Preface
Some questions may appear trivial from the outset but are the quintessence of history and identity. Who were/are the true ancient Egyptians? Who were/are the true Romans? Who were/are the true Israelites? Who were/are the Sumerians? Who were/are the true ancient Greeks? Who are the Arians? These questions are sociological, historical, geographical, and cultural. Though the answer might seem simple, it is hard to produce all-convincing evidence.

The same would be true if one asks, ‘Who were/are the true Ethiopians?’ Abyssinians may contest the answer to this question, but it is clear. If one has been so obscured from the bigger picture and instructed with the Abyssinian history, officiated as "Ethiopian history" for almost a century, the answer could be easy and thoughtlessly outright: "They are Abyssinians, the Habasha." Abyssinians or the Habasha are indeed Ethiopians. However, Abyssinians have only become Ethiopians by inaugurating Abyssinian Ethiopia. The true Ethiopia, Kushite Ethiopia, had existed long before Abyssinia or the arrival of the core Abyssinian peoples to northeast Africa. The true Ethiopians, who have always been Ethiopians, are the Kushite nations and peoples of Africa. Unlike the Semite elements of Abyssinians, they are indigenous to northeast Africa. They are the ancient Kush, which later came to be known as Ethiopia. They now live in half a dozen countries in the Horn of Africa region. One of them, which predominates in modern Ethiopia, is the Oromo nation. The Oromo are the true ancient and modern Ethiopians, and modern Ethiopia (Empire of Abyssinia-cum-Ethiopia) is because the Oromo are.

Even though the Oromo have always been the true Ethiopians, they have done little to assert that. They had allowed Abyssinian settler colonization in the late 19th century, and Habasha-led politico-religious elites had a political, social, historical, economic, and cultural free ride until the fall of the monarchy in 1974. Even though modern Ethiopia became a republic after the 1974 popular revolution, Abyssinian political, cultural, and linguistic domination has continued. The significant results of the domination have been the sustained marginalization of the Oromo and other Kushite nations, the relegation of the Oromo and different Cushitic language-speaking nations to second-class citizenship and the disowning of their histories and cultures, the misappropriation of the ancient name of the indigenous nations of northeast Africa to Abyssinia Proper, and institutionalization of Abyssinia-centered political order. Considering these objectionable results of Abyssinian domination, the present study calls for a new political order in modern Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa.

The study was many years in the making. It was envisaged during the 1997/98 Ethiopian academic year. The trigger was the first-year course, Ethiopian History 101. Modestly said, the course was worthless. It was about an embellished Abyssinian (Tigrie-Amhara) history that discredits, disavows, denigrates, and belittles wittingly other nations and nationalities of the country but glorifies, praises, and elevates the Amhara and the Tigre. A non-Abyssinian Ethiopian could not find himself in it approvingly. At the end of the course, three things were clear: first, Ethiopian History had a fundamental problem; second, the Abyssinian-centered Ethiopian citizenship and Ethiopian nationalism, which the course promotes, were untenable; third, the socio-political marginalization of the Oromo, in particular, must end. These created the passion to position the great Oromo nation in its rightful place in modern Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa's social, cultural, political, and historical landscape. Yet, it took a long time to realize the ambition. The actual work began in Germany in 2011. The work continued in the USA from the fall of 2012 to the spring of 2013. From spring to summer 2013, more input was collected in Germany, and the full-scale study began. The study continued from summer 2013 to fall 2015 in Norway, from fall 2015 to summer 2016 in The Netherlands, and from summer 2016 to spring 2017 in Norway under exceptionally challenging circumstances. By the summer of 2017, it was completed.

The study was an academic endeavor. It was an exploration of the socio-political history and prognosis of the perspective of the Oromo nation in modern Ethiopia in particular and in the Horn of Africa in general. It was conducted within an advocacy worldview, atheoretical framework, and case study design. The study employed multi-approach and multi-methods. In approach, it was illustrative, descriptive, and interpretive. In terms of methods, it combined qualitative content analysis, explanation building, historical narration, and comparisons. In the process, it was retrospective. The subject of the case study was the Oromo nation. Its objects were historical parallel and center-periphery approaches. Because of its very nature, it was based on secondary sources except for the part originating from the researcher’s subjective experiences, analysis, and synthesis.

The study advocates that the Oromo should claim the political centre of modern Ethiopia peacefully and democratically and take the initiative to unite and lead all the Kushite nations of the Horn of Africa for the renaissance of Kush, ancient Ethiopia. It argues, in the true sense, modern Ethiopia is because the Oromo are, and as the most prominent nation (occupying the largest and most endowed territory) in current Ethiopia, the Oromo have socio-political legitimacy to claim the political center democratically. The political status quo which keeps the Oromo in the political periphery in modern Ethiopia must change. Also, the politics of secession of the Oromo from Ethiopia, as if the Oromo have not always been Ethiopia itself, is untenable, nor is the absurd political tendency of reworking the Oromo as non-Ethiopians by the Abyssinian elites. It emphasizes that the Oromo and other Kushite nations are more Ethiopians in their rightful sense than Abyssinians. Indeed, the Abyssinian people inclined to confess Semite identity today are mixed at best, as epitomised in the politically constructed Habasha identity. As true ancient Ethiopians, the Oromo must claim their old name, Kush (true Ethiopia). They must also begin a decisive movement to replace spurious Abyssinian Ethiopia with genuine Kushite Ethiopia. They should do so for themselves and all the rightful titleholders, the Kushite nation of the Horn of Africa. It further argues that, as the largest Kushite nation, the Oromo have sociological legitimacy to lead and integrate the ancient Kushites. They should call upon all the Kushite nations of the Horn of Africa to unite and rebuild the glorious ancient Kushite Ethiopia and Kushite Ethiopian nationalism.

As a starting step, the study reviews the socio-political history of the Oromo at length. It offers a visionary and unifying narrative for the Oromo nation: Ancient Kushite Ethiopianist Narrative. It is an integrated socio-political and historical narrative. It would reorient and refocus the socio-political and historical perspectives of the Oromo nation in modern Ethiopia. It could also unite, first, the Kushites of Ethiopia and, then, all the Kushites of the Horn of Africa. In the meantime, the Oromo must promote themselves democratically to modern Ethiopia's political centre and the Kushite nations' overall leadership. They should initiate and lead the political movement of the Kushites and the renaissance of the glorious Ancient Kush, Ancient Ethiopia. Considering these, the study calls for a new political order in modern Ethiopia, particularly in the Horn of Africa region.

The report of the study is organised into eleven Chapters. Chapter 1 is an introduction. It sketches the outline and methodology of the study. Chapter 2 is a general introduction that relates, among others, the transformation of ancient Kush to Oromia. Chapter 3 reviews the portrayal of the Oromo in the failed “Ethiopian history” and supplies counterarguments. Chapter 4 narrates the cause of the 16th-century offensive-defensive military campaigns of the Oromo. Chapter 5 recounts, in detail, the 16th and 17th-century liberation of the Oromo country that the expanding Christian and Islamic kingdoms had taken away from them and their resettlements. Chapter 6 details the real reasons for the successes of the protracted offensive-defensive campaign of the Oromo in the 16th century in counterargument to Abba Bahrey’s brief sociological analysis. Chapter 7 discusses the Abyssinian and European missed opportunities to adopt Gadaa democracy in the early 17th century. Chapter 8 recounts the Oromo's historical influences in Abyssinia's kingdom from the early 17th century to the mid-19th century and their rule of the kingdom during the so-called Era of Princes, aka Yejju Dynasty. Chapter 9 discusses the failure of the Oromo struggle against the Abyssinian settler colonization and the emergence of modern Ethiopia. Chapter 10 discusses at length the total and partial assimilation of Oromo communities to Abyssinian identity. Chapter 11 offers concise concluding remarks where challenging stances are addressed albeit briefly, a new narrative is proposed, the main argument of the study is recapitulated, and practical recommendations are submitted but just as starters. Every chapter begins with an Introduction. Except for the first and the last, which conclude with a Summary, all other Chapters end with a Summary and Conclusion.

Deribie Mekonnen Demmeksa
Horten, Norway
May 28, 2018