Hornbill hunting decoys in Nigeria represent one of the most striking examples of specialised hunting knowledge recorded in the country during the early twentieth century. Hunters associated with Hausa and Nupe communities used artificial or preserved bird heads as part of carefully constructed disguises, fastening the devices to the head and using controlled, bird-like movements while approaching quarry.
The technique was more sophisticated than simply hiding from an animal. By changing his visible outline and manner of movement, a hunter could appear less recognisably human. The large head and bill of a ground hornbill projected above the hunter while much of his body remained concealed by vegetation or a crouched posture.
Three surviving records are particularly important. The British Museum catalogues a Nupe decoy with a production date of 1900. The University of Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology preserves another Nupe example collected at Yelwa on the Niger in 1902–03. In 1911, E. D. Morel published a photograph by E. Firmin showing a Nigerian hunter stalking game with the head of a ground hornbill fixed to his forehead.
Together, these records provide an unusually detailed glimpse into hunting technology, mobility and environmental knowledge in what became modern Nigeria.
Hornbill Hunting Decoys in Nigeria Before 1920
The earliest of the three key museum records comes from the British Museum. Its collections database lists object Af1926,1110.1 as a decoy made by the Nupe in Nigeria and gives it a production date of 1900.
That date places the object before the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Nigeria Protectorates in 1914. Although museum catalogues today use Nigeria as the geographical designation, the political landscape at the beginning of the twentieth century differed considerably from that of the later Nigerian state.
An even more detailed Nupe example survives at Cambridge.
The Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology holds object 1948.295 B, described as a ground hornbill head used as an elephant-hunting lure or decoy. The object contains a genuine skull and beak attached to a wooden neck and wrapped in leather. Metal pieces were inserted to represent the eyes, while fibre-wrapped bundles were attached around the head.
EXPLORE NOW: Military Era & Coups in Nigeria
It was collected by Major-General Sydney Capel Peck in 1902–03 and came from Yelwa on the Niger. The museum attributes it culturally to the Nupe.
The old catalogue description records how such equipment was used. The devices were attached to hunters’ heads while the men imitated the movements of a bird. The Cambridge specimen was specifically associated with elephant hunting.
The surviving object preserves an important connection between craftsmanship, hunting practice, location and the professional skills of Nupe hunters at the beginning of the twentieth century.
How the Hornbill Decoy Worked
The ground hornbill was particularly suited to this form of disguise because it is a very large bird that spends much of its time walking on the ground.
The northern, or Abyssinian, ground hornbill, Bucorvus abyssinicus, occurs across a broad belt of Africa north of the equator. It is principally associated with savannah, grassland, scrub and relatively open country. Its dark plumage, large body, conspicuous bill and terrestrial habits create a distinctive silhouette.
The hunter’s aim was not necessarily to disappear completely. Instead, the disguise altered what the quarry appeared to be seeing.
A large bird moving through vegetation was less immediately suggestive of danger than an upright human figure. By crouching, controlling his speed and moving the artificial head in a bird-like fashion, the hunter could attempt to approach more closely before the animal recognised the threat.
In modern terms, this can be understood as a form of behavioural camouflage. The deception depended not only on colour or concealment but also on convincing movement.
The construction of the decoys varied. Some examples were carved from wood. Others incorporated the skull and beak of an actual ground hornbill. Leather, string, cloth, seeds, metal and other materials could then be added to complete the device.
These were carefully made hunting implements, shaped for practical use and designed to change the hunter’s appearance as he moved through the landscape.
The Hausa Burtu Tradition
The Hausa tradition is particularly well represented in museum collections.
The University of Michigan Museum of Art preserves a Hunter’s Bird Decoy Headdress, attributed to Hausa culture and dated to about 1950. The museum identifies this type of bird decoy by the Hausa term burtu.
Its catalogue describes Hausa hunters in northern Nigeria and Niger using burtu while hunting birds and other animals. The bird head was connected to a long curved neck and worn on the forehead.
The hunter then imitated the movements of a real bird while approaching the intended quarry.
The Michigan example is made from wood, leather, string and red Abrus seeds, but other examples could incorporate the actual skull of a ground hornbill.
Another Hausa burtu in the collection of Cornell University’s Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art contains the skull and beak of a real Abyssinian ground hornbill attached to a wooden neck and covered with leather.
Museum descriptions also mention hunters wearing dark clothing, helping the human body resemble the dark plumage of the bird and become less conspicuous during the approach.
Some decoys contained herbal preparations connected with beliefs surrounding hunting success. The burtu therefore belonged to a wider tradition combining practical hunting skills, craftsmanship and cultural ideas about the hunter’s profession.
What the Hausa Word Burtu Tells Us
Historical linguistic material adds another dimension to the story.
G. P. Bargery’s A Hausa-English Dictionary and English-Hausa Vocabulary, published by Oxford University Press in 1934, records the expression ya shiga burtu.
Bargery explains it as disguising oneself or dressing in such a way that one cannot easily be recognised.
The expression reflects a broader connection between burtu and disguise. In museum terminology, burtu is also used for the specialised bird decoy employed by Hausa hunters.
EXPLORE NOW: Democratic Nigeria
The language therefore preserves the wider idea of concealment or altered appearance, while the surviving hunting objects show one particularly striking way in which that idea was applied.
The 1911 Photograph by E. Firmin
One of the clearest visual records of the technique appeared in 1911, three years before the amalgamation that created the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria in 1914.
British journalist and writer E. D. Morel published Nigeria: Its Peoples and Its Problems in London through Smith, Elder & Co. The book contained numerous photographs depicting people, landscapes and everyday activities across the territories then commonly discussed under the broader geographical name Nigeria.
Among them was a photograph credited to E. Firmin.
Its published caption described the subject as a Nigerian hunter stalking game with the head of a ground hornbill fixed to his forehead.
The photograph gives a rare visual impression of how the technique worked in practice. Rather than showing the decoy as an isolated museum object, the image presents the device as part of the hunter’s body and posture.
The hornbill head rises prominently from the forehead while the hunter remains low, creating an outline very different from that of a standing person.
The photograph also demonstrates how closely hunting skill depended on performance. The hunter had to move in a manner consistent with the appearance created by the decoy. Sudden or obviously human movement would reduce the effectiveness of the disguise.
By 1911, the practice had therefore entered both photographic and published records.
Bows, Arrows and Professional Hunters
The hornbill disguise existed within a much broader hunting culture.
In the same section of his 1911 book, Morel described a professional hunter travelling with a caravan. He noted that such a hunter could be recognised by his bow and a quiver containing barbed reed arrows, some of which might have been poisoned.
Bows and arrows belonged to the equipment associated with professional hunting in the region, while the hornbill disguise offered a specialised means of approaching quarry.
The two forms of equipment served different purposes. The decoy assisted the approach. The hunter’s weapon provided the means of striking once he had reached an effective distance.
This combination illustrates the complexity of professional hunting. Success depended on far more than possessing a weapon. Hunters needed knowledge of terrain, vegetation, animal behaviour, movement, timing and distance.
The ability to approach an animal without immediately alarming it could be as important as the final shot.
Hausa and Nupe Hunters Beyond Northern Nigeria
Professional hunters were also highly mobile.
Historian Egodi Uchendu, in her study of the arrival of Islam and northern migrants in eastern Nigeria, discusses Hausa and Nupe elephant hunters operating far beyond their northern homelands.
During the closing years of the nineteenth century and the opening decades of the twentieth, hunters moved into forested areas of what became eastern Nigeria, where elephants threatened farms and ivory remained commercially valuable.
Uchendu describes Hausa and Nupe hunters operating in the Abakaliki area during the early twentieth century. Some had moved through the Ekoi forest region before establishing themselves farther west and north.
Elephant hunting in the Abakaliki area declined as elephant populations disappeared from the locality, with the activity largely ending there by about 1920.
These movements show that hunting expertise travelled over considerable distances.
A Hausa or Nupe hunter should therefore not be imagined as confined to one ecological zone. Professional hunters moved through different landscapes and interacted with communities far from their original homes.
Their movements connected hunting knowledge with trade, migration and changing economic relationships across colonial Nigeria.
Knowledge, Craftsmanship and Performance
What makes the hornbill decoy especially remarkable is the combination of skills required to use it successfully.
The maker needed enough familiarity with the bird’s appearance to reproduce its recognisable profile. The hunter needed to know how the bird normally moved and how the intended quarry reacted to both birds and humans.
He then had to reproduce those movements while remaining low enough for the disguise to retain its effect.
The method consequently depended heavily on observation.
The hunter was not simply carrying an object. He was performing the behaviour associated with the creature the object represented.
Body position, pace, direction and timing all mattered.
A poorly timed movement could reveal the hunter’s presence. A convincing approach could allow him to reduce the distance between himself and his quarry before the animal recognised the danger.
The technique therefore combined several forms of knowledge: animal behaviour, landscape awareness, craftsmanship and physical discipline.
The surviving decoys preserve only the material component of the practice. The equally important element was the hunter’s ability to use them convincingly.
EXPLORE NOW: Biographies & Cultural Icons of Nigeria
Conclusion
Hornbill hunting decoys in Nigeria preserve a remarkable chapter in the history of Hausa and Nupe hunting traditions during the early twentieth century.
A British Museum Nupe object is catalogued with a production date of 1900. The Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology preserves a Nupe ground-hornbill decoy collected at Yelwa on the Niger in 1902–03 and associated with elephant hunting. E. D. Morel’s 1911 book includes a photograph of a Nigerian hunter stalking game with a ground-hornbill head fixed to his forehead.
Later Hausa museum collections identify the specialised bird decoy as burtu and describe hunters wearing it on the forehead while mimicking bird movements. Bargery’s 1934 Hausa dictionary also preserves the linguistic connection between burtu and disguise.
These records reveal a hunting system based on more than weapons. It required detailed observation of animals, careful manufacture of specialised equipment and the ability to control appearance and movement.
More than a century later, the surviving hornbill decoys remain important records of craftsmanship, environmental knowledge and the professional skills of hunters in Nigeria’s past.
Author’s Note
The history of the burtu shows how closely hunting knowledge could combine craftsmanship, language, animal observation and physical skill. Hausa and Nupe hunters transformed their familiarity with birds and game into a practical stalking technique in which movement and appearance were as important as the weapon carried by the hunter. The surviving decoys offer a rare window into the specialised environmental knowledge of professional hunters and the ways such skills travelled across communities and landscapes.
References
Morel, E. D. Nigeria: Its Peoples and Its Problems. London: Smith, Elder & Co., 1911.
University of Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. Object 1948.295 B. Nupe ground-hornbill hunting decoy from Yelwa on the Niger, collected by Major-General Sydney Capel Peck in 1902–03.
The British Museum. Object Af1926,1110.1. Nupe decoy, Nigeria, catalogued with a production date of 1900.
University of Michigan Museum of Art. Hunter’s Bird Decoy Headdress, Hausa, circa 1950, object 1982/2.63.
Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art, Cornell University. Hunter’s Bird Decoy (Burtu), Hausa, Nigeria/Niger, object 81.091.002.
Bargery, G. P. A Hausa-English Dictionary and English-Hausa Vocabulary. London: Oxford University Press, 1934.
Uchendu, Egodi. Dawn for Islam in Eastern Nigeria: A History of the Arrival of Islam in Igboland. Islamkundliche Untersuchungen, Volume 303.
IUCN Hornbill Specialist Group. Northern Ground Hornbill, Bucorvus abyssinicus. Species account.
