AHC: Afroasiatic instead of Bantu migration in Central and Southern Africa

As in the title, how do we get the Afroasiatic populations in the Horn of Africa to replicate want Bantu people did and take over Africa south Cameroon? This includes all Afroasiatic people in the region, be they Semitic, Omotic or Cushitic, but not Chadic(they are not in the Horn anyway), if you want to be creative the South Semites in Arabia could also play a role(in Madagascar?)

Earliest POD should be the bronze age collapse, but if you find it too limiting feel free to suggest something earlier, but not pre-bronze age!
 
Maybe some sort of Egypt wank, wherein Egyptian farming populaces seek to expand down the Nile, Red Sea and into Abyssinia indefinitely. This could start a wave move moment southward of speakers from Abyssinia, Somalia and so forth to move southward, ever in front of an expanding tide of Egyptian agriculturalists.
 
Maybe some sort of Egypt wank, wherein Egyptian farming populaces seek to expand down the Nile, Red Sea and into Abyssinia indefinitely. This could start a wave move moment southward of speakers from Abyssinia, Somalia and so forth to move southward, ever in front of an expanding tide of Egyptian agriculturalists.
A new Kingdom scenario? What could motivate this settler-based conquest on the part of the Egyptians? Especially up to the Ethiopian highlands.
 
I'm thinking, what about a strong Dmt? which expands aggressively in the south? Maybe through early adoption of iron, contact or conflict with a strong Egypt and trade with the Levant they could undergo empire formation and creating a push factors for Omotic and Cushitic groups?
 
Some sort of early Ethiopian expansion would certainly work. I can see expansion into Sudan and beyond the Kenyan frontier.
 
Some sort of early Ethiopian expansion would certainly work. I can see expansion into Sudan and beyond the Kenyan frontier.
I find active expansion into Kenya unlikely, I mean it took to the late medieval era for Ethiopia to create a state even just comparable to such an early empire going into both Kenya and Sudan.
But an early expansionism might intensify contact and spread of military technology and encourage expansionism in neighboring people.
 
A new Kingdom scenario? What could motivate this settler-based conquest on the part of the Egyptians? Especially up to the Ethiopian highlands.

Perhaps a religious devotion? Settling the realms of chaos could be defined as a holy ordeal? Controlling the length of the Nile would be somewhat of a sign of divine mandate. This might be the inducting needed to cause a mass migration of peoples, proliferation of an Egyptian styled society and so forth. Thus perpetuating a southward push.
 
A potential problem would be surviving in the Malaria ridden Mid-Africa.

A seaborne expansion could be more feasible. Once they reach the cone, the South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana and surrounding region, Sky is the limit. Land expansion is very difficult, but.

I could think of a few Scenarios of this.

Ancient Egypt colonizes the Cone by seaborne settlements after hostilities with the surrounding kingdoms. Eventually, there are two Egyptian civilizations.

Pagans and Jews of Arabian Peninsula migrate in the nights from their hiding places, from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, etc, via ships, after Islam overran the region. Eventually they settle in the cone, build rich and prosperous settlements with little outside interference, develop a more advanced version of their religions and yeah, prosper and trade after a few centuries.

Edit: Pagans and Jews only. Christians were in very less number and may not ally with the Pagans and Jews of Yemen, Oman and Arabia very easily.
 
Last edited:
Additional ones,

Ethiopia allied with Kingdom of Yemen, doing something like that in the Antiquity.

And how about this, in an Age of a Great Greek Empire, the Empire settles some of its Leventine and Egyptian citizens in the newfound Cone of Africa by sea. Eventually it becomes a Greek colony and a country with a huge minority of Afro-Asiatic speakers.
 
I find active expansion into Kenya unlikely, I mean it took to the late medieval era for Ethiopia to create a state even just comparable to such an early empire going into both Kenya and Sudan.
Hard to say? Ethiopian expansion under Emperors like Amda Tseyon saw the Ethiopian frontier extend beyond the southern rivers and the Ethiopian state itself strengthened enough to see to a vigorous process of centralization completed.
 
A potential problem would be surviving in the Malaria ridden Mid-Africa.
It's true that Malaria is less present in the Horn of Africa, but I believe this is not really such a big difference.
Were the Asian ancestors of the Malagasy particularly adapted to malaria? Also malaria didn't particularly stop Arabs from settling in the coasts Tanzania and Mozambique and mixing with the locals either.



It seems to me that at the very least Kenya is in the same situation as the Horn. Also I believe Omotic people live in a region with a lot of malaria, so maybe we could see them succeed better in South Sudan, Uganda and Congo?

A seaborne expansion could be more feasible. Once they reach the cone, the South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana and surrounding region, Sky is the limit. Land expansion is very difficult, but.
Would a sea expansion be different from a land one following the coast?

Pagans and Jews of Arabian Peninsula migrate in the nights from their hiding places, from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, etc, via ships, after Islam overran the region. Eventually they settle in the cone, build rich and prosperous settlements with little outside interference, develop a more advanced version of their religions and yeah, prosper and trade after a few centuries.
By that point Bantu reached Southern Africa and even Arabs didn't really replace Swahili.
 
Last edited:
Hard to say? Ethiopian expansion under Emperors like Amda Tseyon saw the Ethiopian frontier extend beyond the southern rivers and the Ethiopian state itself strengthened enough to see to a vigorous process of centralization completed.
Sure but one kingdom is in the late middle ages and the other is 2300 years earlier in the early iron age.
 
It's true that Malaria is less present in the Horn of Africa, but I believe this is not really such a big difference.
Were the Asian ancestors of the Malagasy particularly adapted to malaria? Also malaria didn't particularly stop Arabs from settling in the coasts Tanzania and Mozambique and mixing with the locals either.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...y-circa-1900-This-historic-map_fig2_278383204
That's interesting. Opens a window for many discussions.
Would a sea expansion be different from a land one following the coast?
A seaborne one could be faster and easier than a land based one.
By that point Bantu reached Southern Africa and even Arabs didn't really replace Swahili.
Since it is known that the Bantu themselves replaced the older inhabitants, is an another wave of the same possible?
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Cushitic_languages - Wank of speakers of these languages (i.e. ancestors of the Iraqw)? The Bantu didn't migrate all at once or as a unified group after all.
It seems that some of those groups were actually native to their region relative to later populations movements, so maybe we are not even speaking about a migration at all, but rather consolidation in Tanzania and the rest of Kenya.

Also this kinda debunks the idea that Malaria would play a role, at least here.
 
Top