The spanish team new paper
- Thread starter Midas
- Start date
Idilinaa
VIP
Aside from the fabrications and misreadings of history that many have already pointed out, one recurring flaw in these narratives is the obsession with branding Somali societies as purely 'nomadic.' They rinse and repeat this label without considering the full economic and social structures at play.
Let’s take a moment to appreciate how self-contradictory it is to speak of ‘nomadic kings’ who engaged in long-distance trade, lived in fixed coastal settlements, and had dedicated burial sites.
The allergy to recognizing pastoralists as capable of complex socio-economic organization is baffling. When confronted with clear evidence of indigenous political and economic sophistication, they always default to external explanations, as if local agency simply cannot exist in their framework
Idilinaa
VIP
Yes, Axum was landlocked and Adulis was semi-autonomous. Axum had no ships or any maritime domains, it relied on Adulis.
Not only that them conquering Yemen is also exaggerated they got help from the Romans who also supplied them with ships and troops. So it wasn't necessarily a pure display of Axum outwards power projection or might.
I showed a text that referenced roman sources on the matter.
I will also say that people make big deal out of Axumite monuments when it was really just a large palace or church largely surrounded by a sea of huts that commoners lived in. It actually shows you a culture driven less by commercial activity or trade, as well as high wealth inequality and lack of distribution of resources. Axum as an inland city did not maintain local industries, produced nothing of value in terms of tradable commodities, was not attached to a port anywhere near its immediate vicinity, only Adulis was a trade hub.
Reconstruction of life at Ancient Axum:
Whereas Somali coastal cities were far more uniform with evenly distributed stone architecture., where the urban experience is a lot more democratic and civilian focused, as it grew in wealth it progressed into a sprawling stone urbanisation, with houses that were up to several storeys high; These cities also maintained their own industries or trading commodities, that were exported through their busy harbours. They had their own vessels and ships that they traded and sailed with.
It's funny how those archeologists affirm the egalitarian , wealth distributive , commercial nature of those ancient sites, don't even see the direct continuation between that and how Somali cities in medieval and early modern era organized and operated.
This also shows you that Somali cities had a more organic and independent economic model. That idea that it developed in any way under the influence of Axum or others is completely nonsensical.
@Shimbiris is right there is no reason assume the Somali coast and commerical enterprise would have operated differently during the Pre-Islamic era, to it's medieval or early modern successors.
I mean we have to big props to the akaumite steale. They are incredibly massive and I can't imagine how much labor it took to build them .Yes, Axum was landlocked and Adulis was semi-autonomous. Axum had no ships or any maritime domains, it relied on Adulis.
Not only that them conquering Yemen is also exaggerated they got help from the Romans who also supplied them with ships and troops. So it wasn't necessarily a pure display of Axum outwards power projection or might.
I showed a text that referenced roman sources on the matter.
I will also say that people make big deal out of Axumite monuments when it was really just a large palace or church largely surrounded by a sea of huts that commoners lived in. It actually shows you a culture driven less by commercial activity or trade, as well as high wealth inequality and lack of distribution of resources. Axum as an inland city did not maintain local industries, produced nothing of value in terms of tradable commodities, was not attached to a port anywhere near its immediate vicinity, only Adulis was a trade hub.
Reconstruction of life at Ancient Axum:
View attachment 358224
Whereas Somali coastal cities were far more uniform with evenly distributed stone architecture., where the urban experience is a lot more democratic and civilian focused, as it grew in wealth it progressed into a sprawling stone urbanisation, with houses that were up to several storeys high; These cities also maintained their own industries or trading commodities, that were exported through their busy harbours. They had their own vessels and ships that they traded and sailed with.
It's funny how those archeologists affirm the egalitarian , wealth distributive , commercial nature of those ancient sites, don't even see the direct continuation between that and how Somali cities in medieval and early modern era organized and operated.
This also shows you that Somali cities had a more organic and independent economic model. That idea that it developed in any way under the influence of Axum or others is completely nonsensical.
@Shimbiris is right there is no reason assume the Somali coast and commerical enterprise would have operated differently during the Pre-Islamic era, to it's medieval or early modern successors.
Though I do suspect the lalibella churches are more of a natural formation than actual churches dug underground. I think I remember it mentioned somewhere on twitter that these used to be inhabited by troglodgye cave dwelllers.
Idilinaa
VIP
I’m not dismissing the scale or significance of Axumite structures they’re undoubtedly impressive. My point is that their urban and economic model was fundamentally different from that of Somali coastal cities. Axum’s layout where a palace or church dominated the city while commoners lived in huts suggests a highly stratified society with concentrated wealth.
In contrast, Somali cities were built with a more egalitarian approach, with multi-story stone buildings and a more distributed economic model, driven by trade and local industries. This indicates that Somali urban centers developed independently, without Axumite influence, and followed a different trajectory.
As for Somali coastal economic activity, there’s no reason to assume it functioned any differently in the pre-Islamic period than it did in the medieval and early modern eras. The same commercial and maritime traditions persisted, showing a long-standing independent economic mode
Interesting you mentioned the cave dwellers when they conquered the highlands in Futuh , they mentioned the inhabitants in those mountains living in caves in contrast to the lowlands. Maybe they are related to that.
"because they did not dwell in the lowlands but in the mountains and in caves"
Last edited:
I've seen them claim that Aksum had conquered most of Arabia via Abraha's inscriptions. IIRC, it states he invaded deep into Central Arabia and subjugated the tribes there.
What I find humorous about this "nomadic kings" jibber jabber is that this was for generations what the rulers of Abyssinia more or less were. Throughout the Middle-Ages and much of the Early Modern era Abyssinia was effectively "a civilization without cities":
They had pretty much no major towns or cities and the Solomonic Emperors, for much of their rule, travelled in a nomadic tent court that moved from province to province across their domains throughout the year:
It's ironic that people who were settled farmers were being ruled by an effectively "nomadic" Emperor whilst Somalis often did hole their Garaads/Amirs/Imams/Suldaans up in coastal towns and interior towns like Bardhere:
One of the few times they became quite settled-ish and built a somewhat impressive court at Gondar it was basically inspired by the Portuguese and is plainly just Portuguese architecture:
It's honestly sad that in their ignorance of Ethiopia/Abyssinia's true history they're failing to analyze it in its entirety and sincerely. It's frankly quite an interesting civilization in its own way. A unique 2,000-3,000 year enduring feudal society practically to this day as you've explained. It's something of a fascinating case study but these idiots are too busy spreading bullshit about it to truly appreciate and study it for what it was.
Last edited:
Basically the entire Arabian Peninsula was his stomping ground, from the borders of Iraq and Jordan all the way down to the UAE.
The crazy part is that was second time Aksum invaded Arabia. They had briefly conquered Yemen and the Arabian Red Sea coast around 300 years earlier between 200-270 AD.
The things you can do to disjointed clans who all view each other as enemies.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Idilinaa
VIP
That last sentence sounds more like your own fantasy and projections. It’s telling how some of you seem more committed to unserious trolling and carrying pointless grudges rather than engaging with facts. Whatever you imagine, you aren’t harming Somalis, nor are you improving your own position by wasting time on this.
They are welcome to try pushing such revisionism, but it would be like claiming the sky is pink. The historical record speaks for itself Somalis built cities, and archaeological evidence confirms public infrastructure projects such as stone dams, large wells, vaulted cisterns, storage facilities, and even long aqueducts like the one discovered near Berbera.
When Somalis left Somalia, they left as scholars, merchants, sailors, and diplomats not as slaves. History isn’t on their side, and no amount of revisionism will change that
Don't say I didn't warn you then.
Idilinaa
VIP
Rewriting history requires erasing evidence, and in this case, that’s impossible. The records whether written accounts, archaeological findings, or oral histories aren’t going anywhere. Somali civilization is well-documented, and those who try to distort it will only expose their own ignorance.
Instead of relying on vague warnings about 'experts at rewriting history,' perhaps we should engage with actual sources. Facts don’t bend to wishful thinking.
Idilinaa
VIP
The Aksumite invasion of Yemen was not an independent imperial conquest but a strategic intervention backed by Rome, primarily serving their broader conflict with Persia. The fact that Aksum lacked a significant navy and required Roman ships highlights its role as a regional player rather than a dominant expansionist empire.
Abraha’s rule in Yemen was more of a localized Christian kingdom rather than a direct extension of Aksumite authority into Arabia. His military ventures, including the Mecca campaign, were ultimately unsustainable, in some cases unsuccessful, and after his rule, Aksumite influence in the region faded.
In short, Aksum’s presence in Yemen was part of a greater geopolitical struggle, not a sign of long-term Aksumite hegemony over Arabia. The claim that Aksum expanded deep into the peninsula overstates the nature and extent of its influence.
Why do this people always discredit our history
It's too justify and prove the dumb "Africans were living in the Stone Age before colonisation" circlejerk.
However,it most potently used by Zionists and their stooges to paint the picture that Muslim nations currently in turmoil have always been chaos-ridden.
I don't understand why you're being so aggressive towards @Duubpon. He didn't say anything trolly, imho. If anything he complimented you and the rest of us in saying that we should publish like these people are to counter them and their nonsense.
Ironically, that is exactly something you have advised me and advised knowledgeable Somalis in general do. Take it easy, walaal. Feel like you're too often in a state of dagaal.
She's definitely pissed I called out her and her victim-blaming Kacaanist brethren.I don't understand why you're being so aggressive towards @Duubpon. He didn't say anything trolly, imho. If anything he complimented you and the rest of us in saying that we should publish like these people are to counter them and their nonsense.
Ironically, that is exactly something you have advised me and advised knowledgeable Somalis in general do. Take it easy, walaal. Feel like you're too often in a state of dagaal.
16th century maps:
1554 map
If you want more info on these maps or if you want to see more maps check these links:
link 1:
nwcartographic.com
link 2:
1552 Africae Tabula IIII
1554 map
If you want more info on these maps or if you want to see more maps check these links:
link 1:
1552 Africae Tabula IIII
Aphricae Tabula IIII By: Sebastian Munster Date: 1552 (Published) Basel Dimensions: 10 x 13.4 inches (25.4 cm x 34 cm) - Antique Map, Egypt, Nile River, Sahara, northern Africa
nwcartographic.com
link 2:
Last edited:
