Abstract

Monuments play great role to transfer history from one generation to next generation. In Ethiopia, several memorial monuments have been constructed based on internal and external war histories. Historians usually wrote external war histories in which one country fought with another country or external power more or less in similar ways. On the histories of civil war, however, historians sometimes wrote either supporting or opposing, its good or bad side of the civil war. The narratives of civil war histories have been also reproduced by the victim and perpetrator side at different focal points. Accordingly, Anoole memorial monument was constructed based on civil war history happened during the monarchical regime in Ethiopia. The purpose of this study is to examine the Pro and Counter narratives of Anoole memorial monument in the Ethiopian polity. In-depth interview and document analysis are employed as means to generate data. The in-depth interview is held with professionals who have an opposite argument on the narratives of Anoole monument from academic arena (History, Political Science and Fine Art), and political sphere (Blue party, AEUP and OPDO). Three from Academics and three from political sphere in general six professionals are interviewed. Besides, four nongovernment magazines (Konjo, Addis Guday, Jano and Lomi) which gave high coverage for the issue of Anoole monument, and document of Oromia Culture and Tourism Bureau which take the initiation of Anoole memorial monument construction are selected for analysis. The collected data are analyzed qualitatively and the result of the study reveals that the main pro and counter narratives of Anoole memorial monument emphasize on its history that related to power and the design of Anoole statue. The study makes suggestions as to how these contradictory narratives about Anoole monument could be reconciled and the way statues based civil war histories as a commemorative text might be constructed in way that might reduce tensions among different groups.

Highlights

  • Monuments have great values for the society

  • Different meaning and interpretations have been fixed to the same monument in different regimes, political leaders and interested groups have been engaged in the discourse of monuments symbolic dialog to define the historical figures and establish the historical incidents that frame state identities

  • In the modern Ethiopian history (1855- present) several monuments which have historical narratives that related to power are constructed at different political juncture

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Monuments have great values for the society. They are often constructed to represent the society’s religion, culture, history and political aspects. They function as gathering place of the society to strengthen cohesion. Statues erected across the globe have mainly political narratives. [1], Forest and Jonson (2001) states that since 19th C statues have been used as weapons in political battle. Different meaning and interpretations have been fixed to the same monument in different regimes, political leaders and interested groups have been engaged in the discourse of monuments symbolic dialog to define the historical figures and establish the historical incidents that frame state identities

Objectives
Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call