Somali slaves: Which Arab nation 'sold' somalia, to Italy, in the 19th century?

[Caraweelo X]

It's about fucking interests you moron. Somalia doesn't give no fucks about Arabs, and they have actually joined the Turkey-China-Ethiopia pro development axis in the Horn of Africa and stopped getting support from the UAE.

We are beggars and we don't even have a national army. Nothing wrong with admitting the truth. How about you f*ck off back to Nigeria and suck their cocks and leave Somalia alone?


Saudi Arabia? What on earth are you talking about? They have their own problems and are hardly involved in the Horn now. Their main problems are Egypt who they gave $20 billion of free money that has joined the Iranian - Russian alliance.

this nacaas is so confused its mind boggling

Why you mad? Whether it's about interests or not, they're selling themselves accepting money from Saudi in exchange for being used. Somalia would be much better off and probably wouldn't have extremist there if they left Arabs alone. Somalia doesn't need Arabs, whether it's about interests or not.

 

[DuctTape]

I gave you proof, with all the authors. Again, this is talking about with Chinese. It said when Chinese Slave traders purchased....again I provided the evidence, you don't want to accept it. Do an extensive search how terminology, because at one point East Africans were called Moors by Europeans.

The term "moor" was used for North African muslim populations from Morocco, Mali, Niger, Mauritania, etc.
Not East African populations. "East African" is far too broad a regional term to use when we're talking about the 7th Century onwards, anyway. Where in East Africa are you referring to? The Zanj Coast? Abyssinia? The Land of the Berbers? There was no broad blanket term for the entire eastern coast of Africa back then.

 

[Caraweelo X]

@Caraweelo X do you not find it ironic that you're using entirely european sources as a somali to answer these questions?


And a white guy calls you a and a Kenya Madow callsvyou warya. We waz slaves all over the world. Do you realize that Arabs are/were treated horribly in Somalia as well?

The current geopolitical condition of Somalia has nothing to do with history or Somalis ire of Arabs. Not to mention Syria,Sudan,Palestine and many other Arab countries are in the very same situation. It's called geopolitics and has nothing to do with Arab supremacy but more to with western hegemony. Something that doesn't seem to concern you at all.

No it's not ironic because what's funny is Somalis are using White authors on here. I actually not only use White authors but Arabs ones as well. Somali historians use Arab sources because Somalia has no written history and renowned geographers visited and wrote what they saw. History must be able to withstand orientalism.

 

[Caraweelo X]

The term "moor" was used for North African muslim populations from Morocco, Mali, Niger, Mauritania, etc.
Not East African populations. "East African" is far too broad a regional term to use when we're talking about the 7th Century onwards, anyway. Where in East Africa are you referring to? The Zanj Coast? Abyssinia? The Land of the Berbers? There was no broad blanket term for the entire eastern coast of Africa back then.

Zanj means "Land of the Blacks" Please look it up, it includes Somalia.

 

[DuctTape]

Zanj means "Land of the Blacks" Please look it up, it includes Somalia.

View attachment 12095

So "Moors" was used in one instance for Somalis, other cushitic populations and Arabs.
This doesn't change the fact that the term "Moors" was commonly and popularly used for North African populations.

It was a term that specifically denoted North African muslim populations like the Mauritanian and Moroccan peoples.

The Zanj coast specifically refers to the Swahili city states of Mombasa, Lamu, Malindi, etc.
The fact that it included southern Somalia is odd, since the populations of those cities were not ethnically or culturally 'Zanj'. None of the cities mentioned in your source were founded by Arab or Persian traders and Mogadishu existed well before Islam in the form of Sarapion, as mentioned by the Greeks in The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea.
I'm not going to debate the fact that southern Somalia was considered part of Zanj even though that doesn't seem very consistent with how Somalis don't even speak Swahili or have any cultural relation to Swahili people. So while the label may have been used, it was used incorrectly.

 

[Yahya Liban-Lewis]

Zanj means "Land of the Blacks" Please look it up, it includes Somalia.

View attachment 12095

"Zanj" was used to refer to Southeast Africa and Bantu speaking people. Modern day "Zanj" is Kenya and Tanzania. It doesn't include Somalia.

@Caraweelo X

 

[Prince of Lasanod]

When your Arab BDSM fetish goes too far...

 

[Prince of Lasanod]

Why you mad? Whether it's about interests or not, they're selling themselves accepting money from Saudi in exchange for being used. Somalia would be much better off and probably wouldn't have extremist there if they left Arabs alone. Somalia doesn't need Arabs, whether it's about interests or not.

Are these maids being forced to go to Saudi Arabia? No, they are not. They chose out of their own free will to be sent.

Somalia need Arabs as livestock make up the majority of our exports, and Arabs buy the majority of our exports. Therefore, Arabs play an integral role in our economy.

 

[Caraweelo X]

So "Moors" was used in one instance for Somalis, other cushitic populations and Arabs.
This doesn't change the fact that the term "Moors" was commonly and popularly used for North African populations.
View attachment 12096
It was a term that specifically denoted North African muslim populations like the Mauritanian and Moroccan peoples.

The Zanj coast specifically refers to the Swahili city states of Mombasa, Lamu, Malindi, etc.
The fact that it included southern Somalia is odd, since the populations of those cities were not ethnically or culturally 'Zanj'. None of the cities mentioned in your source were founded by Arab or Persian traders and Mogadishu existed well before Islam in the form of Sarapion, as mentioned by the Greeks in The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea.
I'm not going to debate the fact that southern Somalia was considered part of Zanj even though that doesn't seem very consistent with how Somalis don't even speak Swahili or have any cultural relation to Swahili people. So while the label may have been used, it was used incorrectly.

You don't understand the fact that labels are man made & that Zanj is not specifically an ethnic group. Zanj means Black, East Africa, specifically the horn was referred to as Zanj because it means Land of the Blacks. Mogadishu was once referred to as a Swahili city. I've done a lot of research on this, it's not as simple as it's usually painted, it's more complex. Zanj is not a racial category necessarily.

 

[Caraweelo X]

Are these maids being forced to go to Saudi Arabia? No, they are not. They chose out of their own free will to be sent.

Somalia need Arabs as livestock make up the majority of our exports, and Arabs buy the majority of our exports. Therefore, Arabs play an integral role in our economy.

Saudi Arabia are requesting maids for cheap labor, it's modern day slavery. I'm disappointed in Somalia for even entertaining Saudi Arabia, when they still refer to Somalis as Abeed. The Saudi government is trash and needs to correct themselves.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0UV0BH
https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/02/18/saudi-arabia-12000-somalis-expelled
https://horseedmedia.net/2016/02/05/somalia-700-somalis-in-saudi-jails-face-dire-conditions/
http://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2016/J...rabia_aims_to_recruit_15000_somali_maids.aspx

 

[Lord Flacko]

I gave you proof, with all the authors. Again, this is talking about with Chinese. It said when Chinese Slave traders purchased....again I provided the evidence, you don't want to accept it. Do an extensive search how terminology, because at one point East Africans were called Moors by Europeans.

Are you retarded or something? Honestly I'm getting tired of you sounding like a broken record player


That is a general statement. It literally says Somalis were not among the slaves they owned, captured or sold. It doesn't say "but only to the Chinese doe". You say, WITHOUT PROOF, that Somalis somehow had two different markets. One where they (allegedly, no proof given) only or also sold Somali slaves to non-Chinese and one where they sold only nonSomali slaves to the Chinese. That is fucking retarded.


Instead of giving proof Somalis were sold, you give "therefore it must mean" and broad loose statements, which I have disproved with several independent sources.

Here on one page from a book you first used, THREE different times is it directly said Somalis were not sold as slaves.

"East Africans were called Moors are one point" and so where Pakis, Indians, Filipinos and countless others. But the name does not apply to Somalis.


Just give up.

 

[Lord Flacko]

You don't understand the fact that labels are man made & that Zanj is not specifically an ethnic group. Zanj means Black, East Africa, specifically the horn was referred to as Zanj because it means Land of the Blacks. Mogadishu was once referred to as a Swahili city. I've done a lot of research on this, it's not as simple as it's usually painted, it's more complex. Zanj is not a racial category necessarily.

The Horn was never referred to as Zanj. It's a popular misconception but not true.

(Bantus/Nilotics who may have been mixed with Southern Cushites includes the Masaai who live in previous bilad al Zanj)
Description of the Zanj from al Muqqadasi and Ibn Battuta.

As for the Zanj, they are people of black color, flat noses, markings/tattoos on their face, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.

From Ibn Battuta's visit to Kilwa (A Zanj colony)

Kilwa is one of the most beautiful and well-constructed towns in the world. The whole of it is elegantly built. The roofs are built with mangrove pole. There is very much rain. The people are engaged in a holy war, for their country lies beside the pagan Zanj. Their chief qualities are devotion and piety: they follow the Shafi'i sect. When I arrived, the Sultan was Abu al-Muzaffar Hasan surnamed Abu al-Mawahib [loosely translated, "The Giver of Gifts"] ... on account of his numerous charitable gifts. He frequently makes raids into the Zanj country [neighboring mainland], attacks them and carries off booty, of which he reserves a fifth, using it in the manner prescribed by the Koran [Qur'an].[24]

Funnily enough Ibn Battuta also visited Mogadishu at the same time. He didn't describe it as a Zanj or Swahili city.

Even the earliest description of Somalis stated us as a separate group on different from the Zanj.

Where the Arab got their slaves from "the Zanj, a Bantu speaking people's from East Africa" again not Somalis. When Ibn Battuta visited Somali Sultan Abu Bakr he noted that Abu Bakr spoke both Arabic and Mogadishan, which is Somali.

Funny how Abyssinians, Sudanese, Nubians, Bantus and other Blacks beyond the Sahara were mentioned as the source of slaves for the Arabs but not Somalis

 

[Lord Flacko]

This thread has turned into a punching bag with @Caraweelo X assuming the role of the bag. It should be long dead. Just give up abaayo

 

[Prince Abubu]

This thread has turned into a punching bag with @Caraweelo X assuming the role of the bag. It should be long dead. Just give up abaayo

I think you are wasting your time. This cabeed already came with a set of preconceived notions and biases. She isn't interested in fact or truth, only in what can be used to distort Somali historical record to fit her weird fetish and beliefs. Any person of sound mind or intellect would've conceded the argument along time ago. But she still goes on with her false interpretations and deliberate distortion of the sources.

 

[Lord Flacko]

Saudi Arabia are requesting maids for cheap labor, it's modern day slavery. I'm disappointed in Somalia for even entertaining Saudi Arabia, when they still refer to Somalis as Abeed. The Saudi government is trash and needs to correct themselves.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0UV0BH
https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/02/18/saudi-arabia-12000-somalis-expelled
https://horseedmedia.net/2016/02/05/somalia-700-somalis-in-saudi-jails-face-dire-conditions/
http://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2016/J...rabia_aims_to_recruit_15000_somali_maids.aspx

Maids aren't slaves. By your definition I've had Habesha slaves

I think you are wasting your time. This cabeed already came with a set of preconceived notions and biases. She isn't interested in fact or truth, only in what can be used to distort Somali historical record to fit her weird fetish and beliefs. Any person of sound mind or intellect would've conceded the argument along time ago. But she still goes on with her false interpretations and deliberate distortion of the sources.

I'm doing this so when anybody Googles Somali history and stumble upon this forum, they won't be fooled by her revisionism.

 

[Madara x]

I agree with your points. I don't think Somalis can really afford to be so excessively proud of themselves when their country is in such a state - it would make far more sense to have some humility for the people they live among when they immigrate to the West or the Gulf countries or wherever. Right now we're just arrogant.

That's an interesting question. Firstly, let's discuss how much of a problem "Black unity" would be under white supremacy.
First, what benefits do you think a unified 'Black people' would offer to both Black Americans/British and immigrants from Africa alike? Do you think a unified sense of identity would benefit them (and us) greatly? I just want to know what you think about this.

In regards to your question, I don't think that the fact that we weren't enslaved is the only reason that Somalis viewed themselves as superior to Bantus and black Africans alike. The fact that Somalis are ethnically, physically and culturally very distinct from them plays a large part in this too, and this would lend itself to stereotypes and insults that Somalis would have for said groups. But you could say that this was exacerbated by slavery, so your point still stands.
The Italian and British colonialists (two examples of the white nations you speak of) were aware of the racial hierarchy that existed in Somalia between the native Somalis and the Bantu slaves, and encouraged said superiority complex.
View attachment 12094
(Catherine Lowe Besteman, Unraveling Somalia: Race, Class, and the Legacy of Slavery)
I think that this reflects the attitude that Western nations would take today in regards to this inherent sense of superiority the Somalis have. In fact, they actually are aware of the divisions between Somalis and Sub-saharan Africans; the USA made the expatriation of Somali Bantu populations from Somalia a priority during the civil war (http://cis.org/SomaliBantuRefugees) and the CIA even has a factbook on Somalia that explains clan dynamics and racial dynamics in Somalia (http://www.cfr.org/somalia/somalias-clan-families/p13315). So I'd say Western nations are very much aware of the superiority Somalis feel (at least, the governments are). Unlike the colonial powers, however, they seem to be discouraging this by getting the discriminated groups out of Somalia and away from mistreatment.

Your deep. I like this conversation.

Okay, in regards to your question "what benefits do you think a unified 'Black people' would offer to both Black Americans/British and immigrants from Africa alike? Do you think a unified sense of identity would benefit them (and us) greatly?"

This world was created with a racial order. That's how the white west became the place to be and Black Africa became the place to flee. You seem smart, so i won't further elaborate on this. But if you need further elaboration, then let me know.

If the world was made within a racial world order (white supremacy plundering black and other non-black nation such as india), and if the white (western) world built its whole civilization's wealth by kick-starting Capitalism through slavery, then there is nothing more dangerous for the white world (in my opinion) than black peoples coming together with the single objective of seeking retribution (justice) for the violence that was committed against them. What 'coming together' means in this context is obviously up for debate.

The racial category 'Black' didn't exist before the creation of new world (middle ages).
The racial categories (which are stupid cuz no one is really black or white) were forged as a means to reinforce anti-black racism, which was itself merely a means to justify the pillaging of Africa and African peoples.

So if African peoples 'came together' under the umbrella of 'black' as a political position, then the purposed of this 'coming together' could only ever be to combat white domination over the earth. At least this is what i think. So towards this end, i think 'building bonds with other blacks' is useful. Because insofar as the disintegration of white western powers is merely imagined but not actualized, black nations are bound to continue suffering and black peoples will remain dishonored throughout the earth.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Madara x]

I see what you're trying to say but it was mostly the other way around, whites use Madow s to fight us not to mention us being a Muslim nation is why we don't have unity with other Africans.

We have done the whole black power shtick and it's gotten us nowhere. We supported various African nation towards their independence including Angola,Kenya and South Africa (ffs South Africans even got free scholarships to university that they couldn't recieve in their country) and I don't have to tell you it's not exactly safe to have Somali features in any of those countries.

I can't even argue with that. You are 100% right. We can catch a lot of hatred. I've even had other black people try to tell me that there is a thing called 'east African priviledge'. But all of this traces back the white-black racial order of the earth.

 

[Prince of Lasanod]

Your deep. I like this conversation.

Okay, in regards to your question "what benefits do you think a unified 'Black people' would offer to both Black Americans/British and immigrants from Africa alike? Do you think a unified sense of identity would benefit them (and us) greatly?"

This world was created with a racial order. That's how the white west became the place to be and Black Africa became the place to flee. You seem smart, so i won't further elaborate on this. But if you need further elaboration, then let me know.

If the world was made within a racial world order (white supremacy plundering black and other non-black nation such as india), and if the white (western) world built its whole civilization's wealth by kick-starting Capitalism through slavery, then there is nothing more dangerous for the white world (in my opinion) than black peoples coming together with the single objective of seeking retribution (justice) for the violence that was committed against them. What 'coming together' means in this context is obviously up for debate.

The racial category 'Black' didn't exist before the creation of new world (middle ages).
The racial categories (which are stupid cuz no one is really black or white) were forged as a means to reinforce anti-black racism, which was itself merely a means to justify the pillaging of Africa and African peoples.

So if African peoples 'came together' under the umbrella of 'black' as a political position, then the purposed of this 'coming together' could only ever be to combat white domination over the earth. At least this is what i think. So towards this end, i think 'building bonds with other blacks' is useful. Because insofar as the disintegration of white western powers is merely imagined but not actualized, black nations are bound to continue suffering and black peoples will remain dishonored throughout the earth.

What are your thoughts?

The Europeans all share similar cultures, history, and are geographically close.

Culturally and historically, they both have inherited Ancient Greek / Roman culture, share the same Christian religion, and contemporary periods of progression like the Renaissance, Enlightenment, scientific method and development of industrialization. Although there has been constant war between them, they’ve always been closely knitted as neighbours, share the same civilizational structures, monarchs, dynasties and there has always been a boundary for Europe not just artificially (excluding Turks etc), but also grounded in reality.

Africans… well, I don’t how to say this without completely bursting your imaginary bubble.

 

[SOMALI GENERAL]

The Europeans all share similar cultures, history, and are geographically close.

Culturally and historically, they both have inherited Ancient Greek / Roman culture, share the same Christian religion, and contemporary periods of progression like the Renaissance, Enlightenment, scientific method and development of industrialization. Although there has been constant war between them, they’ve always been closely knitted as neighbours, share the same civilizational structures, monarchs, dynasties and there has always been a boundary for Europe not just artificially (excluding Turks etc), but also grounded in reality.

Africans… well, I don’t how to say this without completely bursting your imaginary bubble.

We may share a continent with west africans, southern africans and central africans, but we dont share any cultural, historical connections with them etc. Those parts of africa are a completely different world, however its a different story with our cultural & historical connections in the HOA & north africa.

 

[Prince of Lasanod]

We may share a continent with west africans, southern africans and central africans, but we dont share any cultural, historical connections with them etc. Those parts of africa are a completely different world, however its a different story with our cultural & historical connections in the HOA & north africa.

Culturally we hardly share much with fellow Horners. The difference between Amhara and Somali culture is humongous. We are very different people. Separated by around 3000 years.

I guess you could say we share a history with Habeshas, albeit a very violent one, but we will never be able to unite or come together like how the Europeans have since we follow different religions. Likewise with the Oromo.

We are simply Somali to be honest, and are completely unique. We only culturally bond with fellow Muslims in the Horn (excluding the Oromo), and Arabia.

As for West/Central/South Africa and even other East Africans, there is nothing to talk about. To say we share anything with them is ludicrous.