WI: Successful early Ethopian nationalism/centralization?

Zioneer

Banned
Just an off-the-cuff idea; is there any way Ethiopia could pull off English/French-style nationalism and centralism of their kingdom/empire early on in the medieval/ era? Could they centralize the king/emperor's power, the nation's culture, and so forth with any PoD before say, 1400?
 
Just an off-the-cuff idea; is there any way Ethiopia could pull off English/French-style nationalism and centralism of their kingdom/empire early on in the medieval/ era? Could they centralize the king/emperor's power, the nation's culture, and so forth with any PoD before say, 1400?

They sort of did. "Sort of" meaning that they weren't far off if France in 1400 is the term of comparison, relative to the geographical costraints involved (that are much more problematic for Ethiopia than for France or England, both in terms of distances involved and rugged terrain therein).
Of course, if you think of France in, say, 1800, it's another matter entirely.
 
If you are asking for Ethiopia to "modernize" in the Middle Ages, I don't know if there's a way, but bear in mind that's tantamout to ask whether Ethiopia can be the birthplace of political modernity.
I don't think it's impossible, but probably requires some major shift, on the level of some major local domesticate plant that was not there IOTL (Some of the things similar to what Jared is using Land of Red and Gold may be very handy, a pity that's Austrialian stuff).
 
In 1400 one of the few places that had a notion comparable to the modern state was China. Maybe if the Ming fleet drops anchor in Ethiopia a few more times.
 
Just an off-the-cuff idea; is there any way Ethiopia could pull off English/French-style nationalism and centralism of their kingdom/empire early on in the medieval/ era? Could they centralize the king/emperor's power, the nation's culture, and so forth with any PoD before say, 1400?

I think the construction of an Ethiopian identity based around the Christian religion (kind of like how the Byzantines saw themselves) could have been a suitable substitute for nationalism. That would require the surrounding Islamic states (esp. Ifat) to be a bit more aggressive against the country and engage in long-term low-intensity warfare, with a couple of big campaigns every now and then.

Aggression would also help in the centralization of the country, especially if the king wins some battles and begins to be seen as the leader of Ethiopia, his prestige far above the regional lords. Bureaucratization could then follow. Obviously this doesn't mean Ethiopia has 'modern' technology, but it will be an organized state at least.

I think it's also important for the early Solomonic kings to actually settle down and not be nomads, so there could be a fixed capital where wealth and production could accumulate.
 
In 1400 one of the few places that had a notion comparable to the modern state was China. Maybe if the Ming fleet drops anchor in Ethiopia a few more times.

Did Ethiopia even control an adequate amount of coastline around 1400? IIRC, most coastal areas were more or less under control of not-very friendly Muslim states in that timeframe.
That did not stop intermittent contact between Ethiopia and Asian states (both China and Indian polities I think) as well as Christian countries (there are contacts with the Papacy attested in this era IIRC, though not much) but it was hardly something conducive to major shifts in the Ethiopian feudal ways.
 
I think the construction of an Ethiopian identity based around the Christian religion (kind of like how the Byzantines saw themselves) could have been a suitable substitute for nationalism. That would require the surrounding Islamic states (esp. Ifat) to be a bit more aggressive against the country and engage in long-term low-intensity warfare, with a couple of big campaigns every now and then.

Aggression would also help in the centralization of the country, especially if the king wins some battles and begins to be seen as the leader of Ethiopia, his prestige far above the regional lords.

My understanding is that this is pretty much OTL's history of Ethiopia in the timeframe the OP posits. Christian identity was definitely there in a major way, and the surrounding Muslim states were frequently hostile in a fairly militant and raidly way.
That hardly fostered major warrior leaders IOTL until pretty late, and they never managed to overcome the fractious habits of major Ethiopian lords, until a time when the Italians, not the Muslims, were the problem.
 
My understanding is that this is pretty much OTL's history of Ethiopia in the timeframe the OP posits. Christian identity was definitely there in a major way, and the surrounding Muslim states were frequently hostile in a fairly militant and raidly way.
That hardly fostered major warrior leaders IOTL until pretty late, and they never managed to overcome the fractious habits of major Ethiopian lords, until a time when the Italians, not the Muslims, were the problem.

Yeah, that's what I thought after re-reading the history. Perhaps they need to be the right kind of invasions - not small ones that could be defeated by regional lords, but stronger ones that needed the whole country to fight against, thus elevating the Ethiopian Emperor.
 
Yeah, that's what I thought after re-reading the history. Perhaps they need to be the right kind of invasions - not small ones that could be defeated by regional lords, but stronger ones that needed the whole country to fight against, thus elevating the Ethiopian Emperor.

This also sort of happened at some point IIRC... but did not last.
 

Deleted member 67076

Its alot easier if Ethiopia maintains ports and regular contact and trade with non African powers such as India, China or Portugal.

A good POD would be Ethiopia dominating or conquering several or all of the Somali states.
 
What is considered Ethiopia was the northern highland and it hasnt extended to the nearest coast since the fall of axum in the 700's.
The coastline of axum , modern day eritrea had its own states that were independent from any interior highland state.

So for ethiopia to get a coastline they would have to form a unified state in the northern highlands and expand north and conquer modern day Eritrea which was called midri bahri, they would have had to deal with the formidable beja cavalry and afar tribesmen.
Now to invade into Somali held territories they would have to go through several muslim sultanates . This they did manage to do under made seyon in the 1340’s.
The Ethiopians did not have much difficulty subduing states that fought like them like the several central highland and lowland muslim states, but had a challenge from Adal that had a combined cavalry and infantry army and managed to put up an equal fight for over a century despite a 3 to 1 manpower disadvantage.
This manpower disadvantage will fail against Somali nomadic tribes due to the logistical problem of supplying troops in the vast grasslands, and the fact that even sub clans could field light cavalry in the thousands .
The whole point is moot because to reach Somali lands they would need to go through the oromo like they did between 1880 and 1900. The oromo gadaa system allows mobilization of massive amounts of manpower and they would have matched any Ethiopian army in skill and manpower.

Realistically the only way Ethiopia within its current borders could have been created was exactly how it was done , through access to firearms and easy access to them provided by sympathetic Europeans.
The Ethiopians conquered the Oromo between 1880 and 1900 and they did this with firearms , and genocide. After killing half the population of 5 million, through war, famine and disease.
They turned the remainder into serfs. A large percentage of those became forcefully assimilated and now consider themselves Ethiopians and even part of the dominant amhara ethnicity.
The loose definition of the amhara indentity means that more than half of them today are actually assimilated oromo.
 
Ethiopian delegates actually arrived at the Council of Florence in 1441. There were also ambassadors to the Pope in 1481 and 1533. Aragonese and Italians visited Ethiopia during the 15th century. There were also Ethiopia diplomatic missions to the Portuguese throughout the 16th century.

Portugal was heavily involved in Ethiopian affairs in the first half of the 16th century as it battled Mamluke naval forces in the Red Sea in order to protect its Indian Ocean trade. That cooperation decline in the later half of the 16th century.

If that could somehow be continued, then exchange of trade and ideas might help build a more modern Ethiopian state in the 17th century. Perhaps a Portuguese colony on the Red Sea that gives the Ethiopians secure access to the sea, something like Goa. I think that is your best bet, not a pre-1400 POD.

Ethiopia is isolated. To advance, it needs to break that isolation and have trade and exchange with the outside world. That's not really possible until another Christian power can arrive on the scene.
 
If you are asking for Ethiopia to "modernize" in the Middle Ages, I don't know if there's a way, but bear in mind that's tantamout to ask whether Ethiopia can be the birthplace of political modernity.
I don't think it's impossible, but probably requires some major shift, on the level of some major local domesticate plant that was not there IOTL (Some of the things similar to what Jared is using Land of Red and Gold may be very handy, a pity that's Austrialian stuff).
You can take a look at my geographic description of Axumite Ethiopia in my 6th century Recap thread. You should be able to find something there. ;)
 
Top