Ethiopian Emperors and Slavery
We will be filled with evidence. Menelik didn’t work again for the people of Wolaita, they know that they are slaves to the people of Wolayta. “የወጋ ብረሳ የተወጋ አይረሳም”
“Emperor Menelik didn’t work again for the people of wolaita, they know that they are a slave to their army. That denying is not going to be a history.” Mr. Paul Bogale (Ashamyeleh’s son of Mr. Bogale Walu) has answered this from Canada.
He has been writing a lot about Emperor Menelik and oppose him. 130 years ago, we should only learn good things from today. This generation is responsibility and responsibility for tomorrow’s economy, politics and social life.
But it is a message that is not a generation that is not a generation that doesn’t accept his own conscience and write others to make others happy. That’s also going to be sad.
In this current history of Emperor Menelik’s history, it has been opened. It is better to know that it is not by supporting love or hatred, it is better if it is not by being able to do it.
If we are not ready to accept history or not accept history, it will be a place where we should have history. It should not be a person or a person who has been written by the history of writers or mountains. They should be free judges. The identity of history is scientific.
If the writer wrote history, it is based on the truth, religion, religion or self for benefit or nature. It should not be a stone. It is to be a stone.
If some people have lost honesty, it is a true story to be a judge who doesn’t have any conscience.
Sorry let me go back to where I woke up. They said Emperor Menelik had declared a proclamation to stop a slave business. Others also say that they had been healed by slavery of the people of wolaytan.
The evidence of Menelik’s proclamation to stop the business of barya has given the book of Mr. Bogale Wale. The other will be told, ′′ they have taken the servants of wolaita, and have taken the servants of wolaita This opportunity my name has risen.
Which one of the two sayings is the truth? For the answer is in my father’s book. But both are done, unless it is a precedent.
The truth I know in my opinion is following. I will pay three of wolaitan’s barka.
A / pre-Menelik and wolayta war slave
A slave that followed Emperor Menelik’s invasion
I will pay for the slavery of the slavery after c / he has been done.
1 / before the war of wolayta and Emperor Menelik, it was a slave that was appointed by the king and slave.
It is wrong to say that this history process was done only on wolayta people.
Emperor Menelik was the main amount of economy or wealth of cattle and cattle. We are angry when we hear that today. But then we should be careful because the economic development of Ethiopia was the number of slavery.
The servant was kings who sold him in a pledge, and sold him in a pledge. And there were many cattle, which were before him, which were the kings of the kings who were before him, who had their possessions and their servants, which were before him.
There were kings who sold their own people and their servants who had war against Ethiopia, who had been sold out of Ethiopia. From these kings, aba jifar, who was before this action.
The countries that were sold out of Africa were sold out of slavery all over the world, they didn’t come to Africa with slavery. America didn’t come and take his servants and destroy them. All that was a slave. The Kings of Africa were selling their people for sale.
This is the truth of history that was held all over Ethiopia. In the time that English was held in Italy, the English was being held in slavery or comedy, English was sold in slavery.
2 / if there is anyone who says that the war between Emperor Menelik and wolayta people has not been taken by slavery or not knowing what he has done.
Six times, the famous army of Emperor Menelik is winning the famous army of Emperor Menelik, and he said that we are our warrior and Mohammed.
The war has started, even though the war has not finished the victory of Menelik, the weakness of wolaita army aba jifar has been released by the secret of king tona.
The King of tona went to gamo gofa and went to gamo gofa to the people of gamo, and he was taken to menelik with his horse, and he was taken to menelik.
Menelik has known that menelik has not been killed or killed or killed, before they were killed, the people of wolaita have been killed again. That denying is not going to be a history.
Because it was the time that adwa had been prepared to fight with Italy, the king of their army didn’t kill the robbery and afesa slave that was going to be done on wolayta people.
It is not to accept the truth, saying that the servant of wolayta was not taken by Menelik and their army. In those days a servant who was able to take the winner would have been butter. Then these were the losers wealth. The other army is a crime to kill its natural needs on women. This is still there.
Slavery in the Ethiopian region is of “great antiquity.” (Pankhurst, 1964, p. 202.) Historical inscriptions going as far back as 1495 B.C. point to the subjugation of people from the Land of Punt into slavery. (Encyclopedia Aethiopica, p. 673.) There are also sources indicating the export of slaves from the Aksumite Kingdom (100–940 AD), a territory that included parts of modern day Eritrea and Ethiopia.
Slavery continued to be a “national custom” (Comyn-Platt, p. 152) in Ethiopia well into the early 20th century. (Pankhurst, 1968, p. 73.) So much so that even Ethiopian rulers, including those who did not approve of the institution, such as Emperor Menelik II (1889-1913) and Emperor Haile Selassie (Ethiopia’s regent, 1916-1930 and Emperor of Ethiopia, 1930-1974), are said to have owned slaves by the thousands. (Pankhurst, 1968, p. 75.) Some even personally took part in slave raids; the most notable case being that of Iyasu V (1913-1916) (AKA Lej Iyyasu) and his 1912 slave-raiding expedition (p. 32).
One of the first written laws to regulate slavery in the Ethiopian region was The Fetha Nagast (The Law of the Kings), a traditional law for Ethiopian Christians translated from 13th Century Arabic writings of a Coptic Egyptian writer, Abu-l Fada’il Ibn at- ‘Assal. (Goadby, p. 181; Pankhurst, 1968, p. 74.) Under the Fetha Nagast, one category of people that could legally be enslaved was prisoners of war (POWs). It declared
[[t]he state of] Liberty is in accord with the law of reason, for all men share liberty on the basis of natural law. But war and the strength of horses bring some to the service of others, because the law of war and of victory makes the vanquished slaves of the victors.
It also provided for the enslavement of non-believers and the children of slaves.
A person did not have to have fought for the losing side of a war or be born to a certain class of people to end up a slave as there were additional bases for enslaving people. For instance, a woman who cohabited with or married a slave could be enslaved. Failure to pay one’s debts could result in “temporary slavery,” also known as debt bondage (Encyclopaedia Aethiopica, p. 679) (in those days one did not have the luxury of filing for bankruptcy protection). Slavery could also be imposed as a punishment for committing certain crimes, also known as “punitive enslavement.” Emperor Menilek’s 1899 decree mandating the enslavement of thieves and people who sold slaves in violation of his ban is a good example of this form of enslavement.
Slaves had a dual status under the Fetha Nagast. On the one hand, they were treated as property. Slaves could not own property of their own, serve as witnesses (although in practice this ban was often disregarded, particularly in murder cases), make wills (although they were allowed to do so with permission from their master), act as judges, hold other public offices, serve as guardians, or represent their masters in law suits. More importantly, they could be sold (with a notable exception: selling of a “believing slave to an unbeliever”) or rented – much like any other chattel. On the other hand, there were ways in which slaves (particularly Christian slaves) were treated as human beings. This is illustrated by the existence of an obligation of a slave owner to allow slaves to worship as well as bans on separating women slaves from their children; on selling siblings offered for sale at the same time to two different buyers; or on separating a slave from his wife or child.
The Fetha Nagast did mandate various instances in which slaves had to be freed. A slave could be emancipated:
- If the slave had served two generations of a family (a retirement plan of sorts);
- If a member of the master’s family became the godfather or godmother to the slave;
- If the slave became a priest or a monk (of course, to do so the slave needed the master’s permission);
- If the slave became a soldier;
- If the slave had saved his master’s life;
- If a pregnant slave was emancipated, her child would be born free;
- If a slave had been taken prisoner during war but returned to his master of his own volition afterwards; and
- If a slave-owner died leaving no heirs.
However, the lack of effective control of central governments over the vast parts of the Ethiopian region meant that the enforcement of provisions of the Fetha Nagast and other laws was limited. (Goadby, p. 180.) In addition, the fact that people in places of authority, such as judges and chiefs, were also slave owners who supported the institution made it difficult for slaves to assert their freedom.
Slavery in Ethiopia was abolished in 1942 by Emperor Haile Selassie. However, he was by no means a pioneer in the fight to end the institution. He admitted to this in his autobiography in which he credits his predecessors for their attempts to take on the institution of slavery. (Haille Sellassie, Vol. I, p. 80.)
Emperor Tewodros II (1855-1869) is said to have made the first attempt at ending slavery when, in 1854, right before his coronation, he outlawed the slave trade. (Zewde, p. 34; Pankhurst, 1968, p. 93) However, he did not try to completely abolish the institution of slavery, in large part because he believed that the deep roots of the practice in society made such an attempt impracticable. This was also the reason for his forming an exception to the ban on slave trading in which he allowed Christians to buy slaves if they did so for charity. During this period he is said to have tried to lead by example by making various gestures to discourage slavery, including buying slaves from Muslim traders and baptizing them and banning his soldiers from selling POWs. (Zewde, p. 34)
The 1854 ban on the slave trade had little effect and the slave trade continued to flourish. Upon the realization that this was in large part driven by the exception made to the ban on the slave trade, in 1862 the Emperor issued a decree banning the sale of any and all Christian slaves, the violation of which was subject to a gruesome penalty; a person caught trading Christian slaves would have his hand and foot amputated. (Encyclopaedia Aethiopica, p. 680.)
Yet another unsuccessful attempt at curbing the institution of slavery was made by Emperor Yohannes IV ( 1872-1889). He signed a treaty with Britain in 1884 that sought to put an end to slave trading including the importing and/or exporting of slaves in the region. In it, he also agreed to protect emancipated slaves. Although he is said to have made a genuine attempt to hold his end of the bargain, his actions could not effectively curb the slave trade and slave raids. (Pankhurst, 1968 p. 99.)
Emperor Menelik II was no different in his aversion to the institution of slavery, although he was not always consistent in his actions. In 1876 he issued a proclamation in which he prohibited Christians from buying and selling slaves in his territories and mandated that any Muslim caught traveling with slaves should be taken into custody and tried. (Pankhurst, 1968, p. 100.) This law was ineffective in part because Menelik himself violated its terms by, among other things, continuing to levy taxes from slave markets. Upon his ascent to the throne in 1889, he again issued a decree abolishing slavery. (Encyclopaedia Aethiopica 680.) However, he made an exception for POWs and he used this exception to enslave war captives by the thousands. As noted above, he also used slavery and enslavement as a tool for punishing certain criminals.
In my next post, I will highlight the fruitful attempts made to put an end to the institution of slavery in the 1920’s leading up to its complete abolition in 1942 with the enactment of the Slavery (Abolition) Proclamation of 1942. Stay tuned!
The following materials from the Library of Congress’s collection were used in preparing this post:
- Richard Pankhurst, The Ethiopian Slave Trade in the Nineteenth Century and Early Twentieth Centuries: a Statistical Inquiry, in IX Journal of Semitic Studies No. 1, 220-228 (Manchester University Press, Spring 1964);
- Sir Thomas Comyn-Platt, The Abyssinian Storm (Jarrolds Limited, 1935);
- Richard Pankhurst, Economic History of Ethiopia (Haile Selassie I University Press, 1968);
- F.M. Goadby, The Law of Slavery in Abyssinia, in Journal of Comparative Legislation and International Law, 180-202 (Hazell, Watson & Viney, Ltd., 1933);
- Encyclopaedia Aethiopica (Siegbert Uhliged ed., Harrassowitz, 2010);
- Haile Selassie I, My life and Ethiopia’s Progress, 1892-1937 : The Autobiography of Emperor Haile Sellassie I (Edward Ullendorff, trans., Oxford University Press, 1976);
- Bahru Zewde, A History of Modern Ethiopia, 1855-1991 (Addis Ababa University Press, 2nd ed., 2001); and
- The Fetha Nagast (Paulos Tzadua, trans., Faculty of Law Haile Selassie I University, 1968)