No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 January 2009
In the period before the rise of Emperor Theodore, the provinces in Ethiopia tended to behave like independent entities. Shoa was one of the more successful provinces in this respect. By the middle of the nineteenth century, a strong independent nationalism had developed in Shoa which threatened to stand in the way of national unity. This was not favoured by Emperor Theodore, who therefore strove to destroy provincial independence and unite all the provinces under an effective central government.
For a long time it was thought that Theodore had an easy task with Shoa, defeating her in a single combat and thereafter completely pacifying the country. Recent researches have revealed that this was not the case. Theodore did not gain an easy victory over a timid enemy. On the contrary, he met with a strong and determined resistance from the Shoan kingdom. He did in the end succeed in conquering it, but he did so only after a vigorous campaign which lasted five months. His final victory was affected by two related factors which seriously weakened the morale of the Shoan soldiers. The first was the sudden death of the king of Shoa at the height of the campaign. The second factor was that the heir to the Shoan throne was a boy of ten years, and incapable of giving effective leadership in the war against the emperor. Shoan resistance collapsed with the capture of the heir and of a number of the leading personalities in the kingdom. The emperor established his own administration in the conquered territory, which he hoped would effectively execute imperial policy there.
The administration was, however, unable to pacify the conquered territory, and the period of imperial control was spent suppressing one rebellion after another. On two occasions during this period, Theodore had to go down to Shoa himself to strengthen imperial attacks on the rebels. Although the Emperor managed to gain a hard-won victory over the rebels on the first occasion, he could not make any headway on the second occasion, and eventually he left the country in the hands of the rebels. Thus, in spite of all his efforts, Theodore never succeeded in gaining complete control over Shoa, and by the time he died in April i868, Shoa had already regained her independence.
1 The principal exception to this is Professor Sven Rubenson's recent study of Theodore, in which a correct picture is given of the initial opposition offered by the Shoans to the emperor's invasion and of subsequent rebellions. See Sven, Rubenson, King of Kings Tewodros of Ethiopia (Haile Sellassie I University in association with O.U.P., Addis Ababa and Nairobi, 1966).Google ScholarJesman's, C.article in Ethiopia Observer, x, no.2 (1966), may also be included among the exceptions.Google Scholar
2 Jones, A. H. M., and Monroe, E., History of Ethiopia, 131;Google ScholarTrimingham, J. S., Islam in Ethiopia, 118.Google Scholar
3 For a study of Theodore's life and work, see Professor Rubenson's book referred to in n. I
4 Darkwah, R. H. Kofi, ‘The rise of the kingdom of Shoa, 1813–1889’, London University Ph.D thesis, 07 1966 (unpublished).Google Scholar
5 While the French reports are found mainly in the archives of the French Foreign Ministry at Quai d'Orsay, the Italian ones are found in three different places. In the archives of a section of the Italian foreign ministry, now known as Comitato per la Documentazione dell'Opera dell'Italia in Africa, are to be found various reports, including most of those by Antonelli. Antonelli was, between 1889 and 1891, the official representative of the Italian government in Emperor Menelik's Ethiopia. He first arrived in Shoa in 1879 in a private capacity, but from 1882 to 1889 he served first as an unofficial and later as the official agent of the Italian Government in the kingdom of Shoa. Secondly, in 1877 there arrived in Shoa a scientific expedition which was sent by the Italian Geographical Society to explore the Galla lands to the south of Shoa. Some members of this expedition remained in Shoa throughout the 1880s and into the 1890s. Documents on this expedition are preserved in the historical archives of the Italian Geographical Society in Rome. Some of the reports were published in various issues of the bulletin of the Society, but others have remained unpublished. Thirdly, in the archives of the Sacra Congregaziorie di Propaganda Fide are to be found documents relating to a Roman Catholic mission led by Monsignor (later Cardinal) Massaia, which was sent to evangelize the Galla who constituted Shoa's southern neighbours. The districts in which the mission was established were conquered by Shoa in the 1870s and early 1880s. Massaia wrote a twelve-volume book on his missionary activities in the Ethiopian region. See Massaia, , I Miei Trentacinque anni di missione nell' Alta Etiopia (12 vols., Milan, 1886–1896).Google Scholar
6 Guébré, Sellassié: Chronique du Règne de Ménélik II, roi des rois d'Ethiopie, ed. de Coppet, M., 2 vols. (Paris, 1930–1932).Google ScholarWalda, Maryam, Chroniquέ de Théodros II roi des rois d'Ethiopie, ed. and trans. Vidailhet, C. Mondon (Paris, 1904–1905).Google Scholar Zaneb in M. M. Moreno's Italian translation, ‘La Cronaca di Re Teodore attribuita al dabtara “Zaneb’”, Rassegna di studi Etiopici, II (1942). In his book referred to in n. I, Professor Rubenson makes references to other Ethiopian sources, especially to another Chronicle of Theodore edited by Fusella, L. and to Nuovi documenti per la storia d'Abissinia nel secolo XIX,Google Scholar published by Conti, Rossini in the Rend. dell' Acc. Naz. dei Lincei, ser, VIII, vol. II (1947), 15, no. I; 19, no. 10. But these do not add anything new to what is already known from other sources.Google Scholar
7 An example of this is found in his account of the Shoan expedition to Arussi in May–June 1886, where his details agree with the account given by Traversi, who accompanied the expedition. For Traversi's, account see Bolletino della Società Geografica Italiana, serie. II, vol. XII (1887).Google Scholar
8 In religious matters, however, Shoa appears to have acknowledged, within certain limits, the overlordship of the Abuna.
9 Correspondence Respecting Abyssinia, (1867–1868, LXXII) p. 94, no. 17764, Plowden to Clarendon, 10 07 1854.Google Scholar
10 Walda, Maryam, op. cit. (French trans.), 10. Professor Rubenson says: ‘the northern governors surrendered without much resistance’Google Scholar (Rubenson, op. cit. 52).Google Scholar
11 Antonio, Cecchi, Da Zeila alle frontiere del Caffa, I (Roma, 1886), 251.Google Scholar
12 Walda, Maryam, op. cit., 13. Basing his calculation on an earlier version of Guébré Sellassié's manuscript, Professor Rubenson accepts 9 November 1855 as the date on which Haile Malakot died (op. cit. 53, n. 21). The present writer is inclined to accept the dating of Walda Maryam, because it is the one date on which the Chronicler is most specific, thus giving the impression that he was very sure about it. He dates the death of the king to ‘30 hedar, Friday night, in the 8th year of his reign’.Google Scholar
13 Walda, Maryam, op. cit. 13–14;Google ScholarCecchi, , op. cit. 1, 255; Guébré Sdllassié, op. cit.1, 86.Google Scholar
14 Correspondence Respecting Abyssinia, (1867–1868, LXXII) 269, no. 469Google Scholar (Plowden, to Earl, of Clarendon, , 22 12. 1855).Google Scholar
15 F.O. 1/9, Plowden to Clarendon, 25 0Jun 1855, enclosure.
16 Walda, Maryam, op. cit. 17–18.Google Scholar
17 Professor Rubenson refers to ‘a budding revolt’ in Shoa at the end of 1858 (op. cit. 77–8). This gives the impression that between its conquest in 1855–6 and the end of 1858 Shoa had enjoyed peace. It is clear from the Shoan sources that this was not in fact the case. See Zaneb, in Rassegna di Studi Etiopici, II (1942), 174;Google ScholarGuébré, Sellassié, op. cit. 93–4;Google ScholarCecchi, A., op. cit. 256.Google Scholar
18 Cecchi, , op. cit. I, 256;Google ScholarGuébré, Seliassié, op. cit. 1, 93–4;Google ScholarAlaka, Zaneb, op. cit. 174.Google Scholar
19 F.O. I/II: Plowden to H.M.'s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 2 02. 1860.
20 Walda, Maryam, op. cit. 25–6.Google Scholar
21 Cecchi, , op. cit. I, 257.Google Scholar
23 Cecchi, , op. cit. 1, 258–9.Google Scholar
24 India Office Library, Aden Secret Letters Received (Various), vol. 42, Rassam, to Merewether, , 22 01 1865, fols. 23, 28–32.Google ScholarStern, H. A., The Captive Missionary (London, 1868), 214–16;Google ScholarGuébré, Sellassié, Op. cit. 97, no. 10. The actual date is uncertain. The evidence from Stern would seem to favour late 1863 while evidence from Rassam suggests 1864. What is clear, however, is that there was a revolt in Shoa by February 1864.Google Scholar
25 Cecchi, , op. cit. I, 260;Google ScholarSellassié, G., op. cit. I, 97.Google Scholar
26 G. Sellassié, Ibid.
27 M.A.E. (Paris), Memoires et documents (Afrique), vol. 63, fols. 276–8, Bezabu, to a certain Gabre, Hajwat, 2 04 1863.Google Scholar
28 Stern, H. A., op. cit. 215.Google Scholar