Ethiopian highlanders invented farming a third time, with the false banana

Word histories compared across related languages work as a register of the past, and the great African families make the point. Niger-Congo expansion began in the first four thousand years of the Holocene, carried at first by better returns from collecting wild grain and then by the shift into cultivation. Nilo-Saharan expansion began with an elaborate use of aquatic resources and moved on to herding and cultivation, alongside Cushitic-speaking neighbours doing much the same. The third case is Omotic. In far southwestern Ethiopia, Omotic speakers appear to have invented agriculture on their own around the seventh and sixth millennia BCE, and over the following three thousand years they spread enset farming across the southern Ethiopian highlands and up into the north-central highlands as well. Enset is the false banana, a staple that still feeds millions of Ethiopians and that most of the world has never heard of. Three families, three inventions of farming, three demographic expansions, all African.

Anthropologists building their discipline in the nineteenth century kept finding regions where peoples of quite different origins had spent centuries in contact and had come to share deep features of culture, well past the superficial. Upper Egypt and the eastern Sudan belt were such a region from the sixth millennium BCE onward. Ehret calls the long south to north stretch the Middle Nile Culture Area. The label changes the question of Egyptian origins. Egypt did not come out of one ethnic group or one language community. It came out of a zone of sustained interaction among peoples with different linguistic and historical backgrounds, who over thousands of years of contact built a common stock of practices, ritual forms and material traditions. That makes Egyptian civilisation a regional outcome. To follow it you have to look south, into Nubia and Sudan, because half the culture area lay there and so did the origins of much that museum labels now file as distinctively Egyptian.

Across the societies that speak Nilo-Saharan languages, the divine is understood as a single pervasive Spirit Force. Anthropologists working in a range of these communities settled on the word Divinity for it. The names used follow a consistent pattern: they tie Divinity to the sky, and through the sky to rain and often to lightning. People do call on particular named spirits for help, and they understand those spirits as manifestations of the one Divinity rather than as separate beings with standing of their own. Western theology has a term for exactly that relationship between the one and its appearances, hypostasis, and it took several centuries of argument to arrive at it. The Nilo-Saharan conception traces back to the ninth millennium BCE. It is a complete system with its own internal logic, and it sits alongside the Creator God of the Niger-Congo tradition as the second monotheism worked out in Africa long before comparable ideas surface anywhere in the Middle East.

In northeastern Africa, among peoples speaking Cushitic languages, a third kind of clan religious figure goes back at least to the sixth millennium BCE. In some Soomaali-speaking parts of the Horn the waab or waaber is also called rooble, possessor of rain, which indicates plainly what people believed he could do. Holders of the office never became political rulers. They commanded reverence, and their views carried great weight whenever a community had a decision to make. That makes three inherited traditions of authority, all traceable to the sixth millennium BCE or earlier, in three different language families. The Nilo-Saharan sacral king fused spiritual and temporal power. The Niger-Congo kumo mediated between the living and the ancestors inside a matrilineal clan. The Cushitic rain possessor held religious standing that gave his voice weight without ever hardening into rule. Political authority has more than one origin story, and Africa preserves at least three of them.