The Ajuraan- a view from the oral tradition

[Grant]

Yeah that's the narrative from Cerulli but I think he's got the chronology wrong, the death of the Imam at Ceel Cawl seems to have taken place much earlier than the invasion of Mogadishu, a century or more.

There are two oral histories from the Hiraab oral tradition, the story of the death of the Imam of Ajuuraan at Ceel Cawl, and the story of the takeover of Mogadishu. Cerulli puts the Imam's death later in his chronology and the Mogadishu takeover earlier, but abtirsi tells a different story.

Based on theoretical abtirsi dates?

 

[James Dahl]

Based on theoretical abtirsi dates?

You replied too quickly and missed the rest of what I wrote.
Yes generation dating. It's a blunt instrument in terms of chronology but it's more accurate than Cerulli's educated guesses.

 

[James Dahl]

One interesting commonality that ties the two stories together is one of the Hiraab overcoming discrimination by conquest, and the two stories are tied together by the kind of restrictions placed on the Hiraab.

In the Ceel Cawl story, the Ajuuraan declare that the Darandoole cannot water their herds and draw water from Ajuuraan wells during the day, only by night, placing a great hardship on the Darandoole. They make war on the Ajuuraan and defeat them, and as rulers can water their herds whenever they want.

In the Mogadishu story, the Muzaffar will not let the Darandoole to stay overnight in Mogadishu and are only allowed to be in the city during the day, making it more difficult for Darandoole merchants to do business and by definition disallowing any Darandoole settlement. The Hiraab Imam then tricks Muzaffar into leaving the city walls and is captured by the Imam, who takes over Mogadishu and the markets become theirs.

 

[Factz]

Yeah that's the narrative from Cerulli but I think he's got the chronology wrong, the death of the Imam at Ceel Cawl seems to have taken place much earlier than the invasion of Mogadishu, a century or more.

There are two oral histories from the Hiraab oral tradition, the story of the death of the Imam of Ajuuraan at Ceel Cawl, and the story of the takeover of Mogadishu. Cerulli puts the Imam's death later in his chronology and the Mogadishu takeover earlier, but abtirsi tells a different story.

The story of killing the Imam of Ajuuraan at Ceel Cawl is the origin story of the Hiraab Imamate under the Yacquub dynasty, where the Darandoole (the predecessor of the Hiraab) gather together and make war on the Ajuuraan. In this story they are a subject people of the Ajuuraan who are persecuted by the Ajuuuraan leadership.

The story of the takeover of Mogadishu takes place much later on, a hundred years later, as the Hiraab take Mogadishu the great prize of Banaadir. This story does not mention Ajuuraan and the Hiraab are no longer a subject people but under their own leadership.

Clearly the two stories the Mogadishu story is of an ascendant, later kingdom and the Ceel Cawl story is of an earlier, subjugated people. The chronological order should be clear.

Sir read this source, Ajuran power was challenged in the late 16th century but Ajuran managed to defeat the rebels and still rule them until 1700.

The Ajurans were defeated in the late 17th century since Ajurans were famous for repulsing the Oromo migration in the mid 17th century. Hawiye were getting bigger and establishing more settlements meaning more states and this meant Ajuran the Ajuran had to establish more vessel states like the Silcis Kingdom.

 

[Grant]

You replied too quickly and missed the rest of what I wrote.
Yes generation dating. It's a blunt instrument in terms of chronology but it's more accurate than Cerulli's educated guesses.

One interesting commonality that ties the two stories together is one of the Hiraab overcoming discrimination by conquest, and the two stories are tied together by the kind of restrictions placed on the Hiraab.

In the Ceel Cawl story, the Ajuuraan declare that the Darandoole cannot water their herds and draw water from Ajuuraan wells during the day, only by night, placing a great hardship on the Darandoole. They make war on the Ajuuraan and defeat them, and as rulers can water their herds whenever they want.

In the Mogadishu story, the Muzaffar will not let the Darandoole to stay overnight in Mogadishu and are only allowed to be in the city during the day, making it more difficult for Darandoole merchants to do business and by definition disallowing any Darandoole settlement. The Hiraab Imam then tricks Muzaffar into leaving the city walls and is captured by the Imam, who takes over Mogadishu and the markets become theirs.

I think it would be easy to make a 100 year error over 25 generations. Also, if Ajuraan power ends in the 1500s, how do you explain the Ajuraan-Muzzaffar alliance that gets touted on Wiki? What does this date do to the Gallo Madow wars?

 

[James Dahl]

Sir read this source, Ajuran power was challenged in the late 16th century but Ajuran managed to defeat the rebels and still rule them until 1700.

The Ajurans were defeated in the late 17th century since Ajurans were famous for repulsing the Oromo migration in the mid 17th century. Hawiye were getting bigger and establishing more settlements meaning more states and this meant Ajuran meant Ajuran had to establish more vessel states like the Silcis Kingdom.

The Geledi final defeat of the Ajuuraan in the south was a different Ajuuraan, there were no more Imams after Imam Cumar was killed at Ceel Cawl, but a rump state was established in the south after the Hiraab expelled them from the upper Shabelle valley, but their authority was much reduced.

The Geledi story is complicated because there are two Geledi dynasties. The first Geledi sultanate was the Garsogude Geledi dynasty that ruled from Luuq Ganane in what is now Gedo. They defeated the Ajuuraan in the south around the same time the Hiraab defeated the Ajuuraan in the center region. The Garsogude were overwhelmed by the Mareexaan migration to Jubaland and leadership of the Geledi passed to a new dynasty, the one we think of when we refer to a Geledi Sultanate, the one that conquered the Silcis and established their capital at Afgoye. This is the Gobroon Geledi sultanate and the first Gobroon sultan died in the 1770s.

 

[Factz]

The Geledi final defeat of the Ajuuraan in the south was a different Ajuuraan, there were no more Imams after Imam Cumar was killed at Ceel Cawl, but a rump state was established in the south after the Hiraab expelled them from the upper Shabelle valley, but their authority was much reduced.

The Geledi story is complicated because there are two Geledi dynasties. The first Geledi sultanate was the Garsogude Geledi dynasty that ruled from Luuq Ganane in what is now Gedo. They defeated the Ajuuraan in the south around the same time the Hiraab defeated the Ajuuraan in the center region. The Garsogude were overwhelmed by the Mareexaan migration to Jubaland and leadership of the Geledi passed to a new dynasty, the one we think of when we refer to a Geledi Sultanate, the one that conquered the Silcis and established their capital at Afgoye. This is the Gobroon Geledi sultanate and the first Gobroon sultan died in the 1770s.

Sir, Hiraab Imamate was established in the late 17th century. Darandoole taking over Mogadishu meant power was shifted in the Ajuran province, that's all. Read this source.

 

[James Dahl]

I think it would be easy to make a 100 year error over 25 generations. Also, if Ajuraan power ends in the 1500s, how do you explain the Ajuraan-Muzzaffar alliance that gets touted on Wiki?

The wiki is not a very good source...

 

[James Dahl]

Sir, Hiraab Imamate was established in the late 17th century. Darandoole taking over Mogadishu meant power was shifted in the Ajuran province, that's all. Read this source.

Citation is about Ajuran, not Hiraab?
Also Ajuuraan history is not very well understood, a lot of the academic citations are guesses in regards to chronology.

 

[Grant]

The wiki is not a very good source...

What does a 1500's date for the end of Ajuraan power do to the Gaalo Madow wars? It seems to me that the main Gada was 1567 and that raids went both ways throughout the 16th century.

 

[James Dahl]

What does a 1500's date for the end of Ajuraan power do to the Gaalo Madow wars. It seems to me that the main Gada was 1567 and that raids went both ways throughout the 16th century.

The Gal Madow wars and the Oromo invasion were two distinct wars that are not related to one another. The Gal Madow were not Oromo but rather waaq-worshipping Somalis and the wars were around 1200-1400.

 

[Factz]

Citation is about Ajuran, not Hiraab?
Also Ajuuraan history is not very well understood, a lot of the academic citations are guesses in regards to chronology.

Hiraab Imamate was established in the late 17th century. Read this source.

According to local oral tradition and the town chronicles along the coast, the Hiraab imamate was a powerful alliance of closely related groups who shared a common lineage under the Gurgarte clan divisions. It successfully revolted against the Ajuran Sultanate in late 17th century and and established an independent Hiraab Imamate According to Dr. Bernhard Helander of Uppsala University, "the Imam of Hiraab is a hereditary position that traditionally is held by a person of the first-born branch."

Source: Lee V. Cassanelli, The shaping of Somali society., Philadelphia, 1982 page 48.

The Gal Madow wars and the Oromo invasion were two distinct wars that are not related to one another. The Gal Madow were not Oromo but rather waaq-worshipping Somalis and the wars were around 1200-1400.

Are you serious? Oromo expansion was well documented across the Horn between the 16th and 17th century. Ajuran traditions about Oromos were once known as Galla tried that to expand into Ajuran Kingdom during the mid 17th century and they were repulsed by the Ajurans army.

Read this source from below.

 

[James Dahl]

That source placing the Gal Madow wars in the mid 17th century destroys their credibility imho

 

[Grant]

The Gal Madow wars and the Oromo invasion were two distinct wars that are not related to one another. The Gal Madow were not Oromo but rather waaq-worshipping Somalis and the wars were around 1200-1400.

I just hate this conflation that goes on. Get this:

http://historum.com/middle-eastern-african-history/61218-gaal-madow-ajuuraan-state.html

"The Ajuuraan State is famous for being one of Africa's major hydraulic empires as well as its war with the Portuguese, but it also resisted an Oromo "invasion" or incursion. This was called the Gaal Madow wars, and took place in the 17th century, after the Ajuuraan-Portuguese wars. There's not much information on this, and it seems more like a migration instead of an actual invasion by the Oromo nation. They were defeated, either converted to Islam or forced to shift their migration away from Ajuuraan territory, not really much else to say on that matter."

It's not really a wonder that so many Somalis are confused about their history.

 

[James Dahl]

Events get conflated and so do individuals. Sources that don't mention opponents explicitly historians make connections that aren't explicit.

Because there are so few sources people make assumptions and those assumptions get written in books so people can cite them and make more assumptions.

 

[Grant]

Events get conflated and so do individuals. Sources that don't mention opponents explicitly historians make connections that aren't explicit.

Because there are so few sources people make assumptions and those assumptions get written in books so people can cite them and make more assumptions.

We have a really bad case of it going on at Wiki right now. I read that Nassib Bundo ruled the Ajuraan territory and that Fakr ad-Din was Ajuraan. Some of it has reached Revolvy.

 

[Factz]

We have a really bad case of it going on at Wiki right now. I read that Nassib Bundo ruled the Ajuraan territory and that Fakr ad-Din was Ajuraan. Some of it has reached Revolvy.

I just looked back. It doesn't mention that.

 

[MARAQ DIGAAG]

Events get conflated and so do individuals. Sources that don't mention opponents explicitly historians make connections that aren't explicit.

Because there are so few sources people make assumptions and those assumptions get written in books so people can cite them and make more assumptions.

And you claiming that Gallo Madow were Somalis is an assumption and an opinion . A lot of your theories fall into this category .

 

[James Dahl]

Poorly understood topics with few written sources

And you claiming that Gallo Madow were Somalis is an assumption and an opinion . A lot of your theories fall into this category .

This is true as well, though I would hedge somewhat and say they are Somalis now, perhaps not then

 

[Factz]

Poorly understood topics with few written sources


This is true as well, though I would hedge somewhat and say they are Somalis now, perhaps not then

Study the Oromo expansion sir because you're sounding like a fool right now. They expanded towards the Ajuran Kingdom and the Ajuran army repelled their migration and converted the ones they captured to Islam and it happened in the mid 17th century according to the Ajuran traditions and even Oromo traditions that raided southern Somalia.