Talk:Sultanate of Ifat/Archive 1

Archive 1

Name

Should we add this text "The Ifat Sultanate was a medieval Somali Muslim sultanate in the Horn." ?-page 41 of Ethiopia: The Land, Its people, History and Culture

I mean the dynasty that ruled over the Ifat known as Wilinwili/ Walashma was in fact Somali from what can be surmised, Somali as this page itself notes was a widely spoken language and subsequent sultanates like the Adal largely employed Somali soldiers and so on and that book itself considers them a Somali sultanate. I don't want to add the text simply to have it deleted so do you guys want to add it? Awale-Abdi (talk) 08:29, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I added it and sourced it as well so never mind.Awale-Abdi (talk) 12:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Concerns?

@EthiopianHabesha: I have added a note about Nile diversion, but please note that in the fourth last line on page 40 of Pankhurst this is called an idle threat. The sentences that follow suggest that the Egyptian sultan realized this was so, then dismissed that idle threat. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:31, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

@EthiopianHabesha: This article is not about the history of Egypt and the fears of Egyptians, and that is why I did not add it. But if you feel that is relevant, go ahead add it. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Too much detail

Ms Sarah Welch, what is realy the point of adding all these information? To prove my summary is not good? If you think there are parts in which I summarised in bad faith (which so far you did not explain just like I did explain your paraphrasing out of context) you could have mention them here and we could have discussed about them. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't understand you. Please provide diffs, when you allege something. The version you created did not reflect the sources. I have revised the article, not with you in focus. I have revised the article and added more information to more accurately summarize the sources, thus improve the article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:18, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

The end of Ifat sultanate

@EthiopianHabesha: If the source does not mention "Ifat sultanate", "Ifat province(s)", or something using the word Ifat, directly or as context, please do not add it to this article as that is OR and Synthesis. Unless you can identify a reliable source that states Sultanate of Ifat existed in 18th century or later, don't suggest so because that is OR. If you see support for Sultanate of Ifat and Oromo people etc discussion, please add quotes, because I don't see it. I have no objections if you add more content from additional reliable source(s) that mention / discuss the Sultanate of Ifat. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Origins of the Ifat Sultanate and Walashma Dynasty

This whole section is inaccurate because:

1) It suggests that Umar was the one to conquer the Shewa sultanate but he founded Ifat in Zeila in 1185 and it was most likely one of his sons or grandchildren that did that. He certainly wasn't around at that time.

2) There is no mention of Yusuf bin Ahmed al-Kawneyn and neither the debate that him being ancestor of Umar by way of 5 generations is most likely false.

3) There is no mention of their relation with the Adal Kingdom, my best guess is that Umar originated in the Adal kingdom and founded Ifat. Some maps show the Ifat sultanate encompassing the whole area, including the Adal kingdom. So either they conquered Adal in 1185 or the Walashma dynasty was in fact the ruling dynasty of Adal at the time and on conquering Shewa, Adal became known as Ifat. To add complication to the matter, I see mentions of there being a King of Adal that was defeated by Amda Seyon 'In 1332 the King of Adal was slain when trying to stop Amda Seyon’s march towards Zeila.' But again, this could be Sabr ad-Din of Ifat who was defeated in 1332.

4) Umar was certainly not appointed by the Emperor of Ethiopia in 1275 by Yukuno Amla because Umar was the founder of Ifat in 1185.

5) No Ifat Sultan was appointed by any Ethiopian Emperor until 1332 when Jamal ad-Din I was installed. The Ifat sultanate was not under Ethiopian control at that point and was a rival sovereign state that fought with Ethiopia by proxy of the Showa Sultanate and definitely had no power to appoint their Sultans.

6) 'He was succeeded by Sultan Ali, according to Maqrizi, who was the first to revolt against the customary allegiance to the Ethiopian emperor'. Firstly, he wasn't succeeded by Ali directly, there were vassal kings before him. Secondly, it wasn't an allegiance that he revolted against, rather a vassalage to Emperor Amde Seyon, after he deposed Sabr ad-Din and installed his brother Jamal ad-Din. Allegiance is sort of the wrong word because there was never an allegiance -- they were installing rival Sultans of Shewa against each other's wills and interests from Ifat's official founding right up to Haqq ad-Din I, who invaded and burnt their churches for threatening the Mamluk Sultan who was persecuting Egyptian Copts. There was a religious rivalry taking place at the time for a start. This just loops back to point 5).

7) Perhaps something I find even more perplexing is that there is mention on the page of Amde Seyon that Ifat was merely a province of Ethiopia and was under the control of a governor appointed by the Ethiopian Emperor even before Haqq ad-Din and it speaks about Haqq ad-Din and Sabr ad-Din 'rebelling', which obviously supports that notion. Yet other articles say that they were encouraged to 'invade Ethiopia' speaking about it like a separate entity.

My best guess is that Ifat was an independent kingdom and there was some sort of agreement of mutual existence and trade between the two kingdoms, perhaps it was nominally part of Ethiopia. It is very unclear. It is also worth noting that some sources claim Adal was also part of Ethiopia

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 7xn (talk • contribs) 15:13, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Ifat

The sultanate of Ifat only extended west to Ankober, There hasn’t been any Sultanate that has ruled over Tegulet Menz and most of Amhara Semien Shewa. Islam never dominated the Shewan Amharan Highlands. I have read all the sources and there is no evidence of Islam being a predominant religion within North Shewa. AbysinniaGuard (talk) 12:02, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

have you heard about the sultanate of shewa you can read about it on wikipedia it was a muslim sultanate in shewa, later the ifat sulanate invaded the sultanate shewa and took over shewa and also parts of shewa used to be part of the fatagar province the province included parts of modern day afar region and north shewa as well as east shewa--Gashaamo (talk) 12:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

also even amda seyon mentioned that tegulat was a muslim city, their is no reason to destroy and vandalise history to fit a certain modern day perspective history belongs in the past just read it and injoy it--Gashaamo (talk) 12:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Ethiopian state

Dozens of references (which I added) were removed [1] this kingdom was clearly Ethiopian and founded in the interior of Shewa see this for ex; [2], hence I will be tagging it until it is resolved. This is not a Somali sultanate, the speakers were not confirmed to be Somali either, its original research, the sources do not even match the statements in the article. Magherbin (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Like I said in our previous conversation on the other board. Taddesse Tamrat is not reliable he's simply quoting the Ethio-Semitic theory from Ulrich Braukamper who himself did not believe in it. Ulrich Braukamper who is cited by this source for example merely entertains the idea that the Walashma were possibly Argobbas [3] in a book of his but then shortly after does not hold to this view and uses the usual view [4] that’s been shared on Wikipedia about their Qurayshi & Hashemite genealogical origins suggesting that they were Arabians. He does not then tie this dynasty to the Argobba. It was simply a claim with no evidence attached to it. This is what you call fringe theory.

The mainstream view with primary sources backings is they were Arabians who settled and assimilated with the local Somali population in Zeila and founded Ifat/Adal kingdoms. I'll list multiple of them right here since you failed to reply in the other page.

Africa Quarterly - Volum 43 page 108 states:

However, it was not until the 13th century and after it got Islamised that the Somalis led by Yemeni immigrants founded a state which they called Ifat with its principal centre in Zeila.

Area Handbook for Somalia Volume 550 page 18 by Irving Kaplan

By the early fifteenth century the Muslim empire of Adal, which had its capital in Zeila and some of its territory in what is present-day eastern Ethiopia, was ready to do battle over territory and religion with expanding Christian Abyssinia. Adal was part of the state Ifat, whose ruling dynasty claimed Arab ancestry, however, mixed they have been with local peoples.

Church and State in Ethiopia, 1270-1527 - Page 124

According to Maqrizi, the ancestors of ' Umar Wälasma first settled in Jabara ( or Jabarta ) a region which he says belonged to Zeila; they gradually moved further inland and occupied Ifat.

Encyclopedia of Africa south of the Sahara page 62

Many centuries of trade relation with Arabia began with the establishment of commercial colonies along the coast by the Himmyrati Kingdom and these eventually developed into two small states of Zeila or Adal in the north and Mogadishu in the south, gradually local dynasties of Somalized Arabs or Arabized Somali ruled." In due time these converts [Somali-Arabs] even established the Muslim sultanates of Ifat, Dawaro, Adal, and Dahlak and put pressure on the highland Ethiopian Christians by controlling trade through the main seaports of Suakin, Aydhab, Zeila, and Berbera.

They were indeed a Somali Dynasty with an Arabian ancestory. This is the mainstream view supported by primary sources. I hope this clarifies it. Thanks. Ayaltimo (talk) 12:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

This discussion isnt going anywhere as you're ignoring opposing view points, other contributors can refer to the explanations I and another editor have given on the board [5]. Ethiopian and German historians are not backing fringe theories. Magherbin (talk) 20:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm following the mainstream view and you're clearly ignoring the strong points I'm making. The Ethiopian authors are quoting from Ulrich Braukamper who himself did not believe in the Argobba theory as I just pointed above. He follows the mainstream view. I suggest you drop your ethno-nationalistic agenda. Ayaltimo (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

You've ignored the questions directed at you by User:Llywrch instead you're violating WP:BATTLE by focusing your replies on me or my conduct. Its clear that you and the other user (Ragnimo) only want one viewpoint on the page which ironically supports Somali ethno nationalism. Wikipedia is about presenting facts as stated by references available not bias based on an editors own analysis. I would compromise on the article just stating its a Muslim state but based on the editing you've been doing you obviously will not. Somalis governing Ifat is not a view held by the academic world however historians tie Ifat/Walasma class with the Argobba (an Ethiopian ethnic group) which you dismissed for ex; p.48 on this thesis [6]. I will be opening an RFC as the community needs to come to a decision on the matter. Magherbin (talk) 19:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I am looking to have a fruitful discussion with you but you're not reaching in good faith and literally lying by saying they don't tie Somalis to Ifat when I just literally listed multiple references and just explained to you why the couple of Ethiopian sources you're using are unreliable because they're all quoting from a German historian who himself does not believe in it. You can’t share a source that’s just using another source you’re sharing as a source, that’s just ridiculous. Furthermore, the books you use often site authors such as Richard Pankhurst, I.M Lewis, Enrico Cerulli, and Braukamper who all directly oppose their claims. I'm merely pointing out the contradiction and inconsistency of your sources.

Please call them and let them assess this matter. I have done enough research to know what I am talking about and I will literally break down everything including your argument. You're not only disputing me but many others. I would also like to call upon other editors who follow the mainstream view and properly dealt with fringe theory before to please join on the board. GoldenDragonHorn Awale-Abdi AcidSnow Runehelmet ---Ayaltimo (talk) 05:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging other ethno nationalists is not appropriate here, see WP:VOTESTACK, the intention of the RFC is not to notify ethno nationalists but gathering neutral opinion on the matter to reach a consensus, the participants are random. I've also researched this topic and I.M Lewis is the only one to claim Arab Somalis founded those states. I'm not sure why you reverted the corrections I made on Al Umari and Leo Africanus, they did not state Walashma spoke Somali hence I will be removing that if you do not provide sources for these claims. Al Umari actually states Ethiopian Semitic. Magherbin (talk) 17:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

And why are you acting like you aren't a Habashi ethno-nationalist yourself. I doubt you are even Harari seeing how ignorant you are of Somalis and East African Muslim traditions, you are probably Abyssinian Amhara nationalist as your old sock account was Beta Amhara , pushing for Habesha/Ethiosemetic POV and even put undue weight on Harari because they are ethio semetic speakers. You are even removing mentions of Somalis at every turn from page , even where it is sourced and including your own original research about Harari.

Furthermore Al-Umari already describes the language of the people of Ifat especially Zeila people when he says:

“they cultivate two times annually by seasonal rains … The rainfall for the winter is called ‘Bil’ and rainfall for the ‘summer’ is called ‘Karam’ in the language of the people of Zayla" . It appears that the historian was referring, in one-way or another, to these still used terms, Karan and Bil. This indicates that the ancient Somali solar calendar was very similar to the one they use today.

Both are Somali terms for the seasons in the Somali calendar which is used for farming to this day. These are not ethio-semetic terms, harrari words or Afar words.

A-Omari says Al-Habashi ,which was just a lose generalized term at the time used by medieval Muslim writers to refer to populations inside Ethiopia, and by the read sea coastlands as explained here:

The rest of the designations are broadly ethno-geographical. Red Sea East Africans Appear as Habashi, or Abyssinian, which in the Geniza context generally applies to Muslims from the Red Sea coastlands rather than from the Ethiopian highlands.

[7]

It didn't mean they spoke Amharic or Abyssinian, but a language native to that Geographical area. And you can see it in how other medieval muslim authors use Al-Habasha. For example Ibn Arabi (d. 1240) writes: "In respect of the fact that the Truth (Al-Haqq) is the Speaker. He mentions Himself by names … These names themselves have names with us in the language of every speaker. In the Arabic language, the name by which He named Himself in respect of being the speaker is “Allaah”, in persian “Khuday,” in Habashi “Waaq” in the tongue of the Franks “Creator” and so on in every language…. (al-Futuhat al-Makiyya II 683.29)"

وتركيب حروفها بحسب اللسان والمعنى الموجب للإسم معقول عند المخلوقين فيقول العربي يا الله للذي يقول له الفارسي أي خداي ويقول له الرومي أيشا ويقول له الأرمني أي أصفاج ويناديه التركي أي تنكري ويناديه الأفرنجي أي كريطور ويقول له الحبشي واق (al-Futuhat al-Makiyya II 683.29)"

Waaq if you don't know is the name for God in the Language of Somali and Oromo. The name Waaq itself originating from Somalis and they use it Quranic translations for Allah. It's not something used by Ethio-semetic speakers. Just like how berber was used to describe Somalis doesn't mean that they were modern day North African Berbers in Somalia or spoke berber language. So it's inconclusive, while the descriptions Al Omari gives people of Zayla(The headquarters), is direct and conclusive with use of words from that language which are Somali.

Also Leo Africanus talks about the population in Zeila and as we affirmed already they were predominately Somali and governed local Somali dynasties . I'M Lewis, Enrico Cerruli said: "formed and ruled generally by local dynasties of Somalized Arabs or Somali strongly influenced by Arabic culture "

They said that because like modern day Somalis they had fictive Prophetic Quraishi lineages: [8]

Ifat's rulers , the Walashma ' dynasty , claimed a fictive descent - much like the Somali myth of Arabian ancestry from noble Arab forebears .

This genealogy has zero to do with Arabs, more so to do with how Somalis/Walashma were trying to link themselves to Islam via claiming special relationship with the prophet. Walashma themselves claimed Al-Jabarti(Darod) via Aqeel Abu Talib ibn Abd al-Muttalib the cousin of the Prophet just like the Somali Darod clan do today.

But however this is covered by Sade Mire who clarifes this and how archealogical and textual evidences shows how they were founded and ruled by indigenous local Somalis and not Arabs. [9]

Ragnimo (talk) 13:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Cant read all of this you've spammed the page but let me respond to one point, Richard Pankhurst states Ifat probably spoke Amharic,[10] unless you would like to write an academic journal by reviewing his work, keep the comments to yourself. We are not here to refute scholarly opinion which you're attempting to do on the talk page. Keep the fringe theories and original research off the page, i'm not interested. Cambridge reference also states a Ethiopian semitic language was spoken [11] thats all that should matter here. Magherbin (talk) 05:47, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

It's not that you can't read, its that you are uninterested in reading it because it doesn't fit you your Ethiopian/Amhara ehnationalist point of view. Like i explained "Habashi" was a lose geographical term, it didn't mean they spoke amharic or Abyssinian. Like it is explained here: [12]

You see this when Al-Umari and Ibn Said relate words from the language they are speaking of, "Karam" & "Bil" are both Somali terms for seasons and months. Which he says "in the language of the people of Zayla" And "Waaq" is the somali term for God which Ibn Arabi says is "in Habashi" . If "Habashi" meant Amharic or Abyssinian then the word for God would have been Igziabeher which is the word for "God" in Ethio-semetic languages.

Pankhurst wrote "probably" meant amharic is the author's own assertion of Ifat province. He is assuming things. And Cambridge relates the same assumption as well but makes it more restricted to only the showa population but also states "The linguistic factor may have provided another dimension for the basic cleavage between the sedentary Muslim communities in the Ethiopian interior and the nomadic peoples of the vast lowlands between the plateu and the coast, who were predominately speakers of Eastern cushitic" [13] Ragnimo (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Surprised you didnt call Pankhurst an Ethiopian Amhara ethno nationalist, and yes east Cushitic was likely spoken by lowlanders. I just corrected what the reference stated in the article, it falsely claimed Ifat spoke Somali when the references did not state this. Again its not our job to analyze Al Umari's statements thats for the academics to do. Shewa is regarded as the root of Ifat see Encyclopædia Britannica for example; [14] hence cambrdige should restrict their analysis to Showa. Cambridge also states Walasma the ruling dynasy of Ifat origin is to blame for the development of semitic language Argobba and Harari in Harar see [15]. I'm not sure why you're bolding statements that indicate Cushitic speakers were majority that may be true but this state was not a democracy, majority did not rule. The states were largely based on Islamic rights to the throne which happen to be Semitic. Magherbin (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Rfc: What is the origin of the Ifat Sultanate?

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing early per WP:SNOW - outcome is obvious and no new comments posted for a week. The discussion below presents a clear consensus to use neither label to describe the Sultanate. (non-admin closure) Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:40, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

---

Should the Ifat Sultanate be labelled Ethiopian, Somali or neither? Magherbin (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• Neither. Casting 21st century geography on the 13th is futile. If Somaliland becomes recognized as independent, will we have a RfC on whether this ancient entity was Somalilandi as opposed to Somali or Ethiopian?--VikingDrummer (talk) 06:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

*Somali VikingDrummer Somali is an ethnicity btw not just a nationality , what he is referring to isn't a modern day nationality but the origins of Ifat as a state. Their origins being Somali is clear and in which is covered in the above section btw. Their ruling dynasty originating from Zeila a Somali port city, as well as possessing Somali genealogical and saintly traditions and speaking the Somali language etc. Ragnimo (talk) 14:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Ragnimo is blocked for socking, disregard vote. References also indicate it was founded in Ethiopian territory and certainly not led by Somali ethnic group anyway. Saint traditions apply to the Muslim groups in the entire east africa not just Somalis. Magherbin (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

• Neither per VikingDrummer. The question is directed at what the lede of the article should state. I think we can discuss the various views regarding geographic area and its people, in the body somewhere. Closing admin should be aware that some users have been selectively pinged and this may adversely affect the RFC, see discussion above. Magherbin (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
  • While my name was indeed mentioned, I was never paged for anything and have over forty unread notifications. Even so, I have been following this discussion for quite sometime. AcidSnow (talk) 18:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
• Neither. as per the comment above. Sea Ane (talk) 11:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
• Somali Ottoman Empire was a Turkish empire despite ruling Arabs and other ethnic groups same way as Ifat Sultanate was a Somali kingdom that ruled other groups especially during the conquest of Shewa. Zeila was the capital and center for Ifat Sultanate. The Walashma Dynasty were ethnic Somalis. It would make no sense to dismiss the rulers and majority. Ayaltimo (talk) 15:51, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
• Neither per VikingDrummer. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
• Somali. AcidSnow (talk) 15:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
• Neither per editors above. Idealigic (talk) 15:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Neither unless anyone can point out books or other references that simply say that it was a Somali state, Ethiopian state, etc. < Atom (Anomalies) 11:41, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
• I have to go with neither here, I reviewed the above discussions, did a bit of searching and I just don't see the sourcing I would expect to unambiguously classify this either way. If there's some scholarship I'm missing please draw my attention to it and I'll take a look but the case presented thus far is thoroughly unconvincing. Regards, 31.41.45.190 (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
• Neither As per comment above. BristolTreeHouse (talk) 06:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Theory sections

User:Ayaltimo, self revert to the previous version adhering to WP:BRD, the additions [16] are not neutral and many of the statements are not found in the references. Create a draft on the talk pages and gain consensus. Magherbin (talk) 21:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Magherbin Everything I said is found in the references. I can link them for you. Please state them. Also, it is neutral because the sub-section is called Somali Theory. I created an Ethio-Semitic theory where you can explain why you think it's Ethio-Semitic. Ayaltimo (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

A few issues with the edits, the Jabarta claim doesnt indicate Somali on the source yet you added it under Somali theory section. In the Ethio-Semitic theory you stated Gurage are precursors of Argobba, nowhere is that stated on the source. Self revert and i'll dscuss the issues with your edits entirely. This is how to follow BRD without editwarring and we can both stop editing the article until the dispute is resolved. You've admitted you're having trouble sourcing [17], I can help with this on the talk page before its added onto the article. Magherbin (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

You have failed to address the issues and claiming I'm consigning with original research when I literally repeated from the sources. I don't wish to self-revert. The source states Jabarta is in Zeila. You can go check it yourself. In the Ethio-Semitic section, I didn't state anything. I just created the title. You can make changes to that theory section but don't touch the Somali side which you obviously oppose. It's called theory for a reason. I'm creating a balance because the other methods we had did not work. Please refrain from edit warring. I did not make anything one-sided. Creating theory sections is the best way to explain both sides fairly. Ayaltimo (talk) 22:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Jabarta was a terminology for all Muslims in the Horn of Africa, its not associated with Somalis exclusively. Read p.39 [18] also see Jeberti people, the article lists atleast 4 different countries of origin. Magherbin (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

This is not me saying this but according to Al-Maqrizi. He states: According to Maqrizi, the ancestors of ' Umar Wälasma first settled in Jabara ( or Jabarta ) a region which he says belonged to Zeila; they gradually moved further inland and occupied Ifat. [19] It parrellels with the other sources. Like I said you are free to expand Ethio-Semitic sub-section. Ayaltimo (talk) 23:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

This is a collaborative encyclopedia, editors are not restricted to certain sections, thats not how it works. The edits you've introduced are not neutral and contains original research. Magherbin (talk) 22:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for evidence of your original research claims. The point of the theory sections is not to agree with other scholarly views but to mention your own views in the other theory section. Ayaltimo (talk) 23:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to give you a chance to self revert and follow the BRD process, if you dont then ill file a report per the admins suggestion [20] it is up to you. I personally dont want to file a report but I will have to if its a must. As I said we can discuss the issues with your additions but the BRD process must be followed. Theory section is not for wikipedia editors opinions on the matter as you seem to imply here. Magherbin (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

The section you're attempting to imply here is ethnic leadership hence this is not a valid title for a section, the section should be changed to Somali leadership theory, Ethiopian semitic leadership etc. Statements highlighted in bold below are original research.

According to the chronicle of Shewa Sultanate converting the inhabitants in the area begun in 1108, and the first to convert were the Gurage people whom Trimingham suggested them being the ancestors of Argobbas. A few years later after the conversion of the Gurage people, the chronicle of Shewa sultanate mentions that in 1128 the Amhara fled from the land of Werjih people.

Statements/Sources that dont mention Somali and/or Ifat specifically can not be included in a somali theory section or ifat sultanate page altogether as thats WP:SYNTH and Original research. The following statements below should be removed per those violations.

1. The Islamic Sultan of Ifat was based at Zeila had turned sporadic fighting with the " Abyssinian infidels " into a full-scale religious war. 2. According to Al-Maqrizi, the ancestors of Umar Wälasma first settled in Jabara (or Jabarta) a region which he says belonged to Zeila; they gradually moved further inland and occupied Ifat. 3. Adal was part of the state Ifat, whose ruling dynasty claimed Arab ancestry, however, mixed they have been with local peoples.4. However, the Arab influence is rejected by modern scholars and believed they were indeed independently founded by the locals. According to textual and archeological evidence Zeila, along with Mogadishu and other Somali coastal cities were founded upon an indigenous network involving hinterland trade, which happened even before significant Arab migrations or trade with the Somali coast. That goes back approximately 4 thousand years. 5. Although as do most Somali tribes in the Horn of Africa possess mythical Arab genealogies connected to Hashimite origin, Walashma was most likely a local origin.

Yusuf's background is disputed, he can be Arab or African hence not appropriate for putting this under a Somali theory section, his article even states he arrived from Arabia [21]. I think the only statement that can be included is that Yusuf is a Somali saint, his biography is not appropriate in a section about "Somali theory". This is why the statements below should be removed from the section and perhaps put somewhere else on the article but again that needs to be discussed beforehand on the talk page.

The Walashma dynasty of Ifat is more commonly linked with the Sheikh Yusuf bin Ahmad al-Kawneyn,[44] who is described as a native [45][46][47] Furthermore, in the book, "The History of Islam in Africa", the Sheikh aforementioned is known for establishing this dynasty.[49] Also, the Aw Barkhadle site is also known as an important burial site of the Muslim rulers of Adal and the Walashma dynasty, Al-Kowneyn himself of the Walashma dynasty of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries AD is buried in this town (and is known for establishing this royal dynasty.)[50] Magherbin (talk) 08:23, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

I can remove number one but Zeila is a historical Somali city so it doesn't violate anything. The sources go well together. For example, Lewis and others use Al-Maqrizi's writings to support their pov. As for number 3, it is claimed the walashma had Arab ancestors and mixed with the locals so it's another added bonus. As for number 4 and 5 the word Somali is mentioned and there is archeological evidence that Zeila was founded by Somali pastoralists but maybe I can do some re-wording and mention Somali instead of ingenious. [22]

Well, scholars do consider Saint Yusuf as Somali who was the ancestor of the dynasty so it must be mentioned because we're talking about Somali theory here. I mean if you claim it is disputed I can say the same for Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Ghazi page where it says "had links to the Semitic-speaking Wâlasma aristocracy." How about you remove that since it's disputed? Ayaltimo (talk) 06:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

The references must have Ifat and Somali mentioned together, there's no combining sources and reaching conclusion. You've made a Somali section on an Ifat article hence all references must mention the two keywords verbatim, there's no run around on that. For example if Yusuf is not mentioned with Ifat and Somali, the source and statement off of that shouldnt be in the section. No you cant "say the same" for Ahmeds article, the reference I used, denied Ahmeds Somali identity, its from a scholarly review not out context. People arrive on this page to read about Ifat not about Yusuf's bio nor who owns Zeila however if an academic put into context Zeila, Yusuf, Somalis and Ifat, then we can include this. Magherbin (talk) 06:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from but Yusuf is mentioned being a Somali saint and ancestor of the walashma dynasty and the spiritual legacy of Ifat so it should be included. Lewis used Al-Maqrizi's statement to push his view so it's still within the context and your sources claim they were Ethio-Semitic but mine claims they were ancestrally Arabs that mixed with the local people. The Somali theory is linked with Arab ancestors. Ayaltimo (talk) 03:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

"Local people" does not automatically equal Somali unless the source states it. Statements from the following can not be used in this section as "Somali" and/or "Ifat" terms are not mentioned in the reference; #39,40,41,9,10,43,45,46,47,49,50,51. Reference #63 & 64 make no mention of "Somali capital", "Somali language" nor "Somali territory", hence original research. Magherbin (talk) 09:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

The reference I published about mixed with local people is talking about Somali history. It's called Area Handbook for Somalia and you're taking it out of context. Also, according to the Cambridge History of Africa Zeila was predominantly Somali therefore they spoke Somali. Matter of fact they stated the lowlands were spoken by eastern Cushitic people and Somalis are eastern Cushitic and I published another source stating Zeila was Ifat capital. I'm trying to work with you but you're being disingenuous. Ayaltimo (talk) 07:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Somalia denotes a geographical region assuming its referring to Somali people is your own analysis if the source didnt state so. The Cambridge reference (p.154) [23] should only be used to state that during the time of Emperor Yeshaq I's military conflict, Zeila constituted a large Somali population, this does not translate to Somali was the most spoken language in the capital nor that Zeila was some sort of Somali nationalist capital in the middle ages. I'm well aware there's sources that state Zeila was the Ifat capital but the source doesnt state Somali capital. If the source also states eastern cushitic, we stick with this terminology, we dont translate cushitic to mean Somali either. Anyways indulging in original research can get you blocked, you've editwarred to maintain questionable sources before, if this is a habit it may be perceived as intentional. Do you want me to take this to the board again? An editor on the no original research noticeboard even suggested I take you to the Admins board last time. Original research is a serious matter especially when we notice it happening and the editor refuses to understand the policy. Its up to you if i take it to the board and they agree again that its problematic, you can get a block especially when you're not following WP:BRD as well. Read this carefully WP:OR. Magherbin (talk) 07:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

You've already taken this to the noticeboard relating to Ifat Sultanate and I've explained everything [24] and nothing changed between us so it's preferable if we continue to discuss here instead of threatening me because that won't work. Now going back to the topic.

The thing is Somalis are eastern Cushitic so if Somalis are the predominant group in Zeila, therefore, they spoke Somali. This is not original research. The Cambridge history of Africa is quite clear when you put two to two together.

The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 3 page 139 states:

There is no doubt that Zeila was also predominantly Somali, and al-Dimashqi, another thirteenth-century Arab writer, gives the town its Somali name Awdal (Adal), still known among the local Somali.

The Cambridge History of Africa, Volume 3 page 147 states:

This linguistic factor may have provided another dimension for the basic cleavage between the sedentary Muslim communities in the Ethiopian interior and the nomadic peoples of the vast lowlands between the plateau and the coast, who were predominantly speakers of Eastern Cushitic.

If you scroll down page 141 it shows you a medieval map of ethnic groups and shows you three eastern Cushitic pastoral speakers that dominated the lowlands which were Somali, Afar, and Saho. You tried to say there were many Cushitic groups in the lowland region trying to claim the Somali areas were diverse well not according to the map designed by the Cambridge History of Africa: [25]

Al-Umari made language descriptions of the people of Ifat specifically Zeila:

“they cultivate two times annually by seasonal rains … The rainfall for the winter is called ‘Bil’ and rainfall for the ‘summer’ is called ‘Karam’ in the language of the people of Zayla" . It appears that the historian was referring, in one-way or another, to these still used terms, Karan and Bil. This indicates that the ancient Somali solar calendar was very similar to the one they use today.

Both are Somali terms for the seasons in the Somali calendar which is used for farming to this day. There are no other languages that use these words and I can add this source to end this nonsense. Also, what do you mean by Somali capital? Both Ifat and Adal Sultanates consist of diverse groups nowhere did I mention Zeila was Somali capital. I said it was the capital of Ifat but the city itself is traditionally and historically Somali.

I can agree to remove the Irving Kaplan's source and replace it with this one.

Ifat's rulers , the Walashma ' dynasty , claimed a fictive descent - much like the Somali myth of Arabian ancestry from noble Arab forebears .

Sound better? Ayaltimo (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

The Ifat kingdom is clearly Somali. Ante7896 (talk) 07:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

The only statements that should remain in your Somali theory section are the following per staying on topic of Somalis/Ifat. "The Somalis led by Yemeni immigrants founded a state which they called Ifat with its principal center in Zeila."Many centuries of trade relation with Arabia began with the establishment of commercial colonies along the coast by the Himmyrati Kingdom and these eventually developed into two small states of Zeila or Adal in the north and Mogadishu in the south, gradually local dynasties of Somalized Arabs or Arabized Somali ruled." In due time these converts [Somali-Arabs] even established the Muslim sultanates of Ifat, Dawaro, Adal, and Dahlak and put pressure on the highland Ethiopian Christians by controlling trade through the main seaports of Suakin, Aydhab, Zeila, and Berbera. "The Walashma dynasty of Ifat is more commonly linked with the Sheikh Yusuf bin Ahmad al-Kawneyn, who is described as a Somali." Agreed?

The statements omitted can be placed on the Ifat article in a different section as long as Ifat is mentioned explicitly in the source. Jabarti doesnt mean Somali nor does Zeila polity alone equate to Ifat if the researchers didnt state so in the references provided. Magherbin (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

You just spewed Argobba theory everywhere on each section. Are you trying to work with me or create your own rules? If you want to play this game then I can do the same by adding Zeila was the center of Ifat and place Walashma as a Somali origin in the origin section. The deal was you put your thoughts on the Ethio-Semitic section and not all over the page because it is disputed. I will report you to the dispute board if you're not going to work this out. Ifat Sultanate is disputed therefore work on the dispute and not try to paint as if you own the page. The moderator warned you about coming two weeks after and making changes without addressing anything. You are breaking the rules. Ayaltimo (talk) 18:56, 05 June 2021 (UTC)

I've agreed on the consensus showing my ability that I am willing to work this out If you have other ideas you want to share please create a draft on here to further discuss so we can agree together that it can be added. Ayaltimo (talk) 21:03, 05 June 2021 (UTC)

There was no deal to do anything, you created that section without discussing the matter and then began editwarring to keep the new additions yet you're asking me to discuss new changes? You've removed well sourced content that you dont like. [26] The moderator warned you about POV forks and wanted to topic ban you. [27]. If you have references you can state it was founded in Zeila or Walasma were Somalis, the issue is you dont have any its original research, much like some of the content in the article. Magherbin (talk) 20:27, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Listen, refrain from being intellectually dishonest. The moderator changed his idea about the topic ban when I told him the issue you had which was disappearing in two weeks and coming back making serious changes without negotiating which you have done. You've agreed with the theory section and told me to remove certain things which I've agreed then you change your mind and decide to put something extra? What you're doing is causing problems and I can literally report on your poor behaviour and misconduct and get you banned. Now you either work on this dispute and negotiate with me or I will discuss with other moderators about your problem because you're not following the protocol. By the way, please refrain from being intellectual dishonesty. Aw Barkhaadle is considered Somali and the ancestor of the Walashma Dynasty. I'm the one who is trying to work things out but you're not and moderators can see that since I am agreeing with the consensus and you're not.

As I said before. If you want to add something create a draft and refrain from edit warring. Ayaltimo (talk) 21:39, 05 June 2021 (UTC)

Founding of Ifat draft

"The Argobba people are most linked with founding the Sultanate of Ifat. Some sources assert Somalis and Arabs".

User:Ayaltimo Do you have an alternative to this? There's very few sources linking Somalis to Ifat. Magherbin (talk) 20:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Magherbin I would say keep it neutral for future purposes when new editors come in. Ayaltimo (talk) 21:58, 05 June 2021 (UTC)

Propose a sentence. Magherbin (talk) 21:08, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The Argobba people are regarded by some scholars to be linked with the founding of the Ifat Sultanate. Some sources assert it to the Somalis and Arabs". Ayaltimo (talk) 22:17, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Ok sure. Where do you want to place this? I personally dont care as long as its in the section somewhere. Magherbin (talk) 21:48, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Just below "the Islam was introduced to the Horn region" paragraph. Ayaltimo (talk) 22:50, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. What are the issues you have with the other additions such as currency in the infobox, ruins etc that I added. [28]. Magherbin (talk) 21:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Can you list them for me? Ayaltimo (talk) 22:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

After the era of Amda Seyon draft

"In the fourteenth century Haqq ad-Din II transfered Ifat's capital to the Harar plateau." Magherbin (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah no problem. Ayaltimo (talk) 23:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The end of Ifat sultanate draft

"After much war, Ifat's troops were defeated in 1403 on the Harar plateau."

This line should come before Sa'ad ad-Din II flees to Zeila. Magherbin (talk) 22:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

That's fine too. Ayaltimo (talk) 23:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Military section draft

"According to Mohammed Hassan Ifat's infantry consisted of the Argobba people."

Few instance where infantry of Ifat is discussed. Magherbin (talk) 22:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah sure. I want to add something next to it. What do you think about this? I have the sources.

"Led by the Sultan of Ifat, Haq Ad-Din with his Somali Muslim forces battle Christians in neighbouring Ethiopia. The word Somali appears in the writing for the first time, in an Ethiopian hymn written to celebrate a victory against the Somalis."

But if you think it's too much then that's fine. I want to be neutral because there are literally many sources that indicate the Ifat army also consists of Somalis so I think it's better if you say this and we just put two references there.

"The Ifat's army consists of Argobba people and the Somalis."

What do you think or do you have a better idea? Ayaltimo (talk) 23:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeshaq fought the Adal Sultanate not the Ifat Sultanate hence it wouldnt be Haq Ad-Din but one of the other sons. Further confusing the matter, Haq is said to have founded Adal by some sources hence I guess you can include this but someone may contest this in the future. I personally dont mind you including it though. The question is when does Ifat shift into Adal, i'm leaning towards the reign of Haq addin and not Sabraddin who came back from Yemen. Magherbin (talk) 23:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

It probably does open a can of warms so maybe we should leave and not change what you wrote down and add this next to it.

"According to some sources, the Ifat army also composed of Somalis."

What do you think? I put it in "also" to make it neutral.

Do you think we should propose both sides to how Adal was formed? I think that would save a lot of trouble in the future because a new editor might contest.

Ayaltimo (talk) 00:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Sure, you stated you have a reference for this right? A few lines about Haq being regarded as the true founder of Adal might be warranted. Magherbin (talk) 00:15, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, here is the reference. [29] As for Haq go ahead. Ayaltimo (talk) 1:35, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Location draft

"Five Ifat cities in eastern Shewa; Asbäri, Nora, Mäsal, Rassa Guba, and Beri-Ifat now mostly in ruins dating back to the fourteenth century have been located. The local Argobba people credited Arabs for building these towns."

This was put n the location section but perhaps could go under a new "Ruins" section. Magherbin (talk) 00:29, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I think under location would be preferable because creating too many drafts with such small sentences wouldn't be so great. Do you agree? Ayaltimo (talk) 01:41, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Alright. Lastly Al Umari stated the Sultan of Ifat wore a silk headband, where do you want to place this? I placed it in the Sultans of Ifat list section at the top. The currency they used was dinar and dirham according to Arabic texts, I placed this in the infobox beside a new currency slot. Any objections? Magherbin (talk) 01:07, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Put it where you think it's suited and no, it's all good. Ayaltimo (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Ethnic draft

Hello Magherbin. The sub-section doesn't feel complete but I have one source I wish to add as the second paragraph.

"The Abyssinian king (negus) Yeshaq (1414-1429) expanded his kingdom's political and commercial interests into the trade routes and domains of the Somali Kingdom of Ifat, centered in Zeila. Yeshaq declared the Muslims to be "enemies of the lord" and invaded Ifat in 1415. The local Muslim potentate, king Sa'ad Ad-Din was, defeated, and he was pursued up the coast of the Abyssinians, but it took over a century to overthrow them." Ayaltimo (talk) 22:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

We dont discuss all new edits unless they're challenged. Which section? The Somali theory? I just read the article it makes a huge error by stating Yeshaq I defeated Sa'ad ad-Din II when sources indicate it was Emperor Dawit I. Yeshaq did not invade Ifat, the territory was subordinate to Ethiopia but later freed by Sabr ad-Din III upon his return from Yemen. Sa'ad ad-din reined from 1374–1403 while Yeshaq reined from 1414-1429. Magherbin (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Ayaltimo, after reading the article there seems to be a disagreement on who killed Sa'd ad-din (Yeshaq or Dawit) so I believe its fine to include for now. I'm going to add my part now and i'll add yours in a few days if you dont get the chance to do it. Magherbin (talk) 06:58, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Magherbin, sorry about that I was dealing with disruptive users and thanks for understanding because there seems to be a scholarly dispute between Yeshaq and Dawit. I can pull countless sources that states it was Yeshaq who invaded Ifat and sacked Zeila. [30] [31] [32] [33] Anyways thanks for working things out with me. I really appreciate it. We can fix Adal Sultanate in the near future and make it neutral. I'm just busy right now. Ayaltimo (talk) 14:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Cerulli on Ifat

The Italian scholar Enrico Cerulli gives an account of Ifat on p.343-344: "The kingdom of Ifât covered three distinct regions: a) An area of the highland, namely, a part (more or less extended, as the result of various wars) of the Shewan highland, including the slope towards the valley of Hawash. This region which concerns the name Ifât in its strictest sense, seems to have been the cradle of the dynasty of the Walasma. The name Ifât has been kept in Abyssinia up to now to indicate this region, though reduced in the highland to a narrow strip of the north-east of Ankobar: so, we can say that today, the name Ifât properly indicates the Shewan slopes towards the low valley of Hawash"

Language is discussed on p.361: "It is very interesting to learn about the fact, certified by the Muslim writers, that in the State of Ifât, an Ethiopic language was spoken, 37 together with the Arabic one (the latter, probably, as the language of trade). The Semitic Ethiopic had, therefore, diffused more than that of today in the south-east of Ethiopia, in the XIV century, but during the last centuries, it succumbed to Dankali and Somali." [34]. Magherbin (talk) 22:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I would recommend you to post it on the Ethio-Semitic section for neutrality sake and that section does need improvement. Ayaltimo (talk) 03:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)