Addis Abeba — In recent years, there has been a growing push to introduce Ge'ez as a language subject in schools across the Amhara Regional State. This initiative has gained particular momentum after Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed assumed office in 2018, aligning with broader national efforts to reform the educational curriculum. Last month, the Amhara Education Bureau announced that it is working to expand access to Ge'ez instruction in primary schools. According to the bureau, more than 35,000 students in grades 3 to 5 are currently learning Ge'ez across 276 schools in 45 districts throughout the region. In addition, preparations for Grade 6 instruction-- including the development of student textbooks and teacher guides--have been finalized ahead of the coming academic year. The bureau also indicated that curriculum development for the introduction of Ge'ez education in grades 7 and 8 is scheduled to begin next year.
While such initiatives encourage regions to integrate languages relevant to their local contexts, the rationale for selecting Ge'ez merits careful scrutiny. The official justification is that the initiative seeks to "preserve and foster Amhara heritage and identity" and to promote "indigenous knowledge." However, I argue that this move is misguided--driven by nostalgia and, more critically, by an underlying attempt to impose the identity of a single religion on a region characterized by cultural and religious diversity. Furthermore, I contend that the promotion of Ge'ez is part of a broader political strategy by the administration of Prime Minister Abiy to divide, marginalize, and ultimately weaken the Amhara people.
The assertion that Ge'ez is exclusively linked to Amhara heritage presents historical inaccuracies. There is no conclusive evidence supporting the sole attribution of Ge'ez to the Amhara people. Instead, historical linguistic ties suggest a stronger connection to Tigrayan or Eritrean origins. Furthermore, both the Ge'ez and Amharic scripts and letters are believed to have originated from the Sabaean alphabets, a South Arabian language. Given this historical context, the claim of exclusive Amhara ownership of Ge'ez is highly questionable. If linguistic ownership were to be assigned, it would more logically extend to the Tigray or Eritrea regions, or more broadly, to the Orthodox Church. Therefore, the Amhara region's portrayal as the exclusive protectorate of Ge'ez appears to misrepresent its historical linguistic ties.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Beyond the question of linguistic ownership, the contention that knowing the Ge'ez language will deepen the Amhara people's understanding of their history and identity is equally flawed. Ge'ez has never functioned as an official language for the broader Amhara population. Its historical role was strictly that of a liturgical language for the Orthodox Church and its followers. Evidence shows the language ceased to be spoken popularly sometime between 900 and 1200, though it continued as a liturgical language of the Orthodox Church for some time after that. The Amhara region is not a monolithic Orthodox Christian entity; it is home to substantial communities of Muslims, Protestants, and diverse ethnic groups, each possessing unique religious, cultural, and linguistic heritages. Historical accounts in Ge'ez literature mainly focus on Abyssinian Orthodox people. The histories of other groups, such as the Oromo, Agew, Woito, Damot, and Gaffat, are often excluded or depicted in a demeaning way. For many, reading these texts would be counterproductive and disuniting, as they would reveal a history that views them as less than human.
Prior to the imperials' 'one language, one region, one people' policy, a policy vigorously pursued by emperors from Tewodros II through Haile Selassie I, the diverse ethnic groups now collectively identified as 'Amhara' did not share a common language. Indeed, before 1855, not only was Ge'ez largely confined to church use, but even Amharic was not uniformly spoken across the historical regions of Wollo, Shewa, Gojjam, and Gondar.
In Gojjam, for instance, the population was ethnically diverse, including groups such as the Agew, Gumuz, Shinasha, Oromoo, Woito, Damot, and Gafat communities. These communities spoke their own distinct languages, some of which remained in use until the mid-20th century. It was during the imperial 'era that these diverse groups were frequently compelled to relinquish their unique religious, ethnic, language, and cultural identities in favor of an imposed Orthodox Christian religion and Amharic identity. This transformative process was extensively documented by the revered historian Professor Tadesse Tamrat of Gojjam in his scholarly works on Damot, Gafat, and Agew, and the relationship between state and church in Ethiopia.
There is no conclusive evidence supporting the sole attribution of Ge'ez to the Amhara people."
The histories of Gondar, Shewa, and Wollo, the other major provinces within the Amhara region, largely echo this pattern of enforced assimilation. Professor Brian J. Yates also conducted extensive scholarly studies on ethnic and identity transformation in Wollo and Shewa. Wollo, in particular, underwent significant ethnic and religious identity transformation under successive emperors. By the time Tewodros II ascended to power in 1855, Wollo's population was largely ethnically Oromo and predominantly Muslim and Waqefana. Emperor Tewodros's unification policy was explicitly based on dismantling non-Orthodox Christian identities, as clearly expressed in his various communiques.
Under Emperor Yohannes IV, the forced assimilation of identity continued. As stated in the book by historian Professor Bahiru Zewde in his book "A History of Modern Ethiopia," his Boru Meda Council declaration in March 1878 imposed a "one language, one religion" policy on Wollo, specifically mandating Amharic and Orthodox Christianity. The people of Wollo were compelled to convert or face brutal punishment, including eviction, destruction of property, massacres, and heavy taxation. This decree even forced prominent Muslim leaders, such as Imam Muhammad Ali of Werehimeno and Imam Amade Liban of Woreillu, to be baptized and renamed Negus Mikael and Negus Haylamariam, respectively.
In light of the historical context outlined above, it is my understanding that the Amhara region is predominantly populated by Amharic-speaking people whose indigenous languages, religious practices, and ethnic heritages have largely been assimilated over time. The diverse ethnic backgrounds of the people in the Amhara region suggest that Ge'ez was not a widely shared language. For a significant portion of the population, Amharic itself is a relatively recent linguistic acquisition.
Furthermore, even from the perspective of linguistics, the current move to "rebirth" Ge'ez is perplexing. It is now a defunct language, used almost exclusively in Orthodox churches. Ethiopia does not use it at any administrative level. It is a natural process that languages are born, evolve, and die. In fact, in our contemporary world, numerous local and smaller languages are disappearing as people increasingly adopt international languages that facilitate global connection and opportunities. The Amhara region's initiative thus runs counter to these prevailing global linguistic trends.
Behind Ge'ez push
In my opinion, the motivation to introduce Ge'ez at this juncture stems from either the ruling Prosperity Party (PP) or nostalgic elements within the Orthodox Christian community (nostalgic orthomaras). The PP's strategy regarding the Amhara people is just an attempt to not only divide and weaken them but also to antagonize them with Oromos and Tigrayans. To me, it is a foregone conclusion that PP could only think of the demise of Amharas, rendering further focus on the ruling party's motives unproductive.
What is truly perplexing is the motivation of the co-opted and nostalgic orthomaras, led by clandestine figures like Daniel Kibret, in pushing for Ge'ez introduction in the region's education curriculum. I am aware that this is the same group behind the recent discourse surrounding the Wollo region issue. The nostalgic orthomaras actions, in my view, are driven by two primary motives. First, it is a futile attempt to re-impose an Orthodox Christian identity on all people in the Amhara region. The era when Orthodox Christianity and Amharic were the state religion and identity definitively ended with the fall of the Derg regime, and that political reality will not return. Nonetheless, certain Orthodox religious zealots, largely from the Amhara region, are striving to impose this identity on the region's inhabitants. They are employing various means to achieve this, including the forced introduction of Ge'ez in schools. This agenda is underscored by the rhetoric and public displays of top Fano leaders, who often openly declare their objective to "preserve our mother religion" and purposefully display their crosses at political events.
Secondly, the new education policy encourages regional states to incorporate additional languages based on their existing language responsibilities. It was widely anticipated that Amharic-speaking regions would adopt Afaan Oromoo as an additional language, given their comparatively low language teaching burden and the growing significance of Afaan Oromoo as one of the federal government's working languages and the language of Ethiopia's largest ethnic group. However, due to persistent Oromophobia and anti-Oromo sentiment in the region, the Amhara administration has shown reluctance to include Afaan Oromoo. Instead, it is advocating for the inclusion of Ge'ez--likely as a pretext to later claim that the region cannot accommodate Afaan Oromoo due to an already "heavy" language burden.
Why Afaan Oromoo better suits reality
In my opinion, the era of imposing an Orthodox Christian identity and heritage on the people of Amhara is long gone, just as it is gone from Ethiopia. There is neither popular demand nor linguistic justification for imposing Ge'ez as part of the educational curriculum. While some may harbor the mythical belief that Ge'ez is the first human language or a language of the afterlife, they are unwelcome to impose this belief on others through forced language adoption. Such coercive measures risk the disintegration of an already fragile region. For instance, the people of Wollo, Agew, and Argobba would prefer the inclusion of Afaan Oromoo in their curriculum.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Integrating Afaan Oromoo into the curriculum is a critical step to empower the [Amhara] region."
If the Amhara region were to adopt a forward-looking approach, I would recommend the inclusion of Afaan Oromoo as an additional language in the school curriculum starting from Grade 1. The benefits of such a decision are substantial.
First, there is the demographic reality: many individuals in the Amhara region--particularly in areas like Wollo--have Oromo ethnic roots. Second, Afaan Oromoo holds national significance, as it is the language of Ethiopia's largest ethnic group. Third, it would enhance social integration and mobility. A considerable number of Amharas reside in the Oromia region, and proficiency in Afaan Oromoo would ease their integration into the region's society and economy.
Moreover, several other regions, including Addis Abeba and Dire Dawa, have already begun teaching Afaan Oromoo. The language is rapidly emerging as a national lingua franca, gaining parity with Amharic. Proficiency in Afaan Oromoo increasingly opens up professional and political opportunities. For instance, the mayor of Addis Ababa will likely be expected to speak both Amharic and Afaan Oromoo fluently. By contrast, knowledge of Ge'ez--while historically and culturally significant--does not offer similar practical advantages.
For the future of the Amhara region, a wise and pragmatic approach is paramount. This requires rejecting any divisive agenda from the ruling party leadership. It is equally vital to respect all religious and ethnic identities, rather than imposing one dominant identity through language. Ge'ez should remain within the Orthodox Church's domain, like Arabic within the Muslim domain only. Integrating Afaan Oromoo into the curriculum is a critical step to empower the region. Failure to do so will severely limit opportunities, create communication barriers, and lead to the exclusion of Amhara people from important national positions and opportunities outside their region.
As an Amhara who does not speak Afaan Oromoo, I have personally enrolled in a three-month Afaan Oromoo language course--a step I believe reflects the importance of linguistic inclusion for mutual understanding and national progress. AS
Editor's Note: The author of this commentary, Dr. Shimels Hussien Mohammed, is a faculty member and researcher at St. Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College in Addis Abeba, Ethiopia. He can be reached at [email protected]
