@Shimbiris see how the late medieval Abyssinians (Habash) considered the camel a regular food among the Muslims for meat, of which we know only Somalis had the camel population to eat that normally. We're shown repeatedly through all relevant indicators that the general Islamic region in the medieval days was inhabited by Somalis.
Thomas Guindeuil, "What do Christians (Not) Eat: Food Taboos and the Ethiopian Christian Communities (13th-18th c.)"(2014): p. 66
Pay attention to how the source said neighboring communities. It means even in the far the Somali periphery, showing that Somalis had a presence deep into Ethiopia, so far that on the margins camel meat was very accessible. It shows one important thing if we are to do a serious analysis.
If these were Habash Muslims, they would not have a camel-eating tendency since they never had a camel herder disposition. Logically, one can deduce that the camel is not the predominant animal at all the further you geographically penetrate, thus any love for camel needs to be an ethnographic anthropological emphasis rooted deep to the point that supersedes the environmental constraints. This is why any group that was originally never camel pastoralists, all groups that are not Somali and Afar, could never naturally demand the camel as an important food in the peripheral regions where the camel is not the main livestock available. Unless they shared the same original culture and love for camel, considering the pastoralist aspect as central to their identity despite how they might not be pastoralists even.
The Muslims that live in those Habash areas today do not eat camel meat:
View attachment 320193
Éloi Ficquet, "Flesh Soaked In Faith," (2006): p. 45
Lij Iyasu, the emperor of Ethiopia, slaughtered a camel to forge some form of political situation between Muslims. Notably, the camel was chosen for the Muslims. To the Christian Ethiopians, its original ethnic association changed toward a purely religious one, when in fact there is nothing in Islam that is generally camel emphasizing in meat consumption compared to cow, goat, and sheep. The fact that those highland Ethiopian Muslims such as Amaharas don't eat camel meat even if it is accessible, underscores my point that argument. So this was never religious in nature, meaning no one can peddle that idea as a way to wiggle away from the fact that it was one of the major Somali meat preferences first and foremost.
View attachment 320194
Éloi Ficquet, "Flesh Soaked In Faith," (2006): p. 53
Notice the false association between the camel and how important it is for Muslims when it is a tradition of perception by the Christians because of the ethnoreligious association of Somali camel eaters. In their logic from the medieval age: Somalis ate camels --> Somalis were Muslims and the predominant demographic --> thus camel important Muslim diet. Later they falsely as you see above with an emperor trying to form ties with Muslims by slaughtering a camel for symbolism. I wanted to correct the whole thing but either way, this is important evidence of how even down to the modern era, non-Muslims in the region carried a tradition of their own thinking that camel was an important Islamic meat when it was merely important for Somalis.
Rationally the non-Somali Muslim minorities that later became Muslims due to Somali Islamic contact never had a subsistence based on camel flesh consumption given their geography and tendency to herd different animals -- if they ever had love of that, only through the influence of a culture considered more dominant in the region could have influenced that transition, and they would only be nested within that as a minority. Other Cushites had at most mixed economies with the many farming similar to Habash (eating the same things depending on what region), especially among the peripheral regions where you live close to the Habash Christians.
The only way to describe this is that these people had a love for camel on a cultural and traditional level sourced by a central ethnic shared cultural dietary highlight meaning that they were tied to camel herders and ideologically thought of that as the superior meat and animal at the time, whenever through the trade, extensively carried and facilitated by Somalis co-ethnics, they prized the camel meat so got a hold of it and ate it during celebrations and ceremonies. All this can only be from the fact that these people living deep into Ethiopia, and I mean deep as in bordering the Habash, had a history and conception of ethnic emphasis of camel-based pastoralism as a primary cultural marker of what makes them Somali during the medieval age.
There is no way to turn the table outside this for the people in denial. Either these people were Somalis or they were a minority that was so influenced by a predominantly camel-loving people, undoubtedly Somalis, no question, that they took on that trait of loving camel meat when we know those Ethio-Semites, Sidama-like whatever the deniers want to attribute them as, never had such subsistence of camel. They were a sedentary farmer with some cattle and bovid livestock. Either way, Somalis were the predominant demographic in the entire expanse we're discussing in this thread, shown by evidence of how Habash delineated themselves and considered that a Muslim trait.
How can it be generalized as a Muslim food unless the predominant Muslims in the region did not eat it and considered it important to them? And who were those people but Somalis first and foremost? It is all evident. It could not have been the Afar since in terms of population they are no more than a sub-sub-clan of Somalis. In sizable relative terms, the Afar could never be that influential in the region, we find them not markedly relevant with regards to presence, in the regions we are talking about, otherwise we'd see them take a central stage in the
Futuh, and later. The Oromos are not in the discussion because they were historical late-comers, something not even worth mentioning unless people are historically uninformed about their role in the region.
Again, this was well known and if anyone wanted to shift the camel to other groups, it would be a futile attempt:
The dromedary is the emblematic animal of the lowlands, as he can carry heavy loads (up to 300 kg) over long distances, and can resist high temperatures and lack of water. Dromedary breeding is usually done in association with small livestock (goats or sheep), both of which tolerate full nomadism, unlike cattle which do not. Samantha Kelly, "A Companion to Medieval Ethiopia and Eritrea" (2020): p. 401-2
All other Ethiopians lived with a combination of what I quote below, excluding only Somalis and Afar in those medieval times:
But lowland pastoralists were of course not the only medieval Ethiopians to tend livestock: highland farmers did as well. The zebu, originally from India and domesticated in antiquity, was a key element of the crop-livestock production system, as a work animal and for its dung that served as fuel and manure. Though poor in milk production, it was also raised for its meat, and the hide was made into leather. Smaller livestock like sheep and goats were also raised for their meat and hides. Sheepskin was often worn as a mantle, while goatskin was the favored material for parchment. Horses and donkeys were used for riding and as load animals. Samantha Kelly, "A Companion to Medieval Ethiopia and Eritrea" (2020): p. 402
The source makes a nefarious presentism error of calling people of geographic modern Ethiopia as "Ethiopians" when no such conception existed back then whatsoever because people mentioned in the source belong to a separate regional entity from the historical Abyssinians and this "Ethiopians" business is to attempt to homogenize and validate towards a Habash-centric Ethiopianist view of the region where they apply such terms to unrelated groups that had different civilizational existence altogether, re-writing history. Other than that, the source points out exactly what is a fact with the consumption of meat similar to the screenshotted source:
Muslim Ethiopians, of course, observed their own food customs, regulations, and rituals, which reinforced the distinctions between these peoples. Dromedary meat, for instance, was eaten exclusively by Muslims: in the early fourteenth century, Ibn Baṭṭūṭa mentioned the massive slaughtering of dromedaries in Zäylaʿ for meat consumption. The Lives of medieval Ethiopian saints also record that captured Christians were urged (and refused) to eat dromedary, as its consumption was understood as synonymous with Muslim identity. Even where meats acceptable to both religions were concerned, the rituals of slaughtering differed, which effectively prevented any commensality between Muslims and Christians as soon as meat was included in the meal. Samantha Kelly, "A Companion to Medieval Ethiopia and Eritrea" (2020): p. 405
I wrote my above analysis of the first excerpt before reading the last aforementioned quoted part, but all ties nicely together and it is consistent and goes nicely with my first camel post. Cool how it neatly fits with how the Islamic civilization was demographically dominated overwhelmingly by Somali people. That is why they made Somali culture synonymous with Islam.