November 3, 2018

Succession

By Stuart Munro-Hay

Determining the nature of the succession is difficult. Though it might be expected that the monarchy was hereditary in a particular family following the system of primogeniture in the male line, this is not absolutely certain. Nor do we know if, as seems likely in so long a period, there were changes of dynasty. We know the names of sons of the third-century nagashis Gadarat and `Adhebah, respectively Baygat and Garmat, but they do not appear under those names elsewhere. Ezana’s father was Ella Amida; but nowhere in the inscriptions is it stated that he was a king, although the `Ella’ element allows us to suppose that he was, and Rufinus (ed. Migne 1849: 479) confirms that the child-king who was later converted to Christianity, and who is usually identified as Ezana, succeeded his father. A ring of truth is given to this supposition by the fact that Ezana had to undertake a series of campaigns in Ethiopia and neighboring countries in his early years, perhaps the result of neglect during a long minority under a regency in a system of tributary control such as the Aksumite.

king Kaleb of Aksumite Empire

Ezana’s assumption of his majority under such difficult circumstances, when he needed to set out immediately on campaigns to secure his kingdom, may also partly explain his continued use of pagan phraseology in his inscriptions; the result of a delay from practical causes in announcing his new religion. The sequence Tazena-Kaleb-Wa`zeb follows from father to son, but in fact, only the later hagiographies and king lists call Tazena a king, naming his father as another Ella Amida. Only for Wa`zeb, therefore, do we have primary evidence from Aksumite documents for hereditary succession on the throne. In spite of this paucity of evidence, the flourishing urban society of Aksum, with its prosperous trade and lack of defensive installations seems to indicate that the transmission of power was relatively stable over a considerable period.

The basic idea of the hereditary succession in Ethiopia is confirmed by Ibn Ishaq’s biography of the prophet Muhammad, as preserved, though sometimes altered, abbreviated, and annotated, in the works of such later historians as Ibn Hisham and Tabari (Guillaume 1955: Introduction). The story as given in this source is very interesting from the point-of-view of late Aksumite history (Guillaume 1955: 153ff). It is reputed to have been told by `Aisha, one of the prophet’s wives. The future najashi was apparently the only son of his father and predecessor, who was murdered by certain Abyssinians in order to give the throne to his brother, who had twelve sons to guarantee the succession. He grew up and found favor with his uncle the new king, but the Abyssinians frightened that he might yet become the next najashi, insisted on his exile. At this point the story becomes a little more embroidered; the future najashi is said to have been sold to a merchant, the reigning king to have been struck by lightning, and the twelve sons to have turned out to be too foolish to succeed. Inevitably, the najashi had to be brought back and finally triumphed. However unlikely some parts of this tale might seem, the assumption that the succession must rest in a certain family is interesting. The Chinese account of the life of Muhammad (Mason 1921) noted above (Ch. 4: 7), claims that the ruler whose accession to the Ethiopian throne occurred in c577 was the grandson of a certain `great king’, and that he was in due course succeeded by his own grandson, thus suggesting a descent in the same family for five generations without excluding the possible succession of brothers.