¹ European writers mostly spell Uccialli, following Italian usage. The Amharic name is which is more correctly transliterated or Wichalē. The place is a small town in central Ethiopia where Minīlik had his camp at the time when the treaty was signed. In this article I have tried to adopt a consistent spelling for all Amharic words written in the Latin alphabet, whether proper names or not, without encumbering the text with more than a minimum of diacritical marks. Like every other such attempt, it is obviously open to the criticism of being both unsatisfactory from the linguistic point of view and unnecessarily complicated for the layman. The seven Amharic vowels have been written e, u, ī, a, ē, i, o. The consonants usually causing confusion have been rendered as follows: the diphthongs: , etc. Only when the ‘Europeanized’ spelling is coupled by a distinctly different pronunciation have such forms as Ethiopia and Massawa been retained.

² Archivio Storico del Ministero degli Affari Esteri (A. S. MAE.), Serie V, Trattati, Etiopia No. 3. The Italian text was first published in Atti Parlamentari, Documenti Diplomatici, 1889–90, XV, Etiopia (hereafter quoted as Doc. Dipl. 1889–90 XV), 434ff. The Amharic text can be found in Zaghi, Carlo, Crispi e Menelich nel Diario inedito del conte Augusto Salimbeni (Torino, 1956), opposite page 152. For an English translation of the Italian text see British and Foreign State Papers, 1888–1889, LXXXI, 733ff.Google Scholar

³ Doc. Dipl. 1889–1990 XV, 427ff.Google Scholar, Antonelli to Crispi, 9 Sept. 1889.Google ScholarCf. Battaglia, Roberto, La prima guer-ra d'Africa (Torino, 1958), 375: ‘This was the most important article for us.…’Google Scholar

⁴ ‘His Majesty the King of Kings of Ethiopia consents to avail himself of the government of His Majesty the King of Italy for all negotiations of affairs which he might have with other powers or governments.’Google Scholar

⁵ Cf. Berkeley, G. F. -H., The Campaign of Adowa and the Rise of Menelik (Westminster, 1902), 20. Berkeley argues that the term ‘consents’ was ‘unfortunate’, since because of it ‘Menelik apparently did not consider himself irrevocably bound by the clause’. This was, of course, not the case. The conflict hinged on the different wording in Italian and Amharic, not on the interpretation of the Italian word.Google Scholar

⁶ See, e.g., Public Record Office (P.R.O.), C.O. 879/34, ‘Memorandum as to the Jurisdiction and Administrative Powers of a European State holding Protectorates in Africa. Confidential. African No. 450’, Paragraph 17.Google Scholar

⁷ A. S. Mae., Serie V, Trattati, Etiopia No. 4. The convention is dated Napoli, Oct. 1889, but was actually signed in its final wording only on 7 Oct. Cf. Battaglia, op.cit. 384.Google Scholar

⁸ Ministero degli Affari Esteri, Trattati, Convenzioni, Accordi, Protocolli ed altri documenti relativi all’ Africa, 1825–1906 (Roma, 1906), 1, 559: ‘mldr; et de môme, Ia puissance qui assumera un protectorat, accompagnera l'acte respectif d'une notification…’Google Scholar

⁹ Doc. Dipl. 1889–90 XV bis, 21, Crispi to the representatives of the Italian government in Berlin, Brussels, Constantinople, Copenhagen, The Hague, Lisbon, London, Madrid, Paris, St Petersburg, Stockholm, Vienna, Washington, xx Oct. 1889.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Ibid. 26ff. Most of the replies are found in this volume. The original documents in Archivio Storico dell’ ex Ministero dell’ Africa Italians (A. S. MAI.), 36/8–69, show however that the Italian government had some difficulties which do not appear in the published documents.

¹¹ Sublime Porte, Başbakanlik Arşiv (S.P.B.A.), Misir Iradeleri No. 1337, end. 4; ibid. Archives du Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (S.P.A.E.), Carton 236S, Dossier 5, Husny to Said, 30 Oct. 1889, and Memorandum No. 6636 by La Chambre des Conseillers Légistes, 23 Nov. 1893.

¹² A. S. MAI. 36/8-69, Costa to Crispi,4 Dec. 1889, and Marochetti to Crispi, 26 Dec. 1889. See also Hauptarchiv des Auswärtigen Amts, Ausw. Amt Abteilung A (A.A.A.), Akten betreffend Italienisches Protektorat über Abessinien, Bd I, Bericht aus Petersburg, 10 Dec. 1889, No. 300, ibid. 1 Dec. 1889, No. 304; Bericht aus Rom, 23 Dec. 1889, No. 287. Other interesting documents on the Russian standpoint are letters from Dc Giers to Vélidon, already 17 Oct. 1889, and from De Laboulaye to Spuller, 9 Dec. 1889, Archives du Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (A.E.), Mèmoires et Documents, Afrique 138, fo. 117f. and fo. 142.

¹³ Doc. Dipl. 1889–90 XV bis, 52f., Crispi to Marochetti, 10 Jan. 1890.Google Scholar

¹⁴ P.R.O., F.O. 403/124, 30, Catalini to Salisbury, 28 Oct. 1889.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Ibid. 29, Dering to Salisbury, 24 Oct. 1889.

¹⁶ Ibid. 33, Salisbury to Catalini, 30 Oct. 1889, and 36, Salisbury to Catalini, 12 Nov. 1889.

¹⁷ Ibid. 54, India Office memorandum to Foreign Office, 19 Dec. 1889.

¹⁸ See Journal officiel, 24 Jan. 1890, 68f., for this debate.Google Scholar

¹⁹ An undated memorandum, probably 22 Nov. 1889, in connexion with the Russian appeal to support Turkey's case, indicates that Spuller was nevertheless consistent in his view; A.E. Mémoires et Documents, Afrique 138, fo. 129.Google Scholar

²⁰ In addition to Journal officiel, 24 Jan. 1890, see articles in Le Temps, 17 Oct. 1889, and Le Siècle, 10 Nov. 1889.Google Scholar

²¹ P.R.O., F.O. 95/750, Minilik to Victoria, Tahsas 6, 1882 Eth. Cal. (14 Dec. 1889); A.A.A., Italienisches Protektorat Uber Abessinien, Bd I, Minilik to Wilhelm II, same date; A.E., Mémoires et Documents, Afrique 138, fo. 186f., Minilik to Carnot, same date.Google Scholar

²² Cf. Rossini, Carlo Conti, Italia ed Etiopia dal trattato d'Uccialli alla battaglia di Adua (Roma, 1935),43Google Scholar and Ernest Work, Ethiopia, A Pawn in European Diplomacy (New Concord, Ohio, 1935), 100ff. Expressions of this view are, however, found also in Minilik's own letters. See, e.g., Doc. Dipi. 1890–1891 XVII, Missione Antonelli in Etiopia, 53, Minilik to Salimbeni, Nehasé II, 1882 (26 Aug. 1890).Google Scholar

²³ P.R.O., F.O. 403/124, 38f., Minilik to Victoria, Miyazya 25, 1880 (2 May 1889), and A.E., Memoires et Documents, Afrique 138, fo. 131ff., Report of Savouré to Carnot, 6 Dec. 1889. The letter to Queen Victoria in F.O. 403/124 is an English version made from a free Italian translation of the original, which had been brought to Europe by Mekwennin and held by the Italian government until the British government had acknowledged the receipt of the notification of the protectorate paragraph. Cf. Zaghi, op. cit. appendices I and IV.Google Scholar

²⁴ I have followed the English translation in F.O. 95 /750. It is made from the Amharic original there and is correct in all essential matters. There is also a French translation, which appears to have been written in Ethiopia, although it does not bear Minilik's seal. This text, incompletely dated, is published by Zaghi, op. cit. appendix V.Google Scholar

²⁵ For the position of these letters see note 21 above. I have not been able to check whether Minilik wrote to Russia also, but it is highly probable. In the letter to Wilhelm he states, ‘We have sent letters to all the great kingdoms of Europe.’ The Austrian government, however, does not seem to have been included under this heading. Cf. Zaghi, op. Cit. 419.Google Scholar

²⁶ Doc. Dipi. 1890–91 XVII, 3, Crispi to Antonelli, Dec. 1890. This dealt with the information from Germany only, but a few days later Crispi could inform Antonelli that the President of France had also been approached by Minilik; ibid. 3, Crispi to Antonelli, 13 Feb. 1890. Crispi was not, however, referring to Minilik's letter of 64 Dec. to Carnot, which did not reach Paris until April, but to the letter of July brought by Savouré.

²⁷ Ibid. 4, Antonelli to Crispi, 12 Feb. 1890. Work, op. cit. 105, has misunderstood this document and states that Antonelli reported that he had already carried out this task.

²⁸ Zaghi, op. cit. 147f., diary 27 Aug. 1890. ‘Antonelli has always expressed himself in this sense: [that is] that the King was not obliged to comply with that article, but could if he wished; only, added Antonelli, it would be advantageous if H.M. would give this proof of trust in Italy, availing himself of its services in the sense expressed in that article.’ See also 145f., entry 54 Aug. 1890, ‘… [Antonelli] non fu esplicito nelle sue risposte, parlando di convenienze, di delicatezza, e che so io, ma non di obbligo da parte del re.’ — ‘ …[Antonelli] was not explicit in his answers, since he spoke of convenience, of tact, and of I know not what, but not of any obligation on the part of the King.’.Google Scholar

²⁹ Doc. Dipl. 1890s–91 XVII, 85ff. [With Ras Mekwennin the matter was settled; but on that occasion at Meqelë, I, by virtue of my office, was obliged to speak about it with Your Majesty, who asked me: “But is it because of friendship or because of an obligation that I must make use of the Italian government to negotiate with other powers?” And I replied: “It is because of friendship and regard; and, if these two should fail [to Count], Your Majesty could do whatever he desired.”’ Cf. Rossini, Conti, op. cit. 44.Google Scholar When Antonelli defended his actions in the Camera dci Deputati in June 1893, he stated that he had ‘of course’ notified Minilik, and that Minilik had immediately written an apologizing letter. It is strange that this letter should be missing in the published documents, if it really ever existed. See Rossetti, Carlo, Storia Dipiomatica dell'Etiopia (Torino, 1910), 116, and Battaglia, op. cit. 422, ‘… è probabile, per non dire certo, che l'Antonelli nemmeno gli avesse reso nota Ia fiera protesta del Crispi….Google Scholar

³⁰ Zaghi, op. cit. 106, diary 13 July 1890.Google Scholar

³¹ A.A.A., Italienisches Protektorat über Abessinien, Bd I, Wilhelm II to Minilik, 9 Mar. 1890. ‘According to what we have now been told, Your Highness has in the meantime signed a treaty of peace and friendship with H.M. King Umberto of Italy, Our true friend and ally, and the Italian government, which is greatly interested in the progress of your country, will certainly give sympathetic consideration to the wishes of Your Highness.’ When publishing this letter, Zaghi (op. cit. 406) has followed Conrad Kell, Alfred Jig, sern Leben und sein Wirken (Frauenfeld und Leipzig, 1918), 78, which his l.dto some minor inaccuracies.Google Scholar

³² Doc. Dipl. 1890–91 XVII, 56ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 29 Dec. 1890, and Zaghi, op cit. 157, Salimbeni to Traversi, 30 Aug. 1890. Cf. Rossetti, op. cit. 88ff., Work, op. cit. 106, and Keller, loc. cit. The statement that Minilik was more upset about the German letter because he was addressed ‘Your Highness’ does not seem convincing. In his Arnharic letters Minilik used ‘Li'ul’ without distinction for ‘Highness’ and ‘ajesty’. In any case Work is wrong when he states that ‘the Kaiser had not even addressed him with the title of Negus Negasti’, which appears at the top of the letter.Google Scholar

³³ P.R.O., F.O. 95 /751, Victoria to Minilik, 20 Dec. 1890.Google Scholar

³⁴ Ibid. Other amendments in the draft indicate that the wording was carefully considered.

³⁵ Zaghi, op. cit. 147f., diary 17 Aug. 1890. Cf. 184f., Salimbeni to Dal Verme, 7 Oct. 1890, where Salimbeni stresses the importance of these two letters in the revealing of the ‘imbroglio’. As I have shown above, the conversations with Antonelli in February had not enlightened Minilik. It is just possible that he had received hints or unofficial information from France. Cf. Work, op. cit.,108f., particularly note 26 on page 109.Google Scholar

³⁶ An almost literal translation of this into English would be: ‘The King of Kings of Ethiopia, with the kings of Europe, for all the matters which he wants, it shall be possible for him to communicate with the assistance of the Italian government.’ This means: ‘It shall be possible for the King of Kings of Ethiopia to communicate with the assistance of the Italian government regarding all affairs which he wants [to conduct] with the kings of Europe.’.Google Scholar

³⁷ Zaghi, op. cit. 147f., diary 17 Aug. 1890, and 156f., diary 30 Aug. 1890. ‘That makes a real difference’Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid. 121 f., diary 20 July 1890; Doc. 1890‐1891, XVII, 54ff., Salimbeni to Crispi, 20 Nov. 1890.Google Scholar

³⁹ Zaghi, op. cit. Salimbeni to lIg, 1 Sept. 1890; 161f, Traversi to Salimbeni, 2 Sept. 1890; 177f., Traversi to Salimbeni, 1 Sept. 1890.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Ibid. 145f., diary,4 Aug. 1890; 173f., diary 8 Sept. 1890; 174ff., diary 14 Aug. 1890.

⁴¹ Ibid.,185f., Salimbeni to Mayor and to Pisani, 9 Oct. 1890. ‘I have done everything possible to put all the blame on Grazmach Yosef, but he cleverly puts it back on Antonelli and on the government.…’.

⁴² Doc. Dipl. 1890–9, XVII, 30, Minilik to Umberto, Nehasë 19 1882 (24 Aug. 1890).Google Scholar

⁴³ Zaghi, op. cit. 181 f., telegram Salimbeni to Ministero Esteri,5 Oct. 1890. Minilik's letters were probably written the day before; at least the one to Queen Victoria was. It is missing in F.O. 95/751, but Minilik refers to it as dated Meskerem 25, 1883 (Oct. 1890), in a later letter in the same volume. Instead of replying, the British government informed Crispi, who cabled Antonelli on 19 Dec. ‘The English government has communicated to us a letter from Minilik to Queen Victoria as a matter of no importance, adding that so far no answer had been made.’ Doc. Dipl. 1890–91 XVII, 21.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Doc. Dipl. 1890–91 XVII, 34f., Antonelli to Crispi, 12 Feb. 1891. Crispi had in fact resigned 31 Jan. 1891.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Doc. Dipl. 1890–91 XVII, 41ff., Minilik to Umberto, Yekatit 5, 1883 (is Feb. 1891).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ A.E., Mémoires et Documents, Afrique 138, fo. 340f., Minilik to Carnot, Yekatit20, 1885 (27 Feb. 1893). Rossetti, op. cit. 111ff., quoting the declaration of Brin, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in the Chamber of Deputies on 17 Jun. 1893, states that Minilik wrote both to the Italian government and to other powers on 27 Feb. Conti Rossini, op. cit. 67f., gives the text of one of these letters, dated Yekatk 20, 1885 (27 Feb. 1893), and states that Minilik wrote to Umberto ‘at the same time’.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ See Lo Giudice, Barbaro, ‘I Preliminari di Pace di Faras-Mai del 1896’, Rassegna di Studi Etiopici, Anno II, No. 1 (1942), 90–6.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ A. S. MAE., Serie V, Trattati, Etiopia No. published in M.A.E., Trattati, Convenzioni, Accordi, etc., I, 508f.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Jones, A. M. and Monroe, E., The History of Ethiopia (London, 1960), 139.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ullendorif, Edward, The Ethiopians (London, 1960), 92.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Fage, J. D., An Atlas of African History (London, 1958),47, ‘The pattern of alien rule in Africa, 1895’.Google Scholar

⁵² See, e.g., Doe. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 16ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 14 Nov. 1890, and 54ff., Salimbeni to Crispi, 20 Nov. 1890. Of course there need be no doubt about the existence of intrigues against the Italians. See, e.g., A.E., Mémoires et Documents, Afrique 138, folios 113ff., containing letters and reports by Lagarde and Savouré.Google Scholar

⁵³ Mantegazza, Vico, La Guerra in Africa (Firenze, 1896, 3rd edition), 14f. ‘Not even later, when, in refusing to acknowledge the treaty of Wiçhalë, Minilik threw off the mask was it understood that … there was no longer [any possibility] of placing any reliance on the good faith of Shewa. Minilik had received all that he wanted from us: the imperial crown, the support against the enemies who disputed [that crown] with him; he had received arms, money, and ammunition. Our friendship no longer made him hope for any advantages; [thus], according to his habit, he turned to those who could still give him something, regarding it as of little importance if they incited him against his old friends.’ The battle of Adwa and fifteen years’ interval did not change Mantegazza's views. In his Menelik, I'Italia e l'Etiopia (Milano, 1910), 18, this verdict is repeated verbatim.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Rossini, Conti, op. cit. 11ff. ‘Moreover, for historical reasons and because of environmental conditions good faith was not a plant native to Ethiopia: the mental reservations, the violated trust, the broken oaths … the fact that obligations were not usually transferred from a king to his successor weakened the treaty of Wiçhalé very much.’.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Ibid. 36. ‘A profound change had rapidly been taking place in Minilik's mind. He was no longer the King of Shewa, afraid of the future … he had been gradually changing into the fortunate and powerful heir, who forgets both creditors and benefactors; he was the King of Kings, with sentiments and ambitions quite different from before.’

⁵⁶ Ibid. 44. ‘A simple mistake of translation, made, as we saw, without the intervention of Italians, or bad faith of the translator? and, in the second case, also of the person who inspired him?’.

⁵⁷ Ibid. 45. ‘The Abyssinian aptitude for cheating and the European ill-will’.

⁵⁸ Pigli, Mario, L'Etiopia nella Politica Europea (Padova, 1936, 3rd edition), 26. ‘There was, therefore, on Minilik's part the obligation [to avail himself of the Italian government's Services], and therefore Antonelli and consequently Crispi had every good reason to believe in the establishment of a protectorate’.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Sillani, Tomaso, L'Affrica Orientale Italiana e il conflitto Italo-Etiopico (Roma, 1936), 36. ‘As for Article 17 our good faith was beyond doubt, inasmuch as its translation had been made by the Emperor's interpreter, Yoséf.…’.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Sabelli, Luca dei, Storia di Abissinia (Livorno and Firenze, 1936–1938), iii, 374. ‘But the bad faith was completely and solely on the Ethiopian side; Minilik knew perfectly, when signing the treaty of Wichale, to what he pledged himself’.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Zaghi, op. cit. xx and xxiii.

⁶² Ibid. xxiii ff. In a letter to hg on 1 Sep. 1890, Salimbeni offers the solution that both the Italian government and the Emperor had been cheated by those who had edited and translated the treaty. Ibid. 159.

⁶³ Battaglia, op. cit., particularly 352–458.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Ibid. 444 and 419.

⁶⁵ Ibid. 360, 398, and 429.

⁶⁶ Ibid. 382. ‘… if ever an expression was used “in bad faith”, if ever an imbroglio or a trap was prepared by Europeans for Africans, this was without any doubt the “additional clause” on “actual possession”.’.

⁶⁷ Ibid. 376. While the first phrase means ‘Consents to avail himself [of the services ofrsqb;’, the second means ‘it shall be within the authority (or option) of …’. It is difficult to see how these two phrases can mean even approximately the same.

⁶⁸ Ibid. 445. ‘Minilik could not by any means think of signing away any reduction whatsoever of his own sovereignty.’.

⁶⁹ Ibid. 419.

⁷⁰ Ibid. 375f.

⁷¹ Ibid. 443ff. Cf. also 455.

⁷² Ibid. 444. ‘Because of one single word the legal foundation of the “protectorate”, as Crispi had imagined it, collapsed at one blow.”.

⁷³ Yesus, Afewerq Gebre, Dagmawi Minilik (Rome, 1910), 59. Literally: ‘… it shall be [possible] for him to communicate through the Italian government.….Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Ame Giyorgis, Yegalla Tank, MS. 47, National Library, Addis Abeba, 173. The quotation means literally: ‘If we should send paper [i.e. letters] to European kings, it shall, if we [so] desire, be by the hand of Italy.’.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Mekwiriya, Tekle adiq, Ye-Ityopya Tank Ke-Aşë Tëwodros Iske Qedamawi Hayle SilIasë (4th edition, Addis Abeba, 1954), 73.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Fosses, H. Castonnet des, L'Abyssinie et les Italiens (Paris, 1897), 353.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Morlé, Louis J., Histoire de l'Éthiopie (Paris, 1904), 11, 425 f.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Longrigg, Stephen H., A Short History of Eritrea (Oxford, 1945), 120.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Duprey, A. Gingold, De I'Invasion a la Liberation de l'Éthiopie (Paris, 1995), 1, 39.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Work, op. cit. 119, note 53.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Sir Wallis, Budge, A History of Ethiopia (London, 1928), 11, 58f.Google Scholar

⁸² Keller, op. cit. 70. See also 82.Google Scholar

⁸³ Gingold Duprey, loc. cit.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Keller, op. cit. 73. ‘Was it then by coincidence or on purpose that this article received a completely false meaning in the Italian version?’Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Ibid. 75ff.

⁸⁶ Work, op. cit. 19 and 121.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Zaghi, op. cit. 161 ff., Salimbeni to Traversi, 6 Sept. 1890.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ ‘The present treaty having been drawn up in the Italian and Amharic languages, and the two versions agreeing perfectly with each other, both the texts shall be considered official and shall have in every respect the same authority.’ The Amharic version is shorter and less explicit: In English: ‘When this treaty, which has now been made, has been completed in copies exactly the same in the Amharic and the Italian languages, it shall be a faithful witness.’

⁸⁹ Doc. Dipl. 1890–91 XVII, 10 and 41ff., Minilik to Umberto, Nehasë 19, 1882 (24 Aug. 1890), and Yekatit 5, 1883 (11 Feb. 1891), respectively.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Doc. 1889–1890 XV, 437ff., Progetto di trattato.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 399ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 20 Feb. 1889; 427f., Minilik to Umberto, same date; 407f., Antonelli to Crispi, 25 Mar. 1889; 427ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 9 Sept. 1889. Cf. Battaglia, op. cit. 373, ‘… also after the death of the Negus, Minilik had every interest in concluding the negotiations quickly’. This I do not believe is true except inasmuch as Minilik of course did not want to disappoint and estrange himself from the Italians.Google Scholar

⁹² Doc. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 41ff., Minilik to Umberto, Yekatit 5, 1883 (is Feb. 1891); 85ff., Antonelli to Minilik, undated, about 26–28 Jan. 1891, and 63ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 29 Jan. 1891.Google Scholar

⁹³ A. S. MAT. 36/6-53, Minflik to Umberto, Yekatit i, 1881 (zo Feb. 1889); Minilik to Crispi, same date. Italian translations of these and the other letters are printed with some omissions and slight alterations in Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 401 ff.

⁹⁴ A. S. MAI. 36/6-54, Antonelli to Crispi, 9 Aug. 1889; Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 427ff.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Doc. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 16if., Antonelli to Crispi, 14 Nov. 1890; 78, Antonelli to Minilik, undated memorandum of 23–24 Dec. 1890; 85ff., Antonelli to Minilik, undated memo of 26–28 Jan. 1891.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Ibid. 85ff., Antonelli to Minilik, undated memorandum. ‘As Your Majesty was making the corrections I wrote them step by step in the Italian text and Your Majesty's interpreter [did the same] in the Amharic text. The corrections were so many that the Italian and the Amharic texts were recopied.’.

⁹⁷ Ibid.

⁹⁸ Ibid. 16ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 14 Nov. 1890. ‘Moreover, besides the translation, every article was expounded word for word during the negotiations; all possible explanations were given so that the Emperor might form an exact concept of the obligations into which he entered.’.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Ibid. 53, Minilik to Salimbeni, Nehasë 11, 1882 (16 Aug. 1890), and 49ff., Salimbeni to Crispi, 29 Aug. 1890.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Ibid. 31ff., Minilik to Umberto, Tir 15, 1883 (22 Jan. 1891). By this time Minilik was making use of Mr hg for his correspondence with Italy and therefore the French language is used.

¹⁰¹ Ibid. 41ff., MiniIikto Umberto, Yekatit 5, 1883 (11 Feb. 1891).

¹⁰² I have not been able to find the Aniharic or Italian drafts referred to by Antonelli in the files of A. S. MAE. or A. S. MAI. It has been assumed that Crispi himself removed them when he left oflIce. See Keller, op. cit. 83. Searching in Fondo Crispi, Archivio Centrale dello Stato, has, however, also given a negative result. But since Antonelli invited his superiors in Rome to look at the drafts for themselves, there is no reason to expect that he was not telling the truth.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Doc. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 85 if., Antonelli to Minilik, undated memorandum.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ That Afewerq Gebre Yesus speaks of a French text is, I believe, of no significance. See above, 256. Cf. Zaghi, op. cit. 211 if., Salimbeni to Antonelli, 12 Nov. 1890, where the writer quotes Yosëf's statement that Antonelli dictated the treaty in French.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Doc. DipI. 1890–1891 XVII, 63 if., Antonelli to Crispi, 29 Jan. 1891.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Cf. Zaghi, op. cit. 161 if., Salimbeni to Traversi, 6 Sept. 1890. When Salimbeni refers here to a new Amharic wording this would thus not apply to Article XVII.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ A. S. MAI. 36/6–54, Pro Memoria al Cay. Pisani Dossi, 19 Sep. 1889, by Pietro Antonelli. Printed in Zaghi, op. cit. 3ff.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Zaghi, op. cit. 108f., diary 15 July 1890, and 148, diary 18 Aug. 1890. See also 123 and 238 for evidence that Salimbeni at times spoke with the Emperor without interpreter.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Ibid. 177f., Traversi to Salimbeni, 14 Aug. 1890.

¹¹⁰ Battaglia, op. cit. 443.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ A. S. MAI. 36/7–59, Pro Memoria about the audience, undated; printed in Doc. Dipl. 1889–90 XV bis, 7f.Google Scholar

¹¹² Zaghi, op. cit. sioff., diary 16 July 1890 (italics mine).Google Scholar

¹¹³ For more evidence that Antonelli was supposed by his superiors to know Amharic, see Doc. Dipl. 1889–90 XV, 260f., Robilant to Antonelli, ii Mar. 1887. It should be noted that Antonelli already in 1886 had wrong translations corrected, as he says himself, ‘under my supervision’; Doc. DipI. 1889–1890 XV, 214ff., Antonelli to Robilant, ‘Apr. 1886. On the other hand Minilik kept his interpreter Yosëf with him also during an interview with Antonelli in 1888, which was so secret that Antonelli had to swear that he would reveal nothing; A. S. MAI. 36/5-47, Antonelli to Crispi, 8 Aug. 1888. The portion about the oath and Yosëf's presence is missing in the document as printed in Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 338ff.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Rossini, Conti, op. cit. 44, n. 1. I do not know when and under what circumstances Antonelli made this statement. Conti Rossini does not give the source of his information, and in the Italian papers that I have seen so far I have not been able to discover it.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Doc. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 63ff., Antonelli to Crispi, 29 Jan. 1890.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Zaghi, op. cit. 186, Salimbeni to Amalia, 9 Oct. 1890. ‘Now I understand how one can obtain so eailv such splendid success. One rites a treaty: iii the Italian text one puts what is wanted in Italy, in the Amharic text one puts what Minilik vant, and it doesn't matter if the two do not agree. Those who come later will think about it. What a mess, my dear Amalia, what imbroglios, what lies, what an enormous difference between this king and King Yohannis!-the same as between the King of Italy and Minilik. I owe much to A…, I cannot pose as his accuser. But when I tried to put the blame for the false translation of Article r of the treaty with Minilik on Grazrnach Yosef, he gave me such details and reasons that he shut my mouth, proving tome that. as not ignorant of the mess.’Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Ibid. 180f., diary Ict. 1890, and 185f., Salimbeni to Baratieri, 6 Oct. 1890. That Traversi shared Saliinbenis viev in this respect is evident from his letter to Antonelli, 16 Oct. 1890; Ibid. 407f.

¹¹⁸ P.R.O., F.O. 95/721, Tewodros to Victoria, Tiqimt zo, 1855 (30 Nov. 1862).Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ P.R.O., F.O. 78/2500, Stanton to Derby, 7 and 15 Jan. 1876; F.O. 78/2503, Cook-son to Derby, 9 Jun and 22 July 1876.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ P.R.O., F.O. 78/2503, Vivian to Derby, 20 Oct. 1876; F.O. 78/263 i, Vivian to Derby, 18 Jan. 1877; Vivian to Derby and Chérif Pasha to Derby, 4 Apr. 1877.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Doc. Dipl. 1890–1891 XVII, 41ff., Minilik to Umberto, Yekatit 5, 1883 (11 Feb. 1891).Google Scholar

¹²² A. S. MAI. 36/1-8 and Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 61ff., Depretis to Massaia, I Mar. 1879, with annexed treaty draft. The printed document has Cairoli as sender. For the events connected with the proposed treaty see Ministero degli Affari Esteri, L'Italia in Africa, Serie Storica, Volume Primo, Etiopia/Mar Rosso, 1 (Roma, 1958), 144ff.Google Scholar

¹²³ Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 62f., Trattato di amicizia fra S.M. il Re d'Italia e S.M. il Re di Scioa. 'It shall be within the authority [or option] of H.M. the King of Shewa to use as his address for all letters and communications which he wishes to dispatch to Europe the consulate of H.M. the King of Italy at Aden or any other Italian consular offices which might be established at Zeyla and other places on the coast nearby./1-8 and Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 63ff., ‘Memoria ed istruzioni per negoziare un trattato col Re Giovanni’ with annexed ‘Progetto di trattato’, Nov. 1879.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ A. S. MAI. 36/1–8 and Doc. DipI. 1889–90 XV, 63ff., ‘Memoria ed istruzioni per negoziare un trattato col Re Giovanni’ with annexed ‘Progetto di trattato’, Nov. 1879.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Ibid. Article 18 and comments to this article in ‘Memoria …’. For the general circumstances connected with the failure of Odoardo Beccari and Gustavo Bianchi to negotiate this proposed treaty see M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, I, 575ff.

¹²⁶ M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, 1, 263ff. and 287ff.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ A. S. MAT. 36/2–2 (for Minilik) and A. S. MAT. 36/2–13 (for Yohannis). ‘It shall be within the authority [or option] of H.M. the King of Shewa [variation: Abyssinia] to avail himself of the Italian consular authorities or of the Royal Govemorate at Aseb for all letters and communications that he might want to send to the governments in Europe with whom the above-mentioned authorities are accredited. The subjects of H.M. the King of Shewa [Abyssinian subjects] may also request the protection of those authorities, both on the coast and in the various countries whither they might go’.Google Scholar

¹²⁸ A. S. MAI. 36/2–13, Branchi to Mancini, 9 Nov. 1883. Cf. M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, 1, 289f.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Although the way of wording the promise is quite different in the two versions the meaning is the same. Italian: ‘The Italian consuls shall carry out all the requests which H.M. the King might make directly to them.’ Arnharic: ‘… if You [i.e. Your Majesty] send whatever You wish by any of the Italian consuls, everything You desire shall be done and fulfilled’.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ A. S. MAI. 36/2-13; Article 7 in the Italian draft and 6 in the Amharic draft. The Italian text is printed in Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 143f. The Amharic text of the article runs in full: This is a somewhat complex and obscure sentence, which is not easy to render into acceptable English without paraphrasing it completely. The following is an attempt to convey the meaning of the clause without changing it more than necessary: ‘When I said: if Your Majesty should wish by Your own will to send messengers to Egypt, to Jerusalem, to the Red Sea [or] anywhere else by the hand [or: under the protection] of the Italian consul, I meant so that anyone who does not know should not maltreat them and that they should return having carried out Your will without lacking food, drink, [and] shelter; if You send whatever You wish by any of the Italian consuls, everything You desire should be done and fulfilled’.Google Scholar

¹³¹ MAE., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, I, 266f., Originally Antinori, then stationed at L–1890 XV, 128ff. The Amharic text has never been published, and Professor Carlo Giglio, the present official historian of Italian political activity in Ethiopia, writing for the ‘Comitato per la documentazione dell’ opera dell'Italia in Africa', seems to have been ignorant even of the existence of the original of the treaty in the archives. See M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, I, 282, n. 31.Google Scholar

¹³² A. S. MAE., Serie V, Trattati, Etiopia No. 2. The Italian text was first published in Doc. DipI. 1889–90 XV, iz8ff. The Amharic text has never been published, and Professor Carlo Giglio, the present official historian of Italian political activity in Ethiopia, writing for the ‘Comitato per la documentazione dell'opera dell'Italia in Africa’, seems to have been ignorant even of the existence of the original of the treaty in the archives. See M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, I, 282, 51. 35.Google Scholar

¹³³ In a fairly literal English translation: ‘If the King of Shewa should think: I will send some business to Europe; whether it be Italy's consul or the commissioner who lives at Aseb, they are under King Minilik's authority and it shall be possible for you [i.e. Minilik] to send by their hand the matter in question to whatever government you want and have it finished.’.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Zaghi, op. cit. 26, note 32; M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, 1, 63;Google ScholarIbid. III, 57.

¹³⁵ For Gebre Sillase's role see M.A.E., Etiopia/Mar Rosso, 1, 266 and 313. Yosëf's brother was also known as ‘Giorgio Negussie’.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ The difference between the form used in 1883 and the on used in the Wichalé treaty is only a matter of person, ‘you’ (polite form) as against ‘he’ (polite form, actually plural).Google Scholar

¹³⁷ This was not fully understood by the Italian government in Rome, but Antonelli in Shewa was aware of how difficult it would be ever to regain the respect and affection of Yohannis after the occupation of Massawa; see Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 217ff., Antonelli to Robilant, 11 May 1886.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ A. S. MAI. 36/3–31, Istruzioni per Ia missioned'Abissinia, 7 Jan. 1886, and 36/4-33 containing an Italian draft of the treaty to be negotiated.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 191f., Antonelli to Mancini, 9 Apr. 1885; 194, Minilik to Umberto, Miyazva 3, 187 (10 Apr. 1885); 217ff., Antonelli to Robilant, 11 May 1886; 239, Minilik to Umberto, Pagwimen 4, 1878 (8 Sept. 1886). More material on Minilik's attitude at this time is available in A. S. MAT. 36/3-28 and 36/3-39 to 42, where the Amharic originals of some of Minilik's letters referred to in the following footnotes are also preserved.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Doc. Dipl. 1889–1890 XV, 191 f., Antonelli to Mancini, 9 Apr. 1885 194, Minilik to Umberto, Miyazya 3, 1877, (10 Apr. 1885).Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Ibid. 275, Antonelli to Crispi, 9 Oct. 1887; 278, Minilik to Umberto, Tiqimt 15, 1880, (25 Oct. 1887).

¹⁴² Ibid. 276, Crispi to Antonelli, 27 Nov. 1887; 311 f., Umberto to Minilik, 12 Jan. 1888;321 f., Antonelli to VIinilik, 34 Feb. 1888.