Talk:Somali people/Archive 5

Regions with significant populations

Data for many European countries (Sweden, Germany etc) are missing. Also, India, South Africa, Pakistan, and Malaysia have a nontrivial Somali community not mentioned in this section.Wadaad (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The infobox can only accommodate so many regions without getting cluttered. Most of the foregoing are also already mentioned, elsewhere as well. Middayexpress (talk) 17:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Notable Individuals of Diaspora

I added some weeks ago Abdirahim Hussein Mohamed to the notable people list because also Zahra Abdullah was mentioned there. Someone deleted it (because of political reasons?). Abdirahim Hussein Mohamed is clearly more well known in Finland because of his radio show and important roles within the Centre Party. We should either delete both or have both of them in. This is why I add Abdirahim Hussein Mohamed to the list again.Reskelinen (talk) 16:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

They're both listed. Middayexpress (talk) 17:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Etymology

I was wondering if it would be useful to have an etymology section here. A brief explanation about the possible origins of the word 'Somali'. Have your say. Wadaad (talk) 11:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Good idea. As far as I know, the term "Somali" is believed to have come from one of three possible sources:

(a) a conflation of the Somali words "soo" and "maal" ("go and milk") in reference to the pastoral lifestyle [1].

(b) an old Arabic reference to pastoral abundance [2].

(c) a praise song celebrating an Ethiopian negus' successful military expedition against some eponymous Islamic foes [3].

Another possible (though unofficial) etymology for the ethnonym "Somali" involves a malapropism of "Po-pa-li", the old Chinese term for the northern Somali coast [4]. Middayexpress (talk) 19:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I added the etymology section. Included points A & B. Point C sounds plausible, but I had difficulties wording it, feel free to add it. The Chinese reference sounds a bit obscure to me. I’m not sure if that one is worthwhile.Wadaad (talk) 03:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The section looks fine. The Chinese reference is admittedly obscure, so no worries. Middayexpress (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Religion

An editor has added a sentence suggesting that a "very small" number of Somalis are Christian, and in the process added Christianity to the religion parameter in the infobox [5]. He bases this edit on this article [6] on immigrants from Somalia in Kenya who adhere to the Christian faith. There are roughly 15-17 million ethnic Somalis in the world, but the article only mentions 200 or so "Somali" Christians in Kenya. This obviously fails WP:UNDUE. The article is also clearly using the term "Somali" in a national sense (a demonym) as opposed to the term's more immediate and original application as an ethnonym. This is obvious by the reference to a Christian gentleman dubbed "Michael"; few if any ethnic Somalis have Western names. Some news articles are known to refer to non-ethnically Somali residents of Somalia as "Somali" in reference to their nationality (although the preferred term is "Somalian" for nationals), such as this other article [7] on a Christian man who is visibly from Somalia's Eyle Bushmanoid minority group. The few Christians in Somalia almost entirely belong to other ethnic groups, Bantus in particular (c.f. Christianity in Somalia). However, this wikipedia article pertains to the Somali ethnic group only. And per the Somali Studies scholar Mohamed Diriye Abdullahi, Somalis are, with very few exceptions, entirely Muslim ([8]). Middayexpress (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

The above stated, It is entirely clear that someone or a group of editors is sanitizing news and reports of the persecution and murder of Christians in Somalia. Three are historical records of this persecution, I would like to begin a discussion of why this might be happening. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.186.224.137 (talk) 06:42, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Map

A username has just tried to add a map of the E-V32 sub-sub-clade of the genetic haplogroup E1b1b that many Somalis belong to. I have removed the map because it is original research and Wikipedian-made. There is also no consensus for its addition, not to mention the fact that not all Somalis belong to this particular sub-sub-clade. Additionally, the map breached WP:MOS, as it cluttered the section in question with excess images. The account that added it also appears to have been just-created and specifically for this purpose [9] i.e. a single-purpose account. I have therefore restored the original layout. Middayexpress (talk) 18:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Diaspora

How accurate are the figures for the Somali diaspora in the US/UK/Canada, the numbers currently mentioned on this page seem a bit too low to me. Any recent updates out there? Wadaad (talk) 10:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

There are several sources referenced in "Somalia's missing million" that put the US figure at 150,000. --Somaliweyn10 (talk) 15:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

In the UK, it's now estimated at around 100,000 or higher. In the US, it averages out at about 85,000, and around 200,000 or so in Canada. Middayexpress (talk) 17:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

These numbers seem more reasonable. Wadaad (talk) 18:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Census, Origins, Presence in Kenya

I suppose this is a wiki and those contributing can only contribute what they know to be true. However I am concerned at the various elisions and diminutions regarding Kenya's very large, very old and very successful Somali population. I have added this to the Kenya Wiki and made a few changes with regard to population - the last Census put that number at 2.4 million which is one and a half million people we are claiming do not exist or whose claim to be Somali we are denying by leaving the figure at 900,000.

Somalis also do not live in North Eastern Kenya. Even the smallest Kenyan towns have Somali populations, and Nairobi and Mombasa must be in the top ten largest Somali populations globally.

I will try and keep myself short but there's very little acknowledgment of the great successes of huge Somali business concerns in Kenya, triumphs against marginalisation, bigotry and poverty in succeeding across all areas of public life.

For example, the head of Kenya's military was for a very long time a Somali man called General Mahmoud Mohammed. At the time of Kenya's last election and the following violence, the powerful head of the Provincial Administration something like a regional prefect/governor) in the largest, wealthiest province was a Somali man called Noor Hassan Noor, the head of Kenya's Police Force was a former military General, Major General Hussein Ali. The head of Barclays Africa - yes, the whole of Africa, is a Somali man called Aden Mohammed, the Consumer Banking Director there for East and West Africa is also a Somali called Abdi Mohammed. Some of the biggest businesses in Nairobi, across several sectors are Somali owned. Several important parliamentary committees are led by Somalis, and the Minister of Defence is also Somali.

Our status in Kenya especially is not that of migrants. To say so is to play into the hands of bigots who want to cast us as second-hand citizens here, and diminish our right to participate fully in business, politics and other aspects of public life.

Galana (talk) 20:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Somalis are for the most part recent migrants to the area. They only began trickling in toward the end of the 19th century. As such, they were the last of the Cushitic ethnic minority groups to enter the Kenya region (c.f. [10]). Also, the official count of Somalis in the recent Kenyan census was not just disputed; it was completely nullified by the Kenyan government and is being recounted [11]. Middayexpress (talk) 20:20, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, the local bully. Alright, keep it at that, but would you be so kind as to highlight that the census results are under review? I mean just to show that there aren't actually 900,000 Somalis in Kenya which anyone who's visited the country would immediately know to be false? You would accept at least some population growth since the previous census wouldn't you? You've heard that Daadab is Kenya's 4th largest town?

Even if we took on a wild conspiracy theory that established that Somali Kenyans had somehow taken over government ministries and forced a big fake census number, we'd still think there was some growth, don't you agree? So let's see you make some changes to that effect.

On your point about Somalis being recent migrants into the area. First, this feeds into a now discarded colonial myth that there was empty, uninhabited land before the colonials settled here. Secondly, it ignores the fact that a pastoralist community would be moving back and forth over the border all the time anyway. The border is fairly recent, there were no encumberances, natural or otherwise to the free movement of Somali people into and out of Kenya. It is inconceivable that there'd be for millennia Somali as far south as Mogadishu, Brava, Merca and Kismayo and as far north as Berbera, but that these had somehow kept out of the scary, sacred space that is now Kenya.

Just to warn you, as ignorant and innocent as you think your agenda is, who in all honesty quotes Richard Trillo on political matters??, what you portray on these pages has real life consequences for millions of people. You are colluding in holding them back from a full enjoyment of their rights and dues under the present nation-state system. Galana (talk) 11:54, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd also like to object to a link here that leads to a page titled, 'Kenya should thank God for its Somali problems', that's just really rude and clearly offensive to Wikipedia mores. Galana (talk) 12:33, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Please have a look at Wikipedia's WP:CIV, WP:NPA and WP:AGF policies on civility, no personal attacks and assuming good faith, respectively. That said, it really makes no difference whether or not one personally believes the fact that Somalis are for the most part recent migrants to Kenya -- they are. They are the last of the Cushitic groups to settle in the area, not the first. That you don't appear to be aware that North Eastern Kenya is also where most have been concentrated (the NFD) is odd seeing as how that is part of the Greater Somalia concept (Somaliweyn). Moreover, as far as Somalis are concerned, the current Eastern Africa drought, which is expected to end within a year, is mainly affecting Somali nationals (not the topic of this article), not nearly as much ethnic Somalis (the actual topic; the term "Somali" serves as both an ethnonym and a demonym => see this). This is because ethnic Somalis are mainly concentrated in and originally migrated from northern Somalia (c.f. [12]), not southern Somalia where Somalized ethnic minority agro-pastoralists actually form a numerical majority and the drought's effects are primarily concentrated. As for the Kenyan census, as explained above, the population figures in question were officially nullified by the Kenyan government; they aren't merely under review. They are presently being recounted since they mistakenly lumped together the figures for Kenya Asians and Somalis (c.f. [13]). Until then, the previous Kenyan census' official figures for ethnic Somalis (not Somali nationals) have been cited, with a footnote mentioning the nullification and recount of the previous official estimate. Regards, Middayexpress (talk) 16:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Please see the work of Herbert S.Lewis, Turton and other scholars on this issue. Please also see the book, The Invention of Somalia by Ali Jimale Ahmed. It is available on Google Books. Almost everything you write is based on oral traditions, which is alright considering we ought to give a rounded overview, but then the scholarly tradition is much different. I think there's two theories there, one which as the original homeland as somewhere between Southern Ethiopia and Northern Kenya, even around the Lake Turkana area. Another has this homeland somewhere further south between in the area of the Juba, Shebelle and Tana. There's more than one is my non-expert view, but in either case I think the idea that the Somali people are recent here either in the south, or in Kenya (doesn't for now) have legs to stand on.

--Galana (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

To argue that Somalis aren't newcomers to Kenya is to be unaware of the British colonial ordinance referred to as the Somali Line, whereby Somali pastoralists were effectively barred from continuing their southward movements past a certain point in northern Kenya (a British colony). That's how recent a lot of that migration dates back to.

With that said, there are actually three main theories of origin regarding ethnic Somalis, but only one of them is actually supported by the bulk of the modern and historical data alike. First, there's the long-standing, traditional and best-documented view positing that Somalis trace their immediate origins to the northern Red Sea coast from where they later (and relatively recently) migrated southwards in waves. The second view is the anthropologist Herbert Lewis & historian E.R. Turton's novel linguistic-based co-theory which you allude to, hypothesizing that the Somali migrated in an opposite, northerly direction into Somalia from a southern home-base around the Bale province of Ethiopia. The third theory is that Somalis are relatively recent migrants from Arabia i.e. within the classical era.

The recent Arabia migration theory is unlikely because there are ancient documents, like the Greek Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, that already place the ancestors of the Somali on the Red Sea littoral centuries before the recent Arabia migration is suggested to have taken place (~700 AD/BCE).

The Somali linguist and historian Mohamed Diriye Abdullahi addresses at length in that book I linked you to Turton's & Lewis' novel linguistic-based theory. He points out that, in reality, the migration occurred in the opposite direction: the Somali pastoralists migrated from a northern homeland into central and southern Somalia, displacing and/or absorbing along the way the pre-existing Cushitic, Bushmanoid and Bantu populations that they encountered. The Sab are the descendants of the Cushitic peoples that they met/displaced along the way, with admixture from the various other elements. This is supported by:

• Both Somali and Oromo oral histories, as well as those of many neighboring Bantu tribes.
• The earliest written record of the ethnonym "Somali", which is from a 15th century Abyssinian hymn celebrating a victory over the Ifat Sultanate's Muslim troops based in Zeila. [14]
• Ancient Greek and Arab documents describing the inhabitants of northern Somalia as "Berbers" (the old name for the Somalis' ancestors), and those of southern Somalia as the Zanj (Bantus).
• The Somalis' association with the ancient Land of Punt, which is believed to have been located in the general area of northern Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti and the Red Sea coast of Sudan. That would place the Somalis quite far away from the Lake Turkana region, whereas the H. Lewis/E.R. Turton theory hypothesizes that the Somalis expanded from a northern Kenya/southern Ethiopia homeland as recently as the 1st century A.D..
• Place-names in Somalia, many of which point to an historical Oromo presence (and in some cases, a Bantu one too).
• Linguistics; specifically, the fact that the Sab speak distinct Cushitic languages, with many noticeable Oromo features that were retained.
• The fact that the tombs of many Somali patriarchs -- including the progenitor of the now southern-based Abgaal Hawiye clan, who is buried in Abdal, near Berbera -- are all heavily concentrated in the northern part of the country, particularly those of the older patriarchs. [15]
• The fact that Somali pastoralists traditionally migrate from dryer pastures to greener ones, not the converse. Mostly arid northern Somalia is in no way more fertile than southern Ethiopia, so the movement of herdsmen was almost certainly in the opposite direction.
• The bi-partite structure of the Somali genealogical tree showing the Sab descending from a separate paternal ancestor (simply dubbed Sab) than the northern Somalis (who descend from Samaale). This is a figurative expression of the fact that the northern Somalis and the Sab share common paternal ancestry at a higher, meta-ethnic level (i.e. as Cushites), not at the more immediate ethnic level (as Somalis); c.f. [16].

As I wrote, Professor Abdullahi discusses this extensively on pages 12-16 in his book [17]. It's obviously too lengthy to quote in its entirety, but here's an excerpt:

"One of the more recent theories about Somali history is provided by Herbert Lewis, an anthropologist, and E.R. Turton, a historian. They base their theories solely on the strength of the "theory of migration" postulated by the linguist Isidore Dyen, which might be summarized as: if a certain region has more dialects than another region where similar dialects are spoken then the first region is the original homeland of the group that speaks related dialects. Lewis and Turton, noticing more linguistic variety in southern Somalia, therefore theorized that early ancestors of the Somalis lived around Lake Turkana in northern Kenya and southern Ethiopia where they were supposedly living until well into the beginning of the first millenium. However, Dyen's theory is not a physical law, and when applied to linguistic diversity in Italy, for example, it would wrongly predict that the Romans originated from the border area between Italy and France, since there is much more linguistic diversity in that zone, and then spread out toward Rome and central Italy, whereas in fact the opposite is true and is known from recorded history. Additionally, as far as linguistic diversity in southern Somalia is concerned, Lewis and Turon were laboring under the assumption that Maay, Jiido, Garre, Tunni, and Dabare are all dialects of the Somali language. In fact, they are not Somali dialects but are separate though related languages, whose main characteristics, moreover, in sound and syntax show them to have much in common with the Oromo language; this is not surprising since it is well known that Oromo speakers were in the southern areas well before the Somalis arrived. Despite such serious limitations, Lewis's and Turton's theories have caught on and have been subsequently well quoted in recent works. As for the relative lack of diversity of the Somali language proper, it is due to the intermingling of pastoralists, to constant trade, to itinerant clergy and their students, and to history, such as epochal times when Somalis had to unify their ranks in the face of Christian gorups such as the Amhara-Tigreans or in the face of the Galla (the Oromo), who had in the old days mostly ancestral faiths. Even if Herbert Lewis presents no other evidence, except Dyen's theory, itself an intuitive postulation incapable of explaining all forms of linguistic diversity, he affirms, "At the moment we have no written evidence nor oral traditions to support this view, but neither, I submit, have we any evidence to seriously question it." To the contrary, Somali oral history as well as that of related groups such as those of the Oromo and even of the Bantu groups in Kenya provide abundant material about the general direction of Somali movements. The version of southbound migration sketched by another scholar is more accurate in that it is corroborated by both Somali oral history and accounts from early travelers. The Somalis were still migrating southward in search of greener pastures when the British arrived in Kenya and put a stop to the Somali advance on what became British East Africa. One historian tells us that "the British government in Kenya halted the Somali migrations at the Tana River in 1910, and the point beyond which Somalis could not pass camne to be known as the 'Somali line'." Without that edict, Somalis would have been today probably south of Kilimanjaro and in Tanzania. [...]What is more, whether it is by reason of common linguistic origin or by reason of cultural influence, the Somali language has many terms that have an equivalent term in the religion of ancient Egyptians, which the Lews-Turton hypotheses would not be able to explain since, according to their theories, Somalsi were around Lake Turkana and far away from the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden as recently as the dawn of the second millenium. [...]The facts as we know them, either from historico-cultural sources or from the accounts of ancient, classical, or medieval travelers, tell us that the ancestors of today's Somalis were in fairly stable existence for millenia in their northern homeland, following their herds of sheep and gots back and forth between mountain and coast in a pattern that still continues today. [...]As the Somalis advanced from their northern homeland, they clashed with the Oromo who had preceded them in that direction. In the riverine areas of southern Somalia, they found diverse populations consisting of Galla pastoralists and agropastoralists, agricultural Bantu populations who had stayed behind after the Oromo advance, leftovers from still older populations such as the hunter-gatherer Eyle, and, in the the coastal areas, the Swahili peoples of the Benadir, all living by then in a fairly stable accommodation long after the Oromo attacks had ceased in the region."

Middayexpress (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm afraid you are restricted in your understanding by your inability to conceive the space or the people you are writing about. It's dishonest to present yourself as an expert or any sort of authority when you are really completely unaware of the basics.

You'd really need to take a look at a number of maps. The Somali Line is very very far south. What is called Northern Kenya or the NFD, or even the further north parts of Eastern Province include places as far south as Garissa and Isiolo (latitudes to the south of Kisumu, Kakamega, Nyeri and Kitale). There's a whole lot of land there to be in and be in the territory now called Kenya. Worse, the borders at that time (1911) were such that Kismayo for example was in British East Africa or the Kenya Colony - as recently as 1926. See here -

Thanks for the cut and paste from Mohammed Diriye Abdullahi's book. My theory is that he has a political angle for presenting things as he does. I cannot see in what he writes anything to refute the scholars theory. Any scholar on African history knows to smell a fish when he hears about connections to Ancient Egyptians, and he's still using oral sources which again every scholar on African history knows is extremely unreliable as it's all based on a desire for certain political associations.

Secondly, please see the book I presented, a collection of research essays edited by Prof. Ali Jimale Ahmed. It presents alternative theories and backs the Lewis-Turton theory. Also see his explanation about the different groups that make up the Somali people. I've set out the various places in which Kenya is mentioned in the book.

I'd like if you will allow me still to go back to my initial point. All these are lines drawn on maps that mean absolutely nothing to pastoral nomads. For you to claim that Somalis are recent migrants into Kenya would need for these people to be able to understand these boundaries as they are now presented. Kenya did not exist then. It would be more honest to claim that they moved into their present settlements in the year X rather than to claim that they are recent migrants into Kenya.

--Galana (talk) 20:08, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, the facts above speak for themselves. Somalis really are recent migrants to Kenya. That is, they first started entering the region during the 19th century from the more northerly Horn of Africa. The Somali Line that the British enforced was meant to check the southwest-ward migration of the Somalis; the passage above by the scholar Mohamed Diriye Abdullahi on the Line is from another work. That is, though, why he indicates that Somalis might today have been found as far south as Tanzania had the British not erected the Line. The book you linked to, the Invention of Somalia, is a polemic work with many novel theories presented therein. It is not a neutral study on Somali ethnohistory and culture (see this critique, for example). On the other hand, no such criticisms of the scholar Mohamed Diriye Abdullahi's more recent work cited above exist, And unlike both Herbert Lewis and E.R. Turton (whose theories date from almost forty years ago, by the way), Abdullahi is an actual linguist. He's therefore in an ideal position to gauge the relative strength of Lewis' and Turton's linguistic-based co-theory of migration. Besides what I've already cited above, Lewis' and Turtons' theory of migration vis-a-vis Somalis is also rendered virtually impossible by newly-uncovered cave paintings in northern Somalia of pastoral animals and herders, the latter of whom are reputed to be the ancestors of the modern Somalis. So Somalis have been based in the north of the Horn of Africa for quite some time i.e. for at least a couple of millenia rather than having merely migrated there from Kenya in the classical period. It's not just one or two lines of evidence that belie Lewis' and Turtons' novel theory, but pretty much all of them. Middayexpress (talk) 21:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I see how misleading those quotes on the news articles are when you do not have the full background information. You see quotes in a news article that are not ascribed really could mean anything from the mere and wholly biased opinions of an official to the editorialising of a news reporter. I see your reference in re the census code 700 and also with regard to its source but cannot understand that either that, or the allegation of large scale naturalisations by the minister are anything but the grappling of officials for an explanation when they haven't got one.

The wealth number of conflicting explanations in those links demonstrate the lack of a coherent theory, and a lot of flapping about. Notice that the Immigration Minister does not back the naturalisation theory, even though he'd be the one best placed to promote and explain it. Instead he dismisses the refugees theory. How many naturalisations - over the natural population growth - would be needed to turn 900,000 people into 2.4 million? How does this evade all attention in a country that is almost constantly on the look out for undocumented migrants from Somalia?

It is clear that these explanations haven't the weight in truth that your referencing them grants. Kenya has a long history of such tensions over census results, and politicians have pedigree in making bald faced assertions that influence opinion one way or the other. The state's agenda with regard to Somalis isn't a secret either.

That said, I'd be happy with whatever formulation you decide to employ. However, I propose that we asterisk and date the population figure, explain that it is an old one, this serving to notify users that the true present population figure is higher. There are other ways we can arrive at a proper estimate, not all Wikipedia population numbers are based on censuses. To pretend that this is the correct figure - which is what we are doing by not asterisking and bracketing a date - is just wrong and intentionally misleading.

More, there are plenty of reasons why we should think the published 2009 number is plausible - better, more efficient, modern census, better life conditions, more settled people, a national endorsement of its thoroughness and the professionalism of enumerators, the absence of reports that it was rigged during the count, etc and a good theory for why the Kenyan state and its officials - see the resistance from 'security officials' - would want to diminish that number after the results were out.

Now, regarding the initial entry of Somalis into Kenya. I will concede that we have two conflicting meta-theories, each of which can be ascribed to some scholarship - regardless our opinions of those scholars. Your own contribution above shows that the North to South theory is in contention. My links to 'The Invention of Somalia' and the theory of Lewis backed up by Turton's work as you demonstrate yourself, and my explanations of the size of Kenya's north, including where the colonial Somali-Galla line was, and the reach of Kenya's borders upto 1926 when Jubaland was ceded to the Italians together show that the 19th Century assertion is false. The point about the Somali-Galla line to reiterate, is immaterial, as there was a lot of land to be in, to still be in Kenya, and yet to be north of the Somali-line.

I think it would be best to demonstrate that there are two theories of the first presence of Somalis in the borders of what we now call Kenya, reference these and allow the user the knowledge that neither one has been resolved as factual, both are theories - one based on linguistic theory plus historical record, and another based largely on oral histories and untestable claims to a similitude with cultures mentioned in ancient documents. This is to say nothing of a long interaction and shared civilisation between the people of the littoral of present day Somalia and the coast of present day Kenya.

Please see also the Wajir entry on Wikipedia - under history

A cluster of cairns near Wajir are generally ascribed by the local inhabitants to the Madanle, a semi-legendary people of high stature, who are associated with the Somali Ajuuraan. A. T. Curle has reported the excavation of two of these large tumuli, finding traces of skeletal remains which crumbled at his touch, as well as earthenware shards and a copper ring.

So there, another academic who links early settlements in present day Kenya to the Somali people.

Overall, I'd hope to persuade you that a proper entry should concede the following. i) That Somali people are a large ethnic group in Kenya. That there is a discounted and therefore nullified resent census count of over 2.3 million of their number resident there, and that the 900,000 figure you insist on be explained with an asterisk or a date as being 22 years old (1989 Census).

ii) That Somali people's presence within the present borders of Kenya is not as recent as the 19th Century. That may be true for some of the groups we presently call Somali, but not for all Somali people. It is true that there are even yesterday Somali people who migrated into Kenya, but that is not the subject of this article. The initial date refers to the first existence of Somali people between 1°00'N and 38°00'E. I will assume we agree that the myth of homogeneity has been debunked?

iii) That most Somalis in Kenya are natural-born citizens in Kenya.

iv) That Somalis live across Kenya, there's no need to lock them up in North Eastern Province. We can even add that the mayor of Migori town in Western Kenya close to Lake Victoria is ethnic Somali, or that the wealthiest person in the breadbasket town of Bungoma is an ethnic Somali lady who's family has been there for maybe 40 years, or that the present Kenyan Postmaster-General (former commissioner of police) is an ethnic Somali born in the North Rift Valley town of Eldoret in 1956.

I will repeat again that there's real life consequences, considering the power of Wikipedia, for how this article is toned and what clarifications, elisions and obscurities it contains. I was drawn here by the very confident pronouncements of a bigot who drew on what's published here as fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Galana (talk • contribs) 23:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I see.

It seems to me that you contravene the rules when you so casually dismiss as polemical and unworthy any evidence that does not back your already held theories. What facts speak for themselves? What is your theory for Prof. Ali Jimale Ahmed and his fellow scholar's very well researched and laid out falsehoods? As I said above there seem to be two theories, their age as any scholar would know does not matter.

It is difficult to understand why you would constantly make references to the Somali line in spite of my explanation of just how far south it is and that you keep on harping about a book that cites as evidence of links to ancient Egypt, words that are shared between the two cultures, and the similarity of hairstyle and dress between the depictions of Ancient Egyptians and the people they met on the Red Sea Coast. Is this your idea of serious scholarship?

The north-south theory is intended to create an ancestral link to Arabia. It also privileges some Somali groups migration histories while cancelling out those of others. It isn't my contention that the migrations were necessarily out of Kenya, but that there were south to north migrations, and west to east migrations - depending on the groups involved.

The review you cite demonstrates a political agenda that is offended by the book. It however also proves that there's a difference between a northern theory, and a southern one, and that rather than contest certain academic theories, it prefers to tar them with the charge that they are 'western' and imposed by the external masters.

--Galana (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

From your link that tears into an essay in Prof. Ahmed's The Invention of Somalia,

The scope of my short essay is not an account of early Islam in Somalia nor is it a comparative study of Zayla and Mogadishu, its a simple awakening call for so called Somali specialist to cease the old speculative theories on the origin of some Somali clans and concede the historical record and unique history of every clan, there was no such a thing as 'Somalis' during early Islamic times , there was only a group of Black Berber as Ibn Batuta himself a white Berber referred to them, tribes living in modern horn of Africa each had their own historical arrival be from across Arabia or from central Ethiopia highland , each should be studied separately and this over all inclusive term 'Somali' should be avoided , no modern Somali clan considered himself 'Somali' as late as one century ago, the Dir were Dir and Isaaq were decendent of Isaaq and Daarood of their Daarood ancestor. The southern collusion can't discredit the medival Arabic manuscripts and literature almost a thousand (Al-Basri) years old regarding the history of Sharif Isxaaq Ibn Axmed Al'awali with few pages written in western institutions financed to perpetuate the Europeans theories on the origin of the so called Somalis collectivly, its well established fact that shiekh Isxaaq and the Isaaq people have a legitmate case of their origin judging the flimsy opinions by somali students and their Western masters versues the well documented history of sheikh Isxaaq through the Arab literature.

That's what the scholarship, including this one suggests. If we concede the homogeneity theory's debunked, then we have the possibility of multiple origins, and from the evidence, the reality of multiple languages, modes of production and economic organisation. An honest article should reflect these, and you should admit that without a unified theory of origin, it is difficult to accept - given the evidence supplied in Prof. Ahmed's book - that there were no Somali in Kenya until 'they started trickling in in the 19th Century'.

Galana (talk) 00:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

As already indicated elsewhere, the official reason for the recount provided by the Kenyan government itself (as opposed to the speculations you allude to) is due to "inconsistencies" stemming in large part from government-based manipulation of the figures of naturalized Somalis in the country, not to undocumented immigrants (c.f. [18], [19]). The 900,000 figure for Somalis in Kenya that is cited in this article is already annotated with an explanation that "Although provisional results from the 2009 Kenya census reported a much larger number of over 2 million Somali residents, they are believed to be inaccurate due to reported inconsistencies in the gathered data. The figure has consequently been nullified for an official recount". An additional phrase can of course be added to the footnote explaining that the 900,000 figure is from the 1989 census. Also, most Kenya-born Somalis are concentrated in the North Eastern Province (not Nairobi or elsewhere), which is why it is often referred to as the "Somali Region" of Kenya.

Further, the Somali Line was erected to stop the migration of Somalis that began in the Horn region and moved southwards: "More significant in the long term is the fact that the ' Somali Line ', which checked the age-long movement of peoples from the arid horn of Africa southwards and westwards into the fertile plains, is now more or less a dead letter." [20]

I also did not cite any book review. I linked you to an article that criticizes the book the Invention of Somalia's reformulation of Somali ethnohistory to show that it is not necessarily a neutral work. In doing so, I was neither condoning nor condemning the author's views. Whatever the case, there is really no comparison between Turton & Lewis' novel theory of a northward migration of Somalis and the traditional, long-standing southward migration theory. The former is supported only by erroneous, outdated linguistic data, as the actual linguist Abdullahi has pointed out. That is, Af-Maay, Jiddo and the other tongues that Turton & Lewis rely on to buttress their hypothesis that the greatest diversity of the Somali language was originally centered on the southern Ethiopia/northern Kenya region and that Somalis therefore must have originated in that area are, in fact, not Somali dialects at all. They are actually completely separate Cushitic languages. On the other hand, everything -- from cultural factors (Somalis have strong cultural ties with the Egypt area), to oral traditions of both Somalis and surrounding peoples, to actual written records, to even rock art depicting early Somali pastoral life (e.g. [21]) -- point to a northern origin of Somalis, followed by later waves of southward expansion from the Red Sea littoral. Cushitic groups in general have long inhabited East Africa at large well prior to the Bantu expansion from West Africa. The Somali proper were one of the northern-based Cushitic groups, not the southern based ones. As you have correctly indicated and Abdullahi actually states in that book of his that I both cited and linked you to, the term "Somali" only strictly applies to that group of northern migrants. It did not originally apply to the separate Cushitic peoples that the Invention of Somalia refers to as inhabiting the southern Ethiopia/northern Kenya region and in part later expanding into the southern and central Somalia region. These latter groups, who are collectively referred to as the "Sab", spoke distinct Afro-Asiatic languages like Af-Maay, Jiddo, Tunni and Dabarre and were only later assimilated and culturally Somalized by the southward-moving Somali pastoralists i.e. the Somali proper. As the scholar I.M. Lewis explains, "since, however, the Samaale pastoralists are numerically, and socially dominant, and indeed regard themselves as a pastoral aristocracy, it seems that the ethnic name Somali has been extended to the Sab in much the same way as the various inhabitants of the British Isles are known to foreigners as 'English'." [22] I, of course, don't have any issue with mentioning this since it's basic Somali ethnohistory. The individual traditions of descent from single Arab patriarchs are already covered on the respective clan pages where and when they apply. Middayexpress (talk) 06:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the indigenousness of Somalis in Kenya; the Great Rift Valley was originally inhabited solely by Cushitic and Sandawe type of peoples. The relatively recent Nilotic and later on Bantu migrations into this region completely changed the demographic landscape. It's quite clear from archaeogenetics and craniometry that the ancestral Kenyans and Tanzanians were not Congoid peoples.

Excavations in Kenya and Tanganyika have uncovered remains of a tall, extremely long-headed, Mediterranean racial type, with a tendency to great elongation and narrowness of the face, in pre-Neolithic times.

Carleton S. Coon (1939), The races of Europe, p.445.

W. Howells' study of world craniometric variation is especially relevant to the racial affinity of ancestral Kenyans before the expansion of Negroids into the region. Howells studied some 2,500+ skulls from 28 populations of recent Homo sapiens based on 57 metric variables, including skulls from the Teita tribe of East Africa. These recent Teita tribesmen (and women) clustered with other Sub-Saharan Africans, indicating that recent Kenyans belong primarily to the Negroid race.

Howells then studied prehistoric Kenyans and other humans from around the world to determine whether or not they show any affinities with living races. He did this to examine whether the morphological complexes of modern races can be discerned in remote times. Using the same multivariate approach he studied the Elmenteita, Nakuru and Willey's Kopje skulls from Kenya. His conclusion was that there is no racial continuity between recent Negroid East African skulls and these prehistoric remains, as the following passage illustrates:

The DISPOP [DISPOP is Howells' program] results here are not indicative of anything, except a general non-African nature for all these skulls. Display of POPKIN distances (infra) reinforces this and seems to find nearer neighbors among such more generalized populations as Peru, Guam, or Ainu, but also Europeans or even Easter Island.

Howells WW (1989) Skull shapes and the map: craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Peabody Museum Papers 79:1-189.

Remembering that the Teita series (Bantu speakers of southeastern Kenya), and the recent East African skulls in table 4 above, do clearly exhibit African affiliations, it is fair to say, contra Rightmire, that there seems to be no clear continuity here in late prehistory . On the broad scale, looking at an "Out-of-Africa" scenario, one would expect that, in some region between southern and northeastern Africa, some differentiation would have been taking place within a Homo sapiens stock, evolving into something beginning to approximate later Sub-Saharan peoples on the one hand, and evolving in another direction on the other hand. East Africa would be a likely locale for appearance of the latter. So anyone is welcome to argue that this is what Elmenteita et al. are manifesting. The ensuing picture for East Africa, that is to say, would later have beeen changed through replacement by the expansion of Bantu or other "Negroid" tribes.

Howells WW (1995) Who's Who in skulls: ethnic identification of crania from measurements. Peabody Museum Papers 82:1-108

So in a sense, Somalis are biologically one of the most indigenous modern inhabitants of Kenya.

Wadaad (talk) 16:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

True, in the sense that Somalis are Cushitic and East Africa at large prior to the expansion of Bantus and Nilotes into the area was a center of bio-evolution of Cushitic forebears. Middayexpress (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

genetics

This is a lively discussion!

Why is there even mention of the genetic background of the Somali people? It's plainly biased towards showcasing the so-called Caucasoid haplogrouping. The fact remains that there is extreme genetic diversity throughout all of Horn and sub-Sahara Africa. I put caution on anyone using these research studies because they purport to group every person of the region as paternally identical, which is categorically false.HawaKediye (talk) 18:06, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

This article is not about Sub-Saharan Africa. It's about Somalis specifically and their own particular background, which resembles that of other Afro-Asiatic groups in the Horn. Middayexpress (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't answer the question, which is why is this article focused on genetics, and specifically, the genetics that promote Caucasoid features? It's foolish to think that Somalis are not classified as anything other than Negro; and to point out a similarity that is not universally shared among common ethnic groups is poor journalism in this case. Why not have the article sample the entire genetic pool? If you need some help understanding the Human genome, let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HawaKediye (talk • contribs) 02:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

No idea what "similarity that is not universally shared among common ethnic groups" is supposed to mean. In any case, no one is classified as "Negro" nowadays (a pejorative, btw). Ethnic Somalis and other Afro-Asiatic peoples of the Horn generally were not regarded as such in the past either (c.f. [23]). Moving on, this website is not a newspaper. It's an encyclopedia. As such, it is formulated using a neutral approach, not from a journalistic perspective. This means, among other things, that editors don't set out to try and "prove" that a given people are or are not a certain way (see WP:NOTADVOCATE). Further, the page focuses on the general background of ethnic Somalis, which includes their actual ancestry. And that ancestry is presented here conservatively, discussing the paternal and maternal lineages that are common amongst Somalis. If by "sample the entire genetic pool" you are referring to autosomal DNA, that as well is touched on ("the northeastern-African -- that is, the Ethiopian and Somali -- populations are located centrally between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations"). Middayexpress (talk) 05:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

You're missing the point. (1) East Africa is sub-Saharan. (2) Wikipedia should adhere to the highest standards of journalism; we're documenting and reporting facts. The "Genetics" section in the article is biased, and that is not responsible journalism. There is no such thing as 'ethnic' Somali. Using your logic, Somalis are then classified as "Caucasoid" because a few published papers on macromolecular biology said so. That's rubbish. Use of the term Negro was not meant to offend, but to identify. There are more Somalis living abroad than in Somalia, and in those countries, that is how Somalis are regarded. Not getting into the Tiger Woods "I'm part this, part that" argument, the article should either read without any reference to genetics, or with a more thorough explanation of possible Arab and Italian (Mediterranean) mixing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HawaKediye (talk • contribs) 06:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even sure what's the purpose of all of this, actually. 1) East Africa being geographically situated in a part of Africa below the Sahara desert has no bearing on the indicated biological affinities for Somalis (does the fact that North Africans are situated a few miles north in Africa mean that they too don't have non-African affinities?). 2) That genetic material was all drawn from peer-reviewed studies and is consistent with many others. 3) Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWSPAPER: "Wikipedia articles are not[...] Journalism. Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. Wikipedia does not constitute a primary source. However, our sister projects Wikisource and Wikinews do exactly that, and are intended to be primary sources." 4) There obviously is such a thing as an "ethnic Somali" and this very article is devoted to that ethnicity (see here for more). 5) Personal opinions/anecdotes, including your 'Negro' allusions, are neither here nor there.

From the gist of your comments, you seem particularly disturbed about peer-reviewed studies asserting some Caucasoid affinities for Somalis. Would you have preferred something else, perhaps? You have not bothered explaining why you believe this is "biased" or "rubbish", so it's difficult to say where you're coming from with this. Per WP:TALK, you must actually provide concrete examples of what you mean. Middayexpress (talk) 10:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, Somalis aren't mixed with Italians; see link in #3 above. Middayexpress (talk) 10:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of how Wikipedia would like to operate, it is in fact prima facie accounting of current events. These include editors purporting its content(s) to be of prime significance. Please don't quote some obscure WP reference to claim or deny faux policy. As an aside, your link to the book "opening africa" is basically unintelligible (i.e., there's nothing there that one can follow). I hope this is not an example of what you mean when you say peer-reviewed (?).

The issue I'm uptaking with the genetics bit is that if someone wanted to better understand the peoples of say, East Africa, this article would leave them with the impression that somehow the citizens of Somalia have been isolated for some time, and then randomly influenced her neighbors. The reality of contemporary Somalia is that, historically, it has been a faction-based nation loosely held together by Islam. That truth in itself makes it near impossible to verify such a thing as an 'ethnic person of Somali origin'. For instance, if the Kenyan people are older than the people of Somalia, then how do you traverse over that land without having some foreign assimilation? You don't; which is where both the British and Italian (and in a more abstract sense, Arab) histories in the region come into play. Although you and I would like to be able to define what an ethnic Somalian is, using a genetic argument to state that 10% of Somali males are Caucasoid (how?) doesn't bode well for the remaining population when you're speaking on their behalf.

Again - and I respect your uncomfort with the term, when using the word Negro, we're simly implying that someone is of the Black phenotype. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HawaKediye (talk • contribs) 11:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Much of the above is completely off-topic, like that golfer you brought up earlier. So I'll make this short and to the point. The actual topic of this article is Somalis, not random peoples inhabiting East Africa. It is not about Kenyans and other similar groups in the African Great Lakes region (who, in any case, aren't native to those areas; they migrated there relatively recently). The article also does not state that "10% of Somali males are Caucasoid". If you're going to base your comments on material that isn't even in the article, there's really nothing more to say. Middayexpress (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, let's agree to disagree. The article is rated B-Class, so I'm not the only one taking up issues with it. Have a nice day.HawaKediye (talk) 19:34, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

That's a rating from years ago. So long. Middayexpress (talk) 10:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The genetics section seems very well referenced, and quotes extensively (perhaps a little more than necessary) from primary articles on the topic. It's not entirely clear to me what your objection is, Hawa, but if you think information in the section is incorrect, do you have any citations to better information? Tdslk (talk) 16:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

She appears to have objected to its presence in general, though it's unclear why. Middayexpress (talk) 18:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Why should anything be cited in this instance? You'd be hard-pressed to point out another article of ethnic peoples where there is a section devoted to highlighting their genes. If anything, make it its own page (cf., subsection). Like I stated before, it's counterproductive to make false allegations. In this case, those allegations are that Somalians are of some admixture, which in itself, strongly suggests Caucasoid features. Vouching for what Galana said last year, what is written in the article has a potential impact on millions of Somalis worldwide. An uninformed reader takes this away from the article:

• Somalis are spread throughout East Africa
• Somalis are native to the Horn of Africa
• Somalis originally come from North Somalia (a red flag that is indicative of Arab-influence and brainwashing, since it attempts to say that somehow Somalis might be of Yemen descent)
• Genetically, Somalis can trace some of their lineage to Caucasoid chromosomes (this is implied, yet doesn't clearly state how)
• All Somalis are Muslim
• There is no such thing as or reference to a Somali Bantu
• Somalis are international, but have their own culture and language
  • Somalis are ethnically distinct from other Horners, Habeshas, and Africans in general.

Earlier I made the comment that the nation is factioned. In the article, this reads as "clans". That's fine because that gives a better explanation of diversity than saying Somalis are in some way related to Balkan Europeans without explaining how such a relation comes about.HawaKediye (talk) 09:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

That Galana account's comments were mainly about the Kenyan census, not about genetics. Genetic sections are also actually quite common on wiki's ethnic group pages [24]. Further, Somalis are spread out throughout the northern part of eastern Africa (see Greater Somalia), with the Horn of Africa being their core area of inhabitation and dispersal. The article does not say they are "international". It says Somalis have a diaspora outside of these core areas, which is true. Somalis also did originally disperse from the northern Red Sea coast (c.f. [25]), and it is not indicated anywhere in the article that this has something to do with "Yemen descent" (heritage which, by the way, in itself is not a crime or against website policy). The Somali Bantu are likewise not ethnic Somalis [26]. They are Bantu peoples originally from southeastern Africa, who were brought by slave traders a few centuries ago to the Horn region during the Arab slave trade (see this Bantu-run website). The neologism "Horners" you refer to is also not even used, and Balkan Europeans are only mentioned in the factual context of the distribution of the E1b1b haplogroup that many Somalis possess ("besides comprising the majority of the Y DNA in Somalis, the E1b1b1a (formerly E3b1a) haplogroup also makes up a significant proportion of the paternal DNA of Ethiopians, Sudanese, Egyptians, Berbers, North African Arabs, as well as many Mediterranean and Balkan Europeans"). Lastly, this article is not about "the nation" Somalia. It's about the Somali ethnic group specifically, which is broadly divided into five major clans (Darod, Dir, Hawiye, Isaaq and Rahanweyn). Middayexpress (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Rarely do other articles even mention a detailed report of genetics/chromosomal studies.

Despite how you may read it, this article makes a very strong case for the international status of Somalians (look at the Infobox "Regions with significant populations"). As for why there is no mention of an estimated 9% of a country's core demographic is beyond reason. Imported from a slave trade or not, to be excluded - while at the same time the North African influence is promoted - is unquestionably biased an unabashed. In reality, I'm using 'biased' as a euphemism for 'bigoted'. The article isn't focused on "ethnic" Somalis; it's titled and about "Somali people".

I assume that you have been deeply involved in the article's maintenance for some time, and that may make it difficult for you to see how it appears to others. But, if you're not going to modify the genetics section with the suggestions provided, or will restore another's edit to that section, than there really is no point in arguing. However, your sole policing of the page continues to cast doubt on the articles major points.HawaKediye (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

This is an article exclusively on the Somali people, an ethnic group that long preceded the creation of the modern country called "Somalia" (which was named after it, btw). This community has long been described in the historical literature (e.g.[27]). The first mention of the ethnonym "Somali" actually dates back to the 15th century. Bantus are not ethnically Somali, though they do today have Somali citizenship as residents of Somalia. The same goes for Italian Somalians, Bajuni people, etc., who for this reason aren't discussed here either. Middayexpress (talk) 19:05, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

" As for why there is no mention of an estimated 9% of a country's core demographic is beyond reason.", because those people are an ethnic minority, that means that they hail from an other ethnic group. The Somali Bantu has an article of its own. And the term Somali people refers to ethnic Somalis, not to Italians residing in Somalia. If we look to other "ethnic pages", you see that it only discuss the group and its culture, not other groups residing in their traditional homeland. For example; Dutch people, do you see the ethnic minorities living in The Netherlands? It wouldn't make any sense to add other ethnic groups in the article while the article is called "Somali peope". Runehelmet (talk) 19:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

It can definitely be confusing that "Somali" could refer to either the ethnic group or to the people from the country of Somalia of any ethnic background. What if the top of the article had a statement like This article is about the ethnic group. For the article on people in the country of Somalia, see demographics of Somalia? Tdslk (talk) 19:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Well the lead gives an instantaneous look of the article:"Somalis (Somali: Soomaaliyeed, Arabic: الصوماليون‎) are an ethnic group located in the Horn of Africa, also known as the Somali Peninsula.". Runehelmet (talk) 19:48, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

seeing somalia is a nation even if there's an ethnic group called "somali" one who simply speaks somali and is native within the border lines can call themselves somali so this page should add in somali nation and ethnic group sort of like the English People article. An example is ogadenis can refer to themselves as Ethiopians "there was no such a thing as 'Somalis' during early Islamic times , there was only a group of Black Berber as Ibn Batuta himself a white Berber referred to them, tribes living in modern horn of Africa each had their own historical arrival be from across Arabia or from central Ethiopia highland , each should be studied separately and this over all inclusive term 'Somali' should be avoided , no modern Somali clan considered himself 'Somali' as late as one century ago, the Dir were Dir and Isaaq were decendent of Isaaq and Daarood of their Daarood ancestor." [28] Baboon43 (talk) 18:18, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a demonym, not an ethnonym. The author of that link is also referring to the separate paternal traditions of descent of the various ethnic Somali clans, not ethnic minority groups. These agnatic traditions are already dealt with separately on each respective clan page. The Somali ethnic group also long preceded the country that inherited its name, and this page is reserved for that ethnic group. Middayexpress (talk) 19:09, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

various issues can arise here especially when one is called a somali in texts just for being in somalia..you cant assume one is ethnically somali..this term needs to be broadened so it can be on par with "ethopian" as that term does not restrict to one ethnic group..if articles can portray both meanings it will be less of a hassle instead of a hijacking a term for exclusivity..although its not a legal term as of yet im hoping the new somali state may pass this...

somali or So·ma·lis

1. A native or inhabitant of Somalia.

2. A member of a Muslim people of Somalia and adjacent parts of Ethiopia, Kenya, Eritrea, and Djibouti.

3. The Cushitic language of the Somali and an official language of Somalia.

interesting quote "In the early 1970's, once more the Ethiopian government intensified its acts of eviction. Thus, the Arsi Oromo resquested the Somali government for military assistance to repulse the mass eviction. The Somali government proposed to Arsi Oromos military assistance provided that they renounce their Oromo identity and accept that of the Somali. The government of Somalia coined a new name for the Arsi Oromo : "Somali Abo" meaning "Oromo speaking Somali"-Ethnicity,Politicsm and Society in Northeast Africa: Conflict and Social Change-p.140 Baboon43 (talk) 21:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

That's an allusion to an assimilated group, not to ethnic Somalis. Over the years, various such peoples have attached themselves on a non-descent basis to dominant Somali clans; particularly in southern Somalia and environs. These adopted individuals are distinguished from lineage members, whether in Somalia, Djibouti or elsewhere, and are known as sheegad ("clients" [29]). Also, the ethnonym "Somali" is obviously not equivalent to "Ethiopian" for the simple fact that "Ethiopian" is strictly a demonym (there has never been an "Ethiopian" ethnic group). "Somali", on the other hand, is at its origin an ethnonym. The five major Somali clans are the Darod, Dir, Hawiye, Isaaq and Rahanweyn (c.f. [30]). Middayexpress (talk) 15:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Genetics Quote

Forgive me, I have a question! I do not know if I properly understood these quotes, but at first impression I thought they were saying different things:

• "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence... the proportion m of Caucasoid lineages in the Somali is m = 0.46 [46%]... Our results agree with the hypothesis of a maternal influence of Caucasoid lineages in East Africa, although its contribution seems to be higher than previously reported in mtDNA studies."'

• "The most distinct separation is between African and non-African populations. The northeastern-African -- that is, the Ethiopian and Somali -- populations are located centrally between sub-Saharan African and non-African populations... The fact that the Ethiopians and Somalis have a subset of the sub-Saharan African haplotype diversity -- and that the non-African populations have a subset of the diversity present in Ethiopians and Somalis -- makes simple-admixture models less likely; rather, these observations support the hypothesis proposed by other nuclear-genetic studies (Tishkoff et al. 1996a, 1998a, 1998b; Kidd et al. 1998) -- that populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis (Quintana-Murci et al. 1999)."

• "The result of HLA class I and class II antigen frequencies show that the Somali population appear more similar to Arab or Caucasoid than to African populations. The results are consistent with hypothesis, supported by cultural and historical evidence, of common origin of the Somali population."

What I got from the second quote was the "everyone is an out-of-Africa descendant due to these groups migrating" theory. What I get from the first and last quote, which function as intro and conclusion, sound rearwards? Like it conflicts with the middle quote:

→"populations in northeastern Africa may have diverged from those in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa early in the history of modern African populations and that a subset of this northeastern-African population migrated out of Africa and populated the rest of the globe. These conclusions are supported by recent mtDNA analysis." vs "Somali, as a representative East African population, seem to have experienced a detectable amount of Caucasoid maternal influence/The result of HLA class I and class II antigen frequencies show that the Somali population appear more similar to Arab or Caucasoid than to African populations." ←(That even accidentally sounds like it's saying the Somali population is not even in Africa; an African population is not a race, which they are in, and they wouldn't also be cut off from the now questionably termed "Negro" ancestry they come from if quote 3 is indeed the case in regards to "race," right?)

What I mean to ask is, by referencing the popular theory quote 3 presents, shouldn't it be that there's an influence of East/Northeastern African lineages in the young '"Caucasoid/etc groups and the rest of the world, or that Caucasians/etc have their DNA, not the other way around? I have spoken to Somalis who were also confused by phrases like this, whom also culturally think when it comes to their ancestors, "Caucasoid = our DNA influence, not our DNA = Caucasoid influence." It's not to say that there could be no modern influence/mixing amongst many now, but if the DNA came from those who migrated the world in the first place, or if Caucasians and the like descend from these migrators, it means that DNA was already present within those first humans beforehand and don't "need to be taken from a branch they are the ancestors of in order to have this or that," no? O.o; 98.154.247.191 (talk) 03:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)breathingfiberglass

All three passages acknowledge similar affinities; they just explain them differently. The middle one assumes that those affinities are due to the hypothetical Out-of-Africa migration, while the other two suggest that they are due to either back-migrations or common origins. Middayexpress (talk) 04:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!! I see it now!! :) 98.154.247.191 (talk) 04:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure. Middayexpress (talk) 04:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Pics

The photos on the Somali people page are almost all of the Darod clan (with the exception of one).

It must be clan diverse. I also have issue with the pictures of little known Somali people being used. Who are they?

Where is Mo Farah? Where is Magool? Where is Hassan Adan Samatar? Where is Somalia's First President? Where is K'Naan? Where is founder of Dahabshiil Abdirashid Duale? Where is Rageh Omar? Where are the household Somali figures?

Why have these people been ignored for second rate singers and little known local humanitarian workers who all hail from the same clan?

Put some established people's pictures up and stop with the clannism. It's blatantly obvious. If they were all well known and famous people, it would have been understandable but little known Somalis have been put up.

Actually, the images show Somalis from a variety of clans (although clan representation is not actually a wiki policy prerequisite). Several of the folks above are also already included on the diaspora pages. For the rest, the notables were selected according to copyright free availability, notability, and gender diversity, not clan composition. Middayexpress (talk) 13:38, 5 July 2013 (UTC)