Indirect rule succeeded in Northern Nigeria because the traditional political system was

Analyze the question: It asks why indirect rule worked in Northern Nigeria. The answer depends on the structure of the traditional political system in the North.

Concept: Indirect rule was Lord Lugard's system of governing through existing traditional rulers and institutions. For it to work, there had to be a well-organized, strong chain of authority that the British could use.

Step-by-step solution:

1. Northern Nigeria's system: The Hausa-Fulani emirates, under the Sokoto Caliphate (after the 1804 Jihad of Usman dan Fodio), had a highly centralized administration. The Emir was at the top, supported by officials such as the Waziri, the Galadima and district heads (Hakimai), and he ruled with wide, near-absolute powers. This made the system authoritarian.

2. Why this helped the British: They only had to control the Emir, and the existing structure of tax collection, courts and obedience carried out their orders. Few British officers were needed.

3. Checking the options: • A. Diffused and centrifugal: power is scattered. This does not fit the emirates. ✗ • B. Centralized and authoritarian: matches the emirate system. ✓ • C. Decentralized and hierarchical: it is hierarchical, but "decentralized" is wrong for the North. ✗ • D. Acephalous and polycentric: "acephalous" means "without a head", which describes some Igbo communities in the East. That is why indirect rule failed there, with the warrant chief system as the result. ✗

**Answer: B.

Tip: Remember the contrast:

• North (Hausa-Fulani): centralized and authoritarian, so indirect rule succeeded.
• East (Igbo): acephalous and decentralized, so indirect rule failed.
• West (Yoruba): monarchical, but the Oba's power was checked by chiefs, so indirect rule had partial success.

Whenever you see "acephalous", think of "no king", which usually means the Igbo.