Talk:Sultanate of Mogadishu

Ibn Battuta-> Mogadishu visit
Could you give me a source you trust that describes Battuta's visit to Mogadishu entirely? Thanks, Awale-Abdi (talk) 17:24, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Can you till me what is going on? Give yours perspective and Midday will give his. AcidSnow (talk) 17:29, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Awale-Abdi & User:AcidSnow: This is a bit of a non-sequitur, but I recommend David D. Laitin & Said Sheikh Samatar's book. Middayexpress (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks but that's not what I meant. I want to understand what this dispute is about. AcidSnow (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Awale-Abdi appears to be asking above for a link I trust that describes Batutta's visit to Mogadishu entirely, though I'm not sure why. As you're aware, Batutta visit is already described on the Mogadishu page. Middayexpress (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Mogadishu
Do you want to continue the discussion on the Sultanate of Mogadishu here? If not, then I will go work on other sections such as the World War II. Do you know which division of British troops captured Mogadishu in 1941? AcidSnow (talk) 18:10, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * AcidSnow, I believe the Kharijites were shortly after hijira (~694). The Fakr ad-Din dynasty, however, was the first Muslim ruling house of the Sultanate. Best regards Middayexpress (talk) 18:43, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, now that this event did occur we must now look to see why they came. As you may now, some sources say that Mogadishu and other cites revolted in 805/15 (don't remember exactly). As for the British Troops, I have found some conflicting statements. Some sources solely mention Nigerians, others mention South African, East Africans, and Nigerians, while others solely mention East Africans. AcidSnow (talk) 19:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I have asked those at the military project for help. AcidSnow (talk) 22:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Never mind, it seems that it was South Africans (mostly "whites" or probably all). These supposed "incredible" acts were actually done by the South Africans and not Nigerians. This seems to be another error. I have kept the project discussion open the to get other input. AcidSnow (talk) 22:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello Midday? My apologies if I am bugging you. AcidSnow (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, no prob. I believe the Kharijites were Islamic clerics. There were apparently also some Shi'a adherents. Best regards Middayexpress (talk) 19:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Controversial Leo Africanus
Soupforone, explain what adea kingdom is, i have never heard of a kingdom in the south other then the Hadiya Sultanate. The Leo reference also makes note of Garaadameth title used by Adea which is very similr to the Hadiya title Garad. Is this Leo's work or Alvarez as most references attribute? Mogadishu as a tributary to Ethiopia is also contested by historians as Ethiopian Kings never penetrated that far into the Somali interior Duqsene (talk) 08:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Leo Africanus indicates that the Adea Kingdom was located south of the Adal Sultanate . He does not mention the Hadiya Sultanate, which is not strange since the latter was located all the way in southwestern Ethiopia. I don't see where he mentions the Garad royal title, though (page number?). Note that this was apparently a common local royal title - so even if he had indicated this, it would not have been unusual. Soupforone (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

- Hi, I changed some of the terminology in this section for relevance and to be more in line with the source referenced, and am willing to work together with people who have more in depth knowledge to improve this section and page if needed, cheers xox Knittea (talk) 08:34, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Leo Africanus describes the Cafri as pagan "negros" ("Cafri, or lawlesse wilde Negros" ). He outlines them more vividly in his passage on Cafraria, which was located in remote southern Africa. However, he does not indicate that the Cafri were indigenous Africans from further inland. This is because in his work, the designation Africans instead mainly pertains to the denizens of the actual Africa Roman province in the Maghreb (ex. "this part of the worlde is inhabited especially by five principall nations, to wit, by the people called Cafri or Cafates, that is to say outlawes, or lawlesse, by the Abassins, the Egyptians, the Arabians, and the Africans or Moores, properly so called" ). Soupforone (talk) 14:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC)


 * OK, that's interesting. I felt that the way this information was presented prior to my edit was unclear about how much of the terminology was Africanus's and how much was part of the WP article. Would it be accurate to describe the Cafri in modern terms as being African rather than "Negroid", since we now talk about Africa as the whole continent rather than a Roman province? And do you feel that it would be appropriate to have a passage about Cafraria on the page for Leo Africanus and link to that rather than trying to explain the meaning of "Cafri" within this paragraph on the Sultanate of Mogadishu page? I think that would make both articles flow better. Cheers Knittea (talk) 05:14, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Besides the five population aspect, the crux of the problem with describing Leo Africanus' Cafri as African is that he uses the latter essentially as a designation for Berbers. This is made clear in his passage on the inhabitants of Africa propria and the African language ("The tawnie people of the said region were called by the name of Barbar, being derived of the verbe Barbara, which in their toong signifieth to murmur : because the African toong soundeth in the eares of the Arabians, no otherwise than the voice of beasts, which utter their sounds without any accents" ). Ergo, the identity of the Cafri cannot be disambiguated with the African qualifier since doing so would insinuate that the Cafri were Berbers, and thus, that Cafraria in remote southern Africa was a Berber territory. Leo Africanus indicates that they were a different population. Soupforone (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I propose that since you know a lot about this, it would be a good idea for you to make a passage about Cafraria on the Leo Africanus article and we can link to it from this article :) Would you be up for that? Knittea (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Soupforone

Hello there. I understand about the Adal part but you're getting confused from Adal Kingdom and Adal Sultanate. The Adal Kingdom and Mogadishu Sultanate were indeed allies and both existed in the same times. However, Ajuran Sultanate were allies with Adal Sultanate and it was established before Adal Sultanate and disestablished much later than Adal Sultanate.

Now about Mogadishu Sultanate. I have couple of sources indicating that Mogadishu was the capital of Ajauran Sultanate or the Garen Dynasty began there, but it Mogadishu Sultanate was established by the Ajuran expanding force and the sources in this site proves my claim. It ended in the 13th century.

Lastly, remember Mogadishu Sultanate was allies with Adal Kingdom not Adal Sultanate.

Peace! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bralbops (talk • contribs) 15:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

New section: Ethnicity
I have created a new section about the foundational origins of Mogadishu and its Sultanate. The blanket statement that it was founded by Arabs and that the first Sultan was Arab can all be traced back to a single 19th century document called the Kitab Al-Zunuj, which has been discredited by modern scholars as unreliable. More importantly, it contradicts ancient sources on the pre-existing civilizations that flourished on the Somali coast, and which were the predecessors of Mogadishu and other cities. The Persian and Arab founding ¨myths" are also an outdated colonial reflection of African capabilities to create their own historical states and civilizations. The new section is therefore an extremely important addition to the article. --GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That is but your own opinion and not backed by scholarly work I.M. Lewis, Virginia Luling, Archeologicial work and the Cambridge History of Africa all points to Arab and Persian settlers in Mogadishu.


 * I already adressed this topic above in the Talk Page of Mogadishu. The Cambridge history of Africa mentions Abubakar bin Fakhr al-Din being of Arab origin  and outlines how Mogadishu in it's early years from the 8th century was inhabited by Arab and later Persian immigrants who later formed a confederation. This has nothing to do with Book of Zanj, furthermore I.M Lewis a famous historian on Somali history is of the same view..


 * Futhermore Virginia goes on to describe the inhabitants of Mogadishu after the demise of the Muzaffar dynasty in Mogadishu and how the Abgal cause the decline in the prosperity of Mogadishu'they were followed by the Abgal, who took possession of the city; with them its decline apparently set in.'
 * This was probably due basically, however, to loss of trade; it was the time of Portuguese ascendancy in the Indian Ocean, disruption of earlier lines of communication, and hard times for Muslim merchants. The Abgal merely took advantage of the citys weakness to become its overlords.
 * 'The original city population remained, however. They adopted the Somali language, but kept their distinctive way of life, though its standard declined steeply, and continued to marry only among themselves. They remained, as they still are, a light-skinned people quite different in appearance from the Somali'


 * Just because you do not agree with it, does not make it outdated. Wikipedia does not work that way.


 * Cheers --AlaskaLava (talk) 00:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

That's not my personal opinion, which is why I created an entire new section addressing this issue and backed it with references that highlight the Arab and Persian founding myths were once a popular answer to the origins of Somali cities, but have since been considered outdated. Ross E. Dunn makes it clear that these cities were in-fact African owned and founded, while the Arabs and Persians were nothing more than immigrants that were given permission to stay after fleeing their war-torn kingdoms and regions. What you're doing is placing undue weight on a single origin myth and have weaved a non-neutral POV narrative that completely takes the Somali people out of their own history, despite archaeological evidence, medieval accounts and modern scholars all contradicting this point of view.

"Neither Mogadishu nor any other town on the coast could be described as alien enclaves of Arabs or Persians, ethnically isolated from the mainland populations. On the contrary, these were African towns, inhabited largely by people of African descent, whether Somali or Bantu-speaking stock. - The Adventures of Ibn Battuta: A Muslim Traveler of the Fourteenth Century Page 124 by Ross E Dunn"

and another recent source:

"Despite the tradition that Muslim immigrants “founded” the Benadir ports, it is now widely accepted that there were pre-existing communities here with African leadership who welcomed these exiles, although the Arab traders had to gain permission to stay, and they had to settle in particular quarters of the town. -- Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: A Historical Encyclopedia Page 252 by Michael Dumper, Bruce E. Stanley"

Its ironic that you keep mentioning I.M Lewis, when he is in-fact referenced in the article and his POV is also highlighted. The current ethnicity section is written in a neutral POV and with a updated view on African Studies, especially Somali Studies and the origins of its many old cities, some of which predated Islam, making the Arab Muslim founding myth a logical fallacy.

The Cambridge History of Africa is also not the end all and be all for African scholarship, but even if we were to treat it as such, you will still not come to the same non-neutral POV that you have attempted to create in this article, for in that same Cambridge source, we have passages such as this:

"Pre-islamic immigration of Arabs from Himyar in southern Arabia, their founding of most of the more important towns of the coast from Mogadishu to Mombasa, and also Kilwa, together with their subsequent conversion to Islam, is uncorroborated by other sources, and unsupported by archaeological evidence, and must be dismissed as unhistorical. - Page 198"

and this:

''The traditional view that the Galla preceded the Somali in the Horn is no longer valid. It is rather the Somali who are referred to in the accounts of early Arab geographers. In fact, there was a basic continuity in the use of the term Berber since the first century of the Christian era to describe the land and the people of the Horn. The Periplus, Claudius Ptolemy, and Cosmas Indicopleustes employed it in much the same way as the Arab geographers did after the ninth century. There seems to be no doubt that the Arab geographers had particularly the Somali in mind when they spoke of the 'Black Berbers' of the Horn; and the earlier use of the term by Greek writers may very well indicate a more ancient occupancy of the Horn by the same stock of people.'' ''The contacts between the Near and the Middle East on the one hand, and the African side of the Gulf of Aden on the other, were very old and regular; and the earliest advent of Islam in these regions must have certainly occurred within the first century of the Muslim era. The inhabitants of the Horn at that time seem to have been the ancestors of the present-day Somali. '''Their most important coastal settlements were Zeila and Berbera on the Gulf of Aden, and Mogadishu, Merca and Brava on the Benadir coast. Each of these settlements apparently owed its growth and development to regular stream of merchants from Arabia, and from the countries around the Persian Gulf, who visited these places and who later started to live in them.' - Page 135

If the POVs of the sources you are using are being highlighted, and if those same sources also take a position that the Somali people were most likely the first inhabitants and founders of those same coastal cities, why are you engaging in an Edit war and trying to silence the neutral POV that takes a broader look at the founding origins? Multiple editors have pointed out the undue weight you have placed on a single origin myth in both Somali articles, and those about other ethnicities and nationalities. This is disruptive editing.

--GoldenDragonHorn (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2020 (UTC)