SomaliNet Forums

James Dahl wrote:

BABYGIRL123 wrote:loool neacon is stupid.

Nah I've seen tons of people make this mistake, don't know why.

I think it's because when Darood abtirsi they go "Darood Ismail Jabarti" and their brain then connects "Darood" with "Ismail Jabarti".
I've even caught myself doing it.

What are you now, a Darood in disgiuse???

Cawar wrote:

James Dahl wrote:

BABYGIRL123 wrote:loool neacon is stupid.

Nah I've seen tons of people make this mistake, don't know why.

I think it's because when Darood abtirsi they go "Darood Ismail Jabarti" and their brain then connects "Darood" with "Ismail Jabarti".
I've even caught myself doing it.

What are you now, a Darood in disgiuse???

No, though it's a refreshing change of pace from the standard accusation of me being a covert Habar Gidir.

James, with all of your distortions and prejudices about the Somali history, it's important to know that even as far as Iraq, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia were colonies of the Axumite Empire. It's even recorded in the Kor'an that the Axumite Emperor sent punitive force to Mecca after his subjects refused to make "tribute". This was the time before the continental drift of Yemen and Somalia.

First of all, the term Somali is a political term signifiying the symbol of national unity. The many groups that live within Somalia are ethnically diverse and unrelated though they have some linguistic commonality. To also lump them as one under the category of "Kushitic" or the "Ham-Caucasoid" as first used by John Hanning Speke is false, particularly when he conceived of the idea that those Africans with European features had introduced civilization from Horn of Africa to Central Africa. His theory was later used and developed by other European anthropologists as part of their research work for their respective countries.


I will recommend you to revise your work. The "Cushitic" term has been proven false and if you try to put it in your work, it will be a wasted effort.

RIIGHAYE wrote:James, with all of your distortions and prejudices about the Somali history, it's important to know that even as far as Iraq, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia were colonies of the Axumite Empire. It's even recorded in the Kor'an that the Axumite Emperor sent punitive force to Mecca after his subjects refused to make "tribute". This was the time before the continental drift of Yemen and Somalia.

First of all, the term Somali is a political term signifiying the symbol of national unity. The many groups that live within Somalia are ethnically diverse and unrelated though they have some linguistic commonality. To also lump them as one under the category of "Kushitic" or the "Ham-Caucasoid" as first used by John Hanning Speke is false, particularly when he conceived of the idea that those Africans with European features had introduced civilization from Horn of Africa to Central Africa. His theory was later used and developed by other European anthropologists as part of their research work for their respective countries.


I will recommend you to revise your work. The "Cushitic" term has been proven false and if you try to put it in your work, it will be a wasted effort.

What are you talking about, disproving the Cushitic hypothesis was one of the first things I did, in my first 2 paragraphs in fact.
What distortions and prejudices do I have about Somali history?

James Dahl wrote:
Darood is just as old as Dir and Hawiye as a Somali clan. This surprised me actually since the "recent immigrant" idea is so firmly entrenched.

What proof do you have that Daarood is as old as DIR and Hawiye? Let's see your concrete evidence? This is a naive error in your analysis?

After this the Kushites began to suffer under two different incursions. Initially the Kushites moved south to their former capital at Napata but the Egyptians attacked and sacked Napata, thus spurring a move to Meroe in 591 BCE by Emperor Aspelta.

You grave error emanates from your assumption of the long-distance trade of the Indian Ocean which indeed made possible the rise of commercial centers around northern Somalia. This great passage of economic and cultural intercourse between present day Northern Somalia and ancient Egypt dates back to the reign of Pharaoh Sahure in 2450 bce when he sent trading expedition to the Land of PUNT. For instance, there are records Neferkere Harkuf, the governor and lord of Elephantine who boasted of having sent trading expedition to Puntland, eleven expeditions to be exact. This economic intercourse took place prior to the reign of Queen Hatshepsut (1503-1483 bce).

So by this era, the Daarood or the Ethnic Arabs never existed. We were probably part of the peoples which formed and shaped the Egyptian Dynasties. To make this assumption, which links Kushites to the Egyptian Dynasties and then links DAarood clans to Kushites, is a grave error, and this is where your prejudices and distoritions rest.

You're accusing me of making errors I never made. Darood was an Arab from Yemen, the point is that his arrival in East Africa coincided with the era of Dir and Hawiye, thus the three clans are roughly the same age. They do not have the same origin.

The genesis of the Somali clan system is a later development than you assume. The reason why tribes come into being is because of political turmoil causes rifts within a previously singular tribe. In this case, the singular tribe being the Axumite Empire and its subject peoples.

Tribes are not persistent things, they change and grow and split all the time. For instance Punt. Experts agree that the trade expeditions to Punt ended with the rise of Kush, but noone knows precisely why. However the answer is staring you right in the face as the rise of Kush was brought about by unifying the land of Kush under the Emperor Alara. Punt was one of these lands unified under Alara. Soon after this Kush conquered Egypt, and there was no need for sea voyages to Punt because the Kush Empire could just ship these goods overland from Punt all the way to Egypt. After the loss of Egypt, trade did not resume as Egypt and Kush were hostile to one another, and so Himyar began to dominate trade in the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea, as they had good relations with both.

The point is that the Kush Empire did not move to the horn, they were always in the horn, it's the CENTER of the empire that moved progressively south as they lost land in Sudan and conquered more subject peoples in the horn, thus making Sudan less important to the empire and the horn (previously something of a backwater) more important.

When it is mentioned Somalis lived in Southern Yemen in History books could it be before the continental drift as Righaaye mentioned making present day Northern Somalia Southern Arabia in the past? Any time estimates for When the continents split apart?

Murax wrote:When it is mentioned Somalis lived in Southern Yemen in History books could it be before the continental drift as Righaaye mentioned making present day Northern Somalia Southern Arabia in the past? Any time estimates for When the continents split apart?

Millions of years ago, long before humans were around. The last time Arabia and Africa were connected was the Eocene, 50 million years ago.
http://www.scotese.com/newpage9.htm

Get Ya James.