I dare 2 say Ahmed Gurey was not Somali

[James Dahl]

James dahl,

Anything besides the manaqibs which is used by I M Lewis.

Did you look at the book I provided a link for above?

[Twisted_Logic]

Twisted it has already been established that the Futah is but a single source, inconsistent and not academic, that should serve as a single individual's narration and should be taken as a source and not the source for the wars of those years. In any case, this proves even more why the research should be strengthened.

If you spent half the time you did trying to proof the Imam was not Marehan (even though Abgal is nowhere to be seen in the annals of those history) as opposed to actually trying to document the whole movement and help shed complete light on, we might actually get there.

I just love your strategy. When the talking gets tough, just go on an insulting rampage. Too bad this doesn't mount to much.

The conquest is the most authoritative document on Ahmed Gurey and those conquests. If you are willing to rely on Harvel Sebastian who doesn't even present how he reached the conclusion of Emir Nur being Marehan as the gospel truth, you should have no problem with the conquest book.

Also, Marehan played no central role. In fact, if you read the book carefully, you will notice that they had to be dragged into the battle-field as the excerpts I have posted prove. In the end, many Somali clans took part of the efforts. To pick and choose which ones to be honored is quite dishonest.

I know you are desperate to steer the direction of the discussion by engaging in mud-slinging but this will be quite futile. Take my word for it.

[Voltage]

Twisted it has already been established that the Futah is but a single source, inconsistent and not academic, that should serve as a single individual's narration and should be taken as a source and not the source for the wars of those years. In any case, this proves even more why the research should be strengthened.

If you spent half the time you did trying to proof the Imam was not Marehan (even though Abgal is nowhere to be seen in the annals of those history) as opposed to actually trying to document the whole movement and help shed complete light on, we might actually get there.

I just love your strategy. When the talking gets tough, just go on an insulting rampage. Too bad this doesn't mount to much.

The conquest is the most authoritative document on Ahmed Gurey and those conquests. If you are willing to rely on Harvel Sebastian who doesn't even present how he reached the conclusion of Emir Nur being Marehan as the gospel truth, you should have no problem with the conquest book.

I know you are desperate to steer the direction of the discussion by engaging in mud-slinging but this will be quite futile. Take my word for it.

It is not the "most authoritative document". It's prominence is do more to the lack of competition for viewpoint then complete accuracy or anything else. This is why I say more research is needed before conclusive stances are taken on anything mentioned in the Futah.

What is so hard to understand about that? That seems to be a criticism shared by many African historians and explains why Shihab, for a famous book, is rarely sited in academic circles dealing with this topic.

In any case, I just thought it was more interesting how you are more concerned, actually "enlightened", about trying to proof the Imam is not Marehan or what not then trying to open an honest dialogue exploring the historical moment in its entirety as part of collective Somali history. Like most Somalis, you think since your clan was not involved, a collective documentation of the moment is simply not in your interest.

Somalis, very narrow minded.

[Voltage]

Also, Marehan played no central role. In fact, if you read the book carefully, you will notice that they had to be dragged into the battle-field as the excerpts I have posted prove. In the end, many Somali clans took part of the efforts. To pick and choose which ones to be honored is quite dishonest.

Oh, an add on. See above for a general assessment.

Specifically though, your picking and choosing is dishonest, to say the least. As mentioned in the Futah, the person who wavered was Hirabu, faced with political worries, but the Marehan were ready and on the vanguard. When Hirabu abdicates in favor of his nephew, they waste no time in moving forward to Harrar with the Imam. As well, they are continuously prominently mentioned as the leaders of the Somalis in the war and elsewhere and in the front lines.

But you are blinded to all of that because you have an agenda right?

[Twisted_Logic]

Twisted it has already been established that the Futah is but a single source, inconsistent and not academic, that should serve as a single individual's narration and should be taken as a source and not the source for the wars of those years. In any case, this proves even more why the research should be strengthened.

If you spent half the time you did trying to proof the Imam was not Marehan (even though Abgal is nowhere to be seen in the annals of those history) as opposed to actually trying to document the whole movement and help shed complete light on, we might actually get there.

I just love your strategy. When the talking gets tough, just go on an insulting rampage. Too bad this doesn't mount to much.

The conquest is the most authoritative document on Ahmed Gurey and those conquests. If you are willing to rely on Harvel Sebastian who doesn't even present how he reached the conclusion of Emir Nur being Marehan as the gospel truth, you should have no problem with the conquest book.

I know you are desperate to steer the direction of the discussion by engaging in mud-slinging but this will be quite futile. Take my word for it.

It is not the "most authoritative document". It's prominence is do more to the lack of competition for viewpoint then complete accuracy or anything else. This is why I say more research is needed before conclusive stances are taken on anything mentioned in the Futah.

What is so hard to understand about that? That seems to be a criticism shared by many African historians and explains why Shihab, for a famous book, is rarely sited in academic circles dealing with this topic.

In any case, I just thought it was more interesting how you are more concerned, actually "enlightened", about trying to proof the Imam is not Marehan or what not then trying to open an honest dialogue exploring the historical moment in its entirety as part of collective Somali history. Like most Somalis, you think since your clan was not involved, a collective documentation of the moment is simply not in your interest.

Somalis, very narrow minded.

Indeed Somalis are very narrow minded and you are a good case in point

Of course more research needs to be done. But if you run around this forum spread falsehood based on no hard evidence it will be countered. Depend on that. You don't get to have a free pass with history.

Anyways, you are the one who completely ignored the contributions of other Somali clans and propped the Marehan as the sole fighters when the truth is far away from this. Any contribution made by any Somali group in our history is welcome and is desired but this does NOT include constructing your own alternative history.

[Twisted_Logic]

Also, Marehan played no central role. In fact, if you read the book carefully, you will notice that they had to be dragged into the battle-field as the excerpts I have posted prove. In the end, many Somali clans took part of the efforts. To pick and choose which ones to be honored is quite dishonest.

Oh, an add on. See above for a general assessment.

Specifically though, your picking and choosing is dishonest, to say the least. As mentioned in the Futah, the person who wavered was Hirabu, faced with political worries, but the Marehan were ready and on the vanguard. When Hirabu abdicates in favor of his nephew, they waste no time in moving forward to Harrar with the Imam. As well, they are continuously prominently mentioned as the leaders of the Somalis in the war and elsewhere and in the front lines.

But you are blinded to all of that because you have an agenda right?

Hirabu was NOT the leaders of the Somali clans but his own. I posted the excerpt from the book that you have misinterpreted for what ever reason.

The end point is that the other Somali groups were armed and ready and Hirabu was hesitating. Don't shoot the messenger buddy

[Voltage]

You are a joke and a petty one at that.

The only difference between you and an illiterate geeljire in a cafe is the fact you picked up a couple words in English. You still have the same mentality even with the English you learned in Pakistan.

I can go back and quote excerpt from the Futah you brought which even says "Hirabu, the Amir of the Somalis" but I see no point. It is like legitimizing your petty and very primitive mentality.

Have fun trying to proof the Imam was not Marehan or not with the many texts which have information about them.

But when you see Abgaal mentioned in any of them, call me. I would be more then happy as I have been deprived of any information about them in my collective documentation of Somali history.

[Twisted_Logic]

You are a joke and a petty one at that.

The only difference between you and an illiterate geeljire in a cafe is the fact you picked up a couple words in English. You still have the same mentality even with the English you learned in Pakistan.

I can go back and quote excerpt from the Futah you brought which even says "Hirabu, the Amir of the Somalis" but I see no point. It is like legitimizing your petty and very primitive mentality.

As always, Voltage playing the victim His perpetual tactic

You and your little gang come here spreading false constructed history and at the same time taking cheap shots against other people’s clans. Members have absolutely no reason whatsoever to apologize for seeking information and verifying the claims you make- it is not only our right, it is a necessity.

Everything I have posted is HARD fact/news from the very same source you used. Just because this new information embarrasses you doesn’t mean members shouldn’t be aware of it.
This is the incident inquestion:

''A tribe called Girri then came to the imam. A dispute had arisen between them and their companions in another tribe called the Marraihan whose emir was called Hirabu, so the imam Ahmed sent a message to Hirabu emir of the Somalis, to make peace between them.''

You are using this sentence to claim that Hirabu was the emir of all the Somalis. Which is false, since in this above sentence it clearly says the emir of Marehan, emir of the Somalis refers back to the Marehan since they are Somalis.

You can scream and call me all the names you want. It doesn’t change anything. Presenting SOLID UNDENIABLE facts about this incident doesn’t project a “ joke and petty self”

ps

I amglad our history isn't made up of camel-stealing and plea letters as yours

[Voltage]

I have never used the Futah once as a source. Please correct yourself. Towing the line of Africaphile historians, I have never viewed it as a legitimate academic source.

Also, the Girri are as well Somalis, so why was it mentioned Hirabu is the Emir of Somalis to denote Marehan, as you say, since the Girri, who had a dispute with him, are also Somalis? Did Marehan equal Somalis when they claimed the title of Somalis at the expense of the Girri? This does not make sense unless Hirabu, as Emir of the Marehan, was by nature the hereditary overlord of the Somali people.

In any case, see above for concluding remarks.

[Twisted_Logic]

Voltage,

Every Somali clan was led by their own chief. Hirabu could not be the emir of all Somalis as you want us to believe especially when he was hell-bent on abandoning the Jihad.

''Now, having finished this, let us return to the earlier narrative, and look at what happened during the Somali campaign.

When news of the imam's leaving for the outlying provinces of Abyssinia reached them, a certain person, by name Hirabu, a chief of one of the Somali tribes called Marraihan, had arrived half-way along the route to the country of Harar. After verifying the departure of the imam to the land of Abbyssinia, he doubled back and returned to his own country.''

Again Hirabu was NOT the emir of all Somalis

''Then Hirabu the chieftain of the Somali tribe of Marraihan, killed one of the equerries of the sultan 'Umar Din when he was in Nageb. The imam heard about what Hirabu had done, and he said to the Sultan 'Umar Din, 'This Somali has acted treacherously towards you and killed your equerry.' So the imam, and the sultan with him, prepared himself for an expedition and set out and arrived at the country of the Somalis, as far as Kidad. Hirabu. meantime, had fled and was hiding in his own country.

The imam asked the sultan, 'What shall we do now? I am going to send for him to hand over the horses, and to pay the blood-money. If he does so, then all is well: if he does not, then I shall go against him, while you go back to your country.' So the imam sent to Hirabu to hand over the horses, and to pay the blood-money to some sharifs of the family of Ba' Alawi, the Husainites, may God bless us through their means.

So hopefully even you can understand something so basic.

[Xamud.]

I have heard he was Gerri Konbe Or was it Xarale Konbe?

[ky2008]

Voltage, I read the Arabic text of that book and it doesn't say Hirabu was the chief or leader of the Somali clans.If that phrase contains in the english version of that book then it must be the result of an eror done by the translator in order to keep his copy right.

[admin]

Man! I missed all the action here.

I'd never start this thread had I known it was so sensitive to some of us. Easy guys - we are talking about events that took place hundreds of years ago. No1 knows the facts and I see NO REASON to lose temper or sleep over something that remote!

Bro Voltage, as a matter of fact you disappointed your fans, including me on this one. your argument is overshadowed by your anger - easy bro - that man u r so fond of has been dead for 100s of years. Who knows maybe he was a converted Jew or christian. no1 knows for sure.

tnx twisted for posting the source of my argument.

The question still remains "was he or was he not somali?" I personally don't think so and that doesn't make me an idiot

[Buhodle-Gurl]

He was not?? But my uncle said he was a true Dhulbahante soldier.

[guryasame]

James,

The book is restricted in google, do u have access to it. I looked at a longtime a go and what I remember about the sources I already told u, that is why I wanted to know if u had other sources or did I M lewis list something I missed. The problem is its quiten likely if someone wrote one if these eulogy to the patriarch of the Patriarch of the cisse, they would likely give him sheikh's lineage eventoday cisse is often referred to as a brother of sheikh ishaq's brother and sheikh cisse is said to be cisse bin axmed, because the reer ugaas lineage from whom the cisse have always choose their Ugaas are descendant of yessif a subclan of habar jeclo, thus sealing the kinship of the two clans. Secondly. We know sheikh ishaq's siblings from arabic genealogical scholarship literature which are clearly different. From from what tariqa literature proclaim, this clearly needs explanation, so if u have something that can satisfy atleast some rigor of logic to warrant further curiosity and research completely let me know, assuming u have the book in hand at . I don't I.M. Lewis expect these things right, but his bibliography is valuable and his writing can also be used as raw information to be evaluated. Al-Kowneyn is a very interesting subject, there is a lot of mystery surrounds him, no record of him outside somali territories, I have visited his shrine and at its entrane the date given is 11th century, but his shrine is surrounded by
By large number of graves many of them look very old and large with stone circles which somalis associate with an older era, unfortunately one or two of these graves has been studied, the radiocarbon dating to something around 300-400 yrs old, much some of the things I saw around that site is very curious, I have also wondered if he could be the father of the Yessif of habar jeclo, especially when one very knowledgeable scholar of from the reer ugaas of cisse insisted that they were the descendants of sheikh Yusuf Al-Kowneyn at the sametime saying they from the yessif of the Habar Jeclo, more carbon dating would shed more light. Its plausible that he freed the northern somalis from domination of a minor clan of magicians, around the same the south was dominated by the ajuuran. To be honest, I hav never heard Al-kowneyn being a progeny of sheikh's ishaq accept from what the reer ugaas calim indrectly suggestly, I h
I have heard that sh. kowneyn preceeded sh. Ishaq, I have also heard they were cousins (no detail how close) and was sent by sh. Ishaq to confront magician or voodoo ruler in that region? - have even heard sheikh's ishaq married from the offsprings of sh. Alkowneyn.

Regarding the Walashama I think its far fetched to claim the Wali As'hama dynasty was founded by Al-Kowney, inshallah I will elaborate next time.

Btw, excuse the mispellings and missing words, I use a mo bile device to post on this boards.

Finally, be more forthcoming if u have the book with u right now