All those who were blabbing their mouth at me for being certain that the Harla were Ethio-Semitic speakers are now coping or silent. Futuh was very clear that these were two different ethnicities that also had hostilities. It barely mentions any clan beefs between the different Somalis (Darood, Isaaqs & Dir) yet mentions beefs with the Somalis & Harla.
I still don’t believe the Hararis are descendants of the Harla but rather medieval refugees fleeing the Oromos. The Harla tho were simply absorbed by the Oromos who absorbed Ethio-Semites all over the highlands in their expansions which also shows in their DNa.
I remember you (?) were pushing the Ethio semetic settlements deep into the north west. I think there is little evidence for that. Those archeological sites in the Harar plateau and around Abasa don’t suggest displacement of an Ethio Semitic group (or of any group for that matter). You also have to explain who made all those camel carvings and rock paintings in “Eastern Ethiopia”.
I also think you should not rush into agreeing with the amhaar. Your zeal in being right over other Somalis is pushing you into endorsing an extreme position. He wrote that the “adalites were Ethio Semites”. That is a big gigantic step removed from saying some Harla or all Harla were Ethio Semites. The Harla are actually an over exaggerated group and they were never some big civilisation or empire as mythology makes them out to be.
In fact, they are rarely mentioned as being anything extraordinary in the texts of the wars with the Habash prior to the Futuh. They were just one community or perhaps small principality who later came to be absorbed into Barr Sacad Diin aka the Walashama dynasty. If the Harla were so powerful the Imam would not have been chased around by the governor of Zeila and “his Somalis” at the beginning of the Futuh.
Adal at times encompassed large swathes of territory spanning across different communal groups and occupations. Somalis are deeply tied to the sultanate Adal. The Futuh alone proves that, as well as numerous medieval sources, and also Somali culture (through the zaylici poems sang about imam Sacidiin, lineage maintained, etc). Somalis were the conduit which linked the Yemeni Rasulid dynasty with East Africa. No other group has ties to early Islamic settlements such as Jabart and zaylac than Somalis. The Amhaar is making an extremely disingenuous argument when he superimposes Adal and Harla into one. Harla was not Adal vice versa. These groups were also all Muslims anyhow amd their nemesis has always been orthodox Amhara.
While the Futuh may suggest Somalis and Harlas as being two different groups, it also shows intermarriage between the two groups and deep ties of the Imam to Somalis. I don’t think you can say the Harla were completely replaced by Cushitic speakers when we see the Cushitic speakers mixing with them right there in the Futuh. Even we assume they were Ethio Semitic speakers or groups, no group is closely tied to them as Somalis.
Another side point people have to understand is that ethnicity did not function like it does now. Somali scholars often settled into pagan tribes or set up learning centres to advance Islam. When those scholars and elites married into those communities, their progeny became of them ie the community they settled into. This is the reason many of those groups like the Argobba et al claim descent from sheikhs who came from the Zeila-Berbera corridor; some of those sheikhs are possibly mentioned in the futuh. The point I am making is that, even those Ethio Semitic speaking Muslims have deep ties to Somali traders and ulema. The very name and nisbah given to East African Muslims came to known by (Saylic, Berberi, Jabarti) are linked and related to Somali scholars and islam.
I consider it nonsensical to divorce Somalis from the Adal sultanate because some Harla may have been Ethio Semitic. Sultanate barr Sacad Diin was much bigger than Harla.