text:
BS EN 13230-4-2016
July 27, 2017 | Author: Syed Fadzil Syed Mohamed | Category: Engineering Tolerance, Prestressed Concrete, Structural Load, European Commission, Reference
DOWNLOAD PDF - 1.9MB
networking...
BS EN 13230-4:2016
BSI Standards Publication
Railway applications — Track — Concrete sleepers and bearers Part 4: Prestressed bearers for switches and crossings
National foreword This British Standard is the UK implementation of EN 13230-4:2016. It supersedes BS EN 13230-4:2009 which is withdrawn. The UK participation in its preparation was entrusted to Technical Committee RAE/2, Railway Applications - Track. A list of organizations represented on this committee can be obtained on request to its secretary. This publication does not purport to include all the necessary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. © The British Standards Institution 2016. Published by BSI Standards Limited 2016 ISBN 978 0 580 84808 7 ICS 45.080; 91.100.30; 93.100 Compliance with a British Standard cannot confer immunity from legal obligations. This British Standard was published under the authority of the Standards Policy and Strategy Committee on 31 May 2016. Amendments issued since publication Date
Text affected
EUROPEAN STANDARD NORME EUROPÉENNE EUROPÄISCHE NORM
ICS 91.100.30; 93.100
Supersedes EN 13230-4:2009
Railway applications - Track - Concrete sleepers and bearers - Part 4: Prestressed bearers for switches and crossings Applications ferroviaires - Voie - Traverses et supports en béton - Partie 4 : Supports précontraints pour appareil de voie
Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Gleis- und Weichenschwellen aus Beton - Teil 4: Spannbetonschwellen für Weichen und Kreuzungen
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 4 March 2016. CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre or to any CEN member. This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre has the same status as the official versions. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels © 2016 CEN
All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members.
Ref. No. EN 13230-4:2016 E
BS EN 13230-4:2016 EN 13230-4:2016 (E)
European foreword....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 1
Scope .................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Normative references .................................................................................................................................... 6
3 3.1 3.2
Terms, definitions and symbols ................................................................................................................. 6 Terms and definitions ................................................................................................................................... 6 Symbols ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4
Special requirement ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Characteristic bending moments .............................................................................................................. 7 Positioning of fastening components....................................................................................................... 7 Tolerances ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 General ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 Tolerance of planeness ................................................................................................................................. 8 Tolerances of fastening positioning ......................................................................................................... 8 Tolerance of vertical deviation from straight....................................................................................... 9 Distance from the end of the bearer to the nearest cast-in component ...................................... 9
5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3 5.5 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 5.5.4 5.6 5.6.1 5.6.2 5.6.3 5.6.4
Product testing ................................................................................................................................................. 9 General ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Test arrangements....................................................................................................................................... 10 Test procedures ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Test loads ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 Static test ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 Fatigue test ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Acceptance criteria ...................................................................................................................................... 14 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Static test ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 Fatigue test ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Design approval tests ................................................................................................................................. 15 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Bending moments evaluation .................................................................................................................. 15 Concrete ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Product inspection....................................................................................................................................... 15 Routine tests .................................................................................................................................................. 15 General ............................................................................................................................................................. 15 Positive or negative bending moment evaluations for static test .............................................. 15 Concrete ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Product checking .......................................................................................................................................... 16
Manufacturing ............................................................................................................................................... 16 Manufacturing rules .................................................................................................................................... 16 Additional marking ..................................................................................................................................... 16
Data to be supplied ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Data supplied by the purchaser .............................................................................................................. 16 Data provided by the supplier ................................................................................................................. 16
Annex A (normative) Detailed drawings of the test arrangements ......................................................... 17 A.1
Articulated support...................................................................................................................................... 17
A.2
Resilient pad ................................................................................................................................................... 18
Annex ZA (informative) Relationship between this European Standard and the Essential Requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC ........................................................................................ 19 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................................. 21
European foreword This document (EN 13230-4:2016) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 256 "Railway applications", the secretariat of which is held by DIN.
This document supersedes EN 13230-4:2009.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by November 2016, and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at the latest by November 2016. This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and the European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC.
For relationship with EU Directive 2008/57/EC, see informative Annex ZA, which is an integral part of this document.
This European Standard is one of the EN 13230 series "Railway applications – Track – Concrete sleepers and bearers", which consist of the following parts: — Part 1: General requirements;
— Part 2: Prestressed monoblock sleepers; — Part 3: Twin-block reinforced sleepers;
— Part 4: Prestressed bearers for switches and crossings; — Part 5: Special elements; — Part 6: Design.
There is a change in the wording of the documents of EN 13230 (series) "design bending moment" is replaced by "characteristic bending moment" and "test bending moment".
According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organisations of the following countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
Introduction This part of the EN 13230 series defines the specific requirements dedicated to prestressed bearers for switches and crossings. These are additional requirements to EN 13230-1:2016 that are necessary to have a complete standard dealing with prestressed bearers for switches and crossings. The document specifies the test arrangements, the test procedures and the corresponding acceptance criteria.
1 Scope This part of the EN 13230 series defines additional technical criteria and control procedures as well as specific tolerance limits related to manufacturing and testing prestressed bearers for switches and crossings with a maximum length of 8,5 m.
Bearers longer than 8,5 m are considered as special elements and are covered by EN 13230-5:2016.
2 Normative references
The following documents, in whole or in part, are normatively referenced in this document and are indispensable for its application. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies. EN 206, Concrete - Specification, performance, production and conformity
EN 13230-1:2016, Railway applications – Track – Concrete sleepers and bearers – Part 1: General requirements FprEN 10138 (all parts), Prestressing steels
3 Terms, definitions and symbols 3.1 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in EN 13230-1:2016 and the following apply: 3.1.1 prestressed monoblock bearer bearer manufactured using pre-tensioned or post-tensioned tendons
3.1.2 characteristic positive bending moment Mk,pos positive bending moment at any position of the bearer
3.1.3 characteristic negative bending moment Mk,neg negative bending moment at any position of the bearer
3.2 Symbols For the purposes of this document, the symbols listed in Table 1 apply. Table 1 — Symbols
Positive initial reference test load
Test load which produces first crack at the bottom of the bearer
Fb0n Fbrn
Fb0,05
Fb0,05n FbB
FbBn Fbu kb
kbB kt
Negative initial reference test load
Test load which produces first crack at the top of the bearer
Maximum test load for which a crack width of 0,05 mm persists at the bottom of the bearer after removal of the load Maximum test load for which a crack width of 0,05 mm persists at the top of the bearer after removal of the load Maximum test load which cannot be increased when the bottom of the bearer is cracked Maximum test load which cannot be increased when the top of the bearer is cracked Lower test load for the fatigue test: Fbu = 0,25 × Fb0 Impact coefficient for positive static test
kN kN kN kN kN kN kN
Impact coefficient for negative static test Impact coefficient for fatigue test
Factor used for calculation of acceptance criteria for first crack formation in static tests
4 Special requirement
4.1 Characteristic bending moments The bearer shall be designed with positive and negative characteristic bending moment capacities with the objective of keeping it straight.
4.2 Positioning of fastening components
An area of the concrete section shall be specified by the purchaser to be free from prestressing tendons for the location of fastening components. If required by the purchaser, the design of the bearer shall provide for the repair or replacement of the embedded fastening components.
4.3 Tolerances 4.3.1 General The maximum tolerances specified in EN 13230-1:2016, 6.1 apply to concrete bearers.
In case of early dimensional inspection of the concrete element, the quality plan shall take into account further shortening of the element. Measurement of tolerances shall be checked not before 48 h after transfer of prestressing forces. 4.3.2 Tolerance of planeness
The maximum deviation of the total rail seat or base plate area is as follows: — planeness: 1 mm;
— variation of planeness with regard to 2 points 150 mm apart: 0,5 mm. 4.3.3 Tolerances of fastening positioning
The tolerances of the embedded fastening components positioning shall be measured in accordance with Figure 1.
Figure 1 — Measurement of tolerances on fastening components positioning Tolerance on dimensions A and D (on the same support area):
±1,0 mm
Tolerance between the last cast-in component and the end of the bearer (E):
±10 mm
Tolerance on dimensions B and C (between two separate support areas):
The tolerances specified above may be varied by the purchaser in case of special requirements and shall be defined on the drawings submitted by the purchaser.
These tolerances shall apply to all embedded components with either direct or indirect fastening system.
4.3.4 Tolerance of vertical deviation from straight Figure 2 shows the vertical deviation measurement.
Key 1 rigid support 2 bearer 3 support (50 mm × 50 mm section) across width of bearer 4 straight datum 5 support across width of bearer 6 top surface of bearer 7 vertical deviation measurement area 8 measurement base
Figure 2 — Vertical deviation measurement
Vertical deviation in both directions is measured on a 3,6 m long base as on Figure 2.
Alternative measurement methods can be proposed by the manufacturer and agreed with the purchaser. Bearers shorter than 4 m need not be checked.
Maximum allowed deviation is 3 mm on a 3,6 m base.
For bearer length above 6 m, maximum allowed deviation is agreed between supplier and purchaser.
4.4 Distance from the end of the bearer to the nearest cast-in component
The supplier defines the prestress anchoring area and special care to be taken into account for cast-in components near to the end of the bearer.
5 Product testing 5.1 General
This section defines the testing regime and rules for acceptance of concrete bearers. The layouts of the test arrangements are defined in this section.
5.2 Test arrangements The arrangement for the static and fatigue tests is shown in Figure 3.
Key 1 rigid support 2 articulated support (see Annex A for details) 3 resilient pad (see Annex A for details) 4 bearer
Figure 3 — Test arrangement
For the static test, the bearer shall be arranged as in Figure 3.
For the fatigue test, the load Fb shall be applied at the centre section of the bearer.
5.3 Test procedures 5.3.1 Test loads
Fb0 and Fb0n are calculated from the geometry given in Figure 3 using Formula (1) and Formula (2): Fb0 =
M k , pos
Fb0n =
in kN
M k ,ne g 0,35
5.3.2 Static test The static test procedure is shown in Figures 4 and 5 for the positive and negative bending moments.
The maximum load applied is Fb0,05 or FbB whichever is reached first.
Key 1 load 2 time 3 crack checking (maximum duration: 5 min) 4 120 kN/min maximum 5 from 10 s minimum to 5 min maximum A required part of test B optional part of test
Figure 4 — Static test procedure for design approval test
Key 1 load 2 time 3 crack checking (duration from 10s minimum to 5 min maximum) 4 120 kN/min maximum
Figure 5 — Static test procedure for the routine test
Value of kt is adjusted according to the age of bearer at the time of testing.
5.3.3 Fatigue test The fatigue test procedure is shown in Figures 6 and 7.
Key 1 load 2 time 3 frequency (f) between 2 Hz and 10 Hz (identical frequency maintained during duration of test) for 2 million cycles 4 increase of load at 120 kN/min NOTE
First cycle as in Figure 4.
Figure 6 — Fatigue test procedure
Key 1 load 2 time
Figure 7 — Dynamic load application for fatigue test
5.4 Acceptance criteria 5.4.1 General The tests are managed according to the requirements of EN 13230-1:2016, Clause 7. The crack width is measured following the rules of EN 13230-1:2016, 7.2. 5.4.2 Static test
The acceptance criteria for the static design approval and routine tests are defined as follows: — Fbr > kt x Fb0
— Fbrn > kt x Fb0n
— FbB or Fb0,05 > kb × Fb0
— FbBn or Fb0,05n > kbn × Fb0n
The coefficients kb and kbn shall be provided by the purchaser.
5.4.3 Fatigue test
The acceptance criteria for the fatigue test after 2 × 106 cycles are as follows: — crack width is ≤ 0,1 mm when loaded at Fb0; — crack width is ≤ 0,05 mm when unloaded;
— FbB > kbB × Fb0 when load continuously increased at a rate of 120 kN/min from unloaded condition until failure FbB. The coefficient kbB shall be provided by the purchaser.
5.5 Design approval tests 5.5.1 General The design approval tests to be carried out on the bearer and concrete comprise the tests already defined in this standard. All test results shall meet the acceptance criteria. Each bearer shall be used for one test only. 5.5.2 Bending moments evaluation 5.5.2.1 General The design approval tests should approve the design bending capacity for the defined cross section.
These tests are carried out in accordance with the test arrangement shown in Figure 3 and the test procedure shown in Figure 4. The maximum length of the bearer for fatigue test shall be 3,0 m.
5.5.2.2 Static tests
Static tests are carried out on two bearers for positive bending moments and two bearers for negative bending moments (5.3.2, Figure 4). 5.5.2.3 Fatigue test
Fatigue test is carried out on one bearer for positive test (5.3.3, Figures 6 and 7). Optional test at the request of the purchaser. 5.5.3 Concrete
The properties of the concrete shall be established in accordance with EN 206. 5.5.4 Product inspection
Product inspection shall be carried out on all bearers required for design approval tests including dimensions and tolerances in accordance with EN 13230-1:2016, Table 1 and the surface finish of the bearer in accordance with EN 13230-1:2016, 6.3.
5.6 Routine tests 5.6.1 General
The routine tests shall be carried out in order to find any variation in the quality of the concrete element, leading to an unacceptable quality level. The number and the length of samples and rates of tests are given by the quality plan of the manufacturing unit. 5.6.2 Positive or negative bending moment evaluations for static test
This test shall be carried out in accordance with the test arrangement shown in Figure 3 and the test procedure shown in Figure 5 and acceptance criteria defined in 5.4. For testing bearers longer than 3,0 m, account shall be taken of the self-weight of the overhanging parts.
5.6.3 Concrete
Tests shall be carried out according to EN 13230-1:2016, 7.4. 15
5.6.4 Product checking The position of the embedded components and the vertical deviation of the bearer shall be checked in accordance with 4.3.2 and 4.3.3, respectively at the frequency detailed in the quality plan of the manufacturing unit. The position of the tendons shall be checked in accordance with EN 13230-1:2016.
6.1 Manufacturing rules Before starting production, the supplier shall complete a production file for manufacturing data, which shall be submitted in confidence to the purchaser and shall include: a) water/cement ratio and tolerance;
b) weight of each component of concrete plus tolerance;
c) grading curves for each component of concrete plus tolerance; d) properties of concrete after seven days and after 28 days;
e) maximum relaxation for prestressing tendons after 1 000 h according to EN 10138 standard;
description of the prestressing system including prestressing force and tolerance on each tendon;
g) methods of concrete vibration;
h) curing time and temperature cycle; i) j)
minimum concrete compressive strength before releasing prestressing tendons; method used for releasing prestressing force;
k) stacking rules after manufacturing.
The sample bearers submitted for design tests shall comply with the manufacturing data.
6.2 Additional marking
In addition to EN 13230-1:2016, 6.4, there shall be sufficient permanent marking to identify layout position of the bearer in the track as required by the purchaser.
7 Data to be supplied
7.1 Data supplied by the purchaser All data specified in EN 13230-1:2016, 4.4.2 with the addition of the following:
a) coefficients: kb, kbn and kbB if required;
b) geometrical layout of each individual cast in component for each bearer.
7.2 Data provided by the supplier
All data specified in EN 13230-1:2016, 4.4.3. 16
Annex A (normative)
Detailed drawings of the test arrangements A.1 Articulated support This shall be as shown in Figure A.1.
Dimensions in millimetres
Key Steel: Minimum hardness Brinell: HBW > 240 General tolerances: ± 0,1 mm a minimum length = bottom width of the concrete bearer at the rail seat + 20 mm b high pressure lubricant
Figure A.1 — Articulated support
A.2 Resilient pad This shall be as shown in Figure A.2.
Key Material: Elastomer Static secant stiffness measured between 0,3 MPa and 2 MPa: 1 ≤ C ≤ 4 N/mm3 a minimum length = bottom width of the concrete bearer at the rail seat + 20 mm
Figure A.2 — Resilient pad
Annex ZA (informative)
Relationship between this European Standard and the Essential Requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC
This European Standard has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN/CENELEC/ETSI by the European Commission and the European Free Trade Association to provide a means of conforming to Essential Requirements of the Directive 2008/57/EC 1).
Once this standard is cited in the Official Journal of the European Union under that Directive and has been implemented as a national standard in at least one Member State, compliance with the clauses of this standard given in Table ZA.1 for Infrastructure confers, within the limits of the scope of this standard, a presumption of conformity with the corresponding Essential Requirements of that Directive and associated EFTA regulations.
This Directive 2008/57/EC adopted on 17th June 2008 is a recast of the previous Directives 96/48/EC 'Interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system' and 2001/16/EC 'Interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system' and revisions thereof by 2004/50/EC 'Corrigendum to Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system'. 1)
Table ZA.1 — Correspondence between this European Standard, the Commission Regulation N° 1299/2014 of 18 November 2014 on the technical specifications for interoperability relating to the 'infrastructure' subsystem of the rail system in the European Union (published in the Official Journal L 356, 12.12.2014, p.1) and Directive 2008/57/EC Clause(s)/ subclause(s) of this European Standard The whole standard is applicable
Chapter/§/annexes of the TSI
Corresponding text, articles/§/annexes of the Directive 2008/57/EC
6.Assessment of conformity of interoperability constituents and EC verification of the subsystems
Annex III, Essential requirements
6.1.2.Application of modules
6.1.Interoperability constituents
6.1.4.EC declaration of conformity for interoperability constituents 6.1.4.4.EC declaration of conformity for track sleepers 6.1.5.Particular assessment procedures for interoperability constituents 6.1.5.2.Assessment of sleepers Appendix A – Assessment of interoperability constituents
Table 36: Assessment of interoperability constituents for the EC declaration of conformity – 5.3.3 Track sleepers
1 General requirements
Clauses 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3 1.5 Technical compatibility
Comments According 5.3.3 of the TSI track sleepers are interoperability constituents.
According to part 1 of the standard, the purchaser has to define the L1 dimension in order to ensure the required track gauge. Assessment of the sleeper is based on L1 dimension.
Warning – Other requirements and other EU Directives may be applicable to the product(s) falling within the scope of this standard.
EN ISO 9001, Quality management systems - Requirements (ISO 9001)
EN 13230-5:2016, Railway applications – Track – Concrete sleepers and bearers – Part 5: Special elements
prEN 13230-6:2015, Railway applications – Track – Concrete sleepers and bearers – Part 6: Design
This page deliberately left blank
NO COPYING WITHOUT BSI PERMISSION EXCEPT AS PERMITTED BY COPYRIGHT LAW
British Standards Institution (BSI) BSI is the national body responsible for preparing British Standards and other standards-related publications, information and services. BSI is incorporated by Royal Charter. British Standards and other standardization products are published by BSI Standards Limited. About us
Reproducing extracts
We bring together business, industry, government, consumers, innovators and others to shape their combined experience and expertise into standards -based solutions.
For permission to reproduce content from BSI publications contact the BSI Copyright & Licensing team.
The knowledge embodied in our standards has been carefully assembled in a dependable format and refined through our open consultation process. Organizations of all sizes and across all sectors choose standards to help them achieve their goals.
Information on standards We can provide you with the knowledge that your organization needs to succeed. Find out more about British Standards by visiting our website at bsigroup.com/standards or contacting our Customer Services team or Knowledge Centre.
Buying standards You can buy and download PDF versions of BSI publications, including British and adopted European and international standards, through our website at bsigroup.com/shop, where hard copies can also be purchased. If you need international and foreign standards from other Standards Development Organizations, hard copies can be ordered from our Customer Services team.
Copyright in BSI publications All the content in BSI publications, including British Standards, is the property of and copyrighted by BSI or some person or entity that owns copyright in the information used (such as the international standardization bodies) and has formally licensed such information to BSI for commercial publication and use. Save for the provisions below, you may not transfer, share or disseminate any portion of the standard to any other person. You may not adapt, distribute, commercially exploit, or publicly display the standard or any portion thereof in any manner whatsoever without BSI's prior written consent.
Storing and using standards Standards purchased in soft copy format: • A British Standard purchased in soft copy format is licensed to a sole named user for personal or internal company use only. • The standard may be stored on more than 1 device provided that it is accessible by the sole named user only and that only 1 copy is accessed at any one time. • A single paper copy may be printed for personal or internal company use only. Standards purchased in hard copy format: • A British Standard purchased in hard copy format is for personal or internal company use only. • It may not be further reproduced – in any format – to create an additional copy. This includes scanning of the document. If you need more than 1 copy of the document, or if you wish to share the document on an internal network, you can save money by choosing a subscription product (see 'Subscriptions').
Subscriptions Our range of subscription services are designed to make using standards easier for you. For further information on our subscription products go to bsigroup.com/subscriptions. With British Standards Online (BSOL) you'll have instant access to over 55,000 British and adopted European and international standards from your desktop. It's available 24/7 and is refreshed daily so you'll always be up to date. You can keep in touch with standards developments and receive substantial discounts on the purchase price of standards, both in single copy and subscription format, by becoming a BSI Subscribing Member. PLUS is an updating service exclusive to BSI Subscribing Members. You will automatically receive the latest hard copy of your standards when they're revised or replaced. To find out more about becoming a BSI Subscribing Member and the benefits of membership, please visit bsigroup.com/shop. With a Multi-User Network Licence (MUNL) you are able to host standards publications on your intranet. Licences can cover as few or as many users as you wish. With updates supplied as soon as they're available, you can be sure your documentation is current. For further information, email [email protected]
Revisions Our British Standards and other publications are updated by amendment or revision. We continually improve the quality of our products and services to benefit your business. If you find an inaccuracy or ambiguity within a British Standard or other BSI publication please inform the Knowledge Centre.
Useful Contacts Customer Services Tel: +44 345 086 9001 Email (orders): [email protected] Email (enquiries): [email protected] Subscriptions Tel: +44 345 086 9001 Email: [email protected] Knowledge Centre Tel: +44 20 8996 7004 Email: [email protected] Copyright & Licensing Tel: +44 20 8996 7070 Email: [email protected]
BSI Group Headquarters 389 Chiswick High Road London W4 4AL UK
Report "BS EN 13230-4-2016"
Share & Embed "BS EN 13230-4-2016"


text:
Paid Press Release Submission
GAMER nEWS
CryptoNexa
Altcoin Stay Behind, and BTC Remains High, Bitcoin Reaches the Price of $17k
Chain-link a Bubble On-Chain Data: DeFi-Demand
Wynn-EX Review – Important Questions to Ask about the Exchange
$2.4Bn Bitcoin Futures Just Expired… Is The Value of Bitcoin About to CRASH?
The Australian Investment company Departs Gold and moves for Bitcoin (BTC):
Bitcoin Gets Warnings from Bull Trap after Shoots over $18k Handle
Bitcoin Cash Collectibles RPG Blockchain Game Built on Bitcoin Cash (BCH) Completes Flipstarter Business Plan
Ren Protocol helped in Minting Synthetic Bitcoin Cash, Inter-Blockchain Liquidity
Can a decentralized Blockchain ever succeed?
Movement from Bitcoin to Blockchain: A step by Banks and Tech Companies
How Panademic Affects Your Income Tax Return
Unraveling the secrets of eToro Copy Trading system
MacAndro initiated Cryptocurrency Exchange App Development
Facebook seeks a new way to act against false content published by politicians
Sell Ancira collect AMLO new to AHMSA
Aggregate Market Capitalization Price of Ethereum in Circulation up to 2-Billion Dollars:
Veteran Analyst says, soon the Altcoins would gain on Bitcoin
Ethereum Network Fees moves beyond Bitcoin Transaction Fees
Acceptance of Cryptocurrency Payments in Austria
Electrical Storm Disturbs The Political Courtyard
Get a Jumpstart on Your 2020 Taxes Now
Some Ways of being Successful in Day Trading
Top 7 Penetration Testing Software & Tools
Top 5 Movies About Casino Games for Players
A New Debt Crisis Is Looming
Things That Are Not Saved With Teleworking
Papa John Is Against The Current
Businesses That Emerge Stronger From The Emergency
What Has Happened To Children Bank Accounts
Covid-19 Crisis Drives The Digital Mortgage Market
In the harshest days of the health emergency caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, many wondered what confinement would have been like without the internet .
Now it seems clear that the network was not only used to find information , be in contact with others , entertain or place orders , among other things, but that it was also a means to which people went more than in the times before the emergency to find products banking, especially mortgages.
Internet searches for accounts in the first six months of the year – of which more than three were under the state of alarm – increased 18% compared to the same period last year. In the case ofMortgage loans , this rise reached 23.4%, according to data from the bank comparator iAhorro prepared by Google.
Within this framework, iAhorro emphasizes that "digital banks have found an opportunity in the crisis", since this business has become an essential weapon for financial institutions in their efforts to overcome the consequences of the pandemic and overcome the competition.
In the very special circumstances in which they had to operate, while some banks recorded heavy losses on the stock market motivated by uncertainty and fear of an increase in the delinquency rate, " entities that only operate online have been able to offer a better service to their clients ", in the opinion of the comparator's Mortgage Director, Simone Colombelli.
In this way, during the first half of 2020, EVO —the 100% digital entity, owned by Bankinter— formalized mortgages for a total volume of 124.4 million euros, which is 11% more than what was registered in the entire last year.
A growth that "contrasts with the fall in new mortgage formalizations according to the Association of Property Registrars", underlines the director of Retail Banking of the entity, Eduardo Vioque. An advance on the data for May shows a decrease of 25.8% in mortgages constituted with respect to the same month last year.
Likewise, from ING —whose business is divided between digital, telephone and face-to-face channels through the 29 offices it has in Spain— assure that "in the strongest months of the pandemic, between March and May, online won more weight compared to the same period of the previous year ", going from 61% that it represented in the pre-pandemic times, to 74%.
With regard to mortgages, in April the proportion of applications through non-contact channels grew from 68% to 94%.
For the general director of Pibank, Begoña Martínez, the rise in the contracting of these products that her entity registered – for which she does not provide figures – is the result, among other reasons, of "having a 100% digital process", which allowed to avoid the impact of confinement on their activity .
As happened in other aspects of life and the economy, the health alarm has also brought more digitization to the process of contracting mortgages and has reinforced the trend towards greater acceptance of these products that had been registering since the end of the year past.
"It is possible that without the coronavirus crisis we would have had to wait five or 10 years to see all this," says Colombelli, for whom "confinement has been the great driver of the digital mortgage."
But, how can it be explained that online contracting (except for the signature before the notary, which is always in person) of a complex product that often requires a great debt effort on the part of the client, such as the mortgage, can be successful? The interlocutors answer by highlighting the advantages of this method.
" Not having to leave home to manage it these months has been something that users have valued positively," says Martínez. "Like all digital products, they give greater convenience to the customer, since they can manage it when and from where they need it," sources from ING agree.
"The formalization processes that we offer are much simpler than the traditional ones, because they avoid the discomfort of going to the office or being aware of the crossing of papers for many days", summarizes Vioque.
The change is so evident that "from now on a new scenario arises in which the mortgage will only be digital", predicts Colombelli. Along the same lines, Vioque foresees that "the digital acceleration that the country has experienced will further increase the number of users interested in digital mortgages."
Something that ING sources agree on, for whom "the increased use of digital channels was a trend that was already taking place and it is likely that, due to the situation experienced, it will accelerate."
Despite being convinced that this trend will be confirmed in the medium and long term, Martínez clarifies: "We also know that it is a process that will take time." For this reason, some entities offer, together with a fully digitized option, and to varying degrees, the possibility of using a personalized channel.
Pibank, for example, has five physical offices so that the user can carry out procedures in person. And at ING, clients always have the same manager, regardless of the channel they choose.
Something similar to what happens in Mediolanum, an entity that does not sell mortgages 100% online , but has digitized the management of procedures and documentation, keeping its network of personal advisers active.
Bitcoin Investor prosecuted IRS for illegal Seizing of Financial Records
Jim Harper, a famous Bitcoin investor, has prosecuted the United States Internal Revenue Service, its commissioner, and several other federal agents. He asserted that...
Awi Khan19 July 2020
On Monday. July 13, Chain-link rally more than 34-percent to moves the level of $8.480 all-time high. As long as the price redress back...
How Bitcoin is sanctioning the Unbanked but Face Injustice
When people noticed a miserable downfall of established financial models of business, with crypto as the fate, they shift to decentralized peer-to-peer technology. For...
Overnight Crypto Market Drops 10 Billion US Dollars
The entire market capitalization of more than 5,700 cryptocurrencies breathing lost approximately 10 billion US Dollars throughout the overnight exchanging sessions. Most considerable crypto...
Copyright © 2020 cryptonexa.com | All Rights Reserved

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Buffalo Center ist eine Kleinstadt (mit dem Status "City") im Winnebago County im US-amerikanischen Bundesstaat Iowa. Im Jahr 2010 hatte Buffalo Center 905 Einwohner, deren Zahl sich bis 2013 auf 883 verringerte. Das U.S. Census Bureau hat bei der Volkszählung 2020 eine Einwohnerzahl von 857 ermittelt.

Geografie
Buffalo Center liegt im Norden Iowas, 13 km südlich der Grenze zu Minnesota. Die vom Mississippi gebildete Grenze Iowas zu Wisconsin verläuft rund 240 km östlich.

Die geografischen Koordinaten von Buffalo Center sind 43°23′09″ nördlicher Breite und 93°56′48″ westlicher Länge. Die Stadt erstreckt sich über eine Fläche von 2,77 km² und ist die größte Ortschaft innerhalb der Buffalo Township.

Nachbarorte von Buffalo Center sind Rake (13,2 km nördlich), Frost in Minnesota (23,7 km in der gleichen Richtung), Thompson (15,4 km östlich), Woden (19,9 km südlich), Titonka (24,2 km südsüdwestlich) und Lakota (12,8 km westlich).

Die nächstgelegenen größeren Städte sind die Twin Cities in Minnesota (Minneapolis und Saint Paul) (230 km nordnordöstlich), Rochester in Minnesota (177 km ostnordöstlich), Wisconsins Hauptstadt Madison (431 km östlich), Dubuque am Schnittpunkt der Bundesstaaten Iowa, Wisconsin und Illinois (358 km ostsüdöstlich), Waterloo (224 km südöstlich), Cedar Rapids (310 km in der gleichen Richtung), Iowas Hauptstadt Des Moines (236 km südlich), Nebraskas größte Stadt Omaha (386 km südwestlich), Sioux City (274 km westsüdwestlich) und South Dakotas größte Stadt Sioux Falls (234 km westlich).

Verkehr
Der Iowa State Highway 9 führt in West-Ost-Richtung durch das Stadtgebiet von Buffalo Center. Alle weiteren Straßen sind untergeordnete Landstraßen, teils unbefestigte Fahrwege sowie innerörtliche Verbindungsstraßen.

Mit dem Forest City Municipal Airport befindet sich 42 km südöstlich ein kleiner Flugplatz. Die nächsten Großflughäfen sind der Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport (227 km nordnordöstlich) und der Des Moines International Airport (246 km südlich).

Bevölkerung

Nach der Volkszählung im Jahr 2010 lebten in Buffalo Center 905 Menschen in 405 Haushalten. Die Bevölkerungsdichte betrug 326,7 Einwohner pro Quadratkilometer. In den 405 Haushalten lebten statistisch je 2,15 Personen.

Ethnisch betrachtet setzte sich die Bevölkerung zusammen aus 96,1 Prozent Weißen, 0,6 Prozent Afroamerikanern, 0,6 Prozent amerikanischen Ureinwohnern, 0,2 Prozent Asiaten sowie 2,1 Prozent aus anderen ethnischen Gruppen; 0,4 Prozent stammten von zwei oder mehr Ethnien ab. Unabhängig von der ethnischen Zugehörigkeit waren 6,0 Prozent der Bevölkerung spanischer oder lateinamerikanischer Abstammung.

23,1 Prozent der Bevölkerung waren unter 18 Jahre alt, 46,7 Prozent waren zwischen 18 und 64 und 30,2 Prozent waren 65 Jahre oder älter. 53,4 Prozent der Bevölkerung waren weiblich.

Das mittlere jährliche Einkommen eines Haushalts lag bei 32.813 USD. Das Pro-Kopf-Einkommen betrug 24.748 USD. 15,0 Prozent der Einwohner lebten unterhalb der Armutsgrenze.

Weblinks

 Offizielle Website
 city-data.com - Buffalo Center, Iowa

Einzelnachweise

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Michael Daigle Joins Crosson & Richetti Family Law
Crosson & Richetti Family Law is pleased to announce that Michael Daigle has joined the firm's practice group. Daigle joins from his position as Pro Se Law Clerk for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Since opening in September 2018, Crosson & Richetti has significantly grown. "We are committed to adding amazing talent to our firm so we're thrilled to welcome Michael," said founding member David Crosson. "He brings a wealth of knowledge, connections, and experience to our practice."
Fellow founding member Ian Richetti, added, "Our industry-leading family law and estate planning practice areas are booming. Michael's knowledge and experience allow us to expand into broader areas of litigation, making us a truly full-service law firm."
Daigle brings 20 years of state and federal court experience on a variety of civil and criminal matters. He has extensive experience in federal criminal, employment and civil rights cases as well as state law experience in the areas of personal injury, family law and zoning matters. Daigle worked as the Career Clerk to the late Hon. James Knoll Gardner, former President Judge of the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas and United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, for nearly 18 years.
He is currently the Secretary for, and a member of, the Board of Directors of the Bar Association of Lehigh County. Daigle earned his J.D. from Widener University School of Law and his B.S. from State University of New York Oswego.
About Crosson & Richetti's Family Law Practice
In the Lehigh Valley, and the surrounding areas, the attorneys of Crosson & Richetti LLC offer experienced representation for families of all kinds. They are here to assist and guide all families through the end of a marriage, a dispute over the custody of your children, the expansion of your family through adoption, and estate planning to protect your family's interests. The firm's skilled and dedicated attorneys will obtain your optimum result through mediation, collaboration, negotiation, or litigation. The firm's lawyers work hard to help you reach your personal goals, and are handle complex family law issues, including third-party custody rights, LGBT issues, and high-asset divorces.
Child Adoption (1)
Child Custody (6)
Firm Updates (1)
Will Planning (1)
Understanding the Different Types of Child Custody That Exist Today
Modifying Your Child Support in Pennsylvania
5 Signs You Need to Hire an Ad Litem for Your Divorce
3 Ways You Can Make Sure Children of Divorce Have a Shot at Happiness…Even During the Holidays!
Your Estate Planning Checklist: Ensuring Your Children's Inheritance
Child Support - How Long Does It Last In PA?
Top 5 Most Important Estate Planning Documents
Will vs Trust: What's The Difference
Marital Property Division Checklist
Charting Living Expenses During Your Divorce
by Blissbranding Blogger 0
How Exactly Do Child Custody Negotiations Work?


text:
Sultan Nur Ahmed Aman (; (1841–1907); Somali nickname Nuur Dheere), was a learned religious leader and the 5th Sultan of the Habr Yunis Sultanate and later also one of the leaders behind the Somali Dervish movement and revolt (1899–1920). He was the principal agitator rallying the followers of the Kob Fardod Tariqa behind his anti-French Roman Catholic Mission campaign that would become the cause of the Dervish uprising. He assisted in assembling men and arms and hosted the revolting tribesmen in his quarter at Burao in August 1899, declaring the Dervish rebellion. He fought and led the war throughout the years 1899–1904. He and his brother Geleh Ahmed (Kila Ahmed) were the main signatories of the Dervish peace treaty with the British, Ethiopians and Italian colonial powers on March 5, 1905, known as the Ilig Treaty or the Pestalozza agreement. Sultan Nur is entombed in a white-domed shrine in Taleh, the location of the largest Dervish forts and the capital of the Dervish from 1912 to 1920, a testimony to his contribution in creating the movement.

Biography

Sultan Nur was the direct paternal descendant of the 18th century Habr Yunis chieftain Ainanshe Hersi and great-grandson of Deria Sugulle Ainanshe who became the paramount Habr Yunis sultan in 1836.  He spent much of his early life before his sultanate as a religious Sufi pupil in Hahi and Berato's Ahmadiyya tariqa (known in Somali regions as Ahmadiyya not to be confused with the Ahmadiyya of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad an Ismaili Shia sect). The Ahmadiyya or properly known as the Idrisiyya tariqa was founded by Ahmad ibn Idris al-Fasi (1760–1837). During Nur's years in the Berato tariqa, the head mullah was one Mohamed Arab. and the head mullah of Hahi tariqa was Haji Musa. According to the wife of Sultan Nur, an Aden-born Somali, Nur could not read or write but he could converse in Arabic. However, according to Hayes Sadler's correspondence, Nur could read and write Arabic.

Nur became a sultan after the death of his uncle, Sultan Hersi Aman (Hersi Aman Sultan Deriyeh Segulleh) (1824–1879), in an intertribal fight. Sultan Hersi, the chief of the Habr Yunis clan since the mid-1850s was killed in an inter-clan war with the sage Haji Guled (Guled Haji Ahmed Segulleh) in 1879, a wise legendary elder who led the Habr Yunis clan, also an uncle of Sultan Hersi. This inter-clan war generated much poetry, celebrated poets emerged during the war, for instance the poems of a young teenager Jama Amuume Jama the mute, a seventeen-year-old who lost two brothers in the war, who later avenged his brothers by killing one Warsame the culprit. One poem of Jama the mute was recorded by the Italian explorer Luigi Robecchi Bricchetti in 1884. There was another poem by a lamenting woman who lost her brother and father in the war, probably the oldest Somali poem on record authored by a woman. Both poems were published in the late nineteenth century.

The ascent of Nur to the sultanate caused a decade-long civil war when his great uncle Awad Sultan Deriyeh and eldest living son of Sultan Deriyeh declared himself a rival sultan in 1881. Drake Brockman a medical doctor in the Somaliland protectorate and the author of British Somaliland narrated the long conflict caused by Nur's ascent to the sultanate in his book

Drake Brockman summarised Nur's story in 1911:

 Deriyeh, the head of the Rer Segulleh, was universally proclaimed Sultan by the rest of the Habr Yunis tribe, and was really the first of the Habr Yunis Sultans, although his father, Segulleh, had tried to pose as such. Sultan Deriyeh lived to a great age, and had no less than eighteen sons, of whom the first two were borne to him by a woman of the Makahil section of the Habr Awal tribe, and the elder of these, Aman by name, joining with his brother, formed the Ba Maka-hil, while his remaining sixteen stepbrothers formed the Baha Deriyeh. Aman had ten sons, the eldest of whom was Ahmed, who died before his father, who himself died before his old father, the aged Sultan Deriyeh. Now, as soon as Sultan Deriyeh died there was trouble as to his successor. The Ba Makahil claimed that Ismail and Hirsi, of their section, were entitled to the honour ; but the Rer Segulleh and some of the Baha Deriyeh, said, "No, as several of the late Sultan's sons are still living, one of them should be their Sultan before any of the grandsons"; so they invited Awid Deriyeh to be their representative. In the meantime, Ismail was killed fighting with the Ogaden and Hirsi by the Baha Segulleh. The Ba Makahil now had to look for another successor, so they sent for Nur, the son of Ahmed Aman, and nephew to Ismail and Hirsi, who was living the life of a Mullah at Hahi, near Odweina. Nur, much against his will, consented to be their Sultan, although he preferred the life he was leading as a Mullah. For some years now there were two Sultans of the Habr Yunis, namely, Sultan Nur of the Habr Yunis, Ba Makahil, and Sultan Awd Deriyeh of the Baha Segulleh; so it will be seen the powerful section of the Baha Segulleh had gone to the Baha Deriyeh for their representative". Awad Deriyeh was killed in a fight with the Ogaden Rer Ali, so the Baha Segulleh had to find another Sultan. Accordingly, they chose his brother Hirsi's son, Mattar; but this choice the Baha Deriyeh were not at all pleased with, so all the Habr Yunis tribe decided to meet and discuss the matter out and decide on one Sultan. After a great deal of discussion the two clans, Ba Makahil and Baha Deriyeh, who had claimants for the sultanate, decided to let them toss for it, the winner to be proclaimed Sultan, while the loser got one hundred camels as compensation from the winner. Sultan Nur won, and was proclaimed Sultan of the Habr Yunis tribe.
Nur's ascent to the sultanate in the early 1880s coincided with the Mahdi uprising (1881–1885) Muhammad Ahmad. Various Mahdi and Senussi emissaries visited the Somali coast rallying the population behind their respective Sufi branches.  According to Walsh, the British resident counsel at the Somali coast, these two Sufi sects and their followers occasionally collided in Berbera. Nur welcomed the Senousi emissaries and they were regular visitors to his hamlet according to Walsh. Beyond a few minor encounters with the British at the coast in 1886 and 1892, nothing major occurred. in 1890-1891 Awad Sultan Deriyeh was killed in an Ogaden raid and his nephew Mattar Hersi (Mattar Hersi Sultan Deriyeh) was chosen as a rival sultan by some sections within the Segulleh dynasty, the traditional holders of Habr Yunis sultanate. In February 1899, rival Sultan Madar/Mattar Hersi, after having assisted in recovering raided livestock for the mullahs from Kob Fardod, received support for his sultanate from the religious settlement and Mohammed Abdullah Hassan began to champion Mattar's cause.

Upon a visit to the Habr Je'lo they recited this geeraar praising the Sultan. This poem was recorded by British officer J.W.C. Kirk and included in his book.

A chronology of the first two years of the Dervish movement, February 1899 – March 1901
In mid-February 1899, Mohammed Abdullah Hassan, later the spiritual head of the Dervish movement, for the first time came to the attention of the British authority at Berbera. James Hayes Sadler updating the colonial office on April 12, 1899, stated that the Somali Coastal Administration initially came to hear about this Mullah of Kob Fardod on mid February 1899 when the new Stipendiary Akil Ahmed Muhammad Shermarki (Habr Yunis, Mussa Arrah) raided some livestock belonging to the religious mullahs of Kob Fardod. This incident brought Sultan Nur to the tariqa at Kob Fardod, after Sultan Madar Hirsi, his rival, assisted the mullahs in recovering the stocks and thus gaining the allegiance and support of the tariqa for his rival sultanate.

Contrary to the fanciful adventure later writers wrote about him, the Mullah only came to the attention of the British in February 1899, he never confronted the authority at Berbera upon arrival in 1895 as some claim, nor were there major uprisings in Berbera as official Somali biographies purport, much of this embellishment was a later invention, beyond a few complaints about not receiving their full herds, the mullahs at Kob Fardod and Mohammed Abdullah Hassan had no complaints against the British coastal administration and even the French Roman Catholic Mission which had been established in Berbera since the early 1890s. Mohamed Abdullah Hassan lived in Berbera and his relatives both Duale Liban, a clerk in Berbera customs, and Deria Magan, a personal translator of the council-general, both held high positions in Berbera administration. Mohammed Abdullah Hassan married a sister of Duale Liban and had his first son Mahdi in Berbera in 1893. Throughout the month of March, the Mullahs peacefully corresponded with the coastal authority in friendly terms, requesting the remainder of their herd.

On March 29, 1899, the vice-council at the coast sent a letter to the Mullah requesting the return of a stolen rifle. The Mullah replied in person to this letter as it was addressed to him personally, denying any knowledge of such a matter.

On April 10, camel sowar Ahmed Adan, who carried the letter to the mullah, arrived at Berbera with two replies and made a report to the effect that the assembled mullahs at Kob Fardod and the various tribesmen adopted a hostile attitude and referred to him as a Kafir in addition he reported that a number of them had rifles and were practicing.

On April 20, Dragoman Deria Magan, Hayes Sadler's personal translator and a relative of the Mullah was sent to ascertain the nature of the activities at Kob Fardod. He reported that the Mullah had 52 rifles with about 200 rounds of ammunition and that the various tribesmen Habr Toljaala and Dolbahnata were wavering and they hold no hostile attitude towards the administrations. He added that the Mullah had abandoned the cause of Sultan Madar Hirsi and was now espousing the sultanate of Nur who had recently brought presents and was with him. He also stated that the Mahmood Girad had recently raided the Aligheri.

At the end of April 1899, the dervish movement was declared adopting the term "dervish" to refer to their core followers not their allied clans-men, and they also announced their independence, having their own Amir, Sultan and chiefs. However, they didn't declare war or open hostility, they merely requested to be respected as an independent community.

At the end of June 1899, Sultan Nur leaves the tariqa at Kob Fardod and arrives in his country Odweina in an effort to collect arms and men from the western section of the Habr Yunis clan. On June 27, James Hayes Sadler sent a letter to Nur inquiring about his intentions and involvement in the new movement, no reply was received.

In early July 1899, Sultan Nur called for a tribal assembly for the western Habr Yunis on July 22. However, the assembly was aborted when most of the western Habr Yunis clan refused to join the rebellion. Sultan Nur, failing to convince the western Habr Yunis, left eastward to Burao joining the eastern section of the clan who declared allegiance to the new dervish cause.

In the end of August 1899, the dervish assembled at Burao, declaring an open war. On September 1 a letter arrived from the dervish camp at Burao to Berbera essentially a declaration of war.

In September 1899, after assembling at Burao the Dervish and their clan allies attacked the western Habr Yunis at Odweina under the insistence of Sultan Nur to punish the clansmen who opposed his call to join the rebellion. Also at the end of September they burned and looted the  Ahmadia Tariqa at Sheikh.

In October 1899, the chief of the Dolbahnata, Girad Ali Farah, was murdered by the Dervish. The Dolbahnata chief Girad Ali Farah sent a letter to the British Coastal administration disavowing the Mullah's cause and the Dervish rebellion .

In November 1899, the core Dervish forces crossed the border into Ethiopia and settled at Harradiggit (Hara-Digeed).

In March 1900, the Dervish allies in the Ogaden were defeated at the battle of Jig Jiga, no dervishes participated in this battle.

In July 1900, The Dervishes loot and raid the Aidagalla clan in Ethiopia.

In August 1900, the dervish attack the habr Awal tribe killing 220 including women and children, losing 130 raiders killed.

In October 1900, a combined various Isaq tribes (Samatar/Ahmed Abdalla, Habr Yunis and Aidagalla) attack the dervish and the Ogaden in retaliations crossing the border into Ethiopia.

In March 1901, the dervish reentered Somaliland protectorate after being pushed out by the Abyssinian forces and their Somali tribal allies (Mohamed Zubeir Ogaden)  from the Ethiopian border.

The Somali Dervish History "Taariikhda Daraawiishta Soomaaliyeed" 1899–1920
The Somali Dervish movement was an armed rebellion that abruptly began in the spring of 1899 and lasted some twenty years until 1920. Initially, the rebellion began as an anti-French Roman Catholic Mission revolt. The rebelling mullahs and leaders opposed the church's missionary activities, in particular, the education/adoption of young children and in some instances converting them to Christianity. They also protested what they alleged was an interference in their independence and a persecution of their members by the British Somali Coast administration.

The news of the incident that sparked the Dervish rebellion and to the almost twenty one years insurrection according to the consul-general James Hayes Sadler was either spread or as he alleged was concocted by Sultan Nur. The incident in question was that of a group of Somali children who were converted to Christianity and adopted by the French Catholic Mission at Berbera in 1899. Whether Sultan Nur experienced the incident first hand or whether he was told of it is not clear, but what is known is that he propagated the incident in the Tariqa at Kob Fardod in April 1899, precipitating the religious rebellion that later transformed into the Somali Dervish.

The Christian Somali children incident is erroneously attributed to Mohammed Abdullah Hassan the later spiritual head of the movement. Despite their anti-Christian profession, the dervish in Somaliland targeted primarily Somali nomads who were indifferent to their cause or wholly ignorant of it, for twenty odd years the Dervish wreaked havoc on the Somali nomads, through mostly looting and outright killings.

In 1909 the French Catholic Mission in Berbera was closed by the British colonial administrations, when most of the clans demanded that the mission activity should be suspended, as it was the pretext of the Dervish raids on Somali nomads. They also demanded that the Mullah Mohammed Abdullah Hassan and the Dervish be crushed and finally Risaldar Major Haji Musa Farah the highest native officer of Somaliland and an ardent adversary of the Mullah and the Dervish was to be replaced due to abuse of power. Reginald Wingate and Rudolf Carl von Slatin were tasked in 1909 to ascertain the Somali nomad's attitude to both the administration and the dervish and to advise the British colonial office as to how to improve the situation in the protectorate.

Despite the closing of the French Catholic Mission and the British administration withdrawal to the coast at the end of 1909, the dervish continued to raid and maraud in the interior of the country until 1914, when the British reconquered the interior to pacify the well-armed marauding clans and push the dervish back from endangering the coast.

From 1914 to 1919, the colonial administrator severely eliminated the military power and influence of the dervish in the far interior of the protectorate after a long, slow campaign employing the King's African Rifles (some native Somalis and non-natives included within their rank), and the Somaliland Camel Corps and irregulars called "Ilaalos" or native scouts.

Finally in 1919, a final plan to crush the Dervish using airplanes was devised and between January – February 1920 the dervish forts were bombarded and most of the dervish members either were killed, captured or fled to Ethiopia. A final raid of 3000 Habar Yoonis, Habar Jeclo and Dhulbahante horsemen led by tribal chief Haji Waraba raided the Dervish in Ethiopia putting an end to a movement that terrorized the majority of the Somali nomads irrespective of clan affiliations for two decades.

The movement had its spiritual leader Mohammed Abdullah Hassan, it's Sultan Nur Ahmed Aman and its Chief Lieutenant Ahmed Warsama Haji Sudi.

The beginning of  Dervish movement April–August 1899

This incident brought Sultan Nur to Kob Fardod around March, 1899. Sultan Nur's main objective was to dislodge his rival Madar and to gain the allegiance of the mullahs of Kob Fardod.
In March 1899, one Duwaleh Hirsi, a former member of the Somali Aden police, then Mr Percy Cox's (former counsel-resident of Zeila and Berbera, 1893–1895) expedition guide in Somaliland allegedly stole a rifle and sold it to the tariqa at Kob Fardod. The vice-counsel at the coast Harry Edward Spiller Cordeaux sent a letter to the mullahs at Kob Fardod demanding the return of the rifle. Sultaan Nur was in Kob Fardod from March–June 1899. The letter was carried by a Somali mounted police officer named Ahmed Adan, upon his return after the delivery of the letter Cordeaux interviewed Adan and he provided the following information:

I knew many of the people there—some of them were relations of mine. My brother-in-law, Dualeh Aoreb, was there. I asked them if they had any rifles, they said they at first had only six, but had just received fifty-five from Hafoon. I saw two or three of the new lot, they are Martins(new). They told me they had one or two "14-shot rifles". I saw some Mullahs walking about with Sniders. The Sheikh himself and some of his Mullahs used to practice daily shooting at a target; they put up a shield against a tree. I used to talk with people every day. We talked about many things, some of the words they said were good and others were bad. They called me a Kafir, and laughed at my uniform, saying that I smelt, and asking me why I wore the Sircars clothes. There were hundreds of people there, some from every tribe, Dolbahanta, Habr Toljaala, and Habr Yunis.

What is particularly revealing about Ahmed Adan's interview is the confusion that was caused by another letter carried by a Somali one Salan supposedly a message also from the British administration at the coast. This second letter angered the mullahs at the Tariqa;

The second letter provoked the mullahs, the hostile tone in the reply is due to the offensive second letter carried by Salan the Somali. Both replies, one regarding the rifle curt but relatively inoffensive and a second addressing the confusing insolent second letter are in the British record.

Deria Magan, a relative of the Mullah Mohamed Abdullah Hassan (the later spiritual head of the movement), and chief translator of the Somali coastal administration since 1884 visited the tariqa, he added nothing new to the general information gathered earlier by Ahmed Aden other than the fact that purportedly some clans are leaving the mullah and that the mullahs have abandoned Madar Hersi and were now paying allegiances to Sultan Nur, whose sultanate the Mullahs are now embracing, .

Another letter from the mullahs at Kob Fardod arrived at the coast on May 3, 1899, this letter had an overall beseeching neutral tone. The mullahs pleaded with the administration not to escalate the manner and pleaded to be left alone; but what is noteworthy in this letter is that the followers of the tariqa and its leaders now declared that they were an independent government with their own Emir persumbl the Mullah, a Sultan, Nur persumbly and subject, naturally the clans that frequented Kob Fardod Dolbahanta, Habr Tol J'alaa and the eastern Habr Yunis.

It is unknown when exactly the tribal followers of the Kob Fardod tariqa and their leaders adopted the term "dervish", but the general time was at the end of April 1899. Sadler, updating the colonial office, sent the following updates on the progress of the movement in mid-June 1899;

Sultan Nur returned to his country at the end of June 1899 after more than three months sojourn in Kob Fardod. On June 27 Sadler sent a letter to him, Sadler did not mention what exactly was said in the letter but from Sultan Nur's reaction, the content of the letter was not to his liking. He immediately arrested the camel sowar and stripped him of his gun. Hayes Sadler updating the colonial office of the new development:

Having failed to win over the western section of his tribe for the rebellion and the tribal assembly planned for July 22 having been aborted by Mullah Haji Musa of Hahia (head Mullah of the Ahmediyya tariqa at Hahi), Sultan Nur for the last time left to the east and to Burao and joined the eastern section of the rebellious tribe in his eastern headquarters. A few weeks later, at the end of August, the dervish and their clan followers assembled at Burao, the Mullah with his followers from the Dolbahanata, the various Habr Toljaala sub-clans with their principal headmen (Haji Sudi, Deria Arale, Deria Gure and Duale Adle) and Sultan Nur with his followers from eastern Habr Yunis clan, declared open hostility. The assembled dervish and their clan allies sent the following stern letter to Captain Cordeaux and James Hayes Sadler:

After assembling at Burao the Dervish and their clan allies, the Adan Madoba, Rer Yusuf, Ali Gheri, Jama Siad and the Musa Ismail what the Sadler calls forces from the Dhulbahnate in his correspondence attacked the western Habr Yunis at Odweina in September 1899 under the insistence of Sultan Nur to punish the clansmen who opposed his call to join the rebellion and instead heeded the rival tribal mullah Haji Musa. Having punished the western Habr Yunis their next target was the Ahmadia Tariqa at Sheikh. They burned and looted the tariqa about the end of September, the various dervish clan followers dispersed and the core dervish moved back once they came. The Mullah and Sultan Nur apparently had a disagreement and they and their followers separated, the Mullah to Lasder with his Ali Gheri and the principle Dervish of the Aden Madoba including Haji Sudi while Sultan Nur with the Musa Ismail and Rer Yusuf moved to the Arori plains and the various Habar Tojalaa followers camped at Ber.

During this time the Dolbahnata chief Girad Ali Farah sent a letter to the British Coastal administration disavowing the Mullah and the Dervish. In October the chief of the Dolbahnata, Girad Ali Farah, was murdered by the Dervish. Through the end of 1899 most of the earlier tribal followers of the Dervish made their peace with the coastal administration, all deputations from Dolbahnata, Habr Yunis and Habr Tojalaa made peace. The core Dervish elements however crossed the border into Ethiopia in November 1899 and settled at Harradiggit (Hara-Digeed) along with their leaders.

Once the Dervish settled in Harradiggit and Milmil throughout 1900 with total followers around 1,000 of Ali Geri, Ogaden and 200 Midgans, the Dervish raided the local clans. They raided the Aidagale in July 1900, followed by a devastating raid on Samanter Abdillah and Ahmed Abdillah (Habr Awal) in September 1900, killing over 220 men, women and children. The affected tribesmen then raided the Dervish at Milmil and Harradiggit, also the Abyssinians began to raid the Dervish around the same time. Finally, in March 1901, the Dervish were compelled to go back to their old settlement and they crossed the border back into Somaliland and settled in Samala (Sacmala) a village near Buhoodle. The British administrations by then had assembled enough tribal forces, mostly from tribes that had been looted and massacred by the Dervish. Led by twenty-two British officers and trained by Indian drill officers, the tribal forces then ready to battle the Dervish.

The British and dervish wars 1901–1904

Samala battle June 2–3, 1901, known as Afbakayle in Somali

Before dispatching forces to face the Dervish at Samala Consul-General Hayes Salder made the following instructions to the overall commander of the forces

Eric John Eagles Swayne:

By December 1900, 21 officers of the British and Indian army with a force of 1,500 Somali Levy from the looted tribes were ready to operate against the dervish in 1901. To prevent the Dervish from fleeing west across the Ethiopian border, Ethiopian cooperation was sought and the Abyssinian king sent a force of 8,000 soldiers in January 1901, the Ethiopian operations began at once, three months before the British expeditions, the Ethiopians managed to push the dervish across the Somaliland border and punish the clans who were involved in assisting the dervish.

On May 22 Swayne's forces on their way burned the entire settlement of Kob Fardod leaving only the mosque. Their next operation was to punish clans that supported the Mullah, they seized 3,500 camels from the Habr Toljaalaa Adan Madoba  and the Dolbahanta Jama Siad. On June 2 these tribes, along with dervish forces, attacked McNeill's zariba at Samala to recapture their herds. On the afternoon of June 2, the dervish attacked McNeil's encampment (zeriba) with a force of some five hundred horse and two thousand foot. The dervish leaders Haji Sudi, Sultan Nur and the Mullah watched the battle from a nearby hill. After have been repulsed with many casualties, the dervish attacked the same night with no avail, on the 3rd of June the following morning at 9:00.A.M the dervish attacked with 5000 strong not been able to get anywhere near the zariba before having been shot, the dervish forces were broken, in the two-day fighting the dervish lost 150 dead on the battlefield and counted on the actual scene, the British further claimed they have killed six hundreds, counted dead men who died on the road between Weylahed (weyl-lagu-xidh here where the subsequently the dervish came face to face with Swayne's flying column) and Ana Hargili (Caana-Xadhigle). McNeil lost 18 in killed and wounded.

Failing to regain their stocks, both the dervish and their clan allies retreated on June 3. Subsequently, it came to the knowledge of Swayne that the Mullah initially wanted to attack Swayne's zariba, but Sultan Nur persuaded the dervish that an attack on McNeill's zariba would yield some 400 rifles. The fleeing Dervish accidentally encountered the column of Swayne on the 4th of June, here at Weylahed a small skirmishes took place ending with a prolonged chase of the fleeing scattered dervish horsemen, but the dervish managed to escape. The pursuit continued until the dervish crossed into the Haud. A reporter from The London Times on June 22, 1901, sent a report of the campaigns describing the next encounter after Samala:

Subsequently, the British forces concluded from the dervish dead the implicated clans and found out that the bulk of the dervish forces at Samala were of the sub clans of Kayat, Aadan Madoba, Rer Hagar, Ali Gheri, Nur Ahmed, Jama Siad, and Mijjarten. On June 19 Sawayne decided to punish the refractory clans by ceasing their herds, the Jama Siad and Rer Hagar easily came to terms, by July 8 the operations concluded where the Ali Gheri losing some 60 men and some 6,000 camels the last clans came to submission and their elders came to Berbera.

Ferdiddin July 17, 1901
Recrossing the border from the Haud into Italian Somalia in the Mudug region, the Mullah collected his most fanatical followers the real dervish (men who were mostly mullahs and under oath to fight to the end as opposed to tribal opportunistic clan allies), the dervish withdrew from Mudug and arrived back into British Somaliland and encamped in Beretabli. Swayne arriving at Courgerod with his forces made contacts with the rear of the enemies and spies later discover the bulk of the enemy forces were in force in Firidddin. Swayne chose to attack at early down travelling through the night, with 700 men 75 mounted and 100 left behind to guard the supplies, Swayne attacked with 600 men and 350 Dolbahnata tribesmen, they attacked the Dervish at Ferdiddin. Sawyne described the fight at Firdiddin in his official correspondence:

Gaibdeed and two of his sons (been the brother of Haji Sudi and nephews) were among the leaders killed. The dervish lost a large numbers of well known mullahs and over 60 bodies counted. The fleeing dervish fared no better after five days in the waterless Haud many died and Haji Sudi, the Mullah and his eldest son only survived by water from the stomach of slaughtered camels.  After the defeat the enemy fled south across the Italian border and were pursued some miles the forces had to stop to regroup. Short of water and some 50 miles away from their nearest supplies Swayne was compelled to abort the pursuit. Facing the authentic dervish mostly mullahs, Swayne was impressed by their tenacity and ferocity, commenting:

Erigo/Erego October 6–7, 1902, known as Beer-dhiga battle in Somali

In December 1901 the Dervish raided the a sub sections of the Habr Tojaalaa and on February 1, 1902, news reached the Somaliland protectorate British authority that the Dervish were planning a raid against the tribes from their positions east of the protectorate. On February 7 and 13, the dervishes waged a devastating attack on Habr Yunis and Dolbahnata tribes men east of Burao. The London Gazette reported "On the 7th February, the Mullah had despatched another raiding force against our Jama Siad friendly tribes, 100 miles to the east of the scene of his raid of the 13th February, and here again our tribes suffered heavily. Burao and Berbera became filled with destitute refugees and 2000 persons were fed daily at Burao alone." 1903

On the first week of October the Somali and Yoas led by few British officers at last arrived within the reach of their enemies. They formed a Zariba in a clearing Awan Eergo in a very dense bush, and around 4 pm the enemy were hiding in all the surrounding bushes. The British led forces were compelled to advance slowly, immediately the Dervish attacked from all directions causing the British led forces front line to fall back in a disarray, but the rear companies stood firm holding their position, the 2nd King African Rifles and 6th King Africans Rifles in the extreme right and left, however, fell back in a sudden panic, rescued by one-half company in the front the troops rallied and held their ground under intense fire. In the severity of the fight the transport camels stampeded with the 2nd African Rifles and two Somali companies Ltd Swayne managed to push the enemies for 2 miles and recover 1,800 of the transport camels. in the aftermath of the battle it was discovered a maxim gun was missing, casualties included 2 officers killed and 56 levies. Both the Somali and Yoa performed great in the 6th but on the 7th of October the severity of the fight sunk their spirit and the officers leading the forces complained that they couldn't rely on their men. The dervish in the other hand lost greatly, some 62 death 40 of them Hajis and Mullahs and all 6 commanders of their force were killed,

In the western side of the protectorate the highest Somali native officer Risaldar-major Musa Farah attacked the dervish tribal allies,
"By June 10, Musa Farah's detached Levy of 450 rifles had reached Kurmis. After collecting 5,000 tribesmen from the western side of the Protectorate, Musa Farah had transported them across the waterless Haud where it was over 100 miles broad, had attacked the western Dervish encampments, had routed them in all directions, and had finally succeeded in transporting his force back across the Haud, together with his captured livestock, amounting to 1,630 camels, 200 cows, and 2,000 sheep. For this service His Majesty King Edward VII rewarded the Risaldar-Major with a sword of honour."

At the conclusion of the first and second expeditions, the British administrations and the colonial office were satisfied at the conclusion of the first two expeditions, despite the leaders of the Dervish having not all been either killed or captured. Gabriel Ferrand, the Vice-Council of France following these events observed that "Neither the Mahdi nor his chief advisor Ahmed Warsama, better known under the name Haji Sudi, nor the Sultan Nur,leader of the Habr Younis clan were killed or captured. The optimism Colonel Sadler and Lieutenant-Colonel Swayne in the latest reports relating to military operations is inexplicable."

Gumburu April 17, 1903 and Daratoleh April 22, 1903

The third expedition was launched January 3, 1903 with a new commander, Sir William Henry Manning. The plane was to encircle and trap the dervish from all sides. The main body of the forces were to advance from Obbia in Italian Somalia to the wells of Galkayo while one land at Berbera and form lines through Bohotleh. The dervish leaders, upon hearing news of the Obbia forces landing with a body of horsemen, left for Milmil and Haradiggitt rallying tribal allies:

Towards the end of March news reached the British forces of whereabouts the bulk of the dervish forces.  Defectors and captives claimed the dervish forces were in Galadi.  A reconnaissance patrol led by captain Plunkett was sent by Manning to Galadi where they met the bulk of the dervish forces majority made of Somali Bantu clans of the Makana and Derjele tribes. Between 16 and 17 April the British small forces made up of Somalis, Indians and Yaos were encircled from all directions and decimated. All 9 officers were killed and 89 rank and file were killed.  The battle took place in a small hill Gumburu close to Galadi. Before the news of the disaster at Gumburu made it to the British forces another column from Bohotleh forces engaged another dervish forces at Daratoleh the later forces were defeated by the British forces. John Gough (VC) The bulk of the main dervish forces without their tribal allies moved to Halin in June 1903; according to the intelligence report of the period:

"A deserter from the enemy stated that the Mullah. accompanied by Haji Sudi and Sultan Nur, with a large force of horse and footmen, reached Kurmis on 8th June, camped near Lasakante on 9 June, and moved towards Dannot early on 10 June on their way towards the Nogal. On 12th June mounted scout could not get through from Bohotle to Dannot owing to the numbers of the enemy's horsemen watching the road. On 13th June two deserters from the mullah came into Bohotle and stated that the Mullah with his whole force was on his way to Nogal with a view of establishing his Haroun at Halin. Intelligence Report from 11th July 1903".

August 4, 1903 – a deserter from the Mullah, named Abbas Isman (Ibrahim), came into Bohotle at 5.30 a.m. His story is as follows Haji Sudi is still his trusted adviser. Sultan Nur still lives with the Mullah, but no longer is keen to help him. Abbas was with the Mullah at Wardair during the fight. When the fight was over a horseman galloped to Wardair and announced that the English had been wiped out. The Mullah immediately mounted his pony, Dodimer and rode hard to the field of battle. The Mullah was absent from the battle and much of the command of the dervish fighters fell upon Sultan Nur. This fact caused the rift between the Mullah and Sultan Nur which the informant alluded to in his report.

These two encounters, despite a heavy loss by the dervish, were the only dervish victory over the British forces.

Jidballi January 10, 1904

This was not the mere handful they had fought at Samala, at Gumburu, or at Daratoleh. It was no reconnaissance, nor yet was it a hastily recruited tribal levy such as they had faced at Ferdhiddin or Erigo. In comparison, General Egerton's force at Jidbali must have seemed to them a mighty army; and, in very truth, it comprised some of the best seasoned British, Indian, and African troops at the Empire's disposal. On the other hand, the Darwishes numbered from 6000 to 8000 fighting men, representing the pick of the Mullah's forces.

The command of the British forces was taken over by major-general Charles Egerton with fresh reinforcement from India and Aden, on July 4, 1903, Egerton arrived at Berbera. From his arrival to mid October Egerton was engaged in improving roads, building an advance bases at kirrit and improving water supplies. Also Egerton raised two more Somali irregular mounted corps, the Gedabursi Horse (500 men from the Gedabursi clan) and the Tribal Horse (mainly from eastern Habr Yunis, Habr Tojalaa and Dolbahnata clans). Meanwhile, the dervish were encamped at Halin-Gerrowei-Kalis line of villages and they made Halin their main headquarter. In October the Dervish occupied the small port at Illig in the Mijjertein coast.

Manning was given orders to occupy Galadi and by end of November 1903 Galadi was occupied without incidents. The water was insufficient, Manning left a detachments there and stationed the bulk of his troops at Bohotle.
The first clashes between the Dervish and British forces occurred in December 1903 when news came that the Dervish camp was formed at Jidbali. Egerton ordered lieutenant-Colonel Kenna to make a reconnaissances and to induce the Dervish in an engagement.  Coming upon many dervish camp fires at Jidbali, Kenna opened fire in an attempt to dislodge the dervishes from their zaribas. After three hours of periodic fires Kenna withdrew estimating the enemy to be around 1,500 foot and 200 horsemen.

On January 9, Egerton assembled his massive forces 20 miles east of Badwein having ascertained the dervish were in force in Jidbali. On 10 January 1904, the dervish for the first time fought regular troops in an open country, also in terms of numbers of troops the British forces were the largest thus far. The Mullah was not present in the battle, he was curiously absent. Sending Kenna to the flank of the enemy to block any retreats, Egerton opened his mountain battery guns orderings his troops to kneel or lay down. Upon the commencing of the fight the dervish rushed from cover to cover to through grass and brushes attacking the left. However they were unable to stand the intensity of the fire, the dervish again regrouped and tried to attack from the front and the right. Sergeant Gibbs did an excellent job with the maxim gun, and the K.A.R and Sikh firing was remarkable, with in few minutes the dervish line collapsed and they retreated in full flight, pursued by the mounted Gedabursi Horses and Tribal Horses the rout of the dervish army was completed.

Pestalozza Agreement 1904–1905

 {{Blockquote|As the Mahdi of Khartoum and his lieutenant Osman Digna, H'àdjdj Mohammed ben Abdallah and his lieutenant H'àdjdj Soudi frequently write to the head of the British Protectorate and the commander of the expeditionary corps. They once offered peace on payment of compensation by Britain and the assignment of a port.

At least as far back as in 1903 as Ferrand Gebriel noted the dervish offered terms for peace to the British.Pressured by the English and the Mijertein Somalis whom in their territory the dervish carved out a settlement, after consulting with his dervish and religious rebels, at last the dervish were desperate for peace and willing to negotiate. In 1904 the Mullah wrote to the Italians through Abdilahi Shahri a trusted dervish and his boyhood friend.<ref>Interview Held At Berbera on the 30 April and 1 May 1909, with Abdulla Shahari, Formerly the intimate friend and emissary of the Mullah''. Annex-4, SAD 125/6/130. University of Durham, Sudan archives</ref>}} These initiative for these negotiations, started by the Mullah himself who wrote three letters in March 1904 to Lt. Vessel Spagna, commander of the Italian squad in Bender-Cassin. In August 1904; and from Aden, embarking on the royal ship Volturno, Pestalozza went to Bender Cassem, on the northern Somali coast, to feel the ground, and to send a courier to Mullah, who was in Upper Nogal, benefiting from these practices, as an intermediary, certainly Abdallah Sceri, a trusted man of Mullah himself, who had employed him in various missions. During the war, the British had captured him as a suspect, and then had to hand him over to the Italian consular authority, having claimed in his capacity as an Italian protégé. Councilor Abdallah Sheri was kept on board the Volturno, in a state of arrest, not allowed by the British Authorities to have relations with the natives in Aden and on the coast. He was the chief auxiliary of Pestalozza to the success of his mission.

Giulio Pestalozza in his second meeting with the dervish October 17, 1904  was accompanied by Sylos and Paladini, two fellow Italians. After the second meeting the Mullah declared to Sheri and Pestalozza the following:

After a long, three-way negotiation between the powers of Britain, Italy, Ethiopia and the Dervish, the British received a dervish delegation for a peace agreement:

1. Abdallah Shihiri, Habr Toljaala, Adan Madhoba;
2. Diria Arraleh, Habr Toljaala, Adan Madhoba;
3. Adem Egal, Mejertein, Rer Egaleh;
4. Moallem Mohamed Nur, Dolbahante Kayet.

On March 5, 1905, the treaty of Ilig or the Pestalozza agreement was signed between the dervish and the powers, the dervish represented by Sultan Nur and other dignitaries, who signed the final agreements. In the original Arabic, the following signatures appear - Sultan Nur Ahmed (the chief dervish sultan) and his brother Geele Ahmed (Kila Ahmed), Ugas Diria Arabe and Ugas Issa Farek''.

The Dervish were now technically an Italian protected religious community, they had their own semi-autonomous enclave, the dervish agreed to live peacefully with their Miijerteyn neighbours, the Ethiopians and the British. The Italians granted a fixed sea access for the Dervish between Ras Garad and Ras Gabbe with an Italian representative as a governor with soldiers and custom house, till such representative arrive the Mullah himself shall act as an Italian agent. The Italians assigned the Nogal and Hawd in the Italian sphere of influence as a territory accessible to the dervish, in the English sphere the dervish were only granted grazing for their cattle in British Somaliland Nogal in the area limited by the wells of Halin, Hodin, Tifafale and Damot. On March 24, 1905, the four Dervish Representative and the commissioner of Somaliland Protectorate reaffirmed the March 5, 1905 Pestalozza and Dervish agreement.

Less than a year of the agreement, the dervish and the Mullah were back to their usual raids and general looting, the Mullah was not satisfied with the financial outcome of the agreement. In 1906 Eugenio Cappello the Italian council in Aden went with the usual Abdallah Sceri, to the Mullah who told him, openly, that Italy had failed in all the promises made to him by Pestalozza. "You promised me money," he said, "and I haven't seen it; you promised me that Osman Mahmud would bring down the fort, as this sort of surveillance that exercises on my movements annoys me and he has not done so: you promised me gifts, and the gifts did not come.

Sultan Nur's death, 1907

The last intelligence report mention of Sultan Nur in the Italian archives was in 1907. After the death of Sultan Nur 1907/1908 in the dervish camp at Illig, his son Dolal Sultan Nur ascended the sultanate in the dervish camp, while among the non-dervish Habr Yunis clans, Jama Sultan Hirsi Aman (the son of Sultan Hersi Aman circa 1824–1879), the first cousin of Sultan Nur, was proclaimed a sultan.

Sultan Nur was buried by his dervish in a large, domed tomb in Taleh, his tomb predated the later dervish forts. His white tomb in the dervish capital is a testimony to his contribution to the movement. Only four dervish founders are commemorated in Taleh Nur included. William Archibald Macfadyen, a British geologist and the only scholar to study the structures of Taleh fort, mentioned the handful of tombs constructed by the dervish for their leaders and gave a detailed description of the tombs in 1931. In his article Macfayden only identified Sultan Nur's tomb by name out of the four dervish entombed in Taleh:

Modern Somali Dervish revisionism, 1974–1991

Despite such high regard by his dervish contemporaries, Sultan Nur and most of the non-Daarood dervishes were entirely expunged from Somali history. Aw Jama Umar Ise and his assistant Ahmed Farah Ali Idaja and the rest of the Somali Academy of Sciences and Arts. The Somali Academy of Sciences and Arts (Mogadishu, Somalia), a government institution, in 1976 printed the official Somali version of dervish history (Taariikhdii daraawiishta iyo Sayid Maxamad Cabdille Xasan, 1895–1920. 1976) by Aw Jama Umar Ise (Aw-Jama Omar Isse). In that official Somali account, Sultan Nur appears in but one sentence in the book.

Said S. Samatar in his book (Oral Poetry and Somali Nationalism: The Case of Sayid Mahammad 'Abdille Hasan. 2009), basically a translation of the official Somali version into English, passingly reduced the role of Sultan Nur in the dervish rebellion to one paragraph in which he claimed Mohammed Abdullah Hassan deposed Sultan Nur as the head of the Habr Yunis clan and replaced him with another sultan, a claim that he fails to substantiate by any citation. In other versions of his dissertations which later were published as a book, he claimed Sultan Nur used the influence of Mohammed Abdullah Hassan to outset his rival Madar Hersi.

Abdi Sheik Abdi, another Somali author of a book about the dervish (Divine madness: Moḥammed ʻAbdulle Ḥassan (1856–1920). 1993.), again essentially reduced the Dervish history into a clan narrative, where one side was in British lines and the other clan in dervish sides, further contributing to the single-clan-based dervish Somali narrative widely propagated by the late dictator Mohammed Siad Bare, where one clan was depicted as anti-colonial and nationalist while the rest, in particular the Isaaq (Sultan Nur's clan), was depicted as a British collaborators. Abdi Sheik Abdi minces no words in his book applying the word "collaborators" to the Isaaq and despite the majority of his Daarood clan's presence in the anti-dervish camp and British and Italian camp, he never uses such term to describe their position.

The late dictator himself Siad Barre believed in the clan-based narrative of the dervish, where the dervish story is reduced to a Daarood struggle against Great Britain, according to the former chief of the Somali police and the author of (The cost of dictatorship: the Somali experience) the Somali dictator believed that he was the new Mad Mullah incarnate and that the Isaaq were responsible for the defeat of his "hero" Mohammed Abdullah Hassan.

The Dervish historiography in Somali society was dominated by a one clan, virtually all of the Somali authors of the dervish, history and poetry hailed from Siad Barre's clan, with the exception of Musa Haji Ismail Galal. The clan used the state resources to turn Somali history into what Professor Ali Jimale Ahmed called a process of "dervishization" of Somali history to the exclusion of all others. This one-sided narrative dominated Somali media, school curriculum and even public discourse. During the civil war, Bashir Goeth, a Somali author from the Gedabursi clan which during the civil war was allied with Siad Barre clan against the Isaaq and SNM, called for the destruction of the what he called "Isaaq the troublesome child", in his article Goeth used the Dervish one-sided narrative to depict the Isaaq as "traitor"s. He opened his diatribe with the following paragraph:
... I will try to tackle the Isaq threat to Somalism, starting from their stand on the Dervish Movement to the present situation in a historical perspective. I will not even go into details to include some of their terrorist activities such as hijacking a Somali ship in 1961 and a national carrier in 1966 and again in 1987. The Dervish Movement, led by Sayyid Mohamed Abdulle Hassan, started the first Somali patriotic struggle against the colonialists. This nationalist movement which entered a long and a bloody war with three foreign powers, namely the British, the Italians and the Ethiopian kingdom, would have been victorious if the Isaq clan did not conspire against it with the British administration. The British government armed the Isaq – the 'friendlies' as they were called (Lewis, I. M: The Modem History of Somaliland; Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1965) – to fight against Sayyid Mohamed's nationalist movement. They also spied on and guided the British forces to the Dervish bases. The Isaq had even sent several unsuccessful missions to Sayyid Mohamed Abdulle Hassan on the pretext of mediating between him and the British but each time they asked him to surrender. Sayyid Mohamed never yielded to the Isaq games and even punished them on several occasions for their treachery and cooperation with the colonialists.

Dervish history was used and disseminated as clan propaganda and minor foot soldiers and latecomers into the dervish camps were elevated above the original founders of the movement and supplanted them all, thanks to the Siad Bare's government's overhaul of Dervish history. Ismail Mire (circa 1880s-1961) was promoted in the early years of Siad Bare's rule as the commander and lieutenant and right-hand man of the movement replacing Haji Sudi.

See also
Haji Sudi
Abdallah Shihiri
Sultan Deria Hassan
Mohammed Abdullah Hassan
Dervish state
Sharmarke Ali Saleh
Sheikh Madar
Garhajis
Isaaq

References

1841 births
1907 deaths
19th-century Somalian people
19th-century monarchs in Africa
20th-century Somalian people
20th-century monarchs in Africa
Somali sultans
Somalian religious leaders
Somalian Muslims


text:
Palaquium njatoh är en tvåhjärtbladig växtart som beskrevs av William Burck. Palaquium njatoh ingår i släktet Palaquium och familjen Sapotaceae.

Artens utbredningsområde är Java. Inga underarter finns listade i Catalogue of Life.

Källor

Ljungordningen
njatoh