Response concerning ‘Abyssinia’ [Archives:2004/751/Opinion]
Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
[email protected]
For the Yemen Times
I would like to thank Mr. Wossen Gabriel (“Comments on Africa-related article”) for his good words and nice comments for my article. And I want to agree with his understanding about the regional need for peace, common work and mutual, multilateral progress.
Mr. Wossen Gabriel asks why I use the term Abyssinia for that country. Well, the answer is simple: it is the only one correct! I would like to suggest in this regard a more careful reading of my text, particularly the part dedicated to this subject, where I explain that “Ethiopia” is Sudan, the ancient kingdom of Kush or Meroe, at the southern border of Egypt. The ancient Greek term Aithiopia refers to this kingdom, not Abyssinia!
Yes, King Ezana invaded Meroe (today's Bagrawiyah in Sudan, nearby Atbara) around 370 CE and attached that part of Sudan to his kingdom, but Abyssinia did not control Meroe – Aithiopia for more than 100 -150 years. A little bit after 500 CE emerge in Sudan the three Sudanese Christian kingdoms:
1. Nobatia in the North with Faras as capital, between Abu Simbel and Wadi Halfa on the modern Egyptian – Sudanese borderline.
2. Makkuria in the central part of what was Sudan – 'Ethiopia' in antiquity, with Dongola Agouza as capital, in the south of the modern city of Dongola, around 600 km in the south of the modern Egyptian – Sudanese borderline, and
3. Alwa or Alodia in the area of today's Khartoum.
So, the entire area of what the Ancient Greeks called 'Ethiopia' belong to local Khammitic and Nilo-Saharic peoples and to their states during medieval – Islamic times. Abyssinia controlled 'Ethiopia' for 100 – 150 years! That is all!
Of course, it was a matter of political propaganda of the Christian Abyssinian state of Axum to use the Biblical expression that Aithiopia (in the Greek translation of the 70 Alexandrian scholars) 'will extend its hand to the Lord' for signaling the Christening of Abyssinia. But we cannot afford to take this means of 1600-year old royal propaganda at face value today. Even more so, since Aithiopia in the Greek biblical text corresponds to Kush in the Massoretic Hebrew text; and Kush is certainly Sudan, 'Meroe', not Abyssinia.
What I believe personally in this regard is that Habasha, Abyssinia, is a very beautiful name, and Abyssinians need not to think that they may shine to the Western eyes more impressively through use of the term Ethiopia. And – that too – is up to the modern state of Sudan to
a. get rid of the negative and counterproductive assimilation with Egypt, and the ensuing de-personalization of the Sudanese historical past,
b. to disentangle itself from the lethal embrace of dictatorial, pan-Arabist, and Islamist radical and extremist ideologies and groups, and then
c. to demand the exclusivity of the use of the term 'Ethiopia' by Sudan.
Saying this, I want to stress that I have nothing against either our honourable reader, or Abyssinia itself, a beautiful, and historically rich country. Simply, I believe that in a frank cooperation focusing of great potentialities all the countries of the region have. But if working together, truth must prevail.
And, last but not least, I do not favour Eritrea above Abyssinia. On the contrary, I already stressed in my article that Adulis, the rich port in the area of today's Massawa / Massikha, belonged to and was controlled by the King Zoscales of Axumite (pre-Christian) Abyssinia, according to the 1st century CE text of the Periplus of the Red Sea.
Why do I line up Eritrea with all the other modern countries? Well, one should ask the United Nations! Eritrea is now a reality. One must show to the government of Asmara the correct way for regional cooperation. Rejection is not the way. And the fact that Eritrea was part of Abyssinian forms of state in the past says nothing! Iraq belonged to both the Ottoman Empire and Iran. But today's realities, especially when many different peoples coexist within a country, emanate from the concept of human rights, and are based on the many steps of progress mankind has made. One who forgets this always fails.
——
[archive-e:751-v:13-y:2004-d:2004-07-01-p:opinion]
