You just hit on a highly debated concept in African history. Scholars and political theorists often refer to this dynamic as "internal colonialism" or "native colonialism".
The dynamics behind this argument and why historians view it as a complex mix of state-building and imperial influence include:
* Internal Expansion: During the late 19th-century "Scramble for Africa," Emperor Menelik II rapidly expanded the Ethiopian empire's borders southwards. This incorporated various ethnic groups, such as the Oromo, Sidama, and Somali, into a centralized state.
* The "Neftenga-Gabbar" System: To govern these newly absorbed southern territories, the empire established the Neftenga-Gabbar system. This was a feudal structure where northern soldiers and administrators (often Amhara) were settled on southern lands, leading to land appropriation, heavy taxation, and cultural marginalization of local populations.
* The "Indirect" European Connection: While Europeans did not colonize Ethiopia in the traditional sense, Menelik II famously used European weapons and advisors to equip his army for this southern expansion and to defeat the Italians at the Battle of Adwa in 1896. Later, during the five-year Italian occupation of Ethiopia (1936–1941), Fascist Italy actively promoted the narrative of "Amhara colonization". They claimed they were liberating oppressed indigenous groups from Amhara rule to justify their own imperial presence.
Ultimately, while the Ethiopian state was governed by indigenous—predominantly Amhara—elites, the structural marginalization of peripheral ethnic groups functions similarly to the colonial "divide and rule" mechanisms seen elsewhere in Africa