Abstract: The shadow of skepticism that post-modernist casted on the Meta narrative is so encompassing that it led to conspicuous cynicism on the objectivity of history as a scientific discipline. This article raises this issue by discussing and analyzing the arguments of Samir Yusuf; a post-modernist critique of Bahiru Zewdie's A history of modern Ethiopia. The research, using such analytical tools as the "grand narrative", has attempted to reveal the essence post-modernist arguments discursively. It has also employed a comparative analysis and found out great resemblance with the critique of Ibadan school of History. Based on its findings, it argues that the application of the postmodern critics to the "grand narrative" of Ethiopian history, as in Samr's argument, is detrimental for it fails to take into account the peculiarities of Ethiopian history and historiography.

Keywords: Grand narrative, post modernism, Ethiopian history, historiography, Ibadan.

Introduction

A cursory review of a spate of recent publications on Ethiopian historiography reveals the juxtaposing of Ethno history with the grand narrative vying for attention or readership. In this regard, post modernism seems to have provided a perfect ideological tool for the rise of alternative narratives that seem to have taken the grand narrative obsolete perhaps for its own strategic reasons, for granted, that it cares less for continuity, harmony or accord with the prevailing narrative. This study attempts to describe the challenge posed by post- modernist arguments, on the grand narrative of Ethiopian history. The former aversion to grand theories or narratives has made it a perfect ideological or philosophical weapon for attacking and destabilizing the nationalist historiography by ethno- nationalists. The major objective of this study is to demonstrate the danger lurking behind the application of the post -modernist argument for Ethiopian history.

Objectivity and form in History: From E. H. Carr to post modernism

The Rankean revolution of the nineteenth century emphasized on methodologies and techniques necessary to make written history as objective as possible. However, in the 1930s, American historians Charles A. Beard and Carl L. Becker argued that subjective influences are inescapable. E. H. Carr contended that an historian can attain objectivity by minimizing bias, whereas Peter Novick, in his book *That Noble Dream*, argued that objectivity in history is a delusion. Regarding the form of history, E. H. Carr stated that "all history is teleological" and identifies the Meta narrative as a form that permits a greater degree of objectivity. Similarly, G. R. Elton argues that any serious historical work should have a narrative of political events at its core.

Postmodernism and its Criticism of the "grand narratives"

The term "grand narrative” was introduced by Jean-François Lyotard in his classic work. The faith of modernism in "Grand Theory" and a master narrative of progress had served to increase the popularity of the Meta narrative until it was tested by post modernism. Lyotard characterizes post modernism as an era displaying "incredulity towards met narratives.” Postmodernists are generally cynical about the "Grand narratives" of historians and, at most, concede the arrangement of the past into a multiplicity of stories. According to Bahru Zewde, in the postmodern period, the focus of history has changed from meta history to micro history (the life of commoners in localized settings). The postmodern critique is valid on certain points, such as demonstrating that the notion of a unitary history was untenable. The most powerful challenge to the grand narrative was authored by Hayden White.

Postmodern challenges to The "Grand narrative": The Ethiopian context

An instance of a postmodern challenge in Ethiopian historiography is Semir Yusuf's 2009 article, “The Politics of Historying: a postmodern commentary on Bahru Zewde's History of Modern Ethiopia". In this article, Semir identifies Bahiru' Zewde's book as a typical "grand narrative" and criticizes its form and content. Interestingly, the title of Semir's article relates to the classical criticism of the Ibadan school of History, which includes the glorification of the state system and promoting elitist views. Semir, like Peter Ekeh and John Peel, raises themes like colonialism and the politicizing of history, and criticizes the nationalist historiography represented by Bahiru's work.

The pitfalls of the postmodernist challenges: In defense of the grand narrative

According to Lyotard, in the postmodern period, people no longer believe in grand narratives because they are seen as "oppressive," as one grand narrative excludes another. The contradiction is that this narrative about narratives is itself a grand narrative. Lyotard wrote:

Post modernism is "incredulity towards meta narrative." This incredulity is undoubtedly a product of progress in the sciences. But that progress in turn presupposes it... where, after the meta narratives, can legitimacy reside?

The post modernists' attack on the notion of objectivity and the scientific method has blurred the distinction between historical and fictional narratives. The criticism on the grand narrative, invoking the untenability of national historiography on contemporary Ethiopia, is not viable due to the objective condition in the country, namely the presence of a multi-ethnic society. While European countries have achieved homogeneity, African countries with ethnic diversity and latent centrifugal stances cannot afford to discard nationalist historiography. Hence, the application of the postmodern critic to the grand narrative of Ethiopian history, in particular, could prove harmful. This is because of its unique historiographic traditions and ethnographic reality.

References

1. Adejumobi SA (2007). The History of Ethiopia. Westport: Greenwood Press.
2. Bahru Zewde A (2002). A History of Modern Ethiopia 1855-1991. Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa.
3. Carr EH (2002). What is History? Palgrave Macmillan; Revised Edition.
4. Evans RJ (1998). In defense of History. W.W. Norton and Company: New York.
5. Falola T (2000). Tradition and change in Africa: The essays of J.F. Ade. Ajayi. Africa world Press, Asmara.
6. Iggers G (1997). Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to Postmodern Challenge. Wesleyan University Press, Middletown.
7. Lyotard J-F (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. U of Minnesota Press.
8. Novick P (1988). That Noble Dream: The objectivity Question and the American Historical profession. Cambridge.
9. Semir Y (2009a). The politics of Historying: A postmodern commentary on BahruZewde's History of Modern Ethiopia. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations 3(9).
10. Tosh J (2010). The Pursuit of History, 5th ed. Longman.
11. White H (1973). Meta history: The historical imagination in the 19th C. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.