Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List
 

Here is a link to this page:
http://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.asp?message_group=6831&start_row=11


NONE Christian belliefs found TODAY in modern Ethiopia

1 - 1011 - 19
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: SunofMan Sent: 6/30/2017 3:13:37 AM
Reply

"the Amhara people who do not originate from Ethiopia or even Africa "

??? okay Wallis Budge


Who was in power when the great Christian conversion took place?

According to the article it was the Agaw; that is also what is commonly accepted in Ethiopia today.

Who converted Ezana?

The Amahra? I don't think so.

What about the Amharas' pre-christian beliefs?

Who cares, right? they're not proud Africans right!? really?!

"'Whether they (Oromo) became Christians or Muslims, the Oromo's traditional modes of experiencing the divine have continued almost unaffected, in spite of the fact that several rituals and social institutions in which it was expressed, have been very diminished or apparently submerged in new ritual cloaks."

This is true for the Amhara too.

"Moreover, just like in other African countries, it is
notable that before the advent of Christianity in
Wolaitta, there were personalities who functioned under
superhuman and supernatural influences as seers,
diviners, medicine-men in African traditional religious
settings."

This is still the case, Christianity has not stopped this; such traditions continue to exist in Ethiopia...amongst the Amhara too.

That article would be so beautiful if it didn't go so out of its way to relate the fact that the writer despises Amharas. The Amhara definitely have blood on their hands, but does that mean they're to be cast aside? Or go down as the great invader/villain of Ethiopia?! Every other ethnic group gets a free pass? It is unfortunate that such an interesting and informative article would have such a biased slant to it. The point could have easily been made that Christianity is intolerant and oppressive, even in Ethiopia (and the rest of the world), without crapping on the Amhara.

May we please have the source of the article?



Furthermore, who are these Amhara?

Up until the last quarter of the 20th century, "Amhara" was only used (in the form amariñña) to refer to Amharic, the language, or the medieval province located in Wollo (modern Amhara Region). Still today, most people labeled by outsiders as "Amhara", refer to themselves simply as "Ethiopian", or to their province (e.g. Gojjamé from the province Gojjam). According to Ethiopian ethnographer Donald Levine, "Amharic-speaking Shewans consider themselves closer to non-Amharic-speaking Shewans than to Amharic-speakers from distant regions like Gondar."[71] Amharic-speakers tend to be a "supra-ethnic group" composed of "fused stock".[72] Takkele Taddese describes the Amhara as follows:


The Amhara can thus be said to exist in the sense of being a fused stock, a supra-ethnically conscious ethnic Ethiopian serving as the pot in which all the other ethnic groups are supposed to melt. The language, Amharic, serves as the center of this melting process although it is difficult to conceive of a language without the existence of a corresponding distinct ethnic group speaking it as a mother tongue. The Amhara does not exist, however, in the sense of being a distinct ethnic group promoting its own interests and advancing the Herrenvolk philosophy and ideology as has been presented by the elite politicians. The basic principle of those who affirm the existence of the Amhara as a distinct ethnic group, therefore, is that the Amhara should be dislodged from the position of supremacy and each ethnic group should be freed from Amhara domination to have equal status with everybody else. This sense of Amhara existence can be viewed as a myth.

Source:

Takkele Taddese "Do the Amhara Exist as a Distinct Ethnic Group?" in Marcus, Harold G., ed., Papers of the 12th International Conference of Ethiopian Studies, 1994, pp.168–186.

Selam


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 7/3/2017 9:28:04 PM
Reply

It not an article

it is a compilation of articles and texts researched by myself. There is no body of work this far on this subject as far as I know. However there is work available on the state of Amharic supremacy in relation to other peoples of Ethiopia. I dont point this out to promote tribal war. But to simply point it out. For many - Ethiopians are Christians and live in harmony as Christians unlike the Europeans, and thats that..... When we know this is untrue

The whole point being to highlight what is outside of the stereotypical western depiction of Ethiopian (Amhara) Christians.

When Ezana (Agaw) was converted it is incorrect to think that "Ethiopia" was simultaneously converted. And again I wanted to highlight and explain this point. Also how many of the following 'conversions' that took place are documented to be as much / more about land ownership and wealth than religious epiphany about Jesus.

Still, for origins of the Amhara I find they are a mixed group of Arab / Cushitic origin:


"AMHARA
The Amhara appear to be descended from the same people group as the Tigray-Tigrinyapeople.  Their Sabaean ancestors came to the highlands of what is now Eritrea and Ethiopia from the Arabian peninsula.  These Semitic migrants gradually mixed with the Cushitic peoples there.  Successive waves of migrations across the Red Sea straits and around the Horn have enriched the mix of cultural and genetic heritage in the historical period.  The name is sometimes rendered Amara, from their name for themselves in the Amharic language.

Recent reconstruction of human prehistory from DNA studies indicates this narrow southern end of the Red Sea was the major point from which original humans moved from the African continent into Asia and on to the East and West.  This area has continued to be the crossing point for migrations in both directions in recent millennia.  (See the books by Stephen Oppenheimer and Spencer Wellson this reconstruction of human pre-history.)

The mix of Cushite and Semitic peoples were united over the centuries in the Amhara-Tigray empire, called Abyssinia.  This word Abyssinia is a derivation from the name for a group of the Tigray people at that time, the Habash.  The Amhara and Tigrinya-Tigray groups claim close ties with the Jews, having adopted many cultural values and religious beliefs from them.

The basic ancestry of the Amhara is Semitic, as is their language.  But they became a unique people as they intermarried and absorbed some of the Cushitic peoples who preceded them in this area.  There was a strong Oromo strain in the royal family and nobles.  The Amhara features are similar to the southern Arabs, olive to brown skin, with fine features and dark circles around the eyes.  Most sources say the name comes from the wordamari, meaning "pleasing, agreeable, beautiful and gracious."

The national and ethnic identity of the Amhara has been strongly intertwined with a form of the Christian faith since about 350 CE, when Syrian (Nestorian) Christianity was introduced to the royal family by a young Syrian sailor.  After the Royal Family accepted the new faith, they requested missionaries from Syria and later developed ties with the Egyptian Church, hence the inclusion of the term Coptic (Egyptian) in the name of the Ethiopian Coptic Orthodox Church since early times."


Messenger: SunofMan Sent: 7/4/2017 3:19:48 AM
Reply

You compiled articles to point out what? That the Amhara don't originate from Ethiopia or even Africa?

There are no other ethnic groups in the world, that I know of, that originated elsewhere and were referred to as Amhara prior to their existence in Ethiopia. The people first called Amhara formed uniquely in Ethiopia, and thus originated in Ethiopa. The physical features of those known as Amhara are not so stereotypically categorizable, there are many people of other subgroups that are indistinguishable from many Amhara. Whatever people traveled from the Arabian peninsula back into Africa mixed with the subgroups already there, and then became who are now known as Amhara.

If they were just a group of Christian Yemeni settlers then they would have gone down in history as such; especially since a group of high achieving Africans has been slowly whitewashed over time. European scholars love to push this agenda, that Ethiopians originated from outside of Africa and so did their language, as a means of attributing African achievement to non Africans, similar to European accounts of Egyptian history.

Please read Ethiopic, by Ayele Bekerie, I cannot stress the importance of that book enough; he has also written essays on the pre christian history of Ethiopians. Much of the Amhara pre christian history is dressed in Ethiopian Orthodox clothes, but the church maintains rits and rites unique to the Church. Those traditions weren't just made up after the advent of Christianity, they are based on pre christian tradition. If the Agaw where the first converted, then who converted the Amhara?

I'm not saying the Amhara didn't have a lot to do with further conversion, they did, and you're right, it probably had a lot to do with land ownership. However, it was nobles and the church keeping that land, it's not like all the Amhara farmers where rejoicing cuz they got a piece of the pie too, they were converted for the same reason.

Are the Amhara to be dismissed as non Africans because they are Africans with some real old semitic bloodlines?

Like I said before, the Amhara have blood on their hands, but that does not make them the only Ethiopian sub group to have committed atrocities, or to think of themselves as superior, which is not a thought shared universally by all people known as Amhara.

Do you think Takkele Taddese's description of the Amhara is off the mark?




Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 7/4/2017 9:23:07 AM
Reply

None Christian beliefs found today in modern Ethiopia as the title says. We put fire on all forms of oppression iah from the Ethiopian Christians and from the power of the Amhara (who clearly are African but with their little arab mixup) or from the Tigrayans who were also left out of the text, or from any other ethnic group. After all, there are over 80 ethnic groups in Ethiopia, (Oromo aside) I chose to discuss a few of the less talked about groups who dont historically have a record of recent ruling authority. InI always root for the underdog.


Your focusing on a few lines of subcontext from of a body of text that quite clearly is about traditional religious beliefs in Ethiopia. YOU gone off into an ethnic political argument. I know there is some overlap but it still coming like a tangent.

The text doesnt talk about conversion around King Ezanas time either by the way. It deals with contemporary times and how traditional beliefs have been / are oppressed by the ruling powers and the Church. In terms of the beliefs of the Crown before Ezana - I have been talking about this for years on this forum. Dem time Ethiopias ruling power had a spiritual system dating back to the Axumite Empire which was an offshoot of Kemetic tradition. But again, this thread is simply having a look at a few none christian beliefs still practiced TODAY in ethiopia.


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 7/4/2017 10:20:13 AM
Reply

to your point of genetic origin: The tutsi, the wolayta the konso etc are largely E1B1A And can trace via genetics their lineage back to the horn of africa with little admixture.

The oromo and the amhara have a large proportion of E1B1b but also have a similar prevelance by percentage of Haplogroup J - which proves their Arab/Asian admixture.

This is based off genetics not hearsay or language or belief. That doesnt make them none African but knowing that there are large groups in Ethiopia who have mixed with None Africans this could be significant when discussing traditional beliefs when compared to the traditional beliefs of the Tutsi / Konso for example. It is for context only and was not the focus of the thread. Maybe genetic diversity within Africa could be another topic actually



Messenger: SunofMan Sent: 7/6/2017 3:14:45 AM
Reply

I'm not saying there is no admixture, I don't think I denied that. However, the Amhara are not just Yemeni transplants. Whatever arab blood was added and mixed in, was added and mixed in to original African peoples, and there has been no further "admixture" since a really long time ago! only further dilution into an ethnic group that only became the Amhara in Africa.

I don't have any problem with you rooting for the underdog, I do think that the attrocities committed by any group towards any other are deeply shameful; and it saddens me that the Amhara have that dark history. But it's a complex thing...the Amharas have been abused at times too, and the Amharas didn't abuse others as a unified force. There has been more than one occasion of Amhara/Oromo integration, out of love, not some genetic master plan.

"YOU gone off into an ethnic political argument."

If I recall, you kicked off your post with:

"Amhara people who do not originate from Ethiopia or even Africa have OPPRESSED their traditional beliefs and values."

That sounds like an ethnic political arguement to me!? no?

How much African blood does it take for a group who has existed in Africa for an unkown amount of time to equal an African?

I liked your post, it was fascinating to read some new details about some of the other ethnic groups in Ethiopia, but I don't think you had to throw Amharas under the bus to make your point. Christianity existed prior to the Amharas adoption of it. They had pre christian beleifs too, and you cannot say that their pre christian beleifs were just adopted from the Arabian penninsula.

I never knew an Amhara that wasn't proud to be an African, and I never knew an Amhara to even mention their arab/asian admixture.

Please read Ethiopic, by Ayele Bekerie...at this point I'd be willing to buy you a copy. It's a very enlightening read.


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 7/6/2017 3:25:06 AM
Reply

Well it is up for debate whether these people with the genetic admixture originated FROM ethiopia and mixed or moved into Ethiopia from foreign and mixed with local people. I dont think we can really know all we can say is generally their tends to be small differences between the highland and lowland living Ethiopians. This certainly was a long long time ago. Again, the post was not written by myself but collected by myself and it must be said that throughout my researching of traditional Ethiopian beliefs was a common and repeated theme of Christian and or Amharic oppression of others cultures. It is simply what I found from a number of articles. But we know Ethiopian ethnic-politics is a very hot subject and sometimes with inescapable bias based on the authors background. I will check out the book when I get a chance. Bless up brother


Messenger: SunofMan Sent: 7/6/2017 3:30:29 AM
Reply

Same way King...sorry if I came off too heated.


Messenger: RastaGoddess Sent: 7/7/2017 11:52:48 AM
Reply

Give thANKHs unto both of di I's for a spirited and very interesting reasoning.

I know several Amhara who though they cannot deny being African, they simultaneously reject being associated with their elder (and darker) Oromo family, much less West Africans, or what most erroneously refer to as "sub Saharan"Africans. Colorism is alive and well in Ethiopia as it is worldwide. There are "careless Ethiopians", at home and abroad.

INI know that KUSH is the Mother, and has stretched forth her Hand (DNA) unto ALL parts of Alkebulan (including India/Arabia/Asia), and though her children vary in phenotype and complexion.....INI AH DI ROOT. All roads lead back to the source.

SANKOFA





1 - 1011 - 19

Return to Reasoning List




RastafarI
Email
Haile Selassie I