If we now count together the years attributed to each reign, proceeding in a backward order, and beginning with the end of the year H. 1233, we obtain, in an inverse order, the following chronological dates for the more important periods of the history of Bórnu.

A.H.A.D.
Beginning of the reign of Ayúma3911000-1
Beginning of the reign of Humé, the first Moslim king4791086
Reign of Dúnama Díbalámi, the warlike and daring king who spoiled the talisman of Bórnu618-6581221-1259-60
Beginning of the reign of Ibrahím Nikálemi7071307
Beginning of the reign of Edrís ben Ibrahím7541353
End of the reign of Dáúd, who succumbed to the Bulála7891387
End of the reign of ʿOthmán ben Edrís7951392-3
The reign of ʿOmʿar, who abandoned his residence in Kánem altogether, ceding it to the Bulála796-7991393-1396
Beginning of the reign of ʿAlí Dúnamámi8771472
Beginning of the reign of Edrís Katarkamábi9111505
Beginning of the reign of Edrís Alawóma9801572
Beginning of the reign of Háj ʿOmár10361626-7
Beginning of the reign of ʿAli ben Háj ʿOmár10551645

Having obtained these dates, we have first to observe that to fill up the period from Ayúma to Dhu Yazan, the presumed ancestor of the Séfuwa, and even known as such to Abú ’l Fedá as well as to Makrízí, and whose age (as being that of a man who predicted the coming of the prophet) is fixed beyond all doubt, only six generations are left. This is the circumstance which I mentioned above as speaking greatly in favour of the authenticity of this chronicle and its genealogies, even with regard to the more remote times. For if it had not been necessary to preserve scrupulously a well-established line of succession, how easy it would have been to introduce a few more individuals in order to fill up this blank, as has been done in the other list (b), instead of admitting the palpable nonsense of attributing to the two oldest kings a reign of from two hundred and fifty to three hundred years. Even Séf and Ibrahím, the first two princes of the line, are, I think, quite historical persons, whose existence was so well established that a conscientious chronicler could not change anything in the number of years attributed to the length of their reigns.

Following, therefore, the hints given to us by the chronicle itself, we fix the foundation of the dynasty of the Séfuwa in Kánem about the middle of the third century after Mohammed, or a little before the year 900 of our era. We shall afterwards return to this circumstance.

Now we shall first see how triumphantly the authenticity of the chronicle is confirmed in every respect by the occasional remarks made by Makrízí and Ebn Batúta with regard to the history of Bórnu.

Unfortunately, the oldest date which Makrízí (on the authority, as it would seem, of Ebn Sʿaíd) mentioned with regard to Kánem, namely, an expedition made by its king into the fertile districts of Mábiná in the year H. 650, cannot be used as a sufficient test of the authenticity of the chronicle, as the historian does not mention the name of the king; but the deed itself harmonizes exceedingly well with the warlike and enterprising character of Dúnama Díbalámi, whose reign, according to our chronicle, falls between the years 618 and 658. Just the same is to be said of the fact mentioned by Ebn Khaldún, who, in his valuable history of the Berbers, which has been recently made accessible to all, relates the interesting fact that, among other valuable presents, a giraffe was sent by the King of Kánem (to whom even at that early date he gives the title of “master of Bórnu”) to Abú ʿAbdallah el Mostánser the king of Tunis, in the year of the Hejra 655. The same historian, in another passage of his work, referring to the year 656, mentions again the king of Kánem as having caused the death of a son of Kárakosh el Ghozzi el Modáfferi, the well-known adventurous chieftain who had tried to establish himself in Wadán.

But fortunately we have other data which afford us a very fair test. According to Makrízí, not long after the close of the seventh century of the Hejra (fi hedúd sennet sebʿa mayet), the king of Kánem was Háj Ibrahím; after him reigned his son, el Háj Edrís—the historian does not say expressly that he immediately succeeded his father; then Dáúd, the brother of Edrís, and another son of Ibrahím; then ʿOmár, the son of Dáúd’s elder brother Háj Edrís; and then ʿOthmán, the brother of the former, and another son of Edrís. Makrízí adds that this last-named king reigned shortly before A.H. 800; and then he states that the inhabitants of Kánem revolted against the successors of Ibrahím, and made themselves independent, but that Bórnu remained their kingdom.

All these dates given by Makrízí, as may be seen from the few most important events which I have extracted from the chronicle, are in most surprising harmony with the information conveyed in a dry and sterile but uncorrupted way by the latter. Notwithstanding the slight discrepancy in the order of succession of the later kings, whose reign was of very short duration, and whose relationship is rather perplexing, is it possible to find a harmony more complete than this, if we take into consideration the only way in which Makrízí could have obtained his information, that is to say, from merchants or pilgrims visiting Egypt on their way to Mekka?

We now come to Ebn Batúta; and we again find the same surprising harmony between the fact regarding Bórnu, as mentioned by him, and the dates of the chronicle. The famous and enterprising traveller of Tangiers, on his return-journey from his visit to Western Sudán, left the capital of Mélle or Máli (that is, Mungo Park’s Jára) the 22nd of Moharrem, 754, and, proceeding by way of Timbúktu or Túmbutu, and thence down the Ísa or Niger to Gágho or Gógo, and thence to Tekádda,[44] in speaking about the copper found in the mines near this town, relates that the bars made of it were exported to Góber and Rágha (or rather Ragháy), and also to Bórnu, and then adds the interesting fact that the name of the ruling king of the latter country was Edrís.