Talk:Kilwa Kisiwani

Consistency with Kilwa Sultanate
The Kilwa Sultanate page has some discrepant dates for the early history of Kilwa that should be resolved. And once that has been straightened out, the History section of this article probably needs a better introduction as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.51.110.77 (talk) 15:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

It remained in Portuguese hands until 1512, when an Arab mercenary captured Kilwa and expelled the Portuguese
This is untrue, it was captured by Arabs after the Portuguese abandoned the Fortress due to high maintenance costs

Start Class
Is this article still considered a Start Class? I believe it has at least achieved C-Class? Sputink (talk) 16:29, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * One of my students worked on this article quite a bit last year - I'd vote for an upgrade in rating! Feel free to change it, I think. Ninafundisha (talk) 14:20, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I shall let nature take its way. I am not very confortable rating articles yet. Also thats great that you get students to build articles. The Tanzania project needs all the help it can get. -Sputink (talk) 14:46, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kilwa Kisiwani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060224235342/http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7808 to http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7808
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060210135334/http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7809 to http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=7809

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Africanisation is going a bit weird
"In 1331CE, Moroccan traveller and scholar Ibn Battuta visited Kilwa and described it as one of the beautiful cities in the world. Trade connections with the Arabian Peninsula as well as India and China influenced the growth and development of Kilwa, and, though there are Islamic words and customs that have been adapted to the culture, the origins are African."

The architecture, pottery, cloth and smelting all source from either Arabic or Asian sources. The prevalent religion is of Arabic origin. The coinage and writing from the age is in Arabic script. The rulers of Kilwa from 10th to 15th centuries are Arabian ('possibly' previously Persian). The ocean-going trade ships all source from Arabia/Asia. Swahili in the totality of its lexicon back then was more Arabic than Bantu (something that only began to tilt the other way after the 1800s). What African origins does the statement refer to? 2001:8003:70F5:2400:7939:ABC6:2865:D737 (talk) 21:27, 31 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The precise concerns you mention mimic the colonial area revisionism mentioned in the first paragraph of the "Controversies" section of the article. Nevertheless, your criticism is worthy of refutation so I will consider each point individually.
 * "The architecture, pottery, cloth and smelting all source from either Arabic or Asian sources."
 * Wrong, as stated in the article there was a mix of local and foreign sources. If you disagree you must put forth a source to counter the cited one :Pollard, Edward (2008). "Inter-Tidal Causeways and Platforms of the 13th- to 16th-Century City-States of Kilwa Kisiwani, Tanzania"
 * Yes, there was imported pottery at the Palace of Husuni Kubwa, imports don't destroy notions of local culture, that would be absurd.
 * "The prevalent religion is of Arabic origin."
 * You mean to say Islam? Islam spread from Indonesia to Spain, it's Arabic origins are of little relevance to the point being made. You wouldn't say Medieval Paris follows a religion of Semitic origin in disputing the city as being of French/European origin.
 * "The coinage and writing from the age is in Arabic script."
 * Thousands of Arabic coins were also found in Medieval Scandinavia, are the Norse Arabic? The Cherokee syllabary was based on Latin letters are they Latin or Roman.
 * "The rulers of Kilwa from 10th to 15th centuries are Arabian ('possibly' previously Persian)"
 * Heavily debated and steeped in lore. The only Kilwa Sultanate ruler with a dedicated page is the founder, Ali ibn al-Hassan Shirazi, who was half Persian, half Ethiopian, so not even Arab, and only half Muslim. Yes, there is a claim of ancestry to some far off Muslim ancestor for sake of legitimacy, that isn't new and as the article states such claim was likely for that legitimizing purpose. This was very common in the Islamic world and something even implemented by relatively newly Muslim rulers in Sub-Saharan West Africa to establish legitimacy. Michael A. Gomez's new book African Dominion: A New History of Empire in Early and Medieval West Africa goes into this quite a bit with regard to Mali and Songhay. Even so, you wouldn't call the Umayyad caliphate European because there might have been a line of Spanish born caliphs, or Rome Germanic or Gallic because there might have been a line of German or French born emperors.
 * "The ocean-going trade ships all source from Arabia/Asia."
 * From the article:
 * "Kilwan merchant ships – from the large lateen-rigged dhows that plied the open oceans to the small zambucs used for local transit – were usually built from the split trunks of coconut palm wood, their sails made from coconut leaf matting and the ships held together by coconut coir."
 * So locally made of local sources. Unless you mean to say that some of the ships there are of Arabic and Asian origin which would of course be true because they traded with Arabia and Asia. How would Arabian and Asian merchants get to Kilwa without their Arabic or Asian made ships?
 * "Swahili in the totality of its lexicon back then was more Arabic than Bantu (something that only began to tilt the other way after the 1800s)."
 * From the Swahili article,
 * "The core of the Swahili language originates in Bantu languages of the coast of East Africa. Much of Swahili's Bantu vocabulary has cognates in the Pokomo, Taita, and Mijikenda languages and, to a lesser extent, other East African Bantu languages. While opinions vary on the specifics, it has been historically purported that around 16-20% of the Swahili vocabulary is derived from loan words, the vast majority Arabic, but also other contributing languages, including Persian, Hindustani, Portuguese, and Malay."
 * Perhaps you heard "most loanwords are Arabic" and misinterpreted from there. Nevertheless, the "Spear, Thomas (1984). "The Shirazi in Swahili Traditions, Culture, and History"" article actually mentions this. Even then, languages aren't people, ethnic groups or even cultures. For sake of trade and learning, languages may spread to and within a community despite the community itself not changing in those aforementioned ways.
 * It seems as though you didn't properly read the article, let alone the citations provided to back up any of your complaints and assertions. "Africanization" is described by Wiley as, "the process of defining or interpreting African identity and culture". The Wikipedia article, Africanization, is almost entirely concerned with the aesthetics of nomenclature. As none of these definitions are even remotely applicable to the comment you made, it appears that you seem to be using it here as a backdoor term for "Afrocentrism", something levied anytime something of perceived value or esteem is called African. Please read the article in question closer before you attempt to levy colonial-era and essentially racist criticisms. Prime Paladin (talk) 07:36, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: The Archaeology of Africa
— Assignment last updated by Usomi (talk) 19:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)