Somali twitter vs Spanish archaeologist

[The alchemist]

Again, the Spanish team had studied these texts, even refrenced them. They avoided the truth, and started to refrence wrong things for us to lie about how those people were, to reduce them in the social darwinian way. Like they're telling like the typical Orientalists; don't get it confused, all these nice observations don't mean anything. These people had to be savage. The Spanish team subscribe to a hardcore level racist orientalism. In fact, the Rubial guy has a whole hypothesis that the Somalis were throughout the entire history a consistent broken society as you see today. That what you see today in Somalia, for example, is no different than thousands of years ago. Not only does that go well with their Medieval claims, but it also reveals what they think about is in the extant, as they explicitly described our ancient ancestors. Basically the dysfunction you see in the Somali region is just part of how we have operated, not a set of historically new issues that cascaded into destruction. To make this claim, you have to fabricate fake anti-ethoses, you have to assume people have some sort of genetic tendency to be lower.

"I will take a long-term approach to state ecology and state resistance so as to eschew the presentist bias that is all too frequent in political analyses, particularly in Africa, and that prevents us from understanding some of the deep undercurrent that explain contemporary phenomena."

Here above, there is an abstract that described exactly what I said.

By the way, on the text itself, it mentions that these ancestral Somalis used rafts to export goods to Muza and Okelis, today modern southern Arabia. These rafts were probably just smaller sailing boats and not actual rafts. Or maybe they were more elaborate rafts. I don't know.

They also defined our existence as "peripheries of the Roman empire," as if we were not a center of our own, with Romans just being one of several of the people we traded with. The reason this is important to emphasize is that these people assume an economy could form through being a consequence of Roman expanse, an unfounded claim. This is another nonsense trying to define our expression of perceived refined economic generation as a mere residue of the Mediterranean. Even when it comes to Berenike, Romans did have some involvement there, but the ones that did the trading, that did majorly inhabit the city were Blemmyes. Romans and other foreigners were minor in comparison. These people fail to capture the value that this entire region encompassed an economic region before there ever was a thing called Rome. People had seen all types of luxury before civilization ever hit the entire European continent. These people need to come in more humble and show some basic respect when they involve themselves in other people's history. We had seen whatever this value judgment called civilization long before the Europeans. It's embarrassing to even say this but it is important to set things to scale, be acquainted with historical reality.

So here we have the archeological record of what is descriptive pointing out the obvious, and yet you have these Spanish guy who knows this information (as he is one of the chief guys of these projects) still peddling the racist nonsense he had put forth in the screenshot. Tell me that is not racism. And notice how often they mention the most nasty Orientalist works and quotes.

I notice they start to do slight pivots lately. They are trying to give themselves the plausible deniability route by minorly mentioning things that might allude to Somalis being the main guys, but that is one sentence in a heap of crap (so they contradict themselves in the focus of the main text, so you know it is placed there to protect themselves as they see they have built a false narrative). And they do this (in extreme reluctance) because they are starting to realize their bullshit, while also doing nonsense peddling. And remember, this is after many years of crap and distortions. If these people had worked with the Nubiologists (really professional guys), they would have been humbled quickly and been set straight where their material work (which is very good as I have said), could be used to better overall refinement and built upon the known history of Somalis instead of wrestling with the truth by attributing other aspects.

So this is why I don't think it is a coincidence they showed the poorest looking pastoralist as a representative of the Somali. It is all deliberate, projected from their image that we have historically been nomadic savages. Plain and simple. They did not get influenced by Burton, they agree and express it in their own ways. This is just another living legacy of the new form of Orientalism. I wonder if there is agenda behind this because how they mix competency with disrespect and stupidity is almost coordinative. It's like when someone tries to do harm on purpose out of spite. But it does not need to be that because racism produces such outcomes.

These people have never explicitly given Somalis any placements in the role of the Somali historical economy. But they have done so for others:

Here he was claiming the societies were diverse without any evidence when every information so far point to fairly homogenous peoples:

"The world that is emerging is one of interactions with the wider world and cosmopolitan communities (Insoll 1997; Hirsch and Fauvelle-Aymar 2011; Insoll et al. 2014; Mire 2015), but also of complex and diverse indigenous societies of which little or nothing was known before"

Notice the notion of how cosmopolitan is used. That is used when urbanism is involved on Somali soil in every context, and here strictly means a foreign establishment of long-term systems.

Here it explicitly says these trading hubs were foreign outposts:

"Places like the coastal site of Bender Abbas are witness to the presence of diasporic communities living in their own settlements along the Somali coast but interacting in different ways with indigenous groups. Coastal sites, however, where not just foreign outposts: the documentation of indigenous materials and religious practices in the port of Bulahar offers a glimpse at the role of local groups in the creation of trading centers."

By the way, these were their earliest writings, so here they lay out what they really think while the newer narratives keep it as vague as possible but keep it explicit with the nomad narrative. Here they clearly state the locals as a secondary element at best. Not only that his fake hypothesis basically lays it out that there were stateless people at the "frontier" or even in the state. This describes a conditions where Somalis are a stateless people by definition, so who establishes the state? Clearly it must be different people, expressed in their text. What these people call "the state" is like "nomad" an unserious terms they manipulate to their advantage. It's like when European define every petty medieval local ruler as king, while they call more powerful rulers in later Nubia as "chiefs."

As they had no evidence for this garbage, they later they kept these notions indirectly alluding to "cosmopolitanism," urbanist and nomad dichotomy, going so far as attributing clear regional formations to wacky claims of Oromos long before the Oromo expansion, disassociate Somalis (or not even considering the possibility) that Ifat-Adal are Somali but thinking of it as an Ethiopian (a false concept at this time) extending into the Somali region while pushing Somalis into desert periphery (while now realizing they can't keep up their bullshit, so they have to be more creative about it), and more racist notions that go deep into their imaginations and reveals how they view Somalis as primitive, and a lot of consequential errant racist stupidity.

"Finally, a comparative study of ruined “towns” is showing the internal diversity of the sedentary settlements of Somaliland. Overall, the picture that emerges is one of complex articulations between nomads, town-dwellers, diasporic communities and cosmopolitan merchants."

These are their final conclusions in the older source. The notions of diasporic communities have not been shown any evidence. Remember, cosmopolitan merchants are the ones setting shops, and it does not include Somalis. I told you earlier that "merchant" is never used for Somalis.

There is a vile racial hierarchy imposed on their reading of our history. They can't help themselves, projecting some kind of racial supremacy. It's so baked into their ways and clearly we are very low on that totem pole, so all they percieve as higher, needs to be delegated differently to foreign colony as it pertains to the medieval history, while the empty and foolish term such as nomad (scholarship never use this word for pastoralism unless it is a unique one that is far different from what we historically practiced) consistently used for Somali.

You guys need to understand only nomad has been explicitly associated with Somali. I have yet to read any urban being Somali ever in their writing. Clearly there are "cosmopolitan" (this word comes up nearly every time urbanism is mentioned) and diasporic communities that fit that bracket more. They came, kickstarted the economy and taught Islam to the savage nomads who somehow kept themselves savage (despite nomads showing signs of Islamic slaughtering practice in Harlaa before urbanism appeared there in the 8th century (if I recall correctly) or so), despite trading for over thousand years with "cosmopolitan" traders that also set shop and roughly did the same many centuries earlier.

 

[The alchemist]

Back to the the fish nonsense.

I spent time reading the primary fictional sources that mentioned these fish-eaters, and let me tell you, these ancient Mediterranean's conflated people all the way from the South Asian coast, to the Gulf, and then somehow skipped over to the Red Sea. Absolutely nowhere was there mention of the Somali coast at all. They mentioned that ancient Bejas ate fish, which had to be only a minor part that splintered off and lived off the coast. We know this by the prevalent historic fish taboo among the tribes, and also explicitly mentioned by these ancient sources that the people largely consumed milk and meat, while another group consumed more agrarian foods. The thing is, the mythology describing these fish eaters seems to conflate all of these diverse peoples, letting us know they just placed one mythological stereotype, because it is exactly like the one in the island off the coast of Arabia. The Bejas that ate fish were more often than not just supplementing their diet while living close to high activity areas, so neither were they isolated, socially diminutive or primitive. And they fished in various ways, not eating food raw or anything.

The reason why these people conflated the entire region was because they believed it was part of one continuous stretch. That is why they confuse people in Pakistan, Arabs in the Gulf, and others, and then suddenly fishermen in the coast and islands of the Red Sea. They believed that was the edge of the world beyond civilization.

But putting all of that to the side, none of the sources ever put the Somali coasts, as we damn sure did not primary subsist of fish and would at rare times be relegated as a convenient supplemet, if ever that, and none of the traits attributed to those other groups can ever be translated in any shape or form or vernacular in the historical Somali condition. It seems these people in a weird racist attempt, dragged what they knew for a fact had nothing to do with us, as how we would have appeared to foreigners, all to denigrate through malice, contempt for what was found, high productivity and wealth, bringing empires to its shores and not the other way around.

These people are deeply racist and this was merely a journey for them to cope with how their preconceived minds about how Africans from this part of the world did things that had to not only be uniquely different from what they knew but also operate in toe to toe with their own economic integrity and production value.

They cited unrelated sources that never addressed us, yet used that to claim that might have been how we appeared to foreigners in shock and awe. What a detestable bunch.

This is why I told you guys I was not reaching when I said they used that image deliberately, as it is hands down the worst vintage picture I have ever come across. They had to parse through all the good stuff to arrive at that, like pick the wackest combination of clothes in a rather fashionable closet. You had to try hard to do bad at that point.

Lastly, they should be decent enough to write up something good if they had primary and first access on our historic resources. They should be thankful, not us smiling like idiots when they give us a mixed bag and undermine us in the filthiest ways.

 

[The alchemist]

Wallahi, when I finally go back and move some lacag and influence around, if I live long enough, I'll legit push the odays to ban western researchers for good. Anyone not of a Somali background carrying a western passport will be forced to either simply be a tourist in the magalaad or leave. Time to bring back the Abanship system our ancestors maintained:



@The alchemist Spaniards seem particularly problematic. I remember it was a Spanish archaeologist in Ethiopia whom some silly Xabashis on Wikipedia were using as a source to claim Somalis were "peripheral" and merely "mercenaries" in the Adal army. Where he got this impression, if the moron had ever even skimmed the Futuh, I don't know.

The thing is, Western researchers are alright if they are not like those Spanish guys. But their work has to be processed. Meaning, we need a board of Somali scholarship. The country has to fund certain scholarships so that local operations oversee and involve themselves with the work and guide the process through real competence.

Also, it would be good to actually choose archeologists and give them funding that allows for something better. In that case, not only do we get nice work but you don't have to deal with weird characters that sniff around random places and ask non-involved locals to dig in their backyard.

Archeologists are more than happy to work most places, let alone new areas, if they get through the funding process, as they are eager to get into the field. Might as well set up a cultural and heritage institution, fund scholarships for students to study abroad, then also vet and reach out for good scholars that are willing to do our history justice. Like the Nubian archeology. And maybe one day, inshallah, we have many Oxford Handbook chapters that talk about things accurately.

Certain researchers have become more ethical than others. One can utilize that.

 

[The alchemist]

I dont think this is a bad thing at all. I actually find it fascinating and it makes me hopeful. It's definitely recent though that's for sure. I couldn't find anything online befofe a couple years ago. It's also not just a diaspora thing either if you look at tiktok or better yet youtube. The amount of videos people make on topics like culture,history,literature,etc has skyrocketed over the last 5 or 6 years. While most of these videos aren't of very high quality they're light years better than what used to be available on YouTube.

I'm honestly curious what's causing this trend ?

A people is rooted by a sense of history, culture, and tradition. It's the way in which people maintain their sense of continuity and identity. It's crucial to have a narrative of who your people were historically. As I mentioned, since there are no ways Somalis casually consume these things, they find other ways to engage in it. The reason things have shot up now is because of the concentration of Somalis in social media networks, maturation of content through platforms and participations such as these processing and presenting information from research and delving into new research of history using many academic sources, and probably a strong sense of people wanting to distinguish themselves as the nation, used a a sense of people-hood as we're a severely underrated people.

Basically there is a surge because of many reasons that had to hit critical points before it exploded.

This is not new to us. I was in Egypt many years ago, several times. The locals had no concept of the pharaonic age and did not even identify with it. Now, on the other hand, you would see all types of Egyptians highly internalizing that history, with every other guy having some type of AE image on social media and many of them engaging in genetics, too. Part of it is because of Sisi's plan in highlighting nationalistic aspects of tying such history to legitimize the state and foster engagement for tourism.

 

[Rayaale]

Back to the the fish nonsense.

I spent time reading the primary fictional sources that mentioned these fish-eaters, and let me tell you, these ancient Mediterranean's conflated people all the way from the South Asian coast, to the Gulf, and then somehow skipped over to the Red Sea. Absolutely nowhere was there mention of the Somali coast at all. They mentioned that ancient Bejas ate fish, which had to be only a minor part that splintered off and lived off the coast. We know this by the prevalent historic fish taboo among the tribes, and also explicitly mentioned by these ancient sources that the people largely consumed milk and meat, while another group consumed more agrarian foods. The thing is, the mythology describing these fish eaters seems to conflate all of these diverse peoples, letting us know they just placed one mythological stereotype, because it is exactly like the one in the island off the coast of Arabia. The Bejas that ate fish were more often than not just supplementing their diet while living close to high activity areas, so neither were they isolated, socially diminutive or primitive. And they fished in various ways, not eating food raw or anything.

The reason why these people conflated the entire region was because they believed it was part of one continuous stretch. That is why they confuse people in Pakistan, Arabs in the Gulf, and others, and then suddenly fishermen in the coast and islands of the Red Sea. They believed that was the edge of the world beyond civilization.

But putting all of that to the side, none of the sources ever put the Somali coasts, as we damn sure did not primary subsist of fish and would at rare times be relegated as a convenient supplemet, if ever that, and none of the traits attributed to those other groups can ever be translated in any shape or form or vernacular in the historical Somali condition. It seems these people in a weird racist attempt, dragged what they knew for a fact had nothing to do with us, as how we would have appeared to foreigners, all to denigrate through malice, contempt for what was found, high productivity and wealth, bringing empires to its shores and not the other way around.

These people are deeply racist and this was merely a journey for them to cope with how their preconceived minds about how Africans from this part of the world did things that had to not only be uniquely different from what they knew but also operate in toe to toe with their own economic integrity and production value.

They cited unrelated sources that never addressed us, yet used that to claim that might have been how we appeared to foreigners in shock and awe. What a detestable bunch.

This is why I told you guys I was not reaching when I said they used that image deliberately, as it is hands down the worst vintage picture I have ever come across. They had to parse through all the good stuff to arrive at that, like pick the wackest combination of clothes in a rather fashionable closet. You had to try hard to do bad at that point.

Lastly, they should be decent enough to write up something good if they had primary and first access on our historic resources. They should be thankful, not us smiling like idiots when they give us a mixed bag and undermine us in the filthiest ways.

Very detailed explanation, how do you manage to find this, do you have a background in history and anthropology

 

[Idilinaa]

@The alchemist I appreciate you taking the time to expose us to their ways. I haven't fully read every part but i will in due time and add my 2 cents. I think there is a good way for us to organize our arguments and response to them, taking everything you and others have shared.

Your main points seem to be:

Somalis had established markets and trade hubs – The Periplus explicitly mentions trade with locals in various Somali coastal regions, without any indication that foreigners set up the trade infrastructure.

The Spanish archaeologists misuse cosmopolitanism by acknowledging Somali participation in global trade while simultaneously downplaying their agency and civilization- They frame Somali involvement as incidental or passive, rather than as a sign of an advanced, well-integrated society.

No evidence of foreign colonies or dominance – The text does not suggest Arab or other foreign traders "founded" trade, contrary to the implication that Somalis were just passive participants.

Misuse of the term Ichthyophagoi – While the Periplus associates that term with some Arab fishermen and a minor subgroup of the Beja, Torres and others seem to project it onto Somalis unfairly.

Deliberate historical distortion – The Spanish team, despite having access to the same sources, selectively portrays Somalis in a negative light while omitting details about Arabs and others who actually fit their description of "naked fish-eaters."

Somalis Wore and Traded Clothing – The Periplus explicitly mentions Barbaroi-style clothing being sold in ancient Zaila, contradicting the false portrayal of them as naked primitives.

Archaeological evidence of Somali wealth – Excavations confirm that Somali merchants had luxury goods, indicating prosperity rather than "primitive" living conditions.

Their own findings even disprove them, much like it did for I'M Lewis.

The wealth of the Somali coast, the complexity of trade networks, and the evidence of sophisticated economic structures completely undermine the false narrative of "simple nomads." These scholars are scrambling to reconcile material evidence of prosperity with their ingrained belief that African societies must have been inferior or rudimentary.

Infact, just looking at the excerpt from Periplus that you shared with us it implies Economic Sophistication. Contrary to Spanish claims, the Periplus describes Somalis as tough negotiators, indicating deep market knowledge and strong internal trade networks.