Idilinaa
VIP
I wasn’t even talking about Hargeisa, which, as you rightly said, began as a farming settlement in the 19th century.What historians see is the settled Harari Ethio semites and the nomadic somalis around it, I dont know why youre waffling about habesha tents
Also Somalis were largely nomadic stop this agro pastoralist bs, that was when they were sedentary, some nomads in the 19th century settling like at hargeisa to do substistence farming doesnt mean majority were agro pastoralists thats just an outright lie, falsifying history wont take us anywhere
What I’m referring to is the broader Somali presence in areas around Harar, where clans like the Abaskuul, Gerri, Usbayahan, and Bartirre (the so-called Kombe) were settled agro-pastoralists and yes, they also lived inside Harar itself, integrated into its urban social and commercial fabric.
Same applies to Hawiye clans around the Upper Shabelle basin who were engaged in riverine farming alongside pastoralism for centuries. This isn’t revisionism; it’s basic ethno-geographic fact.
My broader point was about political structure: Somali rulers lived in coastal or interior towns, fortified settlements, or stone-built urban villas, while the ruling class of the Habesha often remained semi-nomadic, moving between highland camps. So if we’re talking about statecraft, bureaucracy, and urban continuity, Somali polities had more institutionalized urban nodes.
As for the “nomad” label it’s reductive. Most Somalis historically were mobile pastoralists and agro-pastoralists, operating in a seasonal transhumance pattern. That’s not the same as full nomadism. Labeling them as “nomadic” flattens the complexity of their economy and society, and that oversimplification is what distorts the historical perception.
I explained this more thoroughly elsewhere how the misuse of the “nomadic” label misleads people into thinking Somalis had no political or social infrastructure, when in fact they did just in a different form:
I think the way the term 'nomad' is often used creates misleading distinctions. Some people use it neutrally, but in many cases, it carries connotations that don't accurately reflect how Somali society functioned. You see it in the way certain European scholars like those Spanish archaeologists apply the term dismissively, as if pastoralism was a primitive or disorganized way of life. It’s also used to create artificial divisions between urban, agrarian populations and herding societies, when in reality, the boundaries were always fluid.
What’s frustrating is how this framing ignores the economic complexity and sustainability of livestock herding. Livestock wasn’t just a subsistence activity it was an economic engine, facilitating trade, wealth accumulation, and social organization. But the way some narratives are shaped, pastoralism is treated as inherently inferior to crop farming, when in reality, it was just as if not more strategic in many regions.
Take the Warsangeli, for example. Their principal town was Las Qoray, but they also had a network of smaller coastal settlements like Durduri, Elayo, Geelwayto, Ras Gahm, and Waqdariya. This pattern wasn’t unique, most Somali clans maintained settlements or economic hubs in parallel with their pastoral activities. Some groups focused on trade, others on fishing, and others on small-scale agriculture, while still engaging in livestock herding. It was a diversified system, not a simplistic ‘wandering herder’ existence.
Seasonal movement wasn’t random either it followed defined patterns within organized territorial structures. Clans had agreements over pastures, water sources, and migration routes, just as coastal settlements had trade networks and fortifications.
The idea that Somalis were purely 'nomadic' in the sense of being unstructured or constantly moving without stability is just inaccurate. What we actually had was a highly adaptable, multi-layered economic system that shifted based on season, need, and opportunity
Last edited: