Brief History of Tabenken, Cameroon (Tang/Tangmbo): Origins, Migration and Traditional Governance

 Brief history of Tabenken

 

Tang or Tangmbo, now officially known as Tabenken but traditionally known in the native Limbum language as Tang and Tangmbo, is a historic Fondom in the Nkambe Central Sub-Division of Donga-Mantung Division, North West Region of Cameroon. It is one of the largest and most influential Fondoms in the Wimbum area, distinguished by both its population and territorial extent. Situated in a fertile central valley and bordered by several neighbouring villages, Tabenken has for centuries served as a centre of cultural integration, commerce and peaceful coexistence.

 

According to the oral traditions of Tangmbo, the earliest known inhabitants of the valley were the Winkor, the indigenous founders of the land, whose descendants are today known as the Boo-Nsoh family. Oral history maintains that these indigenous inhabitants established the first settlement at Bileleng, where they carved caves into the landscape for habitation and laid the foundations of permanent settlement in the valley. They later relocated to Kieku, which became the principal settlement of the Boo-Nsoh lineage. The Boo-Nsoh trace their ancestry to the founding patriarch MBIIEREHG, who is remembered as the pioneer who established the valley that would later become known as Tangmbo. From this lineage emerged two brothers, Ntoh and Mbep, regarded as the progenitors of the two principal Winkor houses. Ntoh settled near the forest known as Kop Mlee, while Mbep established himself at Njikor (Konkor), thereby shaping the earliest indigenous settlement pattern of the valley.

 

Oral historical accounts further maintain that the Winkor developed an organised social, spiritual and territorial system long before the arrival of later migrant communities. Their institutions included sacred shrines and regulatory societies such as Ngon, Ngang, Mndeng-to, Toh Fuh, Ntar and Ndapngong, which served religious, judicial and communal functions.

 

According to oral historical accounts, migration into the Tangmbo valley began in the early seventeenth century, with different communities arriving and settling at different periods. Rather than displacing the indigenous Winkor population, these migrant groups were received by the Boo-Nsoh and negotiated peaceful settlement within the valley. This gradual process of integration gave rise to a unified traditional polity while allowing each community to preserve its own identity and institutions. The arrival of the Roman Catholic Mission in 1913 further connected Tabenken to wider historical developments while allowing traditional governance to continue alongside Christianity.

 

Among the earliest migrant communities were the Boo Nkoh people, who migrated from Tallah and later united with the sub chiefdom of Mayong another migrant community to establish the Bindeh Sub-Chiefdom. They were followed by the Beenjong Sub-Chiefdom of Memnkwa, whose traditional history records that they migrated from Tamba, in present-day Taku village, under the leadership of their ancestor, Fai Ngah Sosah. Another early migrant community was the Biyabi, who trace their origins to Manteh in Ako Sub Division. According to their own oral tradition, the Beenjong of Memkwa arrived peacefully as the third major migrant group, explicitly acknowledging that the Winkor (Boo-Nsoh) were the original inhabitants of the valley and that other two migrant communities had settled before them but merged into one and so they became the second migrant group instead according to present day configuration. Later arrivals included the communities of Bintallah who came from Sah, Kudu from Mbot and Jah and from Luh.

Oral tradition also recounts that the royal and sub-royal families arrived later, bringing with them their own systems of governance and traditional institutions. The indigenous Boo-Nsoh welcomed these newcomers and granted them land for settlement. The royal family was first settled at Konkor, where they maintained their Nkoh, before later relocating to their present royal seat at Manji in Mulah. Likewise, the sub-royal family was granted land at Memnkwa. Over time, the indigenous institutions of the Mbiierehgy lineage and the governance systems introduced by the royal and sub-royal families gradually fused to create the traditional structure that governs Tangmbo today.

 

Robert Pool observes that there is no comprehensive published history of Tabenken and that reconstructing the history of the Grassfields is inherently difficult because oral traditions and linguistic evidence do not always coincide. He notes that many Grassfields societies developed through the gradual amalgamation of small settlements, successive migrations, alliances and communities seeking security—a pattern clearly reflected in the historical evolution of Tangmbo.

 

Oral tradition further maintains that the principal wards of Tabenken were originally independent settlements, each governed by its own hereditary Kibai (Sub-Chief). Over time these communities united under the authority of the Fon of Tabenken. The quarters surrounding the Tang Fon's palace and the central market became the nucleus of the Fondom, while additional settlements were established by successive waves of migration, including people seeking refuge from conflict or social upheaval.

Today, the Tang Fondom comprises six principal sub-chiefdoms: Bee-Ndih (Bindeh), led by His Highness Wifa Ndi Kwanjo; Bee-Njong (Binjong), led by His Highness Wifa Nga Sosah; Bee-Yabee (Biyabi), led by His Highness Wifa Nga Ndicho; Bee-Ntallah (Bintallah), led by His Highness Wifa Nga Burnya; Bee-Du (Kudu), led by His Highness Wifa Njillah Wemchu; and Bee-Jah (Mbijah), led by His Highness Wifa Njilah Mbeh.

Each sub-chiefdom is led by a hereditary Wifa/Kibai (Sub-Chief) and contributes to the governance, cultural preservation, conflict resolution, and development of the Fondom under the supreme traditional authority of the Fon, His Royal Majesty Taa NFOR NKWI TANG.

 

The history of Tangmbo therefore reflects not the story of a single founding lineage, but the evolution of an indigenous Winkor civilisation that welcomed successive migrant communities into the valley. Through peaceful settlement, negotiated coexistence and the gradual fusion of indigenous and migrant institutions, Tangmbo developed into one of the most culturally diverse, cohesive and enduring Fondoms of the Wimbum people.

Tfurndabi Tawong Cornelius

Descendant of MBIIEREHG, Founding Patriarch of the Winkor (Boo-Nsoh) Lineage

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

5 August 2026

Map: The Wimbum Area

NKAMBE COUNCIL CLEAN CITY (NCCC): THE PROMISE OF A UNITED WIMBUM PEOPLE

 

Throughout history, words have carried meanings greater than the moment when they were written. Some words only record what happened, but others become messages that guide future generations. When Jesus was crucified, a sign was placed above the cross saying, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.” It was written in Hebrew, Greek and Latin. In Latin, it became known as INRI — Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum. Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea, ordered these words to be written as the official charge against Jesus. Some religious leaders wanted him to change the wording because they believed it declared Jesus as King. But Pilate refused and said, “What I have written, I have written.”

A message written during a moment of conflict became, for millions of people across generations, a message of faith and meaning. It reminds us that words are powerful. Words written today can become the vision that guides tomorrow.

Nkambe Council Clean City (NCCC) is such a word.

Nkambe Council Clean City is more than a project to remove rubbish from our streets. It is a vision for a new generation. It is a call to clean our environment, renew our thinking, strengthen our relationships and rebuild our villages. A clean city is not only a place without dirt. It is a place where people remove the barriers that prevent cooperation, creativity and progress. The deepest dirt in a society is not always found on the ground. Sometimes it is found in ideas, divisions and systems that people continue to follow without asking whether they truly represent who they are.

For the Wimbum people, Nkambe Council Clean City is also a call to clean our understanding of our heritage. It means protecting what is truly ours, respecting our identity and distinguishing our original traditions from systems and ideas introduced during different periods of our history.

Every generation receives a story from those who came before them. Our ancestors gave us our identity, values, traditions and systems of leadership built on relationships, responsibility and belonging. History also brought change. During the colonial period, foreign administrative systems introduced new ways of organising communities. Some structures and classifications were developed to make colonial administration easier, and over time they became part of public thinking, even where they did not fully reflect the original relationships, responsibilities and identities that existed among Wimbum villages.

Among these were ideas such as clans and clan heads, which became widely used in administrative and public life. Whether useful for administration in another era or later adopted by some associations, such concepts should not automatically become the foundation of how the Wimbum people understand identity, leadership and relationships today. Our heritage is older, deeper and richer than any administrative system.

The traditional Wimbum understanding recognises every Fon as the father of his own people, with a distinct history, identity, authority and responsibility. Fathers may cooperate, support one another and pursue a shared future, but cooperation does not require one father to become the head of another. Where a traditional authority freely accepts a subordinate office, such as a Kibai, Fai or subchief, that is a different traditional relationship and should be understood on its own terms.

This historical process can be compared to the mixing of metals. When iron and carbon are combined, they produce steel. Steel becomes stronger because it benefits from the qualities of both elements, yet iron remains iron and carbon remains carbon. Their identities are not lost simply because they work together.

In the same way, some external ideas gradually became mixed with our traditional understanding. The responsibility of the Nkambe Clean City generation is not to reject history, cooperation or progress. It is to understand our history clearly, preserve the strength of our own foundation and welcome new ideas that strengthen our people without replacing our heritage. If our heritage is the iron, then every good idea we adopt should help forge a stronger future without changing who we are.

 Our responsibility today is not to reject history, but to understand it. Just as we clean our environment by removing what does not belong, we must also clean our cultural understanding by recognising our authentic heritage, learning from history and building our future on a foundation of truth, dignity and mutual respect.

An autonomous traditional authority does not lower his royal staff and crown to stand under another traditional authority simply because villages cooperate or are placed together under an administrative arrangement called clan. In the same way, a President of a nation does not lower his national flag, surrender his identity or place his country under another nation simply because nations work together.

Cooperation does not mean surrender. Unity does not mean becoming the same. Respect does not require one throne to claim authority over another.

The strength of Wimbum communities has always been found in relationships, responsibility and mutual respect. Our Limbum wisdom reminds us that identity comes from people, history and belonging.

 Rather than asking, “Which traditional authority stands above another?” let us ask the greater question:

 “What are we building together for the children and generations that will come after us?”

 The word has been written. The responsibility belongs to us.

 Nkambe Clean City is a call from our roots and a promise for our future. It calls us to clean our environment, renew our thinking, strengthen cooperation and create opportunities for our children.

 Let every village protect its identity.

Let every traditional authority maintain its honour.

Let every citizen become a builder of tomorrow.

The palace honours yesterday. The people build tomorrow.

The Wimbum story is not a competition between villages to find one Fon who stands above all others. It is a story of heritage, dignity, cooperation and shared progress.

 The future will not be shaped only by what we inherited. It will be shaped by what we choose to build together.

 Some systems and approaches introduced during the colonial period, and later repeated through some development and cultural associations, may have served another time. They belong to another chapter of our history. The Nkambe Clean City era calls us to build a new chapter—one founded on unity, dignity, cooperation and respect for every village and every traditional authority.

 Our heritage is our iron. Our future is the steel we build together.

 Now is the time to write the next chapter.

Tfurndabi Tawong

The Missing Dimension of AI: How the Ndapngong Tri Scan Could Restore Human Wisdom

 

Artificial Intelligence is becoming more powerful every day. It can analyze data in seconds, write books, diagnose diseases, and solve problems that once took experts weeks. Yet despite

its extraordinary intelligence, humanity continues to face the same moral crises—war, corruption, inequality, loneliness, misinformation, and ethical failure.

The problem is not that AI lacks intelligence. The problem is that intelligence alone has never been enough.

This is where MoralityCode AI begins.

Inspired by the ancient Ndapngong wisdom of the Wimbum people of Cameroon, MoralityCode AI introduces the Ndapngong Tri Scan—a framework designed not merely to make AI smarter, but to help people and intelligent systems make wiser decisions.

Humanity's Greatest Challenge

Every person, leader, organization, and nation faces moments when there is no perfect answer—only difficult choices.

Should a doctor preserve one life or save many?

Should a government protect security at the expense of privacy?

Should a business maximize profits or safeguard human dignity?

These are not technology problems.

They are moral dilemmas.

Modern AI can predict outcomes with remarkable accuracy, but prediction is not wisdom. Algorithms calculate possibilities; they cannot determine what is right. They can imitate human reasoning, but they cannot replace human conscience.

An Ancient Guide for a Modern World

Long before artificial intelligence existed, the custodians of the Ndapngong tradition understood something profound about human decision-making.

Every initiated son symbolically climbs three rungs of consciousness:

• Instinct – the wisdom of the body.
• Intellect – the reasoning power of the mind.
• Intuition – the wisdom of the soul.

The significance is hidden in the very language.

Each begins with "in."

The source of wisdom is not outside us.

It begins within.

Instinct preserves life.

Intellect expands knowledge.

Intuition gives life meaning.

Together they create a complete human being. This understanding closely echoes the insight that instinct, intellect, and intuition are complementary dimensions of human consciousness, with intuition representing a deeper inner knowing beyond analytical thought.

Why Intelligence Alone Is Not Enough

Today's world celebrates intellect.

Schools teach it.

Universities reward it.

Technology accelerates it.

But humanity's greatest failures have rarely resulted from a lack of intelligence.

History's worst atrocities were often engineered by brilliant minds disconnected from compassion and moral responsibility.

Knowledge without character becomes manipulation.

Power without wisdom becomes destruction.

This is why MoralityCode AI does not ask only:

"Can we?"

It first asks:

"Should we?"

The Ndapngong Tri Scan

MoralityCode AI evaluates every ethical dilemma through three interconnected dimensions:

Thought — What are the facts? What does reason reveal?

Emotion — Who is affected? What promotes empathy, compassion, dignity, and justice?

Action — What decision creates the greatest long-term good while preserving human values?

These three dimensions reflect the deeper Ndapngong understanding of Mind (Brain), Heart, and Will (Navel)—working together rather than competing against one another.

The result is not simply an intelligent answer.

It is a morally informed decision.

Technology Guided by Wisdom

The future does not belong to machines that merely think faster.

It belongs to societies that think wiser.

Imagine classrooms where students learn ethical reasoning before they learn programming.

Imagine hospitals where AI supports physicians without replacing compassion.

Imagine governments evaluating public policy through moral consequence instead of political convenience.

Imagine businesses measuring success not only by profit, but also by human flourishing.

This is the vision of MoralityCode AI.

A New Standard for Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence may become the greatest invention in human history.

But unless it is anchored in wisdom, its intelligence may become its greatest danger.

MoralityCode AI offers a different path.

It bridges ancient African wisdom and modern artificial intelligence through the Ndapngong Tri Scan—helping people, institutions, and future AI systems move beyond information toward ethical transformation.

Because the future will not be determined by how intelligent our machines become.

It will be determined by how wise humanity chooses to be.

MoralityCode AI

Teaching AI to reason. Empowering humanity to choose wisely.

 

Who Is a Clan Head? — Rediscovering the Living Temple Among the Mbum People

 Among the Mbum people, words are never just words. They carry memory, spirit, lineage, and worldview. A mistranslation is not a small mistake—it can quietly reshape identity, authority, and spiritual understanding. So we must ask a serious question: Could it be translators from Limbum to English are causing confusion and loss to Mbum people?

In Limbum ‘to’ means head or top. ‘to ndap’ – head or top of the house. ‘to chi’ – top of the tree. ‘to tap’ – top of hurt. ‘to manjo’ – owner of a system. I have heard people who would like to be head or at the top or to rule over in Mbum called themselves ‘to ngong’, ‘to nkfu’ etc and I wonder because from growing up and having physical and spiritual education from my grandparents, parents and others we have never heard of ‘to ngong’. Instead, in Mbum spiritual practices we know of ‘tu ngong’. ‘Tu’ or hole, because a hole both in Limbum and English does not have a head. And ‘ngong’ is cyclical in both English and Limbum and if this be true, like science says the world is round, how does it have a head?

Now every Fon in Mbum is sovereign. We all know the systems that when a Fon has them it means he is sovereign. Now can a sovereign leader or Fon have a head or leader over him? It is just like saying the Paul Biya, the President of Cameroon, has another head over him. What would be the office or title that this head occupies? How is it that in Mbum land some Fons are called clan head? Is it confusion of English translation or do Fons have heads above them in Mbum culture?

In our compound we have ‘Tar la’ and he leads the whole compound but he is not excited to lead individual houses, so his function is not physical leading but father, because father represents or incarnates the original creator in a genealogy but not necessarily biological or has to take internal decisions within families in the compound. He is steward of the common good. He is the spiritual father of all because it is an office he incarnates, not by birth, because he can even be biologically the son of another older person in the family and son to many others in the compound.

I have also been hearing that Jesus Christ is the head of the church. In what can to be likened to a church that my grandparents had was ‘ndapngong’, and we do not have a ndapngong head. We have the ambassador or messenger or apostle of God who leads in the ‘ndapngong’. One of my aunts is even named ndapnong and got married to Binka which shows that in a sense anyone in my genealogy could even name themselves church (‘ndapngong’) if colonization had not disrupted our systems and imposed foreign structures over our traditions.

If Christ said “destroy this temple and I will raise it up in three days” and we all know he was the temple, is Christ being head of the church meaning the fullness of Godhead body sits at the top and is connected to us to be head, or he is the church himself? As it is written in Gospel of John 2:19, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” And later it was explained that he was speaking of the temple of his body. The apostle also teaches in First Epistle to the Corinthians 12:27, “Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.” And again in Epistle to the Ephesians 2:21, “In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.”

Sometimes I write that I am ‘ndapnong’, and if I say I will do something in the world or ‘ngong’ you may think I need to go to the Kieku Tang where that groove or temple is located to do it. It seems to me people in every epoch are thinking and believing the same thing that the church is a building, just as it was in the beginning, even after the clarification that Jesus Christ gave that he is the temple which was destroyed and raised up the third day. Then why are those believing still not realizing this resurrection which they believe in, and what truly happened?

In Tangmboh we have small sub chiefs (pTar la bee), sub chiefs (pkibais), and Nkfu (Fon), and it ends with Fon (Nkfu) as the supreme, and there is no other physical or spiritual entity above nkfu or Fon. And if such were to exist, and I have never seen or heard, I hear that if you come with such supremacy to Tangmboh you must keep it aside and surrender under HRM Ta Nfor Nkwi Tang, the Fon. Now the supposed clan heads we have in Mbum land, if they come to Tangmboh to stay permanently, unconditionally they must surrender or dethrone themselves because we cannot have two Fons in Tang. So how can you be a clan head or head of a church, for example, that you cannot be there to control all your jurisdiction permanently? Why claim to be head of a geographical Mbum or church only in name and not in power? How can another Fon claim to exercise clan power over other villages simply by calling themselves a clan head? How can another Fon claim to exercise clan power over other villages simply by calling themselves a clan head? If the President of Cameroon were to try something similar in the CEMAC sub-region, he would at least be issuing formal decrees—so what authority or traditional decrees are clan heads issuing to exercise their power in other villages?

The Fon of Tang, wherever he may be, is still the Fon of Tang. And myself Tfurndabi Tawong, wherever I am, I am still the Tawong. Why are the other Mbum Fons who have been made clan heads not having the sovereignty all over those clans as Tawong has in the Ngong and Ta Nfor Nkwi Tang has in Tangmboh?

And as the scripture says in Gospel of Luke 17:21, “The kingdom of God is within you.” If the temple of God is living, if the church is living, and if sovereignty is living, then the question before the Mbum people today is deeper than language. It is a question of identity, memory, and truth. Have translations slowly shifted meanings that our ancestors clearly understood, or are we ready to look again at our language, our spirituality, and our sovereignty so that the fullness of what we are is not lost in translation?

Let this be a call to reflection among the Mbum people: Is this conversation merely about language, or is it revealing deeper truths about our history and structures? Are we confronting colonial administrative systems that reshaped our traditions? Are we rediscovering the sovereignty of our kingdoms?

Tfurndabi Tawong

 

A Digital Witness: When Words Become History, and Silence Becomes Loss

 In every generation, truth does not merely live in books—it is spoken, challenged, refined, and preserved through both voice and action. What we now call “history” was once a living conversation. What we now call “art” was once dismissed as ordinary work.

When I stated that carpentry is an art and history itself is also an art, it was not a casual remark. It was a recognition that creation—whether with hands or with memory—is sacred. The builder and the historian are not far apart; one shapes wood, the other shapes time. Both require vision, discipline, and truth.

It is therefore concerning that when I proposed a transparent and intellectually grounded approach—calling for multiple historians to research and write diverse perspectives of Mbum history—the idea was not examined, but erased. Not corrected, not debated—deleted.

This is not just a digital action. It is a spiritual signal.

Across cultures and even within Christian tradition, truth has always been tested in the open. Prophets spoke not because it was convenient, but because silence would have been a greater error. When something is in formation—whether a law, a system, or a historical narrative—statements, objections, and contributions are not disruptions; they are safeguards.

An idea that cannot withstand dialogue is not yet ready to become history.

My intention was simple but essential: that history, once written, should not become a closed document but a living testimony—examined from multiple lenses, strengthened through intellectual diversity, and preserved with integrity. A single narrative risks becoming a single point of failure. Multiple narratives create resilience, depth, and truth.

The deletion of such a suggestion raises a deeper question: Are we building history, or are we controlling it?

I have come to understand something through lived experience—words spoken online are not empty. They travel, they remain, and they act. I have seen statements made in passing return with consequence. I have seen corrections, reflections, and even sermons shared in digital spaces produce real-world impact over time.

The digital space is not separate from reality—it is an extension of it.

There was a moment that stayed with me: an elder, living in comfort within a well-structured society, chose not to contribute meaningfully, yet spoke words that diminished the struggle of my father—who labored to raise us. That moment did not disappear. It remains, not just in memory, but in meaning. This is why every statement matters.

To delete a contribution is not only to remove words—it is to interrupt a possible correction, a future reference point, or a needed balance. What is dismissed today may be the very insight required tomorrow.

I therefore choose to restate, clearly and without hesitation: History deserves plurality.

Truth requires openness.

And digital spaces must not become places where ideas are filtered by preference rather than refined by dialogue. If an instrument, system, or historical record is being built, then let it be strong enough to receive critique. Because if it fails in the future, it is often the ignored voices of the past that hold the key to its correction.

This is not resistance.

This is responsibility.

And so, I submit this not as a complaint, but as a record—that a voice spoke, that an idea was offered,

and that history, whether accepted or rejected, has now been witnessed.

A Living Archive Speaks: Authority, Memory, and the Voice of Tfurndabi Tawong

The narrative “Meet ‘Ngang’: Disclosing the ‘Boo-Nsoh’ Code and the Juju That Shapes Tabenken’s Identity” is more than cultural reflection–it is a living transmission of memory, lineage, and authority. Its meaning rests in the voice that carries it.

Who is Tfurndabi Tawong in This Context?

He does not speak as an observer or external researcher. He speaks as:

• A direct descendant of the lineage he describes

• A bearer of inherited memory and encoded tradition

• A voice shaped by bloodline continuity, not study alone

His contribution is therefore not merely intellectual–it is lived and embodied.

In many African epistemologies, history is not only written; it is carried through people, names, rituals, and generations. In this sense, he stands as: A living archive one whose authority rests in ancestry, continuity, and cultural legitimacy.

The Streamed Storyteller: Keeping the Ancestors Alive Online

 

The Storyteller and the Smartphone

Streaming the Ancestors –When the Drumbeat Meets Wi-Fi

A young Cameroonian YouTuber, fueled by curiosity and love for his roots, wants to keep his culture alive but in a way the world will notice.

He sees a crisis no one talks about: the village stories–the oral wisdom that shaped generations are dying in silence.

Yet when he begins to record and remix his grandfather’s tales for YouTube, a new problem emerges:

“These words are sacred,” says his grandfather. “Not for the crowd, not for the algorithm.”

External Problem: Youth no longer visit elders to hear stories.

Internal Problem: The YouTuber feels torn between honoring tradition and reaching his generation.

Philosophical Problem: Should sacred knowledge ever go viral?

His grandfather, a respected cultural custodian, doesn’t just tell stories he guards them. Though uneasy, he sees his grandson’s fire, and offers a challenge:

“If you must digitize, do it with consent. Tell the story with its spirit intact.”

Together, they forge a new kind of transmission:

Permission First: Only tell stories the ancestors would allow shared.

Spirit Intact: No edits that distort meaning, only those that translate it.

Shared Stewardship: Credit the elders, cite the clan, honor the drum.

“Don’t scroll past your roots—stream them.”

If we don’t act: The oral tradition vanishes, and the digital world fills with noise instead of meaning.

If we do: The ancestral voice lives on rhythm by rhythm, reel by reel. Youth reconnect. Elders are honored. Culture evolves without erasing its soul.

The YouTuber becomes more than an influencer he becomes a bridge.

The grandfather, once cautious, sees the stories echo in Ottawa, New York, Nairobi, and Yaoundé.

The world hears Cameroon’s soul one story at a time.

“Tradition is not what we worship it’s what we carry forward.”

Stream wisely. Speak with reverence. Remember together.

🔴 Ngang Unveiled: The Secret Codes and Ancestral Power of the Boo-Nsoh Lineage in Tabenken

 

Meet ‘Ngang’: Disclosing the ‘Boo-Nsoh’ Code and the Juju That Shapes Tabenken’s Identity

There is much that many sons and daughters of Tangmbo do not know. Just like in the 1980s, the buzzword was “think outside the box.” While many people are familiar with this old trend, very few apply it in their daily lives. Eventually, the concept evolved from thinking outside the box to systems thinking - considering all systems as interconnected, and using journey maps to identify where the pain points lie.

Lately, I have been reflecting on the very first traditional system in Tabenken. The original Tangmbo people–those who did not migrate from elsewhere are known as the Winkor. They are still present today and are now referred to as the ‘Boo-Nsoh’. The term ‘Boo-Nsoh’ in this context does not refer to children from Nso (although some individuals from Nso did later settle with the two Winkor houses to form part of the ‘Boo-Nsoh’). Rather, the ‘Boo-Nsoh’ of Kieku in Tabenken refers to those who founded the land–those who chiselled out the caves to make habitable dwellings and began living in the valley.

Their first settlement was at Bileleng, and researchers are encouraged to visit their forest, known as Kop Bileleng, to explore these caves further. The ‘Boo-Nsoh’ later moved from Bileleng which is now used as farmland and settled at the present site known as Kieku. The ‘Boo-Nsoh’ of Tabenken can trace their lineage to the founding ancestor MBIIEREHGY, who established the valley now called Tabenken. Any celebration or expression of identity that fails to acknowledge this ancestor reflects a serious gap in knowledge. I am aware that due to cognitive dissonance, this newly revealed knowledge long suppressed may provoke conflicting reactions.

As a descendant of this lineage, one of my responsibilities is to erect a statue in honour of MBIIEREHGY at Bileleng in the near future.

Two of his biological descendants brothers from the Mbiierehgy line are known as the Winkor. These brothers moved from their original settlement in Bileleng to Kieku. The elder, known as Nto, settled near the bat forest called ‘Kop Mlee’, while the younger, Mbep, moved across to settle at Njikor or Konkor.

It was Fai Njilah Nkur, a Winkor man of this lineage and a warrior in ‘Nfuh Bee-Njong’, who transformed into a bird of prey ‘Nkur’, a type of hawk and rescued the Fon of Tabenken after he was captured by the Germans and taken far away, as far as Mbijah, passing through Kurbar.

In the photo below is my uncle, the current custodian of the ‘Nlah Boo-Nto’ or ‘Boo-nto’ compound in Kieku, Francis Mburli, fondly known as Mburli Mbep. Though this nickname may have originated in another way, the name ‘Mbep’ clearly connects to our ancestor who settled in Konkor. It is the way of the ancestors to bring back or recycle names and characteristics in future generations.

Though the royal and sub-royal families of Tangmbo arrived later coming in from Talla and Tamba, along with their own power structures, the ‘Boo-Nsoh’ remained hospitable. They welcomed these newcomers but maintained their own systems, power, and landownership. During this era, a two-headed grandfather from this lineage was expelled by the newcomers, who feared him. Some ‘Boo-Nsoh’ people followed him to Nkor-Noni in Lasin, Bui Division while those who stayed behind preserved their systems and influence. Traces of this legacy are still found on the land in the form of the jujus and shrines ‘Ngon’, ‘Ngang’, ‘Mndengto’, ‘toh fuh’, ‘ntar’, ‘ndapngong’, and more.

Mbep, as he is fondly called in the photo, is leading the ‘Ngang’, which is praised during its display as ‘ngang Taa-Ngwang’, ‘Kamangang’, ‘Kamakam’ etc. The juju system shown here is incomplete. For it to be fully represented, the ‘ngon’, ‘mfirngang’, ‘ngang’, and others must be present. The red cloth he Mbep wears, called ‘bang cher cher’ in Limbum, is a symbol of the highest authority within Tangmbo–it outranks spiritually all other traditional power structures in the valley.

What is particularly remarkable here is the red garment worn by Mburli Mbep–an emblem of ancestral authority and power.

In the next write-up, I will explore the ‘Boo-Nsoh’ power system in more depth, and how the arrival of royal and sub-royal families, with their own traditional structures, gradually fused with the existing MBIIEREHGY ancestry structures to shape the functioning of the valley today. The royal family was given land at Konkor, where they still maintain their ‘Nkoh’, before later relocating to their current settlement at Manji in Mulah. The sub-royal family was granted ‘Memnkwa’, a rocky area which they initially undervalued, but in those days, land no matter its appearance was the greatest wealth.

Ta-Tfurndabi Tawong Cornelius

Edmonton-Canada