Just out of curiosity, when did ISAAQ come about as a Clan.

[Sharmarke91]

I recently, came across an article discussing Somali tribes and when each tribe cropped up in the Somali peninsula. The article alluded that ISAAQ came about fifteen to sixteen centuries. This didn’t make sense to me for the simple reason that when the ISAAQ in the coastal cities were signing treaties with the British in eighteen centuries, ISAAQ were already in their 10 to 15 generations from Sheekh ISAAQ.

Anyways, the article got me interested, started to retrace my genealogy (Abtirsiin), shockingly, calculating all the age gap of my forefathers (assuming each having his son or sons between 30 and 40, as earlier generations would marry in their mid-thirties due to marriage being difficult, costly and would take most of if not all one’s whole camel possessions), AYUUB SHEEKH ISXAAQ must have lived in the late fifteen to early sixteen century, this goes same for all other sub clan of ISAAQ originators.

Then I wonder, ISAAQ can’t be this young, so if we rule out the possibility of ISAAQ being Arab and say ISAAQ branched off from DIR then the DIR himself hadn’t been around that long as he would only be couple generations older than ISAAQ. Even the Samaale character wouldn’t be that old as he only precedes the DIR couple generations himself.

This is a dilemma for me because on the one hand, I don’t believe we descended from an Arab guy who appeared out of thin air in the fourteen centuries and on the other hand we can’t claim being part of DIR as DIR is the alleged original people in this part of the world yet ISAAQ not being that old.

The question is when did ISAAQ come to be? ISAAQ was never mentioned in The Conquest of Abyssinia (Futuh Al-Habasha), only the Habar-Magaadle was mentioned. May be when those wars ended, the ISAAQ was created by Habar-magaadle and others (Habar-habuusho).
Anybody knowledgeable on this subject who would care to share anything with us. Thanks guys

You take this too seriously man.

The fact is ALL somali clans weather Darod, Hawiye, Dir or Isaaq are just people that have come together and formed alliances which have evolved over centuries, resulting in these modern clans. This tribal tradition came to us from Arabia due to Islam.

Nonetheless, the Hawiye and Dir do not claim they actually ALL descend from the same ancestor it just the Isaaq and Darod that claim they all descended from one ancestor. For example, the Hawadle and other major Hawiye clans are not actually Hawiye.

I think most Somalis are only genuinely related on or around the 7th generation. Anything above that is bullshit.

So xplaya, Isaaq could have been a real person, but is the progenitor of the Isaaq clan?

I doubt. That's why I took the example of " xer" not all xer members are biological brothers they are just spritual brothers and that can evolve into cult or clan. As we have seen in gaalkacyo (xerta sheikh cabdi weli who is killed by alshabab recently). If sheikh isaaq was real carab man and he fathered all isaaqs then why isaaqs clan members have the same DNA markers as other Somalis ?

The isaaqs or daarods have no evidence that they are different from other Somalis who have nothing to do with the Arabian peninsula. Their hashimite/ashraaf myth is bullshit . they just invented fake abtirsi out of the blue just because they are sufi shafi,is who are extremely in love (axbaab) with with mohamed csws and his offspring. These kind of groups exist almost every Muslim country especially in Shia majority or shafaci countries like us .

It's interestin dat not a single person hu evr argued against the sheekh Isaaq story can bring any historical texts to challenge it or debunk it. Instead it's out of pure hatred for arabs or a false pride about being unique that makes you deny a historical facts. Cut the emotional bullshit

We have first hand sources of people who accompanied the sheekh, and also wrote about his life marriage and children. These manuscripts remain until today and agree with secondary sources and Somali tradition. To add to that, Islam whether Shia or Sunni(sufi included) are completely against taking false fathers. One of the founding 5 principles in shariah is preservation of lineages

It was narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Any man who knowingly claims to belong to someone other than his father has committed an act of kufr. Anyone who claims to belong to a people when he has no lineage among them, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3317) and Muslim (61).

Your crazy man.

Sheikh Isaaq might have existed or not, i can't disproof that.

But to state all whole claim Isaaq today descended from him is just absurd.

This clan tradition obviously came to us from Arabia due to Islam and our proximity to it.

You have to gullible to actually believe that bullshit.

The reality is were only related on the 7th generation.

[xisaabiye1]

You take this too seriously man.

The fact is ALL somali clans weather Darod, Hawiye, Dir or Isaaq are just people that have come together and formed alliances which have evolved over centuries, resulting in these modern clans. This tribal tradition came to us from Arabia due to Islam.

Nonetheless, the Hawiye and Dir do not claim they actually ALL descend from the same ancestor it just the Isaaq and Darod that claim they all descended from one ancestor. For example, the Hawadle and other major Hawiye clans are not actually Hawiye.

I think most Somalis are only genuinely related on or around the 7th generation. Anything above that is bullshit.

I doubt. That's why I took the example of " xer" not all xer members are biological brothers they are just spritual brothers and that can evolve into cult or clan. As we have seen in gaalkacyo (xerta sheikh cabdi weli who is killed by alshabab recently). If sheikh isaaq was real carab man and he fathered all isaaqs then why isaaqs clan members have the same DNA markers as other Somalis ?

The isaaqs or daarods have no evidence that they are different from other Somalis who have nothing to do with the Arabian peninsula. Their hashimite/ashraaf myth is bullshit . they just invented fake abtirsi out of the blue just because they are sufi shafi,is who are extremely in love (axbaab) with with mohamed csws and his offspring. These kind of groups exist almost every Muslim country especially in Shia majority or shafaci countries like us .

It's interestin dat not a single person hu evr argued against the sheekh Isaaq story can bring any historical texts to challenge it or debunk it. Instead it's out of pure hatred for arabs or a false pride about being unique that makes you deny a historical facts. Cut the emotional bullshit

We have first hand sources of people who accompanied the sheekh, and also wrote about his life marriage and children. These manuscripts remain until today and agree with secondary sources and Somali tradition. To add to that, Islam whether Shia or Sunni(sufi included) are completely against taking false fathers. One of the founding 5 principles in shariah is preservation of lineages

It was narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Any man who knowingly claims to belong to someone other than his father has committed an act of kufr. Anyone who claims to belong to a people when he has no lineage among them, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3317) and Muslim (61).

Your crazy man.

Sheikh Isaaq might have existed or not, i can't disproof that.

But to state all whole claim Isaaq today descended from him is just absurd.

This clan tradition obviously came to us from Arabia due to Islam and our proximity to it.

You have to gullible to actually believe that bullshit.

The reality is were only related on the 7th generation.

2 things about this. Lambar 1, you proved my point about emotional non constructive rebuttals with no substance . Lumbar labo the arabs never adopted fake clan lineages, this is not a arab custom..they only had isbahaysi qabiileed but never took a fake lineage. That disproves your point even though it was a garbage point to argue fro.

[Sharmarke91]

It's interestin dat not a single person hu evr argued against the sheekh Isaaq story can bring any historical texts to challenge it or debunk it. Instead it's out of pure hatred for arabs or a false pride about being unique that makes you deny a historical facts. Cut the emotional bullshit

We have first hand sources of people who accompanied the sheekh, and also wrote about his life marriage and children. These manuscripts remain until today and agree with secondary sources and Somali tradition. To add to that, Islam whether Shia or Sunni(sufi included) are completely against taking false fathers. One of the founding 5 principles in shariah is preservation of lineages

It was narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Any man who knowingly claims to belong to someone other than his father has committed an act of kufr. Anyone who claims to belong to a people when he has no lineage among them, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3317) and Muslim (61).

Your crazy man.

Sheikh Isaaq might have existed or not, i can't disproof that.

But to state all whole claim Isaaq today descended from him is just absurd.

This clan tradition obviously came to us from Arabia due to Islam and our proximity to it.

You have to gullible to actually believe that bullshit.

The reality is were only related on the 7th generation.

2 things about this. Lambar 1, you proved my point about emotional non constructive rebuttals with no substance . Lumbar labo the arabs never adopted fake clan lineages, this is not a arab custom..they only had isbahaysi qabiileed but never took a fake lineage. That disproves your point even though it was a garbage point to argue fro.

Nacasnimada nagala tag ninyaho.

You can belief in the myth but ain't true.

You don't have to even search hard to find how these major somali clans came to be. If you look at the recent history of the Isaaq for example, in the 1950s some segments of the Akisho were assimilated into the Sacad Muse, Jibril Abokor, even more recently the Kuul Care were being assimilated into the Habar Yonis etc. In fact there is an attempt to assimilate Isaaq itself into Dir. Marka hadadan cagli lahyn sxb anigu caqli kuma noqon kare iskaga jir jahligaas.

[xisaabiye1]

Your crazy man.

Sheikh Isaaq might have existed or not, i can't disproof that.

But to state all whole claim Isaaq today descended from him is just absurd.

This clan tradition obviously came to us from Arabia due to Islam and our proximity to it.

You have to gullible to actually believe that bullshit.

The reality is were only related on the 7th generation.

2 things about this. Lambar 1, you proved my point about emotional non constructive rebuttals with no substance . Lumbar labo the arabs never adopted fake clan lineages, this is not a arab custom..they only had isbahaysi qabiileed but never took a fake lineage. That disproves your point even though it was a garbage point to argue fro.

Nacasnimada nagala tag ninyaho.

You can belief in the myth but ain't true.

You don't have to even search hard to find how these major somali clans came to be. If you look at the recent history of the Isaaq for example, in the 1950s some segments of the Akisho were assimilated into the Sacad Muse, Jibril Abokor, even more recently the Kuul Care were being assimilated into the Habar Yonis etc. In fact there is an attempt to assimilate Isaaq itself into Dir. Marka hadadan cagli lahyn sxb anigu caqli kuma noqon kare iskaga jir jahligaas.

Kuul caare, akisho are stand alone that have or tried to make a confederacy. They dont appropriate Habar awal or habar yoonis lineage. Try again buddy

Like I said, bring a reference stronger than the first hand accounts of sheekh isaaq which is in agreement with secondary narrations and Somali oral tradition. Its impossible for you to debunk that in a constructive way. Anigu caqligeygu iyo damiirkeyguba waa mid maantiq(logic) kudhisan. Wixi aad ii gudbiso waan akhriyi lahaa dabeetana waan cabiri lahaa. Lkn hadalkaagu waa hadal bilaa micna ah waana iska ra'iy un. Taariikhdu ra'iy kuma koobna, wax cadayn un balaga raaca.

[DayrBare]

I recently, came across an article discussing Somali tribes and when each tribe cropped up in the Somali peninsula. The article alluded that ISAAQ came about fifteen to sixteen centuries. This didn’t make sense to me for the simple reason that when the ISAAQ in the coastal cities were signing treaties with the British in eighteen centuries, ISAAQ were already in their 10 to 15 generations from Sheekh ISAAQ.

Anyways, the article got me interested, started to retrace my genealogy (Abtirsiin), shockingly, calculating all the age gap of my forefathers (assuming each having his son or sons between 30 and 40, as earlier generations would marry in their mid-thirties due to marriage being difficult, costly and would take most of if not all one’s whole camel possessions), AYUUB SHEEKH ISXAAQ must have lived in the late fifteen to early sixteen century, this goes same for all other sub clan of ISAAQ originators.

Then I wonder, ISAAQ can’t be this young, so if we rule out the possibility of ISAAQ being Arab and say ISAAQ branched off from DIR then the DIR himself hadn’t been around that long as he would only be couple generations older than ISAAQ. Even the Samaale character wouldn’t be that old as he only precedes the DIR couple generations himself.

This is a dilemma for me because on the one hand, I don’t believe we descended from an Arab guy who appeared out of thin air in the fourteen centuries and on the other hand we can’t claim being part of DIR as DIR is the alleged original people in this part of the world yet ISAAQ not being that old.

The question is when did ISAAQ come to be? ISAAQ was never mentioned in The Conquest of Abyssinia (Futuh Al-Habasha), only the Habar-Magaadle was mentioned. May be when those wars ended, the ISAAQ was created by Habar-magaadle and others (Habar-habuusho).
Anybody knowledgeable on this subject who would care to share anything with us. Thanks guys

Your question simply can be summarized into " was sheekh Isxaaq a historical personality"? Meaning did he exist, and the question to that is simply yes. We have enough of first hand witnesses visiting Maydh encountering sheekh Isxaaq there in the 1300s. At least 3 Arab travels left behind a written account of meeting sheekh Isxaaq.

Now one mistake Somalis commit regarding dates , is when they say the 14 or 15 century they mean the 1400s and the 1500s which is wrong when you say the 14 century in English it means the period from 1300-1400 same for the 15 century meaning 1400-1500.

Now the average generation is 3 generation in a century or maximum 4 in a century. Taking the average in your case 15 generation to Ayuub multiplied by 33 years that will give you an approximate of 500 years putting Ayuub around early 1500s . That's the years of Futuux Al Xabasha so it's pretty much accurate. That doesn't mean Ayuub lived at that time it's just an approximate using your 15 generation. Most Isaaq today are at least 17 generation to Isaaq putting the 8 sons of Sheek Isxaaq in the 1400s, which is plausible since Sheek Isxaaq time was between 1300-1400.

The rest of the mumbo jumbo dir ibnu rag ibnu bnu zag ibnu Ram is pure gibbirish invented recently.

Ok then one must ask the question how a segment of the Isaaq (Habr-magaadle in this case) were able to enlist such large soldiers that took part in the conquest of Abyssinia since they were two to three generation to Sheekh Isxaaq?

[Jaamacbuuhoodle]

Isaaq waa dad isku tagay oo qabiil noqday ee sheekh isaxaaq waxuu ahaa wadaadka dadka isku tagay diinta islaamka bari jiray ee Aabhood ma ahayn sheekhu waxu ahaa Dir kuwa hada ku abtirsada sheekh isaxaaq maanta gaarkood waa oromo
hadaan doonayaa in waxii madhibaan , midgaan . Tumaal . Yibro ee jooga koonfurta Sool inaan ku daro reerkayga Axmed Garaad sidu reerkaygu aad u bato oo kor u dhaafno 500k .
Waa mashruuc fiican walaahi ciidan fiicanba laga samayn kara .

[Khalid Ali]

Beesha doofaar have issues some times they claim waaq galla madow ancestry some times jabarti ancestry
Of jabarta some times alkhadams some times a sufi saint in zubayd who died 1404 they claim.


Sheikh isxaaq story and history has always remained the same.

[X.Playa]

I recently, came across an article discussing Somali tribes and when each tribe cropped up in the Somali peninsula. The article alluded that ISAAQ came about fifteen to sixteen centuries. This didn’t make sense to me for the simple reason that when the ISAAQ in the coastal cities were signing treaties with the British in eighteen centuries, ISAAQ were already in their 10 to 15 generations from Sheekh ISAAQ.

Anyways, the article got me interested, started to retrace my genealogy (Abtirsiin), shockingly, calculating all the age gap of my forefathers (assuming each having his son or sons between 30 and 40, as earlier generations would marry in their mid-thirties due to marriage being difficult, costly and would take most of if not all one’s whole camel possessions), AYUUB SHEEKH ISXAAQ must have lived in the late fifteen to early sixteen century, this goes same for all other sub clan of ISAAQ originators.

Then I wonder, ISAAQ can’t be this young, so if we rule out the possibility of ISAAQ being Arab and say ISAAQ branched off from DIR then the DIR himself hadn’t been around that long as he would only be couple generations older than ISAAQ. Even the Samaale character wouldn’t be that old as he only precedes the DIR couple generations himself.

This is a dilemma for me because on the one hand, I don’t believe we descended from an Arab guy who appeared out of thin air in the fourteen centuries and on the other hand we can’t claim being part of DIR as DIR is the alleged original people in this part of the world yet ISAAQ not being that old.

The question is when did ISAAQ come to be? ISAAQ was never mentioned in The Conquest of Abyssinia (Futuh Al-Habasha), only the Habar-Magaadle was mentioned. May be when those wars ended, the ISAAQ was created by Habar-magaadle and others (Habar-habuusho).
Anybody knowledgeable on this subject who would care to share anything with us. Thanks guys

Your question simply can be summarized into " was sheekh Isxaaq a historical personality"? Meaning did he exist, and the question to that is simply yes. We have enough of first hand witnesses visiting Maydh encountering sheekh Isxaaq there in the 1300s. At least 3 Arab travels left behind a written account of meeting sheekh Isxaaq.

Now one mistake Somalis commit regarding dates , is when they say the 14 or 15 century they mean the 1400s and the 1500s which is wrong when you say the 14 century in English it means the period from 1300-1400 same for the 15 century meaning 1400-1500.

Now the average generation is 3 generation in a century or maximum 4 in a century. Taking the average in your case 15 generation to Ayuub multiplied by 33 years that will give you an approximate of 500 years putting Ayuub around early 1500s . That's the years of Futuux Al Xabasha so it's pretty much accurate. That doesn't mean Ayuub lived at that time it's just an approximate using your 15 generation. Most Isaaq today are at least 17 generation to Isaaq putting the 8 sons of Sheek Isxaaq in the 1400s, which is plausible since Sheek Isxaaq time was between 1300-1400.

The rest of the mumbo jumbo dir ibnu rag ibnu bnu zag ibnu Ram is pure gibbirish invented recently.

Ok then one must ask the question how a segment of the Isaaq (Habr-magaadle in this case) were able to enlist such large soldiers that took part in the conquest of Abyssinia since they were two to three generation to Sheekh Isxaaq?

The war of the conquest of Abbysiniya took place in the 1530s some 200 years since the founding of the Isaaq clan which puts the Habar Magaadle in their 5th or 6th generation. Putting a force of 800 men is not really much in my opinion they could have provided double that.

Look at it this way the modern reer Guuleed can employ 800 men easily and they are 6 generation old never mind the entire habar Magaadle.

[X.Playa]

I recently, came across an article discussing Somali tribes and when each tribe cropped up in the Somali peninsula. The article alluded that ISAAQ came about fifteen to sixteen centuries. This didn’t make sense to me for the simple reason that when the ISAAQ in the coastal cities were signing treaties with the British in eighteen centuries, ISAAQ were already in their 10 to 15 generations from Sheekh ISAAQ.

Anyways, the article got me interested, started to retrace my genealogy (Abtirsiin), shockingly, calculating all the age gap of my forefathers (assuming each having his son or sons between 30 and 40, as earlier generations would marry in their mid-thirties due to marriage being difficult, costly and would take most of if not all one’s whole camel possessions), AYUUB SHEEKH ISXAAQ must have lived in the late fifteen to early sixteen century, this goes same for all other sub clan of ISAAQ originators.

Then I wonder, ISAAQ can’t be this young, so if we rule out the possibility of ISAAQ being Arab and say ISAAQ branched off from DIR then the DIR himself hadn’t been around that long as he would only be couple generations older than ISAAQ. Even the Samaale character wouldn’t be that old as he only precedes the DIR couple generations himself.

This is a dilemma for me because on the one hand, I don’t believe we descended from an Arab guy who appeared out of thin air in the fourteen centuries and on the other hand we can’t claim being part of DIR as DIR is the alleged original people in this part of the world yet ISAAQ not being that old.

The question is when did ISAAQ come to be? ISAAQ was never mentioned in The Conquest of Abyssinia (Futuh Al-Habasha), only the Habar-Magaadle was mentioned. May be when those wars ended, the ISAAQ was created by Habar-magaadle and others (Habar-habuusho).
Anybody knowledgeable on this subject who would care to share anything with us. Thanks guys

You take this too seriously man.

The fact is ALL somali clans weather Darod, Hawiye, Dir or Isaaq are just people that have come together and formed alliances which have evolved over centuries, resulting in these modern clans. This tribal tradition came to us from Arabia due to Islam.

Nonetheless, the Hawiye and Dir do not claim they actually ALL descend from the same ancestor it just the Isaaq and Darod that claim they all descended from one ancestor. For example, the Hawadle and other major Hawiye clans are not actually Hawiye.

I think most Somalis are only genuinely related on or around the 7th generation. Anything above that is bullshit.

So xplaya, Isaaq could have been a real person, but is the progenitor of the Isaaq clan?

I doubt. That's why I took the example of " xer" not all xer members are biological brothers they are just spritual brothers and that can evolve into cult or clan. As we have seen in gaalkacyo (xerta sheikh cabdi weli who is killed by alshabab recently). If sheikh isaaq was real carab man and he fathered all isaaqs then why isaaqs clan members have the same DNA markers as other Somalis ?

The isaaqs or daarods have no evidence that they are different from other Somalis who have nothing to do with the Arabian peninsula. Their hashimite/ashraaf myth is bullshit . they just invented fake abtirsi out of the blue just because they are sufi shafi,is who are extremely in love (axbaab) with with mohamed csws and his offspring. These kind of groups exist almost every Muslim country especially in Shia majority or shafaci countries like us .

It's interestin dat not a single person hu evr argued against the sheekh Isaaq story can bring any historical texts to challenge it or debunk it. Instead it's out of pure hatred for arabs or a false pride about being unique that makes you deny a historical facts. Cut the emotional bullshit

We have first hand sources of people who accompanied the sheekh, and also wrote about his life marriage and children. These manuscripts remain until today and agree with secondary sources and Somali tradition. To add to that, Islam whether Shia or Sunni(sufi included) are completely against taking false fathers. One of the founding 5 principles in shariah is preservation of lineages

It was narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Any man who knowingly claims to belong to someone other than his father has committed an act of kufr. Anyone who claims to belong to a people when he has no lineage among them, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3317) and Muslim (61).

The dirty-waqooyi proponents of Dir theory have zero evidence be it historical, traditional or even cultural. One simple fact that will shut off fools like Yusuf is this.

Did ever happened a Dir man been killed for an Isaaq revenge?

Qoloyahan aabaha cusub helay waa kuwa ugu caqliga xun. Sheeko 1960 Ina Cigaal iyo Cosoble sameeyeen oo is bahaysi siyaasadeed ahaa ayey ku qaldayaan abtirsiin.

[theyuusuf143]

@Dr x.playa

YEs it happens in koonfur where the name Dir is more popular. Inta lagu dilo baa weliba aakhiro laguu diraya hadaad ku nooshahay meelo ay Dir iyo dad kale wada degaan . Waadba ku khasbantahay inaad tolka ka Barbar dagaalanto . Anagu hadaba dadkaas baanu la tolnahay oo gar iyo gardaraba isku raacsanahee bal car adigu ilmaaderadaada carabta ku hadhay na tus oo noo keen aanu kula aragnee. Anigu malaayiin dira oo iga barbar dagaalamaya baan soo tubi karaa hargeisa without any efforts car bal adigu 5 midh ciraaq ka keen.

[PrinceNugaalHawd]

It's interestin dat not a single person hu evr argued against the sheekh Isaaq story can bring any historical texts to challenge it or debunk it. Instead it's out of pure hatred for arabs or a false pride about being unique that makes you deny a historical facts. Cut the emotional bullshit

We have first hand sources of people who accompanied the sheekh, and also wrote about his life marriage and children. These manuscripts remain until today and agree with secondary sources and Somali tradition. To add to that, Islam whether Shia or Sunni(sufi included) are completely against taking false fathers. One of the founding 5 principles in shariah is preservation of lineages

It was narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Any man who knowingly claims to belong to someone other than his father has committed an act of kufr. Anyone who claims to belong to a people when he has no lineage among them, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3317) and Muslim (61).

Your crazy man.

Sheikh Isaaq might have existed or not, i can't disproof that.

But to state all whole claim Isaaq today descended from him is just absurd.

This clan tradition obviously came to us from Arabia due to Islam and our proximity to it.

You have to gullible to actually believe that bullshit.

The reality is were only related on the 7th generation.

2 things about this. Lambar 1, you proved my point about emotional non constructive rebuttals with no substance . Lumbar labo the arabs never adopted fake clan lineages, this is not a arab custom..they only had isbahaysi qabiileed but never took a fake lineage. That disproves your point even though it was a garbage point to argue fro.

According to Arab tradition, the Qahtanites are pure Arabs, unlike the Adnanites who are "Arabized Arabs", descended from Ishmael through Adnan.

Ofcourse you can become Arab by speaking their language, like the ancient Sudanese, Egyptians and Berber people of Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Maurtania, and the Ancient people of the Levant or Sham,Syria, Lebanon & Palestine , and The ancient civilization of Iraq. All were Arabized.

Somalis are African Cishites, they might have immigrants who mixed with them and settled with Us, Arabs, Indians, Persians, Turks, Portuguese, Oromo, and the Enslaved people. Somalis most likely developed their own language then expanded and subclans developed then Alliances became Major tribes, we cannot say we are not related tru clans, but most likely Somali Clans and tribes adopted others.

[SultanOrder]

Xplaya do you believe that isaaq today are the direct paternal descendants of a historical figure by the name of Sheikh Isxaaq?

[X.Playa]

Xplaya do you believe that isaaq today are the direct paternal descendants of a historical figure by the name of Sheikh Isxaaq?

No clan on earth can claim decent from a single line, clans are created through centuries of political and religious factors. Even Mohammed of Quraysh can't maintain a one man clan patriarch. Quraysh is a clan made up of many ancestry through the centuries no different then the modern Isaaq. These are universal sociological reality.

But that doesn't negate two important things, one that sheekh Isxaaq was a historical personality and two that sheekh Isxaaq is the founder of the Isaaq clan in both ancestry and religious community members.

The Dir theory advanced by some revisionist have not a single shred of evidence and it doesn't not predates Ina Cigaal political alliance in the1960.

[theyuusuf143]

Xplaya do you believe that isaaq today are the direct paternal descendants of a historical figure by the name of Sheikh Isxaaq?

No clan on earth can claim decent from a single line, clans are created through centuries of political and religious factors. Even Mohammed of Quraysh can't maintain a one man clan patriarch. Quraysh is a clan made up of many ancestry through the centuries no different then the modern Isaaq. These are universal sociological reality.

But that doesn't negate two important things, one that sheekh Isxaaq was a historical personality and two that sheekh Isxaaq is the founder of the Isaaq clan in both ancestry and religious community members.

The Dir theory advanced by some revisionist have not a single shred of evidence and it doesn't not predates Ina Cigaal political alliance in the1960.

No body said isaaq is not the founder of the isaaq clan. What we are discussing here is how he did it ? Are they all his children, were they his xer ? If for example they were his xer what was their clan before they joined him ? Sheikh isaaq himself was he Somali or Arab ?

[X.Playa]

Xplaya do you believe that isaaq today are the direct paternal descendants of a historical figure by the name of Sheikh Isxaaq?

No clan on earth can claim decent from a single line, clans are created through centuries of political and religious factors. Even Mohammed of Quraysh can't maintain a one man clan patriarch. Quraysh is a clan made up of many ancestry through the centuries no different then the modern Isaaq. These are universal sociological reality.

But that doesn't negate two important things, one that sheekh Isxaaq was a historical personality and two that sheekh Isxaaq is the founder of the Isaaq clan in both ancestry and religious community members.

The Dir theory advanced by some revisionist have not a single shred of evidence and it doesn't not predates Ina Cigaal political alliance in the1960.

No body said isaaq is not the founder of the isaaq clan. What we are discussing here is how he did it ? Are they all his children, were they his xer ? If for example they were his xer what was their clan before they joined him ? Sheikh isaaq himself was he Somali or Arab ?

We know who sheekh Isxaaq was and according to historical manuscripts and eyewitness accounts he was an Arab emigrant. We also know he is the founder of the Isaaq clan, we can also deduce that the modern Isaaq clan can be grouped into :

1- his descendants
2- the descendants of his religious community and disciples
3- his sociological descendants, by that I mean individuals and groups whom through social and political factors joined and through time intermingled with the above two groups.

The Isaaq clan is no different then any other clan on earth and all clans are created by the above means.

That absolutely negates the Dir crap " who's my daddy" theory. My advice to the dirty-waqooyi is stop shopping for a daddy.