies in authorship and the questionable events and legends render the Kitaabu Gbunja a highly questionable source.

Consider, for instance, line 28 of IASAR/1 accessioned at the Institute of Africa Studies, University of Ghana, where it is narrated that:

“After the death of Jakpa, the Dagbunba and the Gbunja fought with each other, and the Gbunja captured Garba, the Amir of Yendi. The Dagbunba asked them [to release him] and said to them, 'We shall give you whatever you wish.' Yet the Kitaabu Gbunja refused and killed him. They cut off his head, wrapped it in a red skin, and sewed it up. It is still in their hands.”

This story and many others raise a lot of doubts about the authenticity of the “Chronicles of Gonj,awhichat contemporary Dagomba historians are beginning to cast a slur upon the narratives. Interestingly, research among contemporary Gonja historiaappearsear to also express the weaknesses of the "Chronicles from Gonja" similarly.

The informed Gonja appears to have no practical knowledge of any war between the Dagomba and the Gonja.

This raises serious doubts with both the Kitaabu Gbunja and the historical works based on Hausa or Arabic scripts.

Kodua Alhassan, son of Kagbapewura Kodua Matue-amu Jewu II, in his Highlights on Distortions on West African History, observed the following about the Dagomba war with Gonjas:

Tampuri (2016:39) speculates that “Ndewura Jakpa defeated Dagombas and killed their king, Ya-Na Dariziogo. It is, however, doubtful if Ndewura Jakpa had encountered any Yana in person at Burugu (now Daboya), because Burugu was said to be only a vassal of the Dagomba King when Ndewura Jakpa subjugated the place. Ndewura Jakpa was no more alive at the time Wasipe capital was relocated from Old Wasipe in the present Bole traditional area to defend Buruguwuriche against invasive forces at Burugu (now Daboya).”

In an interview with the Gonja author, Abubakari Is-haq Motariga, in 2025, he is quizzed for more clarification on the Gonja wars with the Dagombas. His remarks are as follows:

“There are many stories I have heard, and even some of the stories we have heard about encounters with Ndewura Jakpa are now being taken to be Gonja wars with Dagombas. In fact, those stories are narrated variously by different people. Kadichara Tina was a powerful Tampulima leader aroundthe Daboya and Mankarigu area. There are a whole lot of myths. Some myths say Ndewura Jakpa shot him with a spear, and he was divided into two. The spear became stationary within him until he eventually had to rejoin, and the spear wounded him, and he died. I am hearing it was one Kalogsi Dajia who got separated like that. This Kalogsi Dajia doesn't even sound like a Gonja name. We do not have a trace of his history. There are no descendants of his."

"In fact, no one knows this. It is only recently that we are hearing that there was one Kalogsi Dajia, and he was Ndewura Jakpa. Some writers are even saying Ndewura Jakpa died fighting with the Asantes. All those stories can't be ascertained. In fact, we don't know of Kalogsi Dajia. We don't know of Golon Golon Kumpatia. Kalogsi Dajia could be a Tampulima leader. The Golon Golon Kumpatia could be one of the aboriginal people, but certainly not a Gonja. Ndewura Jakpa did not encounter any Ya-Naa. Even the estimated reign lengths make the stories doubtful. The periods indicated for Naa Dariziogu and Naa Luro make them doubtful until we find moreevidences. Ndewura Jakpa had not arrived to found Gonjaland. It was close to 200 years later that Ndewura Jakpa appeared here.”

The answer Kodua Alhassan gave seems not different from the answers other a lot of Gonjas give when asked about Gonja wars with Dagombas.

This calls forclarifications on some versions of the Dagomba drum chant.

It is important, first, to distinguish between the local Dagbani names such as ‘Kolinsis’, ‘Kalogsis’, and ‘Zabagsi’.

In the Dagomba drum chant about Naa Dariziogu, who reigned between 1543 and 1554. Drummers narrate about how the Dagomba king made a journey to visit his maternal relations in the Daboya area.

In his journey, Naa Dariziogu was accordingly met by a warrior named Kalogsi Daji, whose hands the king is said to have died.

The people of Kalogsi Dajia have been referred to variously in drum chants as Kalogsis or Kolinsis.

In revenge, Naa Dariziogu’s successor, Naa LuroLuro (1554 to 1570), encountered the Kalogsis or Kolinsis at the same Daboya area where Kalogsi Dajia and a good number of his warriors, according to the drum chants, were killed.

With a few of them standing by a tree in an apparent frightful mood, Naa Luro referred to them as 'Zabagsis'.

By this time, Ndewura Jakpa had not arrived to found the Gonjaland, let alone to encounter Naa Dariziogu or Naa Luro.

According to almost all sources on Gonja history, Sumaila Ndewura Jakpa was a Mande legend who founded Gonjaland in the early 17th century.

According to Kodua (2020:12), “The term ‘Kagbanya’ (plural being Ngbanya) is a Guan expression for bravery, especially in the power of land confiscation. The language is called Ngbanya, used in the singular sense; Ngbanya is a language. This name, Ngbanya, was adopted by the Mande band that founded their kingdom in the present Savanna Region of modern Ghana, under the auspices of the legendary Sumaila Ndewura Jakpa in the 17th century. The term ‘Ngbanya’ was subsequently corrupted to ‘Gonja’. In fact, the present dialect of the Ngbanya people is neither Malinke, Bambara, Juula/Dyula/Wangara nor Soninke/Mandingo, but that of autochthonous Guan, believed to have inhabited modern Ghana far earlier than the arrival of most groups in the country.”

From the above, it is apparent that ‘Kolinsis’, ‘Kalogsis’ or ‘Zabagsi’, likely refers to Tampulimas around Daboya, which was a vassal of Dagbon.

While the local Dagbani name “Zabagsi” in modern times loosely refers to all people within the Yagbon kingdom, Gonjas or Ngbanya appear different from the Kalogsi people, le Naa Luro referred to as Zabagsi. Early written scholars could not incorporate this dichotomy in their legion of chronicles aboGonja'snja wars with the Dagombas.

Between the 1500s and 1700s is about two centuries.

While Gonja wars with Dagomba have been repeated copiously in many written archives, the archives seem to agree on this estimated reign length between Naa Dariziogu and Naa Luro on one hand and Ndewura Jakpa on the other hand.

It is therefore doubtful from the documented sources that Naa Luro or Naa Dariziogu encountered Ndewura Jakpa between 1622 and 1666.

We are not oblivious of drum chants about Naa Zangina (1648 to 1677).

The story extols the successful deeds of Naa Andani Sigli against a mercenary by the local Dagbani name “Golon Golon Kumpatia”.

The chant discusses this warrior who was unimpeded by Dagomba chieftains until he reached Sang Chirizang, where Andani Sigli encountered and killed him.

This warrior was not a Gonja but a Wangara by the name Mohammed Abdul-Waris Kumpatic. He was so tall that the Dagomba drummers used his height to describe him with words such as “Golon Golon”.

Kumpatic became Kumpatia in the drum chants, and the narrative continues.

As recounted earlier, Gonjas appear to know no warrior by the name Kumpatic or Kumpatia.

In summary, our research reveals no such event as the expulsion of the Dagomba from their old capital [Yendi Dabari] by the Gonja, neither was there any vigorous Gonja attacks that led to the abandonment of the old capital or the establishment of the new capital in Yendi.

We also found no historical movement of the Dagomba in droves from Diyali, Tolon, Kumbungu, Tamale, or any of the western settlements towards the east (Yendi) as a result of Gonja pressure.

Since contemporary Gonja and Dagomba historians are befuddled by the multiplicity of accounts of the Gonja war with Dagomba, we formally wish to appeal that such accounts be expunged from the NaCCA history curriculum.

This would better shape the Gonja and the Dagomba in an enhanced interactive relationship rather than the current learner outcomes.

It will also enhance the truthfulness and objectivity that the history teacher must be guided by in making history a relevant subject.

The Dagomba were conquered by the Asante Under Opoku Ware:

Similar to the points above is Asante's hegemonic history of invasion of Dagomba and Dagbon.

In many history books approved by the Ghana Education Service, the narrative follows the same pattern that the Asantes invaded and conquered Dagbon, making it a vassal state of the Asante.

Some authors even make the point that Naa Gariba was captured during the invasion by the Asantes. Most historians,s based on Tamakloe (1931) and Blair (193,0), assume that these written sources are backed by Dagomba drum chants; he,nce they are authenticated.

Tamakloe (1930:33) observes about the capturing of Naa Gariba by Asantes under Opoku Ware as:

“Strong forces had been sent into Yendi with instructions either to deport Gar'ba or fine him 2,000 slaves, but if the Dagbambas showed any resistance, the country must be taken by force of arms. The Ashantis arrived in Yendi without opposition and arrested Na Gar'ba with the firm determination to take him to Kumasi. But owing to the intercession of the chiefs and the princes, 2,000 slaves were demanded by the Ashantis for his ransom. As the 2,000 slaves could not readily be paid, the Dagbambas agreed to pay 200 slaves annually to Ashantis posted in Yendi for the special purpose of receiving them for dispatch to Kumasi.”

Blair (1930:51) in the Conference of the Dagbamba Chiefs similarlyopinedd that:
“…when the King of the Kambonsi (Ashanti) came and fought against Na-Gariba, neither Savelugu nor Karaga, nor Tolon, nor Kumbungu answered Gariba's call to arms. So he fought them with only his own soldiers and those of the nearby Chiefs, and was conquered. And the Kambonsi captured Gariba, who had to be redeemed with a ransom of 1,000 slaves. From that time, a tribute of slaves was paid yearly to the King of Ashanti. But Ashanti always feared Dagbon, and treated the Dagomba as a powerful people, though tributary to their King (compare Dupuis p. 170, who even speaks of a town called Kikiwhary in the heart of Ashanti as having been destroyed by the Dagomba-p. 35).”

Contemporary research has proven that these narratives are mere speculations, storied by Hausa scholars such as Alhaj Muhammad B Al-Mustafa, Muhammad Kanakulay, etc. Apart from Kitaab Gbunja, there are also sources such as Qissat Salgha Ta’rikh Gbunja (Accounts of the campaigns of Jakpa, King of Gonja) by Alhajj Abdallah, who was under the Sultan of Alfay (Muhammad Kanakulay), Ta’rikh Dagbanbawi (History of the Kings of Dagomba) by Khalid b. Ya’qub, among others.

The current curriculum seems to refer the history teacher to Kitaab Gbunja as one common source of written archive about the Gonja, the Asant,e and the Mole-Dagomba.

On Kitaabu Gbunja (KG), Kodua Alhassan observes that:

“As stated earlier, the KG was clearly drawn from inter alia the MS/COP (Wilks et al, 1986:65, 68/,9) which was found among three bundles of manuscripts labeled “Manuscripts from Guinea” in the Royal Library of Copenhagen, Denmark.

Levtzion visited Copenhagen in 1964 in the name of going to search for Dagomba manuscripts, where the Conservator of the Royal Library, Dr O.K Nordstrand, supposedly examined the three bundles and reported that they belonged to the period c.1795 to c.1820 (Wilks et al, 1986:52).

Bundle III contained the annals of the Guinean Fulani caliphate and was brought to Salaga for manipulation and dissemination to various archives.

The manuscript (Copenhagen fragment) was coded MS/COP, and several versions were subsequently produced and rebranded as the Kitab Ghanja by faceless writers.

Wilks et al (1986:111) have confirmed an instance where a redactor of the MS/COP decided to substitute jaysh (army) for jihad (holy war – Manwura’s campaign against Kud) to deliberately obscure the obvious religious connotation of the term ‘jihad’.

Ivor Wilks collected and disseminated copious such manuscripts to the Melville Herskovits Africana section of Northwestern University library, and to some local elders.

A Hausa version onofamory Babatu, said to be authored by one Mallam Abu in 1914, was given to Dr J.F. Corson (in the Northern Territories of the Gold Coast), who eventually released it to the School of Oriental and African Studies, London (Hausa MS 980017; Wilks et al, 1986:29).

All these account for the widespreadoccurrence of such conjectural Arabic manuscripts and their derivatives in the literature.

Although we do know that many Wangara/Juula immigrants from neighboring Ivory Coast, Burkina Faso, and Mali are currently resident in modern Ghana.

Nonetheless, no discerning mind would ever fathom how the account of the Amr Adjadina (invasion of Segu by horsemen under the command of Umar and his brother Nab, who were sons of King Jigi Jara of Mande Kangaba) has been deviously transposed to and confounded with Bitu/Beetu and eventually the Bono region of modern Ghana.

It is clear that, for almost every article/book that concerns this conjectural Begho, the ultimate source would certainly be traced to Ivor Wilks/Wilks et al (see Wilks et al, 1986:49 and 50).”

A US-based ethnographer, Karl J Haas, in his paper titled “A View From the Periphery: A Re-Assessment of Asante-Dagbamba Relations in the 18th Century,” re-examined the historiography of the relationship between Ashanti and Dagbon in the mid- to late eighteenth century, specifically as it pertains to the reputed Ashanti invasions of Dagbon in 1744/45 and 1772.

He makes the following conclusions about the Asante-Dagomba invasion:

“After reviewing the available evidence, taken together with oral histories collected in Tamale, in the Northern Region of Ghana in 2007, 2013, and 2014, I suggest that claims of an invasion of Yendi in 1744/45 were based on spurious evidence and faulty analysis, and likely never happened. I also suggest that the events leading to the bolstered trade agreements between Asante and Dagbon in or around 1770—especially concerning the issue of whether slaves sent from Yendi to Kumasi constituted tribute, debt, or trade—have been obscured by numerous competing accounts. I contend that historical representations of this relationship have privileged an Asante perspective and that any attempt to definitively discern the nature of this relationship cannot be unproblematically separated from the subject positions of the various historical actors who lived through the events of the 18th century and the contemporary sources whose oral testimony informs our knowledge of the past.”

In Motariga (2024:150), we also deduce that “…oral and written sources about the purported invasion and capturing of Dagbaŋ by Asante are exaggerated and misrepresented facts of the relationship between Asantes and Dagbamba. This is especially so because one finds it difficult in the written sources to identify the battlefield where the supposed war was fought.”

In summary, almost all Dagombas, drummers, fiddlers, elders, chiefs, and historians reject outright claims of the Asante invasion of Dagbon.

Nowhere in history has the Dagomba and the Asante ever engaged in an act of war, nnorwas there ever an event of the capture of Naa Gariba by the Asantes.

There is absolutely no battlefield to support the claims except the written rhetoric populated by the scholars of Kitaab Gbunja and one other archive by the title “A Reliable Account of the Coast of Guinea (1760)”, being a memoir of Ludwig Ferdinand Rømer.

We therefore wish to appeal that such accounts be expunged to make history more relevant and objective.

Conclusion:

We have outlined above historical issues affecting the Mole-Dagomba true identity, with the understanding of the mandate of the NaCCA, under Act 2020 (Act 1023), having a mission to develop curriculum and assessment standards that ensure children in Ghana are lifelong learners with a heightened sense of national identity and global citizenship.

If the history of the Mole-Dagomba in the curriculum and the recommended textbooks do not provide proper accounts, we must conscientiously call for a review to reflect who we are.

This is to reduce the false labels and identities given to the Mole-Dagomba people as well as reduce, to the barest minimum, conflicts in Northern Ghana bordering on our doctored history. Under the circumstances, we formally seek a review of the distortions through scholarly engagement with recognized Mole-Dagomba custodians of oral and written history.

To appeal that books written by the people themselves are recommended sources oforthe history of the Mole-Dagomba.

Although none of the history books written so far can be 100% as accurate as the Mole-Dagomba past, those written by Mole-Dagomba scholars seem to be closer realities than the early accounts by our colonizers based on the scholarship of the Hausa Mallams named above.

In the meantime, we recommend some of the history books written by some Mole-Dagombas as followers:

1. Ibrahim Mahama Esq.: "History and Traditions of Dagbon", GILLBT Printing Press, Tamale, Published in 2004. Revised in 2024.

2. Fusheini Yakubu: “History of the Gbewaa States” Published by GILLBT Printing Press in Tamale in 2013. Revised in 2022.

3. Abubakari Is-haq Motariga: “The Untold History of the Dagbamba People” Published by Brilliant Edge Impressions in 2024.