This is thetalk page for discussingBono State and anything related to its purposes and tasks. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Ghana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofGhana on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.GhanaWikipedia:WikiProject GhanaTemplate:WikiProject GhanaGhana
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofAnthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
@Norcer I saw the additions you made. I just wanted to inform you that theAssin,Akyem, andAsante citeAdanse region as their direct homeland. Which is why I revised the section.
The Dormaa are a splinter group from the Aduana clan which founded Akwamu and descend from Twifo-Hemang.
“… indicate how prosperous Bono became through trade, commerce, trolls and tributes received from vassal kingdoms, before the kingdom declined in the mid 18th century. Before this time, population expansion and internal struggles, together with the desire for independence existence, compelled several Akan units within the kingdom to emigrate southward to found new settlements. Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem.”
While acknowledging Adanse, Buah emphasised the various Akan units migrated from Bono before some settling or passing through Adanse. It’s the same thing Buah said about Akwamu on p.19 and Akyem on p.28. He also said the same about the rest of Akan on p.29
Compton on p.39 l quote “ Effah-Gyamfi argues that the Bono people contributed to the rise of Akan states in other areas; Bono emigrants helped to establish the Fante state on the coast and may be related to ancestors of the Denkyira. McCaskie (1995:134) and Bowdich
(1819:171) ”
Actually there are numerous sources which support the Akan migration from Bono. I don’t think this is worth further reiterating from other sources.
Also on Bono oral tradition, Compton p.36 “As pioneers or first born of the land
they claim to be the first to settle the area and cultivate the land. Oral traditions indicate that the Bono pioneers broke their way out of the earth and began farming the land. The
cave complex at Amowi collapsed, and it is remembered in social memory as a supernatural disaster caused by the anger of the supreme god. In a rage, the supreme god Biakuru killed all but a few inhabitants of the Amowi caves for violating taboos and handling food improperly. At the time of the Amowi cave collapse, the shrine priest for
Biakuru ordered some of the surviving inhabitants to found new villages, while leaving
some people behind to care for the shrine. A small group was left at Amowi to care for
the God Biakuru and his associated shrine, but the remaining settled in a village named Yefri, whose name can be translated as “we are coming out” [of the cave complex].”
This is the summary I made on Biakuru and and translation of first born. I don’t think it is advisable to copy everything verbatimNorcer (talk)09:16, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that all Akan states came from Bono oversimplifies the history. While Bono was important, oral traditions are diverse and point to multiple origins.
Shinnie’s excavations at Asantemanso and Adansemanso show both sites were large settlements by the 9th–13th centuries, long before Bono’s formation as a state and decline. Adansemanso, the old capital of Adanse, is listed as one of the five original Akan towns and was likely the largest ancient forest town yet found. This implies Adanse developed parallel to the Bono regions settlements, not just as a Bono offshoot.
Compton and other historians say Bono’s claim to being the first settlers through the Amowi cave story, but that’s their local tradition. Other groups, like Akyem, Asante and Adanse, have their own distinct narratives that trace origins elsewhere.
Shinnie also points out that early urban growth in forest regions happened in multiple centers Adanse, Asantemanso. Bono is seen as the source of all Akan groups due to seniority but the truth is somewhere in the middle.
You can read about the archaeological study in the link below.
To be fair, you can clearly see I’m personally not making that claim but based on quotes from historians and scholars. On archaeological records, most sites of Bono were occupied around BCE and even before 9th centuries. But my position is not on this. Well, Adanse and Asante may claim different origin, and that’s not the subject matter here. The fact is Akan as first was developed indigenously at Bono before spreading in other areas. For I I know Buah has emphasised on this as quoted above. Konadu has also emphasised on this in his Ghana readers book and Akan diaspora. And to be clear, I made emphasis on Buah on Fante, Akwamu Twifo, Akyem, Denkyira etc. Fair enough. It is the same/similar in other sources.Norcer (talk)11:58, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for the thoughtful and well-sourced contributions. I agree that while Bono holds a significant place in Akan migratory and political history, it's important to present a balanced view that reflects the diversity of oral traditions and archaeological evidence.
As noted by AkanArchives and supported by Shinnie’s work, settlements like Adansemanso and Asantemanso were established and thriving as early as the 9th–13th centuries, predating Bono’s consolidation as a kingdom. These findings suggest parallel centers of early Akan development—not just a single source.
That said, oral histories like the Amowi cave narrative from the Bono tradition are also valid cultural sources and should be acknowledged—perhaps under a “Traditional accounts” subheading. We should make sure the article distinguishes between mythical/traditional origins, historical migration patterns, and archaeological evidence to avoid oversimplification.
I propose restructuring the section on Akan origins to reflect these multiple perspectives clearly, citing Buah, Compton, Shinnie, and others. I’d be happy to help draft that revision.Sweetabena (talk)18:43, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the origins of the Akan people are more diverse than often presented. While Bono-Manso is commonly cited as a starting point, the evidence doesn’t support a single-source origin. Research shows that Akan ancestors formed several early settlements across the northern forest fringes and central forest zone. The history points to multiple centers of development, not one linear path.
Earlier historians, though influential, worked without access to archaeological data and systematically recorded oral traditions. Much of that evidence only became available through later fieldwork and excavations.
Kwasi Konadu, a modern historian, brings together archaeological findings, early European accounts, and the work of scholars like Ivor Wilks, Reindorf, F. K. Buah, K. Y. Daaku, and Adu Boahen. His synthesis offers a more balanced and evidence-based understanding of Akan origins.
Here’s a digitized copy of The Ghana Reader, which covers 500 years of Ghana’s history:
The origin of Akan is certain and clear as presented by historians and scholars. Konadu, Buah, Adu Boahen, Effah Gyamfi, Warren, Compton and others have made emphasis on this. The Konadu books Akanarchives introduced: Ghana readers (p.33) and Akan diaspora (p.34) clearly stipulate on this on northern forest, just as forest savanna zone by Adu Boahen.
Also archaeological records from Konadu, Effah Gyamfi, Posnanky and others suggest Bono were occupied before BCE or even before 9th century.
One thing is certain, Akan people origin is clear from Bono enclaves. However, later development from other areas doesn’t change this fact.Norcer (talk)12:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In The Ghana Reader (p. 33), Kwasi Konadu notes that archaeological and oral evidence shows continuous occupation at Asantemanso from as early as 700 BCE (Considered too early for Shinnie) to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively which predates Amowi Cave, Bonoso and Bono’s emergence as a centralized state. He emphasizes that several Akan societies were autochthonous to the forest zone and not all derived from Bono.
It’s also important to consider that many earlier historians didn’t have access to this kind of evidence. Much of the archaeological work and systematic oral data came later, in the 1980s and 1990s. Scholars like Ivor Wilks, F. K. Buah, and K. Y. Daaku made major contributions, but many of their theories were based on limited sources like European records and localized oral traditions. Some passed away before newer discoveries (e.g., Daaku in 1974, Warren in 1997) or before the broader synthesis now available through scholars like Konadu.
So while Bono is foundational, the broader evidence now points to a network of early Akan settlements with parallel developments, not a single point of origin.
It is important to note that before archaeological work in the Bono region and the collection of oral traditions, many scholars proposed that the Akan originated from Egypt, Libya, or the Sahel. These theories were widely accepted until new discoveries in the 1970s through the 1990s shifted the focus to local developments within the forest zone. We now know that migration stories linking the Akan to Ancient Egypt or the Ghana Empire are not supported by evidence.
Even historians like Ivor Wilks once suggested that the Akan were originally hunter-gatherers who became more organized through trade with Muslim and European merchants. That view has since been reconsidered in light of archaeological findings showing established agriculture and settlement centuries earlier.
The broader point is that there is no single origin for the Akan. Oral traditions from theAssin,Akyem, and Asante consistently trace their ancestry toAdanse, which is seen as one of the earliest organized polities and the spiritual homeland of many clans. Bono elders shared a similar view with Dennis Warren, claiming they were the first settlers, with groups such as the Fante leaving their lands after disputes.
Denkyira is also often cited as having emerged from either the Bono or Adanse area, with many accounts noting that it began as a subordinate state before asserting military dominance. Oral traditions from areas like Twifo-Hemang reflect mixed accounts, further showing that early Akan identity was shaped by multiple, interconnected centers.
Since we are the main contributors to this page, I believe a more balanced presentation would be the most responsible approach.
I’d really like to see more documentation of Bono oral traditions in the history section, and discussion of different reigns. Also the external origin narrative is given far too much prominence since it seems like it’s been discreditedKowal2701 (talk)13:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article currently reflects what you just said. As it says the Bono rather emerge from the cave than Egypt or Sahara or Sahel. Reiterating, Buah just stated Akan trace the origin to Bono with states such as Fante, Akwamu Twifo, Akyem, Denkyira, Sefwi among others migrating southward. Compton said the same thing, likewise Effah Gyamfi and Warren. Same can be said about other historians. Nothing changes. The Akan origin is clear. The most recent one is Konadu archaeological records, both books also trace Akan people origin to Bono areas in the northern forest. The Bono areas were the first occupied at BCE before any other area in Ghana. Just like Kintampo. Stahl also points to the same thing. So Akan origin is clear pointing to Bono while acknowledging secondary migration from other areas.Norcer (talk)20:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thoughtful engagement and for referencing my earlier comment. Just to clarify — while I didn’t use the exact phrase “it’s more nuanced with the new findings,” I do agree with that sentiment. My point was that presenting Akan origins requires recognizing bothtraditional accounts andemerging archaeological evidence that reveal a morecomplex, multi-centered development.
I appreciate how the discussion is drawing from a range of scholars—from early historians like Buah and Daaku to more recent syntheses by Konadu. I’m happy to help with a revision that reflects this balance clearly in the article structure.Sweetabena (talk)13:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by multi-centered? Saying that there were multiple proto-urban centers in the early Akan zone is very different from saying that the Akan people derive from both autocthonous groups in Ghana as well as Sahelian or Middle Eastern immigrants. The former is correct, the latter is disproven.
Both oral traditions and archaeological records point to Bono as Akan origins. Buah, Adu Boahen etc points to this while recent archaeological evidence from Konadu both books points to this also. The article demonstrates on that while challenging migration from Sahara or Sahel. This is clear enoughNorcer (talk)21:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively… At both sites, we find sacred groves and forests with shrines in close proximity to streams, ancient roadways, and fields indicative of agriculture.” — Konadu, page 33.
Buah’s History of Ghana was written before key discoveries. Effah-Gyamfi died before the Asante and Adanse sites were excavated, and Posnansky focused mostly on Begho and the Bono area. The broader archaeological picture only came later. Bono region being the sole origin, would be an over simplification.AkanArchives (talk)03:13, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I may suggest a somewhat roundabout solution: we need pages forAsantemanso andAdansemanso. Konadu refers to them a lot, but in a somewhat oblique way, and without more information on what the archaeology actually found there it's hard to understand how it can be put in a concise and accurate form here. In particular, I don't really understand the relationship between those sites and Bono. Are they in Bono? Right next door? Far away? Even stub articles that just had the bare bones location, dates, etc. would be helpful.Catjacket (talk)07:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Asantemanso dates back to the 9th century CE or earlier with some findings dating back to 700 BCE. Adansemanso was the old capital of the Adanse polity which roughly dates the same, though Konadu gives a calibrated date of 393 CE based on unpublished excavation data. Both sites were large, early forest settlements central to Akan formation. They are located in the Asante Region.
Here's the journal for the archaeological evidence
I recommend readingGreat Akan and the Adanse phase (first 2 pages very important) of Addo Fenning's book on the oral traditions of Akyem Abuakwa which explains and corroborates what I am saying below
While Bono is cited as the first centralized Akan state and was once seen as the origin of all Akan people, many groups trace their roots toAdanse. It’s viewed as the ancestral homeland and the origin of key institutions like theOkyeame (linguist),clans, and early state formation. Oral tradition calls it the place “where God began creation,” and groups like theAsante Empire,Denkyira,Akyem, andAssin trace their beginnings there.
Both historical records and archaeological records points to Bono as the Akan origin. Just as Buah, Effah Gyamfi, Adu Boahen etc. The current books of Kwasi Konadu also refers to Bono as Akan origins. The history today will be the same tomorrow. As you are referring to Kwasi Konadu, the same author points to Bono as Akan origins. This is clear. Fante, Akyem, Denkyira, Akwamu Twifo etc all migrated from Bono to the southern areas and established themselves. Compton, Buah, Adu Boahen, J. Agyei and Ofori Mensah, Kwasi Konadu etc all say the same. His is historyNorcer (talk)15:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Integrating Oral, Archaeological, and Historical Sources
Thank you all for the rich discussion and insightful citations. I agree withAkanArchives and others that recent interdisciplinary work—especially by Konadu, Effah-Gyamfi, and Posnansky—has helped shift the narrative from a single-point origin (such as Bono-Manso) to a broader, multi-centered understanding of Akan beginnings.
As Konadu emphasizes, many early Akan communities were autochthonous to the forest zone, developing independently while maintaining cultural and linguistic links. This supports a model of parallel evolution, where Bono may have been the earliest centralized kingdom, but not necessarily the sole ancestral root.
I also appreciate the point raised byNorcer on the foundational role of Bono. It’s important to balance that acknowledgment with what newer archaeological evidence and historical syntheses now suggest—namely, that multiple polities such as Adanse, Asante, and Akyem also emerged from long-established communities with complex social systems.
It may be helpful to reorganize the article's “Origins” section into clearly defined subheadings:
Archaeological Evidence
Oral Traditions
Early Written Sources
Modern Historical Synthesis
This structure would allow the article to present the layered nature of the Akan origin story without privileging one perspective over another.
I think what you’re proposing is more historiography than history? I think modern historical synthesis is what the section should be on, although I’d usually start an origins section with a couple sentences on origin traditions. But you two are much more knowledgeable about this than me so I am happy to defer, just remember we’re writing for a popular readership (WP:RF).Kowal2701 (talk)14:02, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Konadu, Effah Gyamfi, Buah or Posnansky points to Bono as Akan origins. Just as the recent books by Konadu both point to Bono in the northern forest as Akan origin. Both oral tradition and archaeological records make emphasis on this. Akyem, Denkyira, Fante, Twifo Akwamu, Sefwi among others all trace the origin to Bono. It must also be noted that records acknowledge Adanse as secondary migratory route or settlementsNorcer (talk)21:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Buah and Boahen wrote their major works before key archaeological discoveries in the Asante and Adanse regions. Their views on Akan origins focused heavily on oral traditions and early written sources (some of which are outdated). Effah-Gyamfi, who died in 1983, never saw the later excavations at Adansemanso or Asantemanso and focused mainly on Bono sites. Posnansky concentrated on Begho and the Bono area, not the southern forest. None of them had access to the full archaeological picture that emerged in the 1980s and 1990s.
Denkyira traces its origins to the Adanse region, some accounts also link them to Bono. Fante oral traditions say they came from Techiman (Bono) and moved south. Akwamu traces its ancestry to the Adanse region, likely from the Twifo-Hemang area, before migrating southeast. Twifo also originated from Adanse and were once under Denkyira influence. Sefwi traditions link them to both Bono and Adanse, with later movements through Denkyira territory. Akyem originated from Adanse as well, emerging from frontier settlements like Kokobiante and Sebenso before moving east across the Pra River under Denkyira pressure.AkanArchives (talk)03:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Upon all that you have said, the books of Konadu, Compton, Ofosu Mensah and others refute it. The archaeological references also point to Bono. It’s like you are using the same Konadu, Adu Boahen, Buah, Compton etc books at the same time and later discrediting the same scholars based on your personal way of thinking. The books are clear, they say what they say. History is history and archaeology points to that. Concentrate on what the book says, there were some authors who never came to Bono too, and concentrated mainly in the interior forest. Such as “Akanman piesie num” or “Great Akan” rhythm. Concentrate on the source and stop jumping on the scholars and authors. You have criticised the Europeans, yet you use the same Europeans to draft the “Great Akan” article. You have also criticised your own Ghanaian historians from 1900-2000. At the same time, you are still using the same Ghanaian authors (from the same dates) to draft your articles. That’s not how it’s done. At the moment, it’s like you are trying to have everything your own personal way instead of using what’s in the books. History is history and it doesn’t change. The scholars have always emphasised Akyem, Fante, Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Sefwi etc migrating from Bono to the southern areas. Archaeological records, oral tradition and history points to this, as emphasised by scholars and historians.
The same archaeological records points to Kintampo inhabitants long ago as afar as BCE, and the same archaeological records point Begho with activities dating as far as 3500 years ago, as well as other areas. The same archaeological records points Bono as Akan origins.Norcer (talk)16:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstand. I’m not saying newer data invalidates the older works. I’m simply pointing out that the historians you’re referencing, especially those active and wrote books as well as articles before the 1990s, did not have access to the archaeological and regional data we now have. You keep bringing up Effah Gyamfi, but he literally died before the major excavations in the Asante and Adanse areas were even conducted. When it comes to origins, the discussion today is much broader than the older one place migration theory.
As for the claim that Bono is the sole origin of all Akan groups, that’s not supported by current research. Compton is very clear:
“Three firstborn places are recorded for the Bron (Bono Manso, Wenchi, and Hani [Begho]) and five for the Akan (Adanse, Akyem, Assin, Denkyira, and Asante).”
(Shifting Trade Networks, p. 5)
This clearly shows that even oral traditions distinguish between Bron and Akan origins.
Konadu explains this too. In The Ghana Reader, he describes Akan as a composite culture, not a single origin people:
“The Akan were not a singular people but rather various groups that came to fall under a shared cultural-linguistic umbrella.”
(Ghana Reader, p. 24) 
He also highlights that settlements like Asantemanso and Adansemanso show continuous Akan presence from as early as 393 CE
“Oral and archaeological evidence from Asantemanso and Adansemanso indicates continuous occupation from 393 to 1650 CE”
(Ghana Reader, p. 33)
Finally, the articleGreat Akan focuses on a specific context: 15th to 17th century in European records. It describes how Portuguese and Dutch observers understood the inland Akan-speaking gold producers of that time. It is not about the origins of all Akan groups (some groups who do not even cite Bono as an origin point), so comparing it to the broader question of origins is a false equivalency. The sources, the focus, and the context are entirely different.
The criticism is only toward outdated statements, and theories, not to the entire works of the scholars. Claims that are no longer supported by literal data should be reassessed.AkanArchives (talk)17:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good good good. With all that you said. Effah Gyamfi (even some of his works remained unpublished and couldn’t explore further) is not the only person who conducted archaeological research in Bono, Ponansky, Macintosh, Compton, Konadu etc all did. And in the compiled books of Kwasi Konadu, he stated the Akan origins from Bono in the northern forest(Ghana reader p.33). He clearly saw Asantemanso and Adansemanso or Adanse yet he pointed it to Bono. The same origins at (Akan diaspora p.34) by Konadu.
The same Konadu points to Bono Manso at 300 CE, Begho 100 CE. Even some archaeologists points to Bono Manso 100 CE whiles Begho at 3500 years ago, and among other areas in Bono which is dated beyond. In a nutshell, both archaeological records from Konadu points to Bono after accessing everything. Oral tradition and history points to Bono.
You made a quote:“The Akan were not a singular people but rather various groups that came to fall under a shared cultural-linguistic umbrella.” (Ghana Reader, p. 24)
It is the same thing summarised by Buah, Adu Boahen, Compton etc.
According to Buah p.9: I quote
“… indicate how prosperous Bono became through trade, commerce, trolls and tributes received from vassal kingdoms, before the kingdom declined in the mid 18th century. Before this time, population expansion and internal struggles, together with the desire for independence existence, compelled several Akan units within the kingdom to emigrate southward to found new settlements. Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem.”
It is the same thing summarised by Konadu as Akan origins from the northern forests by archaeological evidence.
You also made a quoteKonadu explains this too. In The Ghana Reader, he describes Akan as a composite culture, not a single origin people:
It is the same thing said by Konadu in Ghana reader p.33 and Akan diaspora p.34 as Akan origins from Bono. So which either way, still the origin/origins is from Bono. This is confirmed by oral tradition, history and archaeological evidence. Bono is the first created or born, and it is from Bono that Akan originated, developed and despersed.Norcer (talk)16:19, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Saying “all Akan people came from Bono” is incorrect. The evidence does not say that. Not even Konadu, or Compton say that. What they do say is thatBono was the first centralized Akan state, but they do not equate that to the sole point of origin for every Akan polity.
Konadu describes the Akan as a network of proto-Akan settlements. That quote you mentioned
“The Akan were not a singular people but rather various groups that came to fall under a shared cultural-linguistic umbrella” (Ghana Reader, p.24), this literally debunks the “all-from-Bono” claim.
In The Akan Diaspora (p.34), he situates the early core in the northern forests, yes. But what does he point to? A network. including Bono and places like Adanse, Asantemanso, etc. He emphasizes shared development, not a singular point of departure.
In her 2014 paper (Shifting Trade Networks, pp. 4–6), Compton clearly separates Bono from other early Akan formations:
She says verbatim
“Three ‘first born’ places are recorded for the Bron (Bono Manso, Wenchi, and Hani [Begho]) and five for the Akan (Adanse, Akyem, Assin, Denkyira, and Asante)” . — Notice how she seperate the Forrest Akan groups from the Bono.
Sheidentifies distinct origin centers for Bono and other Akan groups, meaning these were parallel foundational areas, not offshoots of Bono.
Buah (1998, p.9) notes:
“…before the kingdom declined in the mid-18th century… several Akan units within the kingdom [Bono] emigrated southward… Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo, Akwamu, Asante, Fante, and Akyem.”
'Read it carefully: Buah is referring to the 'political incorporation of groups into the Bono kingdom, not ethnic or ancestral origin.The people already existed. Theyleft a centralized structure, not a birthland.
Yes, Bono Manso is dated to 300 CE. Begho earlier. That makes Bono REGION archaeologically important, but the archaeology doesn’t back an exclusive origin claim. In fact:
1. Adanse, Asantemanso, etc also show continuous pre-Bono occupation, that means before Bono centralized and gained mass influence, Proto-Akan people already had various settlements (Konadu, Ghana Reader, p.33; Shinnie; Stahl).
2. The cave at Amowi is a Bono origin site, but it’s not the only one. Wilks and Compton document other “emergence” sites, especially found in Adanse, which many Akan matriclans like the Asona and Oyoko cite in their own oral histories. Mostly Bono people from the Bono region cite Amowi cave as their origin point. Notice how the Adanse, Asante, Denkyira, Assin, and Akyem don't even mention Amowi, Wenchi ?
What Bono was:
•The first centralized Akan polity? Yes.
•The cultural and ritual exporter of many socio political symbols like stools, gold regalia, swords? Yes
•The origin point of all Akan people? No.
Konadu and Compton show that Bono was part of a wider northern forest constellation of proto-Akan settlements. The Bono area birthed Bonoman, yes—but that doesn’t mean it was the source of all Akan people.
What you’re calling “origin” is actually centralization, influence and state formation.Origin is plural,Adanse, Bono, Assin, Dawu, Begho, Asantemanso. That is the scholarly position.AkanArchives (talk)17:00, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What you are also failing to comprehend is that Bonoman was the original outlet for southern Akan settlements to access long-distance trade. The Bono had the earliest and most consistent access to trans-Saharan goods, brassware, salt, textiles, amulets, and Islamic trade items, which circulated through Begho and Bono Manso before Europeans ever arrived. Southern Akan polities on Bono controlled markets to obtain those goods.
Before 1471, the forest and coastal Akan were dependent on Bono as the intermediary for foreign trade. This gave Bonoman greater cultural and economic influence over other Akan groups, especially in political symbolism (gold weights, stools, regalia) and urban organization.
This does not mean all Akan people migrated from a single source, it means Bonoman was the first polity to emergence from the proto-Akan network and had foundational and political influence over the various Akan settlements that were not yet centralized polities.
“The Akan had been engaged in long-distance trade through Begho and Bono Manso with Muslim merchants and forest polities long before European arrival.”
To be clear, I’m not talking about trade neither is the topic. I’m also not doing grammar. I’m quoting based on evidence from archaeology, history and oral tradition.
I would like to know maybe you are reading different Konadu book. I quote Konadu (Ghana reader p.33)”In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from… Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlement of Bono Manso, the capital of Bono polity and the township of Bew(commonly referred as Begho). All of the sacred sites associated with Bono settlements…” As can be seen Konadu pointed Akan origins to Bono.
The same Konadu in Akan diaspora (p.34) pointed Akan origins to Bono. These are archaeological evidence based on Konadu’s compiled books.
Also archaeology points to Bono areas as far older than Adansemanso with activities such as farming or agricultural or smelting dating beyond Adanse areas.
It is also good you now got Compton concept differentiating between interior/all forest Akan settlement and forest savanna(northern) forest Akan settlements. The difference is clear now. Asantemanso/Adansemanso can only run shoulders in the interior forest.
Buah p.9 emphasised “Indeed, nearly all different groups of Akan trace their original homes to Bonoland…”
Later part he (Buah) also added (1998, p.9) notes:
“… indicate how prosperous Bono became through trade, commerce, trolls and tributes received from vassal kingdoms, before the kingdom declined in the mid 18th century. Before this time, population expansion and internal struggles, together with the desire for independence existence, compelled several Akan units within the kingdom to emigrate southward to found new settlements. Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem.”
This means the Akan trace their origin to Bono and also their original home. And just as Konadu said “The Akan were not a singular people but rather various groups that came to fall under a shared cultural-linguistic umbrella” (Ghana Reader, p.24). This also summarises everything said above, that Akan units/subgroups/various groups trace their origins to Bono.
So Akan origins/origin is from Bono based on the evidence pointed out. Secondary migration from Adanse doesn’t change the fact.Norcer (talk)20:09, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Claim 1: “Konadu pointed Akan origins to Bono”
Konadu does not say Akan origins are only from Bono. He writes:
“Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono Manso… and Begho.” (Ghana Reader, p.33)
This is a comparative statement, not an exclusive one. He puts Bono Manso and Begho on the same level as Asantemanso and Adansemanso. He acknowledgesmultiple zones of early Akan development.
Claim 2: “All of the sacred sites associated with Bono settlements proves Akan origins from Bono"
Reality: Konadu also mentions sacred origin sites in:
1. Asantemanso
2. Adansemanso
Both of these site predate the existence of Bono-Manso. This means before "Bono" even existed, the ancestors of the Adanse, Akyem, Assin, etc were already in living in settlements in the forest.
Reality: On p.34 of The Akan Diaspora, Konadu highlights the northern forest zone generally not Bono alone, as the area where early Akan societies formed. He includes Bono, but also discusses Kintampo, Adanse, and forest-savanna margins. He presents a network, not a mono origin. This means Asantemanso, Adansemanso, Amowi, Wenchi and Begho were among a network of settlements in the Forrest region.
Claim 4: “Archaeology shows Bono is older than Adanse, therefore origin is Bono”
Reality: Older sites ≠ sole origin.
Yes, Begho and Bono Manso are early (100–300 CE), but:
By your logic, Bono settlements came from the Adanse region since Adansemanso has continuous occupation from 700 BCE to 1600 CE??? Wrong, that is not how it works.
Claim 5: “Compton distinguishes between interior and northern forest, proving Bono primacy”
Reality: Compton (2014, p.4) lists:
“Three ‘first born’ places for the Bron (Bono Manso, Wenchi, Hani) andfive for the Akan (Adanse, Akyem, Assin, Denkyira, Asante)”
That directly confirms multi-origin. Bono is one center, not the sole origin of the Akan. Notice how she separates the early Bono settlements from Adanse ?
Claim 6: “Buah said nearly all Akan trace to Bonoland”
Reality: Buah said “nearly all” (p.9)—which already allows for exceptions. He’s summarizing oral tradition, not archaeological fact. The history of Ghana by F.K. Buah was published in 1980, a decade before Peter Shinnie's archaeological work in the Asante region.
Claim 7: “Konadu’s shared cultural umbrella quote proves origin in Bono”
Reality: It proves the opposite.
“The Akan were not a singular people in the ancient times…” (Ghana Reader, p.24)
That means Akan identity formed from diverse, parallel groups. It was a process of cultural convergence, not a single-point origin in Bono.
We have been exchanging in circles, if we cannot agree on the information then it is best to ask for outside input from the others help assess:
•We arestill discussing whether the Akan have a single origin in Bonoman or if the evidence supports multiple origin zones across the forest region (e.g. Adansemanso, Asantemanso, etc.).AkanArchives (talk)20:58, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry I don't have time to read the sources, so take what I say with apinch of salt, but based on the discussion above AkanArchives seems to have it right. The early influence of Bonomanso should be emphasised and it outlined as the centre for state formation among the Akan, but not a first settlement from which others dispersed. If we/you guys can't come to a consensus, I'd really recommendWP:DRN.Kowal2701 (talk)21:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To emphasise: Bono Manso is just the capital to Bono state. The Akan origins is from Bono state as a whole, not Bono Manso.
Akan origins is from Bono, and the subgroups migrated from Bono to the southern areas to found new settlements. It is from Bono that Akan subgroups firstly migrated or dispersed, that’s why Kwasi Konadu points Akan origins to Bono. That’s why Buah clearly stated Twifo Akwamu, Akyem, Fante, Denkyira etc all firstly migrated from Bono to the south.Norcer (talk)20:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From the very onset, I made myself clear, just as the source. The Akan origin is from Bono, points to northern forests of Bono but not the interior forest. This Konadu clearly says. Buah also clearly says. History will not force anyone, just as archaeological or oral tradition. The Akan origins as emphasised is from Bono. Secondary migration can’t alter this.
At the moment it seems you are doing your own interpretation instead of following the sources. Also stop misquoting the sources, quote exactly what the source says.
Point 1 Im quoting exactly from Konadu Ghana reader p.33 ”In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the 5th century CE onward, and, addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground stone artefacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlement of Bono Manso, the capital of Bono polity and the township of Bew(commonly referred as Begho).”
This is clearly emphasised, the Akan origins point to the northern forest of Bono. It never pointed to the interior forest of Asantemanso or Adansemanso.
Point 2 Also, Bono Manso is not the only site in Bono, there are many sites in Bono but the best known are Begho and Bono Manso. Begho predates both Asantemanso and Adansemanso. There are other places in Bono too that predates the Asantemanso and overall Bono sites are the oldest to Adanse.
Point 3 Again, Kintampo is Bono settlements in the northern forest or forest savanna. It predates Asantemanso and Adansemanso. And to be clear, Adanse or Asantemanso is in the interior forest. It is only Bono that’s in the northern forest.
Point 4 Again, you firstly tried to compare Adanse to Bono in terms of archaeology. And I made it clear that based on archaeology, Begho alone had agriculture activities dating 3500 years ago, and that alone is older than both Asantemanso and Adansemanso.
Point 5 Compton distinguishing the northern forest from interior forest is the same thing Konadu did. As Konadu pointed Akan origins to the northern forest of Bono.
Adanse, Akyem, Assin, Denkyira, Asante etc are all in the interior forest.
And Buah clearly stated (p.9) '…indicate how prosperous Bono became through trade, commerce, trolls and tributes received from vassal kingdoms, before the kingdom declined in the mid 18th century. Before this time, population expansion and internal struggles, together with the desire for independence existence, compelled several Akan units within the kingdom to emigrate southward to found new settlements. Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem.”’
Meaning Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem etc all migrated from Bono to the interior forest. And they all trace their original homelands to Bono. Buah said nearly because of the secondary migration, and the secondary migration doesn’t change Akan origins. As it clearly states Akan origins is from Bono. For example, if Denkyira migrated from Bono as its origin, and later settled at Adanse, then again Denkyira moved from Adanse to central region. This is a secondary migration, and doesn’t change Akan origin.
Also the archaeology from Kwasi Konadu points to Bono in the northern forest as Akan origins. Bush’s oral tradition also points to Bono. So stop criticising Buah, it doesn’t change anything.
Lastly“The Akan were not a singular people in the ancient times…” (Ghana Reader, p.24)
It is the same thing Buah (p.9) said. “Indeed, nearly all different groups of Akan trace their original homes to Bonoland…”
Later part he (Buah) also added (1998, p.9) notes:
“… compelled several Akan units within the kingdom to emigrate southward to found new settlements. Some of these were Denkyira, Twifo Akwamu, Asante, Fante and Akyem.”
This summarises it by Buah and Konadu, the different groups or subgroups trace the origins to Bono. And the subgroups migrated from Bono to found Twifo Akwamu, Denkyira, Fante, Akyem etc.Norcer (talk)20:15, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Buah's book was published in the 1980s, which came out about a decade before archaeological work was done in the Asante region that uncovered Asantemanso and Adansemanso. These are the sites that the Asante and Adanse peoples identify as their places of origin, the Akyem and Assin later cite origins in Adanse, not Bono. While Buah’s book contains valuable oral and documentary traditions, he did not have access to the archaeological evidence in the 80s and 90s. We now have tangible archaeological findings showing that the ancestors of the Adanse and Asante had settlements in the forest region before Bono even emerged.
For deeper context, the historical consensus has changed many times. In 1817, Bowdich and others claimed the Akan were pushed into the forest by Muslim invaders. In 1895, Reindorf proposed a migration from Mesopotamia, Libya, and Egypt that ended in Adanse. Other writers at the time didn’t mention Adanse or Bono at all, instead connecting the Akan to the Ghana and Mali empires. In the 1960s through the 1980s, historians began to take Bono oral traditions more seriously, which led to excavations in the Bono region.
Those excavations uncovered early Bono related sites like Amowi, Wenchi, and Begho, which date between 100 and 600 AD. Many historians updated their views based on these findings, but most of them were no longer active after the 1990s and early 2000s.
Historians today like Konadu, Compton, and others have had access to a broader range of archaeological and oral sources. They support a plural origins model for the Akan, which points to a network of early settlements across different areas before the emergence of polities like Bono, Adanse, Denkyira, Akyem, Asante, and the Fante states. This model recognizes several early centers of development, including Amowi, Wenchi, Begho, and Adansemanso, which all seem to have emerged around the same period. With the only anomaly being Asantemanso, which has some findings dating back to 700 BCE.AkanArchives (talk)21:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the relevant policy isWP:AGEMATTERS. In the sectionBono state#Formation of Inland Akan Polities, the sentenceIt is generally accepted as Bono is the origin of the Akan people. cites three sources: Buah (which supports it),Konadu 2010 pg 34 (which indirectly contradicts it), andKonadu and Campbell 2016 pg 33 (which also indirectly contradicts it). The rest of the section is cited to Arhin 1979 which is quite old. I think this section should be rewritten.
I'd start by saying which oral traditions trace their origin to Bonoman with a few sentences on them, and then say it was thought that the Akan dispersed from Bonoman (citing Buah and presumably Arhin). Then discuss the archaeological research which caused this to be revised. How does that sound?Kowal2701 (talk)21:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'm sending you the book by the way
Buah addresses the Bono's origins in page 9 then the Adanse in page(s) 17 to 19.
Keep in mind, this book was publish in the 80s and leans into some of outdated theories before archaeology (even mentions the Bono migrated from Burkina Faso). But I thought I'd share.
Konadu both books points to Akan origins in the northern forest of Bono. It never said in the interior forest. Buah also records Akan origins from Bono, and migrations towards south.
Begho alone is far older than Asantemanso of 700BCE. Agricultural activities dates back 3500 years. Other areas in Bono also older than Asantemanso.
Buah, Adu Boahen, Ofosu Mensah etc points to Bono as dispersal from Akan. That’s the original home and origin. Konadu also points to Bono as Akan origins in the northern forest. That clear, that’s what the evidence saysNorcer (talk)11:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, that’s what Kwasi Konadu and Buah says. Konadu points Akan origins to the northern forest of Bono. Just as Buah says.Norcer (talk)11:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the 5th century CE onward…Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlement of Bono Manso… and Begho.
^ Konadu (Ghana Reader, pg. 33)
“Adanseland was the original centre of Akan dispersion… and it was here that Akan institutions… took shape.”
^ F. K. Buah. (A History of Ghana, Page 16)
This is contradicting what you are saying
If Bono is the source of all Akan groups, why does the oral tradition of the Assin, Adanse, Asante and Akyem claim to be from the Asante/Adanse area ?
Why does archeology point to the Asante and Adanse spiritual centers predating the formation of Bonoman ? Konadu says Adansemanso dates back to 393 CE, with Peter Shinnie saying settlements peaked in the first half of the 2nd millennium, this is older than Amowi cave which dates back to 400 AD according to Effah Gyamfi, the Bono people's oral traditions claim to be from this specific site.AkanArchives (talk)11:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stop misquoting the sources. Konadu points Akan origins to the northern forests of Bono, and not the interior forests. The source is talking about Akan origins. It was at Bono that Akan originated as pointed by Konadu. Likewise Buah, p.9 also says it was at Bono that Akan originated.
Get to know, the migration first took place at Bono to the southern areas, some settling in Adanse or passing through, then another dispersion from Adanse. Thats what Buah clearly says.
Archaelogically, Bono is far older than Adanse. The overall highest age at Adanse is Asantemanso of 700 BCE. Begho alone predates that with 3500 years ago. Smelting at Bono Manso 300CE also predates Adansemanso 393CE. Besides Konadu also says Bono was occupied with activities in first millennium. There are other unmentioned sites in Bono by archaeologist which is far far older than all these combined in Adanse.Norcer (talk)13:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems you misunderstand the information.
Bono oral traditions and archaeology confirm that Amowi Cave which was an early rock shelter site inhabited by the ancestors of the Bono people, not Begho. Amowi Cave dates back to 400 AD according to archaeology by Effah Gyamfi.
You keep citing F.K. Buah but he literally contradicts what you're saying in page 9 and 16.
He literally says that Bono's migrated from Burkina Faso on page (9). I'm sorry but you're wrong. Stop citing archaeology from Begho, the Akan people who founded Bonomanso do not claim to come from there, their oral tradition says Amowi Cave was their ancestral origin point.
F. K. Buah also clearly identifies Adanse as another core origin zone in A History of Ghana:
“Adanseland was the original centre of Akan dispersion… and it was here that Akan institutions… took shape.” (Buah, 1998, p.16)
This means there wants one origin for all Akan people.
I'm not misquoting Konadu at all
You’re citing Konadu from Ghana Reader, p.33, where he compares Bono Manso and Begho with Asantemanso and Adansemanso. But on p.24, he makes this broader claim:
“The Akan were not a singular people but rather various groups that came to fall under a shared cultural-linguistic umbrella.”
That line alone refutes the “one-origin” claim. Why would he say this if we are all from one location ?
Also you keep saying all Akan people dispersed from the Bonoman but the state formed between the 11th and 13th century, some historians even say the 15th century, we have hard core irrefutable evidence of Akan people living in Asantemanso and Adansemanso BEFORE the founding of Bonomanso.
That's what you're not getting, all Akans have multiple origins, that means there's much more broader and nuance. This is the modern day consensus from Konadu and Compton.
Also I don't know why you're linking Begho discoveries from 3500 BCE, there's no evidence of Akan people or Bonoman even existing around that time. It is asCatjacket said, Bonoman as a state or polity didn't exist until the early 2nd mellenium. So unfortunately you are wrong, all Akan people did not disperse form Bonoman, they came from various networks of Forrest settlements in Wench, Amowi, Asantemanso, and Adansemanso before the emergence of Bonoman as a state.
What I find very weird is thatAmenumey 2008 page 17 says that the Bono originated from Adanse, which massively contradicts Bono tradition. Imo we should often be starting origin sections with documenting oral traditions, even when archaeological contradicts them (not at all saying it does here).Kowal2701 (talk)21:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adu Boahen also depicts the "Akan Heartland" in the Asante + Adanse region in a map in page 204 in the General history of Africa, abridged edition, v. 5: Africa from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century
1. On page 205, the Akan dispersal comes from this region which along with countless books also contradict the believed idea that all Akan people come from the Bono State
2. Addo Fenning states the Akyem directly migrated from Adanse due to Adanse-Denkyira conflicts, and the Proto Asante attacks on the Asona clan, see page 2 and 3 below
3. In Asante before 1700, Kwasi Boaten says on page 1, Adanse is therefore an important ancestral home of many Twi speakers. The area is traditionally known in Akan cosmogony as the place where God (Odomankoma) started the creation of the world, such as the ideas of the clan and kinship.
Assin, Akyem, Asante and some Agona clan members (Denkyira) all trace their origins to Adanse
Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively, although Adansemanso was occupied mainly in the first half of the second millennium CE, a long dry period in West Africa and the second major re-gression in the levels of Lake Bosomtwe
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward, and, in addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground-stone artifacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso, capital of Bono polity, and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).
I know it may seem pedantic but saying "areas associated with Akan origins" is very different to saying "areas from which the Akan originated". Also, he says Asantemanso was settled from 700 BCE, and areas "associated with Akan origin" from 5th century CE, ie. the Akan were already in the interior long before the settlements previously associated with Akan origins were founded (let alone before the state of Bonoman was founded). Konadu appears to actually be revising and contradicting the origin from Bono.Kowal2701 (talk)20:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment the source speaks for itself. No personal interpretation. As clearly stated by historians and archaeologists, Akan origins points to Bono. And Bono settlements are far older than in Adanse. Like I said Begho alone is 3500 years, far predates Asantemanso of 700BCE. Likewise Bono areas record activities in first millennium as compared to first half of second millennium of Asantemanso. History, oral tradition and archaeology can’t be taken for granted. The record does everything than mere interpretation.Norcer (talk)21:48, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nana Asaman led the Bono people out of Amowi Cave 1 and founded Bonomanso. Begho is not the origin of the Bono people—it later became an important market center for the Bono polity.
Amowi Cave 1’s archaeology dates to 440 AD according to Effah Gyamfi, which is why Konadu stated that “sites associated with the Akan origins date to the 5th century.”
Proto-Akan people were already in places like Asantemanso and Adansemanso before Nana Asaman founded Bonomanso after the 5th century.
That debunks your claim that all Akan people are from the Bono state. Stop editing pages to remove this fact.@Kowal2701:‘s assessment is correct—it’s not a personal interpretation, but exactly what Konadu is saying. He and I both cited multiple historians who write that many Akan groups claim Adanse as their place of origin. You’re cherry-picking sources to force a one-source migration narrative. Again, all Akan people are not from Bonoman, we have tangible evidence of many Akan sites existing before Bonoma's existence.
Where is it said Begho was 3500 years old? Konadu and Campbell pages 32-33 say
A number of these archaeological sites were substantial in size and had permanent structures that suggest large populations and long-term occupation. The age of the majority of those sites ranges from 3500 BCE [Before the Common Era] to the nineteenth century in terms of occupation and include the Bosompra cave on the eastern forest fringe, Bono-Manso and Bɛw (Begho) on the northern forest fringe, Nkukua Buoho, Boyase Hill, Asantemanso, Adanse-manso, Dawu-Akwapem, Akwamu, and the Krobo mountains of inhabited caves
and then go on to say 5th century for the northern forest as in the above quote. Our articlesBono Manso andBegho say 11th century, although Konadu and Campbell page 27 say
The earliest phase of occupation at Bono Manso is thought to date to the sixth or seventh century BP.
This is about Akan origins. And clearly Konadu, Buah and others emphasised. Is not about ones personal interpretation neither is it about ones views. Konadu points to Akan origins, just as others points to Bono. It is also good you are pointing to archaeological dates, now let me set the records straight. Bono sites predates Adanse by far margin. Nonetheless, Konadu points to Akan origins in the northern forests, not interior forests. That clarifies it.Norcer (talk)19:25, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While evidence for first millennium CE occupation is sparse in central Ghana, in the early second millennium CE, large cities appeared on the forest/savanna margin, in part due to the shift in gold production from Bambuk and Buré (see below) to the Akan region.53 The largest city, Begho (12th–19th centuries CE), included at least 1500 houses (peak population estimated at 7000–10 000) organized into six distinct dispersed quarters and a central market.
In contrast, over 100 km to the southeast the city of Bono Manso (12/13th–18th century CE) has significantly less evidence for trade than found at Begho, although limited quantities of brass, glass beads, trade ceramics and stone and clay weights were recovered from the site.56 This large site, which grew substantially after the 15th century, eventually reaching ca. 500 houses, is linked through oral history to the origins of the Bono kingdom. Recent work at the small village of Kranka Dada 10 km to the southeast found similar densities of durable trade items, suggesting that in this area, small and large sites had equal access to exchange networks.
Now that it clarifies everything, so in summary, how does your statement relate to Akan origins as said by Konadu, Buah and others.Norcer (talk)20:41, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because it directly contradicts your claim Begho is 3500 years old, and it means the first towns of Begho and Bonomanso were founded after Adansemanso and Asantemanso, meaning all Akan could not possibly have originated from them. This is becomingWP:ICHY.Kowal2701 (talk)21:04, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment you are doing personal interpretation as opposed to the sources. So are you now personally criticising Konadu and Buah as they pointed Akan origins to Bono? As you can clearly see, I’m dealing with sources but not personal interpretation. The sources are clear, the sites predates Asantemanso and co. Go and read Kwasi Konadu again, it appears you are fighting the sources now with your personal interpretationNorcer (talk)21:11, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Konadu does not support a Bono origin. You are blatantly misrepresenting sources, which is a conduct issue. I don't want to take you toWP:ANI, but I may have to if this continues.Kowal2701 (talk)21:18, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are trying to implicate Konadu by saying “Konadu does not support a Bono origin”.
Meanwhile Konadu Ghana reader p.33 stated emphatically ”In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the 5th century CE onward, and, addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground stone artefacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlement of Bono Manso, the capital of Bono polity and the township of Bew(commonly referred as Begho).” This is by stating categorically and in reference to Bono as areas of Akan origins in the northern forests as stated by Konadu.
I was keenly monitoring with the sources of yours and your personal interpretations, all I could see isWP:SYNTH. I think going forward it would be better to quote directly from sources, that settles it. As you are misrepresenting sources as well as false accusations, that will do.Norcer (talk)23:09, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're misinterpreting the information.
He's saying the areasassociated with the origin of the Akan people date back to the 5th century.
He's referring to Amowi Cave 1, which Effah Gyamfi excavated and dated to 440 AD. Amowi Cave 1 is considered the first recognizable settlement by the Bono people because it is referenced in the oral traditions. Nana Asaman lead his people out of Amowi Cave and founded Bonomanso, the first Bono settlement, which later became the spiritual and political capital of Bonoman.
All Akan people cannot possibly be from Bonoman because it was founded in the 2nd millennium.
Adansemanso and Asantemanso were already settled by the ancestors of the Asante and Adanse in the 1st millennium before the Bonomanso and Bonoman were founded.
The Adanse, Asante, Assin and Akyem do not cite originating from Bonoman. The Denkyira and Twifo on the other hand say they come from Bono (some say Adanse) and settled Adanse region. Baoulé oral traditions claim to come from the Asante.
This invalidates your point thatall Akans are from Bonoman. All Akan Groups have varying oral traditions, and origin points.
Bonoman is the first centralized Akan polity but it is not the source of all Akan people, Konadu makes it clear that there was a network ofProto-Akan settlements in the forest region.
Now, that’s why I have made myself clear. You are equally engaging inWP:SYNTH. The source is taking about Akan origins pointing to the northern forests of Bono but not interior forests whiles you are also addressing something different. Adanse and its satellites of Asantemanso and Adansemanso or Asante is in the interior forest. You are also saying Baoule from Asante, how does it relate to Akan origins. It clearly summarises what I’m saying.Norcer (talk)00:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are the Baoulé not Akan ? The overarching point is various Akan groups have different oral traditions that suggest they do not come from Bonoman.
I simply listed 5 groups whose oral traditions contradict what you are saying. Also you're deliberately taking Konadu's statement out of context but I digress.AkanArchives (talk)00:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That’s good, it summarises what I’m saying. The quotations and sources will speak. Henceforth the quotations will only be used. The archaeological evidence by Konadu and oral tradition by Buah, Ofosu Mensah will speak. WP forbidsWP:SYNTH. Is like saying, playing football trace its origins to Brazil, so currently because football is played in other countries, then football originated from there too. Or by saying, Christianity from Israel, so because Christianity is worshipped in other countries, then Chritianity trace its origins to those countries also.Norcer (talk)00:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Closing as requested atWP:CR. There seems to be rough consensus here forOption B. The majority of contributors to the discussion are in favour of this (4 out of 6), and this view also seems to be supported by a preponderance of reasoned arguments and source analysis.(non-admin closure)Dionysodorus (talk)11:54, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should the first sentence of the sectionFormation of inland Akan polities read:
A - It is widely acknowledged that Akan trace its origins to Bono, and Bono played a significant role in early Akan history as the first centralized Akan state (the current wording)
Or
B - Bono played a significant role in early Akan history as the first centralized Akan state (the proposed wording)
A - This is supported by early and recent scholars & historians such as Adu Boahen, Buah, Kwasi Konadu etc. This has always been the case.Norcer (talk)18:23, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
B – Multiple reputable sources (Buah, Boaten, Fynn, Konadu) support a multi-origin model including Adanse and Asantemanso, not Bono alone. The current wording overstates Bono’s role in Akan origin.
F. K. Buah’s A History of Ghana, there is recognition that the origins of the Akan are not singular. While he initially writes that “nearly all the different groups of the Akan trace their original homes to Bonoland” (p. 8), he later notes that oral tradition has “persisted to this day that Adanse… was the home and centre of Akan dispersion” (p. 16). He further explains that Adanse emerged earlier than Denkyira and Asante (p. 17), and that it served as the original homeland for the Akyem states (p. 28), the Bosome (p. 29), and likely the Ahanta, Evalue, and Nzima as well (p. 29).
Kwasi Konadu, in The Ghana Reader, likewise describes Akan origins as linked to several towns in the forest zone—including Adanse, Asantemanso, Bono Manso, and Begho—stating that “the Akan peoples… trace their origins to a number of important forest towns in central Ghana” (p. 33).
Kwasi Boaten adds in The Asante Before 1700 that Adanse was “the first of the five principal Akan states” (p. 51) and “nurtured most of the important Akan clans” (p. 52).
J. K. Fynn, writing in Ashanti and Her Neighbours, reinforces this by noting that the ancestors of the Ashanti “were formerly subjects of the Akanny state which… may confidently be identified with the old Adanse kingdom, ‘the first seat of the Akan nation where God first began the creation of the world’” (p. 50). He further states that “the Akanny of the seventeenth century was the old Akan state of ‘Arcania’, whose territorial boundary then embraced the whole of modern Adansi, parts of Akyem and Denkyera and Southern Ashanti” (p. 36), and suggests that “perhaps the Akanny state was the Adanse state reputed to have been the first Akan state” (p. 37). He also observes that “the consolidation of the Denkyera state must be attributed to some families from the princely houses of the old Akanny kingdom,” with its early capital located in modern-day Adansi (p. 43).
We considerWP:AGEMATTERS andWP:SYNTH here. None of your source mentions Akan origins, rather quotings which sum up toWP:SYNTH. However, numerous scholars such as Buah, Adu Boahen, Konadu etc trace Akan origins to Bono in the north.
As Buah, Adu Boahen etc trace Akan origins to Bono in the north forest. The recent scholars Kwasi Konadu and Campbell also record the same
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward, and, in addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground-stone artifacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior,the two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso, capital of Bono polity, and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).
To clarify everything,the areas of Akan origins points to the north forest of Bono. This distinguishes between the north forest of Bono (Begho & Bono Manso) and interior forest of Asantemanso/AdansemansoNorcer (talk)20:53, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
B – The claim that all Akan people originated from Bono oversimplifies what the sources say.
Konadu (2016, p. 33) states that Akan origins are traced to multiple forest towns,including Adanse, Asantemanso, Bono Manso, and Begho—not Bono alone.
Here’s the exact quote from Konadu (2016, p. 33), The Ghana Reader:
“Oral and archaeological evidence from two of theoldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively… Although Adansemanso was occupied mainly in the first half of the second millennium CE
This contradicts the claim that all Akan people migrated from the Bono State, these settlements are older than the Bono state
According to Konadu, there were Akan settlements in the forest region before Bono existed as a state.
Buah (1998, pp. 8, 16–17) presents Adanse as important origin centers.
Fynn (1971, p. 36) identifies the “Akanny” state with Adanse, calling it the first Akan state. The evidence shows a multi-nodal origin model, not a singular one. Therefore, the proposed wording in B is more accurate and avoids implying an unsubstantiated consensus.
You are all over sayingB without any supporting reliable source. We are dealing withWP:AGEMATTERS. Stay on topic, it is about Akan origins. Konadu (2016) clarifies on Akan origins from areas of north forest as quoted above.
Your quotations on the other hand, summarisesWP:OR thus based on your personal thoughts. AndWP:SYNTH, making personal conclusions without explicit statements in reliable source.Norcer (talk)09:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
B,WP:AGEMATTERS. The only source supporting a Bono origin (ie. a dispersal from the northern fringe of the forest) isBuah 1980 page 9 (republished in 1998). Other sources such asKonadu 2010 page 34 andCompton 2014 page 4 appear to support a multifocal origin for the Akan (however unfortunately we can't find a source which discusses historiography).Konadu and Campbell 2016 page 33 says (emphasis mine)
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest,areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward, and, in addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground-stone artifacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso, capital of Bono polity, and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).
, which could potentially be construed as indirectly supporting a Bono origin, however he contradicts himself in the earlier paragraph
Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively, although Adansemanso was occupied mainly in the first half of the second millennium CE, a long dry period in West Africa and the second major re-gression in the levels of Lake Bosomtwe
, ie. Asantemanso and Adansemanso predated the earliest settlements in the Bono region, meaning they couldn't have originated from there and "areas associated with Akan origin" refers to either tradition or the version prior torevision.Kowal2701 (talk)15:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also when Konadu says 5th century, he's referring toAmowi cave, Bonomanso and Begho are thought to have been founded in the second millennium CE (see quotes from above discussion)Kowal2701 (talk)15:04, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A- This is supported by scholars such as Buah, Adu Boahen, Konadu etc.
Buah has emphasised Akan origins to Bono. Adu Boahen also did the same, by tracing Akan origins to the northern forest of Bono. The recent scholar Kwasi Konadu also did the same. Quoting Konadu (2016)p.33
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward, and, in addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground-stone artifacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior,the two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso, capital of Bono polity, and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).
Now, everything is clear, it saysareas of Akan origins are to thenorth of Bono
Your other quotes aren’t talking about Akan origins, this is out of context. Besides the oldest places are in Bono.Norcer (talk)20:07, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oral and archaeological evidence fromtwo of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively… Although Adansemanso was occupied mainly in the first half of the second millennium CE… The two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso… and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).”
This clearly affirms thatAsantemanso predates Bono Manso by over a millennium, and Adansemanso is centuries older than Begho. Konadudoes not say Akan origins lie only in Bono. He presents a multi-nodal model — as also supported by Boaten (1971), Buah (1998), and others — recognizing multiple origin centers:Adanse, Bono, Begho, Asantemanso.
Also, Buah himself affirms this in A History of Ghana, writing:
“Oral tradition… has persisted to this day that Adanse… was the home and centre of Akan dispersion.” (Buah 1998, p. 16)
Therefore, Konadu is not saying “everything is clear” about a Bono-only origin. He explicitly includes Asantemanso and Adansemanso among the oldest Akan towns with continuous cultural and archaeological presence.
The claim that all Akan people originated from the Bono state is both outdated and inaccurate. Archaeological and oral tradition evidence indicate that settlements such as Adansemanso and Asantemanso predate the formation of the Bono state. Furthermore, the oral traditions of Asante, Akyem, Assin, and Adanse do not trace their origins to Bonoman, but instead point to distinct local centers in the central forest zone.AkanArchives (talk)09:33, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, none of your quotations mention Akan origins. Your quotations sum up toWP:SYNTH andWP:OR
As clearly defined by Adu Boahen, Buah, Kwasi Konadu etc. Akan origins are associated to the north forest of Bono and southward migration to the central forestNorcer (talk)09:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, this is a misrepresentation of the sources and a misapplication of both WP:SYNTH and WP:OR.
First, the quotations I provided explicitly mention Akan origins, both in oral tradition and archaeological context:
Konadu (2016, p. 33) writes:
“Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively…”
This is a direct statement about the antiquity and continuity of Akan settlements—specifically regarding origins.
Buah (1998, p. 16) states:
“Oral tradition… has persisted to this day thatAdanse… was the home and centre of Akan dispersion…”
This clearly identifies Adanse as an acknowledged origin point in tradition.
Fynn (1971, p. 50) adds:
“The ancestors of the Ashantis… were formerly subjects of the Akanny state which… may confidently be identified with the old Adanse kingdom, ‘the first seat of the Akan nation where God first began the creation of the world.’”
This is not inference or synthesis, it is directly stated in the source.
Second, invoking WP:SYNTH is inaccurate in this context. No original interpretation is being made by piecing unrelated facts together. The sources themselves explicitly recognize multiple early Akan centers, includingBono Manso, Begho, Asantemanso, and Adansemanso, as settlements associated with Akan origins.
Finally, narrowing Akan origins to Bono alone contradicts the very authors you cite. Konadu, Buah, and Fynn all present a multi-nodal origin model. In fact, Konadu’s own chronology places Adansemanso and Asantemanso as older than Bono Manso.
B - I think version B is better because it doesn’t overstate Bono’s role. From what I’ve read in the sources listed here, a bunch of places (Adanse, Asantemanso, Bono Manso, and Begho) are all linked to the early history of the Akan. Konadu (2016) even says the Akan trace their origins to several important forest towns, not just one area. Saying it is "widely acknowledged" that Bono is the origin feels like too strong a claim when the sources mention multiple places.Vertyy (talk💬|contribs📝)02:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A- That’s really what sources cite Akan origins to, indicating the north forest areas.
Citing Konadu (2010, 2016) page 34 and 33 respectively:
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward, and, in addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground-stone artifacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior, the two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso, capital of Bono polity, and the township of Bɛw (commonly referred to as Begho).
Phrase or expression that Akan generally trace their origins to Bono areas, as supported by historians and scholars.Norcer (talk)20:20, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No it is not, most historians do not outright say all Akan come from Bonoman. The state is acknowledged as the first Akan kingdom in which many Akans political practices can be traced to.AkanArchives (talk)00:32, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is not just a mere claim, but must be supported by reliable source. These are the recent sources
Konadu does not state that all Akan originated from Bono. On the contrary, he writes:
“Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE and 393 CE respectively…” (Konadu, 2016, p. 33)
He then adds:
“The two best-known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlements of Bono-Manso… and Bɛw (Begho).” (ibid.)
This clearly distinguishes between multiple regions—forest interior and northern/northwest forest—all associated with early Akan identity. The evidence Konadu presents supports a multi-nodal origin, not a singular one from Bono.
You are intentionally ignoring the full context of the source and selectively quoting it to support a conclusion that the author himself does not make.Konadu presents evidence for multiple early Akan settlements, not just Bono, and explicitly identifies Asantemanso and Adansemanso as among the oldest in the forest zone. Presenting this as a unanimous Bono origin is misleading and unsupported by the cited text. This is misinformation.
Again, Akan people were living in Asantemanso and Adansemanso before the Bono State even existed. This makes your claim of all Akan people migrating from Bonoman false.AkanArchives (talk)09:40, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, none of your quotations mentions Akan origins but a summation ofWP:OR andWP:SYNTH which is prohibited.
Historians and scholars such as Buah, Adu Boahen etc recorded Akan trace its origins to Bono and southward migration to the central forest.
According to new source also (Konadu 2016 p.33)
In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the 5th century CE onward, and, addition to continuity in pottery styles, rock shelter sites show the use of microlithic industries and ground stone artefacts into the first millennium. Like Asantemanso and Adansemanso of the forest interior,the two best known sites of the northern and northwest forest are the Akan settlement of Bono Manso, the capital of Bono polity and the township of Bew(commonly referred as Begho).
At this stage, emphasis is being made between the north forest and interior forest, citing that Akan origins is associated to the north, and not interior. The key words are “areas associated with Akan origins”, and it points those areas of origins to the north forest of Bono.Norcer (talk)10:01, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A bot left me a feedback request for this RfC. I'm going to try and summarise the information presented so far as it hasn't been summarised in a neutral fashion yet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to be a debate over whether the Akan people trace their origins to a singular centre of development (Bonoland) vs there being a multi-nodal pattern of development (as in there were multiple urban centres that developed independently and eventually came together to make the Akan people).
Quotations presented so far and what they are purported to support
Source
Quote
Quote supports A/B
F. K. Buah’s A History of Ghana (1998)
"nearly all the different groups of the Akan trace their original homes to Bonoland" (pg. 9)
Buah doesn't seem to be giving his opinion as to their origin but the oral tradition. This is notable, but I wouldn't conflate this with expert opinion.
F. K. Buah’s A History of Ghana (1998)
"Oral tradition has, howeer, persisted to this day that Adanse in the present Asante Region was the home and centre of Akan dispersion... This legend would seem to point to the likelihood, as some historians maintain, that Adanseland was the original centre of Akan dispersion... and Akan institutions... took shape." (pg. 16-17)
So the oral traditions and historians are not in total agreement. I'd describe this, in the article, along the lines of "most oral traditions agree that the Akan originate from Bonoland"
F. K. Buah’s A History of Ghana (1998)
"All the Akyem states trace their original home from Adanse... Like other Akan groups, they probably formed part of the nucleus of the Bono empire... Like nearly all other Akan south of the Pra and Ofe Rivers, the Ahanta, Evalue and Nzima trace their origins in the 'north', most probably in Bono or Adanse land." (pg. 28-29)
More disagreeing oral traditions about the origin of the Akan.
The Ghana Reader (2016)
"Recently, both archaeologists and historians have taken renewed interest in the origins of peoples, and in this excerpt Kwasi Konadu offers an important (but highly condensed) view on the early formation of a composite Akan culture and those influenced by it, taking cues from recent research in Ghana archaeology and oral histories. He emphasizes the forest-savanna context and the place of the Tano River in how the Akan conceptualized their beginnings and the shape of their communities and composite culture... Oral and archaeological evidence from two of the oldest Akan towns in the forest interior, Asantemanso and Adansemanso, indicates continuous occupation from 700 BCE to the present and 393 to 1650 CE, respectively... The excavated material culture of Asantemanso and Adansemanso supports the oral-historical sources, which are consistent with Akan spiritual, ideational, and material culture through a constellation of evidence... Although Peter Shinnie, who carried out excavations at Adansemanso and Asantemanso, seems certain “there was permanent settlement [with a population of several thousand] at Asantemanso as early as the last few centuries B.C.,” he, however, would rather speculate on the presence of Guan speakers in the central Ghana forest than where the evidence points—to a proto-Akan presence... In the northern and northwest parts of the forest, areas associated with Akan origins are generally dated from the fifth century CE onward... [the evidence] does support the claim that several Akan societies were autochthonous [definition: Originating or formed in the place where found; indigenous: synonym: native.] to areas where Kintampo cultural sites on the fringe and in the forest interior are found" (pg. 30, 33-34)
One of this essay's/chapter's focus is how the Akan people have a multi-nodal origin. I don't see how it could be reasonably interpreted differently.
Anne M. Compton, Shifting Trade Networks: Sub-Saharan to Atlantic Exchange in Central Ghana 1355-1725 CE (2014)
"Three first born places are recorded for the Bron (Bono Manso, Wenchi, and Hani [Begho]) and five for the Akan (Adanse, Akyem, Assin, Denkyira, and Asante)" (pg. 5)
There being multiple points of origin of the Akan are given here.
Kwasi Konadu, The Akan Diaspora in the Americas (2010)
This is an older version of what was given above from The Ghana Reader. It is making the same argument, that being a multi-nodal origin.
I've already spent a few hours going through the sources and, so far, they all agree about a multi-nodal origin. Unless quotations can be provided from modern scholarship that I haven't covered here and which proves otherwise, I think the evidence supports optionB. I'll add my vote to the survey section. If possible, someone ought to clean up the survey section, its not meant for discussion.FropFrop (talk)03:31, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In sum, the findings from the site of Adansemanso indicate that a significant level of cultural complexity was attained within the central forest region of Ghana 2-3 centuries earlier than previously thought. Prior to these excavations, researchers have generally accepted that the Akan States first emerged and developed on the northern forest fringes, at sites such as Begho and Bono Manso. These new finds support the view that the complex organizations of the Akan forest states emerged concurrently with the forest fringe states. Such findings indicate that models of local state development have to be revised, and that much work remains to be done within the central forest region before we can fully understand the emergence of the Akan states.
The discussion above is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
%2c_early_1900s%2c_Central_Africa%2c_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo%2c_Pende_people%2c_wood%2c_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG)