Talk:Dʿmt

Why write protected? Correction needed

Hi! Why is this article write protected? There is an (albeit small) grammatical error around the word ”survive” in the 2nd sentence, that could ideally be corrected, thanks! Gunboz (talk) 01:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

No reason to call it Ethio-Sabean

This was not some type of alliance and ethio-sabean is not ground in evidence nor fact.

”epigraphic and archaeological evidence if diffuclt to reconcile with a south Arabian colony, no south Arabian ruler found and it is the local rulers claiming sovereignty over both”

this is 19th century fallacies ~2026-35457-9 (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Avanzini 2016, p. 127 is the reason it is called that. AFAIK, 2016 wasn't in the 19th century 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 16:58, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Well Avanzini has not defended the point well and as recent studies show it is completely unwarranted to call it such and undue attention was given to affinities with south Arabia ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:14, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Ethio-sabean

One source is not enough to use to substantiate a claim on such a contentious topic when we have newer sources contesting it, like González-Ruibal, Alfredo (2025).

Also the genetic evidence isn't really there, ethio-semites are much closer genetically to bronze age levantines and anatolians then to sabeans or modern day arabs.

Source: Molinaro, L., Montinaro, F., Yelmen, B. et al. West Asian sources of the Eurasian component in Ethiopians: a reassessment. Sci Rep 9, 18811 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55344-y ~2026-56982-6 (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

González-Ruibal 2025 doesnt contest this. It says that the two possibilities are either a full scale colonization, or a mass migration event of sabeans to the hoa which led to them assimilating with the people there. Either ways sabaeans are involved in the creation of this polity 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 04:25, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Again if there were mass migration there would be genetic evidence which there isn't at all. ~2026-59445-6 (talk) 19:20, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Also there are no historical texts of saba ever conquering or having ruled d'mt or any of the eritrean coast yes there is evidence on the northern somali coast with the temple there ebing directly ordered to be built by sabean rulersbut not on ethio-eritrea. ~2026-59445-6 (talk) 19:25, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

also involvement of sabeans doesn't mean the territory was under sheba which also another claim made by you. ~2026-59445-6 (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

What? The paper does not claim mass migration it claims a sabean diaspora intermingling with locals. The only thing it definitely claims as colonial woild be on the northern somali coast. There is the danakil desert between those places we are taking so to make a claim the full colonial enterprise stretched into where d'mt lies is a serious claim. ~2026-59445-6 (talk) 19:45, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

"we can perhaps discern two different models: a proper colonialist one along the northern Somali seaboard, with direct intervention of the state and aimed at the extraction of resources, and a diasporic model in the northern Horn [where Dʿmt was located], led by élites who soon mixed with local people, while maintaining ties with their ancestral homeland" 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 02:27, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

You know what You cited said the same thing as me how did you get mass migration from elite. Unless saba had elites in droves. And what this shows at max is that sabeans influenced d'mt and possibly helped it be founded never that it was under Seba which you also claim. Also you northern somali seaboard is infact not in anywhere in ethi-eritrea. So why did you claim colonization of that area when it was a different area with a massive and inhospitable desert inbetween. ~2026-63504-3 (talk) 09:46, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

You’re attacking a straw man regarding the genetics. I never argued for a total population replacement or mass migration in the sense of millions of people moving. I’m talking about the formation of the state itself. You are misinterpreting how ancient DNA (aDNA) modeling works. The Molinaro et al. (2019) study uses "Bronze Age Levantine/Anatolian" samples as proxies for the Eurasian component because we lack a comprehensive aDNA atlas for Ancient South Arabia from that specific period. In population genetics, when a specific reference population (like the Sabaeans) is unavailable, the model defaults to the closest available genetic profile, which, for most of the ancient Near East, is the "Levantine/Anatolian" Neolithic farmer signal.

It is a known fact in population genetics (see Sirak et al. 2024) that we lack ancient DNA samples from Iron Age South Arabia due to climate preservation issues. Because the model doesn't have a "Sabaean" reference category, it defaults to their closest genetic ancestors: Bronze Age Levantines and Anatolians. Even Molinaro et al. (2019), the very source you cited, admits this. The presence of "Levantine-like" DNA doesn't mean the migrants came from Syria; it means the Sabaeans (who were Semites) carried that same Levantine-derived genetic profile.

"how did you get mass migration from elite", I didn't. I quoted the paper that you've cited, which suggests a diasporic elite model. Historically, you do not need elites "in droves" to establish a polity or a cultural sphere. Historical state formation often involves a smaller, highly organized group establishing institutions over a larger local population (e.g., the Normans in England). A ruling class establishes the institutions, the script, and the religion. If the rulers of Dʿmt used the specifically Sabaean title of MKRB (Mukarrib), worshipped the Sabaean state god Almaqah, and built temples using South Arabian masonry, then the polity is fundamentally Ethio-Sabean in its political and cultural structure. If a "diasporic" group arrives, builds the Temple of Yeha (using South Arabian masonry), introduces the worship of Almaqah (the state god of Saba), and utilizes the title "MKRB", they are not just influencing the area. Regardless of whether it was a colony or an independent polity run by Sabean-acculturated elites, to claim that Sabaeans were just 'involved' without being foundational is contradictory.

Regarding the distinction between the Somali coast and Dʿmt: That actually hurts your argument. The paper suggests that the Somali coast was a resource extraction zone (aka a colony), while Dʿmt was a "diasporic" integration. Integration implies a deeper connection, not a weaker one. It means they didn't just extract resources and leave; they settled, intermarried, and co-founded a civilization using their ancestral political structures. The evidence from the Somali coast proves that the Sabaeans were, in fact, capable of establishing direct outposts and navigating the region.

There is the danakil desert between those places we are taking so to make a claim the full colonial enterprise stretched into where d'mt lies is a serious claim.
The presence of the Danakil desert is irrelevant to whether they could connect, since we know they did, because the inscriptions and architecture are there. The debate isn't about whether Saba conquered Dʿmt militarily, but whether Dʿmt was part of the Sabaean cultural-political sphere.

Also there are no historical texts of saba ever conquering or having ruled d'mt or any of the eritrean coast

Ja 585 and Ja 576+Ja 577 named conflicts and interactions with Abyssinian/Aksumite actors, and B-L Nashq ? mentioned long‑distance trade missions 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 10:48, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

This discussion is now bigger than the article. Instead of trying to restart a discussion for the xth time, try to expand the rest of the article 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:30, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

That is false, there is no evidence in Eritrea nor Ethiopia of them ever ruling there. All royal are local and written in proto-Ge’ez ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It makes no sense it literally states they are ruling over the Sabeans ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:11, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

No he doesn’t. He literally states that we can discern two models he does not speak of a mass migration’s ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:15, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

He says no such thing and clearly states that the archaeological evidence does not support it whatsoever ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 00:41, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Ethio-Sabaean is used a lot in sources, even by scholars who strongly disagree with the colonisation POV. As a term it's open to interpretation, readers can just interpret the Sabaean part as cultural influence if they like Kowal2701 (talk) 12:57, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

There was no Ethio- Sabean period

no south Arabian king nor queen is mentioned and all rulers are local ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:08, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It is misleading it gives impression that they were in power when they only literally state they were there to work. Which other recent source speaks of such? ~2026-10160-51 (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Searching "Ethio-Sabaean" into Google Scholar returns loads of recent hits, though a fair few are in scare quotes.

Wolf 2010 says

As a result, the approach to the spatial extent of that period and a polity of DCMT, as well as towards generalizing and ambiguous terms like "Pre-Aksumite" or "Ethio-Sabaean", is now being reviewed rather critically

Phillipson 2012 says

Sabaean’ and ‘Pre-Aksumite’ were seen as successive stages, but sometimes both were attributed to a ‘Pre-Aksumite’ period that was divided into two phases, the first being termed ‘Ethio-Sabaean’ and the second ‘Transitional’ or ‘Intermediate’. In any event, the appearance of the first inscriptions was seen as a watershed — largely, one must suspect, because conceptually it marked the end of prehistory. Inevitably, this led to emphasis on élite elements of ancient society and culture, with concomitant disregard for signs of underlying continuity.‘ Continued use of the term ‘Ethio-Sabaean’ has served to perpetuate the resultant misunderstanding.

Benoist et al 2020 say

These revisions make clear how problematic terms such as ‘Ethio-Sabaean’ are in describing such developments, including the term ‘pre-Aksumite’4 itself, and demonstrate the need to establish a more precise systematics for the study of pre-Aksumite archaeology.

Benoist et al 2021 say

[Kidane Mehret] is an example of a non-Ethio-Sabaean pre-Aksumite settlement which has prompted new discussions concerning the terminology to adopt for the 8th-5th centuries BCE: "Ethio-Sabaean" versus "pre-Aksumite". The issue is still pending.

For those defending the "Ethio-Sabaean" terminology, the period from the 4th century BCE to the 1st century CE was labeled the "Intermediate Period".

Given there's a dispute, I think was a Ethio-Sabaean/Pre-Aksumite kingdom located in present-day Eritrea and the northern Tigray Region of Ethiopia. citing Benoist et al would be npov? Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 12:40, 19 February 2026 (UTC)