The account of Borno's war with Mandara thus recounted above, at least from the point of view of the Mandara Chronicler, and all the other accounts I have given above clearly portray to us the essence of the Mune in that oppression and/or a war of caprice is not enjoined. And the war against Mandara was clearly a war of caprice, as Mandara had clearly recanted on its recalcitrance, when threatened. The essence of the Chronicle itself, however, is that we are here seeing, from accounts of an eye-witness, the portrayal of a polity whose language principles and practice of diplomacy, in war and in peace, are not less developed than any we have seen in the states of Euro-Germanic experience, of comparable times. The basis of this well ordered art is essentially the Mune, even though in its universalist form we may wish to assign it to the Book and the Sunna of Islam. Why not then, should we not regard the Mune as the constitution of the pre-colonial Borno State? Munen - ba (not in the Mune), for the Sayfawa ruler is certainly more binding than most modern constitutions had been binding on leaders of present-day African States!