Founded on different written sources and personal accounts, this article aims to caution the taken for granted suppositions behind Habasha identity. The term Habasha is challenged that it does not really denote a unitary identity, culturally or historically. The history of Habasha, its origin and representation somehow has been written and rewritten on ideological positions that are often incompatible. Three interacted positions come to work that make Habasha discourse extraordinarily problematic as a) the ethnocentric assumption of Habasha uniqueness ,centrality in Africa civilization and their juxtaposition to western culture herald of western scholars or the Habasha elites claim that Ethiopia has been the defender of African freedom in public b) in this manner the adoption of the claim by the subjects either the replacement of multi-nations with a single Habasha identity to support a unitary system or in daily discourse Habasha reinforces the outsider-status of non-Habashas and serves as a reminder of their exclusion from state power and social fabric of ´´Proper Ethiopia’ and c) The affirmation Habasha as a categorical identity by its counter- supporters despite lack of unanimity on this term and its origin. This real problematic disposition about Habasha and the task of tracking all nations into ``Imaginary Habasha Identity’ would be fairly reinvestigated. If not , one could foretell its underlying and deleterious side effects on the relations between the patrons of Habasha and their foes by extension on existence of the would be´´ Ethiopia´´.
Key words: Habasha, discourse, identity, real, performance, self representations, misrepresentations and ethnic exceptionalism.