On the arab nomadic states and why somalis lacked it

[Midas]

This something ive been thinking about after watching multiple videos about the middle east and the parts that caught my eye the most were when they talked about the states fromed by Bedouin tribes like the Saudi state or the dozen+ other ones that existed in the Arabian peninsula. I couldn't get my head around why these nomads were able to form these emirates/states in the desert even though they didnt have much.

What it ultimately came down to was that the penisula recived almost no rainfall and this meant the only real source of water were several large oases and the occasional valley. You couldn't just establish settlements anywhere everything was concentrated in these oasis and so regardless of how much trade routes might have declined these oasis towns could never be abandoned. This of course naturally encourages centralization since whoever controlled these oasis towns controlled the wealth from the trade. Thus you had these nomad states in a sense.

 

[Midas]

In comparison somalia recived on avg about 4x times the rainfall the penisula did. This meant that the entire country was pasture, and people could gather,trade, and establish settlements anywhere. There was no real need for everybody to gather in a few large settlements. We also outside the jubba valley dont have any massive sources of water like an oasis so this further impeded the development of any large settlements .

An example would be like how after two habar awal sub clans got into a dispute over berbera . One of them decided to leave and restablish Bulhar. Stuff like this meant there was no real way to take control of all the trade in a region and route it through a single town. So even though there might have been more wealth and livestock no single town could really have a monopoly on this in the way that an Arabian oasis town which was the only real settlemebt for hundreds and possibly thosuands of miles could.

 

[The Oponian Guild]

shrewd rulers+historical precedence, there were three Saudi states, two of whom were destroyed, to cement control during the foundation of the third Saudi state, the rulers and princes married into the tribes they came to rule over. A Prince or a king of theirs would have multiple offspring who had maternal relations to the individual tribes, that way the tribes had the ear of the ruling house, and bonds were cemented.

there is no viable Somali comparison, mainly due to the fact that there was no need for it, in times of war, sub clans would coalesce into large tribes and from there would be drawn manpower, and in times of peace everyone would go back to their grazing lands and disperse. people were happy with that they had and preferred their own to rule over them (symbolically ofc)

 

[Midas]

shrewd rulers+historical precedence, there were three Saudi states, two of whom were destroyed, to cement control during the foundation of the third Saudi state, the rulers and princes married into the tribes they came to rule over. A Prince or a king of theirs would have multiple offspring who had maternal relations to the individual tribes, that way the tribes had the ear of the ruling house, and bonds were cemented.

there is no viable Somali comparison, mainly due to the fact that there was no need for it, in times of war, sub clans would coalesce into large tribes and from there would be drawn manpower, and in times of peace everyone would go back to their grazing lands and disperse. people were happy with that they had and preferred their own to rule over them (symbolically ofc)

Im not even just talking the Saudi state but the other emirates they conquered and the states that existed centuries before the Saudis.

But yeah we had no need for it. On the northern somali coast you have like 15 different mini ports and the interior was just endless pasture. The life of an Arabian Bedouin was honestly far more difficult than a Somali geeljire. These Arab bedouin dudes had to band together for survival. And as long as you were able to conquer a few oasis towns you had yourself a state.

 

[Saxiix]

You might be right about it being based on who controlled the resources. From an Islamic point of view The king of the area when Nabi Yusuf was in prison had a dream of 7 skinny cows and 7 fat cows. When he told the king it would be 7 years of drought and 7 years of prosperity the king was able to prepare his kingdom for this. In good times his kingdom rose in power and the other kingdoms who needed help got absorbed into his kingdom over time thus starting the end of kings and the beginning of pharoes. From this point view your post makes sense.
I don't know how Egypt started out but i'm assuiming its the same thing the Nile being the resource? But then again it was too big for anyone to control in the begining but anyway its interesting. Though initially when I read your post I was gonna say its due to the seasonal travel issues where in winter time when the bedouins had to travel elsewhere and come back in the summer time. Bandits caused problems on the way there forced them to create a government of some sort to protect trade but it sounds wrong though. Resource might be the answer. @Midas

 

[Emir of Zayla]

What about the riverine regions + Benadir? I think if a Sultanate became prominent in that region they could tax heavily on produce, trade between the interior and coast, promote canoe trade in the Shabelle and Jubba, and also encourage agro-pastoralists to settle and focus on farming full-time like how Sufi orders used to. I don’t think the Geledis ever did that but maybe Ajuran/Mogadishan Sultanate did. I’ve always wondered why didn’t our two rivers become like the Nile in Egypt and Sudan with huge population density.

 

[Midas]

You might be right about it being based on who controlled the resources. From an Islamic point of view The king of the area when Nabi Yusuf was in prison had a dream of 7 skinny cows and 7 fat cows. When he told the king it would be 7 years of drought and 7 years of prosperity the king was able to prepare his kingdom for this. In good times his kingdom rose in power and the other kingdoms who needed help got absorbed into his kingdom over time thus starting the end of kings and the beginning of pharoes. From this point view your post makes sense.
I don't know how Egypt started out but i'm assuiming its the same thing the Nile being the resource? But then again it was too big for anyone to control in the begining but anyway its interesting. Though initially when I read your post I was gonna say its due to the seasonal travel issues where in winter time when the bedouins had to travel elsewhere and come back in the summer time. Bandits caused problems on the way there forced them to create a government of some sort to protect trade but it sounds wrong though. Resource might be the answer. @Midas

Eygpt is basically the Nile. There is nowhere else for people to live since as soon as you get a few km away from the Nile your in pure desert and even then like 80% of the pouplation lives in that small delta region and not the long narrow river you see.

For your main point about resources. Yeah it ultimately comes down to how much of the trade can be concentrated in a single place which will generate wealth. I mean what are urban centers at the end of the day ? The only thing you have to realize though is that there has to be a reason behind this concentration of wealth/trade in one location. In most of somalia there isnt one or even a couple towns where everything has to go through if you want to trade livestock or buy goods.

 

[Midas]

What about the riverine regions + Benadir? I think if a Sultanate became prominent in that region they could tax heavily on produce, trade between the interior and coast, promote canoe trade in the Shabelle and Jubba, and also encourage agro-pastoralists to settle and focus on farming full-time like how Sufi orders used to. I don’t think the Geledis ever did that but maybe Ajuran/Mogadishan Sultanate did. I’ve always wondered why didn’t our two rivers become like the Nile in Egypt and Sudan with huge population density.View attachment 371880

It has to with a couple things one is that because of how tropical souther somalia's climate is there is way more mosquitos and malaria then in places like the Nile. There is also the fact that our discharge rate is much lower and we dont really have a decent floodplain which is where the most agriculture took place.

Take for example the niger river . In mali it creates the inner niger delta. This is where the legendary timbuktu as well as the other cities of the mali empire and stuff where located.

If you could zoom in youd probably find all the other big anicnet urban centers in that region

 

[Midas]

This red circle is basically that inner niger delta region.

Now if you take a look at the maps of both the mali empire and the songhai empire . You'll see that all those cities of these anicent empires are all basically concentrated in that inner delta region that I circled.

 

[Mohamedamiin120]

What about the riverine regions + Benadir? I think if a Sultanate became prominent in that region they could tax heavily on produce, trade between the interior and coast, promote canoe trade in the Shabelle and Jubba, and also encourage agro-pastoralists to settle and focus on farming full-time like how Sufi orders used to. I don’t think the Geledis ever did that but maybe Ajuran/Mogadishan Sultanate did. I’ve always wondered why didn’t our two rivers become like the Nile in Egypt and Sudan with huge population density.View attachment 371880

Because the Shabelle River is not a big river and can’t be used to make a empire. The Jubba River is big but it was only captured by Somalis in the 19th century, before that only the east bank was Somali.

When we took the river and pushed the Borana to far-away lands, we actually did develop it quite well- maybe a strong state could have formed there if not for colonialism starting soon after we took it.

And a state that springs from the Jubba River already exists- you just won’t like it if they ever grow to predominance