I wish to extend my sincere appreciation to the Harvard Center for African Studies for hosting a comprehensive panel discussion on significant issues and current affairs related to Ethiopia and the ongoing conflict in Tigray. Although I was pleased to watch the discussion forum on YouTube, I am disappointed that the panel’s contemporary historical analysis and field research fell short of my expectations. https://youtu.be/_10EEKVr14s?si=3faOKAXf5fb89O1K
On History
From a historical perspective, the claim that Ethiopia’s three-thousand-year history is a myth and refuses to acknowledge Mehari Yohannes is absurd, which aligns with the teaching of the Marxist-Leninist of Tigray. To dismiss Ethiopian history as myth is to misunderstand and debunk history itself. Suppose we rely on historiography, brushing aside oral tradition for the time being. In that case, we will explore abundant archeological and documentary evidence that proves beyond a doubt that Ethiopian history stretches back three thousand years. Mind you, from the golden ages of Aksum to the present alone, the historical timeline covers slightly over two thousand years. Put otherwise, before Aksum, there was Yeha. Before Yeha, now we know that there was one other civilization that thrived in a place called Gobedra, just seven kilometers (about four miles) outside the city of Aksum. This was substantiated by an archeological finding of a ceramic- and pottery-making community and was dated to circa 3,000 BCE. If we begin with Gobedra, then the history of Ethiopia would cover 5,000 years. Ethiopia indeed is a very ancient land. Ethiopian historiography is not mythology; it is rather an authentic historical account that helps us understand significant junctures in the Ethiopian experience. Mahari, who claims that Ethiopian history is just a century old? I will say shame on you, Mehari failing to “take a history lesson!” This notion of a “one-hundred-year-old nation” may refer to modern Ethiopia. Nevertheless, those who advance this argument often overlook the fact that modern Ethiopia is a continuation of medieval Ethiopia, which in turn is a direct descendant of ancient Ethiopia. We are the continuation of our forebears who have lived in this land for several millennia! Ethiopia, as we know it today, has existed without interruption for the last 3,000 years. This question embodies two essential parts: 1) ancient and modern Ethiopia and 2) the continuous existence of a state. To answer the question, it is necessary to underscore the context of the parts. No, I am not saying that Ethiopian history continued without interruption. There were intermediate periods characterized, for instance, by the Gudit (Yodit) period in ancient times, the Ahmed Grañ sixteenth-century Jihad wars, and the civil wars (also known as the Era of Princes) between 1769 and 1855. The state was interrupted (a political vacuum occurred) several times, but it did not vanish. Concerning modern Ethiopia, I would not say it is a replica of ancient Ethiopia. Still, I would argue that it is its torchbearer because the legacy of ancient Ethiopia (culture, artifacts, literature, music, religion, etc.) is very much alive in modern Ethiopia today.
South Arabia, which is essentially Yemen today, is only twelve miles away from Djibouti on the Gulf of Eden side. Therefore, it is not surprising that the two lands on either side of the Red Sea could have made cultural exchanges in ancient times.
Ethiopia and Yemen were connected in history, and there were trade, cultural, and diplomatic relations between the two countries. However, the Ethiopian civilization of antiquity was much closer, in many respects, to the Nile civilizations of Nubia and Egypt rather than to Yemen. The names of the kings and queens who reigned long before Askum emerged were similar to those of ancient Egyptians; the stele of Askum are similar to the Egyptian obelisks; the Ethiopian calendar of thirteen months is identical with that of Egypt, except that the Ethiopian calendar consists of four seasons with 3 months each and that of Egypt was three seasons with 4 months each; either way, we have 12 months plus the short thirteenth month with 5 days in both calendars. With Yemen, the Sabean letters and names of places such as Hawzen, Mereb, Saba, etc., could be the connection. Other than that, neither Aksumite mint coins (Aksum/Ethiopia was the only kingdom that had its currency in Africa) nor the unique Geez alphabet (quintessentially Ethiopian letters) are to be found in Yemen. On top of this, historical documents testify that ancient Ethiopians exercised hegemony over Southern Arabia during Aphilas in the last quarter of the third century AD and during Kaleb in the first decade of the sixth century AD. At present, the official historical account of Yemen admits that the country was a colony of Ethiopia in ancient history.
Part II: On Politics
The question of nationalities in Ethiopia, which was one of the foremost slogans of the Ethiopian Student Movement during Haile Selassie’s reign, has been addressed and answered by the EPRDF. However, demarcating territories to forge states based on language and ethnicity is flawed. The states should have been demarcated based on history, geography, and political expediency. For instance, Tigray was historically home to the Tigrigna, Agaw, Kunama, Saho, and Afar nationalities. These nationalities could have remained in their original settings and still enjoyed self-determination. The same logic applies to Wollo, which has also accommodated several ethnic groups throughout Ethiopia’s history. I believe the one regional state that comes closest to my idea of demarcation is the Southern Ethiopian Peoples’ Region, in which a cluster of different linguistic groups has chosen to live side by side in the same area and still use Amharic as their lingua franca for communication, business, and education.
To the ethnically demarcated regional states, there is some controversy surrounding the Wolkait and Woldia-Alamata areas, lands taken from Gondar and Wollo, respectively, and made part of Tigray. How do we analyze this controversy?
There is no doubt that the issue is controversial. Still, a part of the Ethiopian opposition in the diaspora is focused on the taking of land and incorporation into Tigray rather than on the politics of self-determination. Ethiopians in the diaspora, particularly Amhara chauvinists, are raising their voices concerning the role of the people. They should inquire whether the Ethiopian people have had a voice in the making of the regional states. Were these regional states formed by political fiat or by a referendum in which the Ethiopian people spoke out? The former reflects the reality of the newly restructured Ethiopia, and it is well known that there was no referendum regarding territorial demarcation. The only referendum that Ethiopians witnessed was the referendum on Eritrean independence, and ironically, Ethiopians were not invited to voice their opinion on the fate of Eritrea. It was, again, decided by political fiat, and only Eritreans were allowed to vote for independence.
Going back to the Wolkait controversy, however, I’d like to shed some light on the evolution and history of this region. One could refer to the history of Tigray to determine whether Tigray administered Wolkait or not. Tigray has always been the northernmost region of Ethiopia. As part of Ethiopia, it administered proper Tigray, present-day Eritrea, and Wolkait on the western frontier, as well as the Alamata-Woldia area on the southern border, known as Alwaha Melash. In the middle of the 17th century AD, Dejazamtch Galawdewos of Shire administered Wolkait. In the early 20th century, both Wolkait and Tselemti were paying tribute to Ras Gugsa of Tigray, whose power was terminated in 1930 when the Prince Regent Ras Tafari was crowned as Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia. Consequently, Tselemti and Wolkait were gradually incorporated (1930-1957) into the Gondar area. If scholars are interested in knowing more about the geographical extent (region) of Tigray in the early In the 17th century, they could refer to a book entitled ‘Tractatus Tres Historico-Geographici’ (Portuguese) or ‘A Seventh Century Historical and Geographical Account of Tigray, Ethiopia (English), authored by Manoel Barradas in 1634, translated into English by Elizabeth Filleul, and edited by Richard Pankhurst in 1996. The map of Tigray in this book covers Alwaha-Milash in the south, Lemalimo in the west, the Afar depression in the east, and the Dahlak archipelagos in the northeast (these are islands on the Red Sea, now in Eritrea). Tigray in the 17th century was four times the size of the present regional state of Tigray. To be Continued
Resource: Ethioobserver has conducted a comprehensive interview on significant issues and current affairs about Ethiopia with Dr. Ghelawdewos Araia, January 17, 2012