The Yejju Oromoo in The Politics of The

Gadaa Journal/Barruulee Gadaa
Vol. 4 No. 1 June 2021 e-ISSN: 2616-3985

p-ISSN: 2616-3977
https:journals.ju.edu.et
A Bilingual Journal of the Institute of Oromo Studies
(IOS) Jimma University
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full Length Research Paper

The Yejju Oromoo in the Politics of the Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia
(1786-1853)
Dechasa Abebe (PhD)*
Email:dechasa.abebe@aau.edu.et
Center for African and Asian Studies, College of Social Sciences, Addis Ababa University
Submission Date: November 08/2020

Acceptance Date: January 14, 2021
Abstract
The Oromoo had been playing a significant role in the power politics of Ethiopian history.
The period of the Yejju Dynasty (1786-1853) was peculiar in this regard. However, this
historical fact was abused and was written as if the country was in a state of disorder and
political anarchy during that period. This was done mainly to praise and justify the political
measures of the “Great kings” of Gonder in the 17th and early 18th centuries and the
emperors who were recognized as “unifiers” of Ethiopia in the second half of the 19th
century. Hence, this is an attempt to disclose the role of the Oromoo in the political history of
the country during the period under discussion. This role is explained by taking some issues
into consideration: struggle for political power, the nature of political administration,
economic activities mainly agriculture and trade, foreign relations and socio-cultural
systems. Known sources were consulted thoroughly to bring to light to the ideas overlooked
intentionally or unknowingly by professional and public historians. Thus, works of earlier
traditional historians, European travellers and missionaries’ accounts, Ethiopian chronicles
and the works of few professional historians were used for this purpose. Accordingly, the
sources indicate that the Oromoo became the actual governors of the country designing a
limited monarchy-type of government system by enthroning ceremonial kings as head of state.
Unlike what is common in the literature of Ethiopian history, it was a period of continuity of
the previous unifying factors with relative peace than the prevalence of only divisive factors.
Moreover, it was also a period of wider economic activities when agriculture and trade, both
local and cross border, were extensively carried out.
Key terms: Christian kingdom, Great kings, Oromoo, Yejju Dynasty
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* Corresponding author.
1
Gadaa Journal/ Barruulee Gadaa Vol. 4, No.1 pp. 1-25 January 2021
Axeereraa
Seenaa sirna siyaasa Itoophiyaa keessatti Oromoon gahee olaanaa taphateera. Waggootiin
(Baroonni) Yeejjuu Deenastiin (1786-1853) itti bulchaa ture kanaaf fakkeenya gaariidha.
Haata’u malee, seenaan qabatamaan kun akka waan biyyattiin seer-maleessummaafi
fiinxaleessummaan yeroo kanatti bulteetti akkaataa burjaajii keessa nama galchuutti
barreeffame. Kun hunduu haala kanaan akka barreeffamu kan ta’eef siyaasa Nugusootaa
Goondar ol kaasanii mul’isuufi ittiin dhugoomsuuf; akkasumas, Jaarraa 17ffaa, jalqaba
jaarraa 18ffaafi walakkeessa Jaarraa 19ffaatti mootonni dhufan mootoota Itoophiyaa tokko
gochuuf dhufan jedhanii beekkamtii kennuufiif akka ta’e yaanni isaan kaasan ni mul’isa. Kun
yeroo kana keessatti gahee Oromoon siyaasa biyya Itoophiyaa keessatti qabu xiqqeessuuf
yaalii godhameedha. Faallaa kanaa yaanni kun akka sirrii hintaane ibsuuf, dhimmoota tokko
tokko xiyyeeffannaa keessa galchuuni yaanni qindaaye kahameera. Isaanis: sochii gama
aangoo siyaasaa, sochii haala bulchiinsaa, warraaqsa dinagdee, keessattuu gama qonnaafi
daldalaa, hariiroo gama haajaa alaafi tooftaa walhidhatiinsa aadaafi gama
hawaasummaatin. Maddeen kun maddeen beekamoo ta’an xiyyeeffannoo keessa galchuun
ilaalamaniiru, kunis, yaada beekaas ta’ee, osoo hinbeekin hayyoota ogummaa seenaa
qabaniifi warroota beekumsa seenaa ummataa qabaniin xiyyeeffannoo dhaban akka
xiyyeeffannoo argataniif ragaadhaan deeggaruun barreeffamee jira. Kunis, barreeffamoota
warra seenaa katabdoota osoo seenaa hinbaratiini, warra Awurooppaadha dhufanii biyya
keessa deemaa turaniifi misiyoonoota wabeeffachuun. Barreeffamoonni warra ogummaa
seenaa qabaniifi kironikiliiwwan Itoophiyaas dhimma kanaaf wabeeffatamaniiru. Haaluma
kanaan ragaan akka mirkaneessuutti Oromoon biyya kana bulchaa akka tureefi akka
nugusaattis mataa biyyattii ta’uun fakkaattii mataa biyyaa ta’uun bulchuu isaanii
mirkaneessa. Haalli kun gama faallaa ta’een ogbarruu seenaa Itoophiyaa ibsan keessatti
wanta mul’atuudha. Kunis, tokkummaa walitti fufiinsa qabuufi nageenya biyyattii keessatti
shoorri isaan taphatan waan guddaadha. Dabalataanis, baroonni kun baroota sochiin
dinagdee keessumattuu gama qonnaa, daldalaafi gama hariiroo biyya keessafi biyyoota alaa
(ollaa) wajjin ture daran itti babal’ateedha.
Jechoota Ijoo: Oromoo, Mootummaa kiristanaa, Deenastii Yeejjuu, Mootoota Gurguuddoo
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dechasa, The Yejju Oromo in the Politics …

2
Introduction
Historical facts were abused frequently in the modern historiography of Ethiopia. The history
of the country has been written as if some of the ethnic or religious groups were strange to
Ethiopia and had less contribution in the processes of state formation. The notion that some
groups became part of the Christian highland Ethiopian history only in the 16th century has
begun to be challenged by newly disclosed historical evidences 1. It became possible by
critically reading the already known historical sources. Basically, the abuse of history in
Ethiopia was to legitimize the illegitimate political power by defaming predecessors 2.
Particularly, post conflicts and post dictatorial government history topics or lessons tried to
justify the positions and deeds of the existing political power that it is there to correct those
wrong acts of the predecessor3.
In such cases, history is not taught for reconciliation rather it tends to give recognition for one
group and deny the contribution of others. Even, it accused only one group for the
instabilities that took place frequently in the history of the country. It associated the absence
of national unity or the retardation of the process of national unification with the fault of only
one group of the peoples of the country4. This had been done through the implementation of
some interrelated forms of abuses in the process of historical reconstruction in Ethiopia.
One was by omitting the historical sources that discuss the contribution of “unwanted” groups
of the society; they could be religious, ethnic or occupational group. This was done sometimes
to the extent of destroying sources pertaining to those groups5. The second one was by
defaming through sorting out only the failure of those groups in the course of history of the
country6. This was also strengthened by labelling all the socio-cultural and economic systems
different from that of those groups on the political power as backward, barbarian or practices
of the Satan7. The third was by adding opinions more than what were easily identified in the
historical sources of the country8.
1
Mohammed Hassen, The Oromo and the Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia 1300-1700 (Oxford: James Currey,
2015), pp. 15-61; Asafa Jalata, “The Struggle for Knowledge: The Case of Emergent Oromo Studies” in African
Studies Review, Vol.39.No.2 (Cambridge University Press, Sep. 1996), pp. 95-123.
2
This can be understood from the historical literature written about Ibin Ibrahim Aligazi (Mohammed Geragn)
and the Oromo in the post 16 th century period, about Yejju Dynasty during the reign of Emperor Tewodros II,
about Emperor Tewodros himself during the reign of Menilek II, about Lij Iyyasu during the reign of Emperor
Haile Silassie I, and about Haile Silassie himself during the period of the Derg and now about the period of the
Derg itself.
3
Afework Gebre Iyesus, Dagmawi Ate Menilek (Addis Ababa: United Printers, 1973), pp. 1-2; Mahteme Silassie
Wolde Meskel, Zikre Neger ( Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Press, 1962 EC), pp. 506-515.
4
Tekle Tsadik Mekurya, Ye Itiyopiya Tarik: Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros( Addis Ababa: Birehanina
Selam Printing Press, 1961 EC), pp. 94-98; Getachew Hailie, Ye Abba Bahriy Dirsetoch, Oromochin Kmimlektu
Leloch Sndoch gara ( Addis Ababa, 2002), p.118-123; Bahru Zewde, A History of Modern Ethiopia: 1855-1974
(Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Press, 1992), p.9.
5
Mohammed Hassen, The Oromo of Ethiopia 1570-1860 (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1994), pp.
Xii-xiv.
6
Getachew Hailie, pp. 118-123.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.
3
The overall purpose of the abuses was to label those groups as outsiders or strangers to the
history and systems in the country. It was also to ostracize or marginalize those groups from
the national privileges in the consecutive regimes of the country9. The common privileges that
were denied included political power, lucrative job opportunities, economic activities and
possession of major national resources10.
One of the national groups that was subjected to the abused historical writings in Ethiopia was
the Oromoo. Their share in the politics of the Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia has been
overlooked or marginalized in the historical writings in the country or abroad for the last one
century. In fact, significant efforts were made to correct those abuses by a number of scholars
recently11. So, the main objective of the present attempt is to add on those efforts to disclose
the historical truth pertaining to the Oromoo in the history of the country.
1. Historical Background
Sources indicate that the profound involvement of the Oromoo in the politics of the Christian
highland Ethiopia began to be seen clearly with the reestablishment of the center of political
power in the region north of the Abay (Blue Nile) by the first quarter of the 17th century. One
of the major roles of the Oromoo was to servie as soldiers for the political power aspirant. The
service helped the aspirants to come to the political power and maintain their positions. The
earlier of such service was provided to Susenyos in the last decade of the 16th century. The
other role of the Oromoo was hosting rebels who exiled among them retreating from the
center of political turmoil of the Christian Highland kingdom of Ethiopia. Susenyos was one
of such royal family members who was brought up among the Oromoo and familiarized with
the Oromoo culture and could communicate in the language12. Geographically, the Oromoo
began to inhabit areas not very far from the capital town, Gonder. It is said that, Susenyos
settled a number of clan-based Oromoo regiments in the provinces north of the Abay like in
Gojjam. So, he was one of the Ethiopian emperors who brought the Oromoo to the heart of the
post- sixteenth century political power struggle in the country13.
Of course, the Oromoo were serving in the army (chewa) of Iyyasu I (1682-1706) to fight
against his opponents including the Oromoo themselves. Clan regiments like Itu, Wallaga,
Gadisa, Tulama etc were some of the Oromoo armies that served in the Gonderine kingdom14.
Hiroki further mentions that “the royal army at the end of the reign of Iyyasu I comprised
troops led by provincial governors, troops of the Oromoo people and others”15. The same
author underlined that “... Emperors had considerable household troops and that they
depended increasingly on the Oromoo people, and that the latter‟s political position rose
9
Aleqa Taye Gebre Mariam, Ye Itiyopiya Hizib Tarik (Addis Ababa: Qidus Giyorgis Printing House, 1958),
p.24.
10
Olana Zoga, Giztina Gizot (Addis Ababa: Bolie printing House, 1985 EC), pp. 24-25).
11
Asafa Jalata, pp. 95-123.
12
Getachew Hailie, pp. 134-136; Alemu Haile, Ye Itiyopiya Tarik (1597-1625 EC) Ye Atse Susenyos Ziena
Mewa’el (Addis Ababa: Sirak Printing Press, 2005), pp.3-5.
13
Alemu Hailie, pp. 79-82; the text narrates about Oromo and Gojjam significantly chapter after chapter and
pages after pages.
14
Ishikawa Hiroki, “Changes in the Military System during the Gonar Period (1632-1769): Their Influence on
the Decline of the Solomonic Dynasty” in Annales d’ Ethiopie, Vol. 18, annee, 2002, pp. 217-218.
15
Ibid, p. 220.
4
during latter half of the Gonderine period”16. So, it is suffice to say that almost all emperors
of Gonder depended heavily on the Oromoo for military purposes from its large size
population, the practice continued to the 21st century history of Ethiopia.
The foundation of Gonder as a capital town of the kingdom in 1636 by Fasiladas, the son and
successor of Susenyos, gradually resulted in the confinement of the political power in the
town and its vicinity. Even, the immediate successors of Fasiladas, who were called the
“Great Kings” of the Gonderine period, could not strictly put all the areas within their domain
under their full control. The main achievement of the Gonderine kings in this regard was
compelling those regions to pay annual tribute. Otherwise, they send their army to raid those
rebel regions. Internally, those kings were pre-occupied by power rivalry and turbulence.
They attempted to solve such problems by confining all possible contenders in a royal prison,
Wohniamba17. Bakafa (r.1721-1730), who was the second next to Sysenyos in bringing the
Oromoo to the politics of the Christian Highland Kingdom, was one of the victims of the royal
imprisonment. He managed to flee from the royal prison and exiled himself among the
Oromoo in Wollo, Warra Himanu, at the home of a lord called Amizo. Later on, Bakkafa was
supported by the Oromoo of Wollo to secure his political power. That was followed by a
marriage alliance between the two, Bakafa and Amizo, who allied Iyyasu II (r.1730-1755)
with Wabi (Christianized and named as Wubit or Wolete Bersabeh) the son and daughter,
respectively18. The measure brought a number of influential Oromoo individuals and groups
to the palace to support one power contender against the other. The marriage alliance also
gave rise to kings who had blood line from the Oromoo. Those kings needed the support of
their kinsmen in counseling, military commandments and services as the majority of the army.
The case in point was that of Iyoas (r. 1755-1769), the son of Iyassu II who brought his uncles
(Brilie and Lubo) and other numerous relatives from Wollo19. As a result, it has been said that
his Oromoo followers “over flooded” the town of Gonder that their language became a court
language (ልሣነንጉሥ). Iyoas himself spoke mostly Afan Oromoo by which his other relatives
from Quara were disappointed20. The act brought two groups of power contenders not only for
the position of kingship, but also for the positions of counseling and military commandments.
Regarding the contenders, one group was from the Oromoo and the other from the non-
Oromoo ethnic perspectives; and one from the Muslims (identified as Galla) and the other
from the Christians (identified as Amhara). The latter could be the Agaws and other related
Cushitic peoples like the Qimant from Quara. Most probably, the Quaregnoch were the
Amharic speaking Qimant and the Gojjames were the Amharic speaking Oromoos or
Agaws21. At certain point, the monarchs could not manage the rivalry among these two
groups, the Quaregnoch and the Wollowoch. As a result, they attempted to bring a neutral
16
Ibid, p. 222.
17
Tabor Wami, Ye Wugena Dirsetochna Ye tarik Iwunetoch (Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Press, 2006 EC), p.
298.
18
Richard Greenfield, Ethiopia: A New Political History (London: Pall mail press, 1965), p. 45; Birru Tsegayie,
Ye Silitanie Afrikawi Minchina Beteret Megarejawoch Yetdbqu Iwuntoch (Addis Ababa: Bedir Printing House,
2002 EC), p. 321.
19
Richard Greenfield, p. 45.
20
Ibid; Fitsum Wolde Mariam, Ye Atsime Giyorgis Gebre Mesih Dirsetoch, Ye Oromo Tarik (1500-1900 EC)
(Addis Ababa: Azop Printing, 2009 EC), p.222.
21
Fitsum Wolde Mariam, pp. 227, 232.
5
body from Tigray22. Unfortunately, that measure worsened the weakness of the monarchs and
limited the power of these groups. This continual weakness of the Gonderine monarchs paved
the way for the rise of the Yejju Dynasty (1786-1853) in which the Oromoo became the main
actor in the politics of the kingdom. With regard to this period, a number of abusive historical
literatures were contributed. Some of the abusive stories pertaining to the period were on the
rise of Yejju Dynasty, struggles for political power, the nature of political administration, the
territorial extent of the kingdom, foreign relations and the nature of socio-cultural systems of
the country.
The Rise of the Yejju Dynasty and the Struggle for Political Power
The end of the period of “king making and unmaking” by Ras Sehul Mikael of Tigray who
was identified as “ቀታሌ ንጉሥ” “murder of kings” in Gonder gradually gave rise to the
appointment of the Oromoo to the position of the inderasie (viceroy) with a title ras betwode;
the highest politico-military rank next to the monarch. The first inderasie from the Yejju
family was appointed by King Tekle Giyorgis who came to power in 1777. In fact, it was his
father (Guangul) who was invited by King Tekle Giyorgis for the position. But, Guangul
recommended his own son, Ali and the latter was appointed to the position23. By then, the
political domain of the king was very small; he could not collect taxes and tributes from the
regions which were tributary to the kings before him. Because of this, he planned to collect
taxes from Begemidir itself which was exempted from that for their military services24.
Unfortunately, the nobles of Begemidir initiated by certain Dejach Eshete Hailu from Estie
rejected this plan or decree of King Tekle Giyorgis saying; “there was no tax in Begemidir
like there was no desert in the sky. Begemidir was exempted from tax of honey or cash but
gave his chest for spear and his foot for gravel. Please, govern like your fathers Fasil, Adiam
Seged Iyyasu did, we continue our loyalty to you. 25”
However, the king refused their appeal. As a result, they suggested a new form of government
saying, “If the king changed his administration system, we [also] change our governor; our
throne is in our hands!” They invited Ali to the position of their own inderasie instead of that
of the king as “አጼ ተክለጊዮርጊስ የሰጡዎን እንዯራሴነት ይተዉና በኛ በኩል እንዯራሴ አድርገንዎታል፤ አልጋ ግን
ከአገራችን እንዳይጠፋ ወይዛዝር ከሚባሉት ከነገስታት ዘር አጼ እያልን አንደን እያነገስን እናስቀምጣለን...”26; “Leave
the position of inderasie of Atse Tekle Giyorgis, we will appoint you as our inderasie, but to
preserve the tradition of monarchy, we will put ceremonial kings on the throne from the royal
family.” The act was to limit the absolute power of the king, in which the real political power
should be in the hands of people‟s inderasie. Therefore, the government was headed by the
inderasie of the people. And the king became the ceremonial head of the state without real
political power. So, Ali Guangul became people‟s inderasie (people‟s appointee) by leaving
his position with the king. The king was disappointed because of the measures and exiled to
22
Ibid, p. 223.
23
Birru Tsegaye, p. 324.
24
Tekle Tsadik Mekuriya, ke Atse Libine Dingle iske Atse Tewodros, p. 291.
25
Ibid.
26
Ibid; Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, p. 292.
6
Aksum saying, “በጌምድር! ከኔ ከወንድምሽ የየጁ ጋላ ከተሻለሽ ዯግ ነዋ!”27; “Begemidr! If the Yejju Galla
is preferable to you than I, your brother, it is well.” Thus, this measure was the opening of the
period of the Yejju Dynasty, the end of absolute monarchs not the end of government, but a
change in the form of government. Tekle Tsadik Mekuria rightly commented that “ፍጻሜ
መንግስት….. ይባላል፡፡ ነገር ግን የነገስታቱ ኀይል ዯከመ ለማለት ነዉ እንጂ፣ መንግስቱ …. በመሳፍንቱ እጅ ቀጥሏልና
ፍጻሜ መንግስት በማለት ፈንታ ፍጻሜ ነገስት ማለት ይገባል፡፡”28; “….they called it the end of state; but it
should be called the end of monarchs because the government continued in the hands of
mesafints.” Unfortunately, the official history of the country identified the period as the time
of “disorder” or “statelessness” instead of identifying it as the period of limited monarchy.
Several opinions were written against facts concerning this historical period. Of these, the
following can be re-thought looking into the official sources contributed by the royal
chroniclers and traditional historians. The majority of modern professional as well as amateur
historians omitted those historical facts to legitimize all the political activities of Emperor
Tewodros II (1855-1868) who brought the period to an end. Shiferaw Bekele and Tekele
Tsadiq Mekuria, to the knowledge of the present author, became different from Ethiopian
historians of the 20th century in this regard. Both of them interpreted sources on this historical
period genuinely and invited others for further investigation 29. Asme Giyorgis Gebre Mesih
also shared this peculiarity to some extent in his description of the period30.
The political power of the Yejju Dynasty was identified as “vassalage system” by Shiferaw
Bekele, in which regional lords can grant land and mobilize their own armies which were
totally dependent on them. This inhibits the full control of the Yejju rulers on the regional
lords indirectly31. In fact, all the rulers of the Yejju Dynasty from Ali I to Ali II were suzerain
to all other regional lords within their domain. Of course, the majority of the regional lords
were protesting frequently either for the position of ras betwoded by which the Yejju rulers
were identified32.
Thus, the period of the Yejju Dynasty was characterized by intense power struggle for the
position after the death of each inderasie. The claim for the position of ras betwoded from
other regional lords was carried out frequently under the cover of identifying the Yejju
inderasies as usurpers to the position33. The two major rival provincial lords for the position
of inderasie were the lords of Tigray-Simien and Gojjam-Damot. The rest two, Begemidir and
Wollo, were not frequently part of the struggle against the Yejjus because Wollo was already
the main actor in the government system and Begemidir was the host of the system; even the
27
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, p. 292.
28
Ibid, p. 288.
29
Shiferaw Bekele, “The state in the Zamana Masafent (1786-1853): An Essay in Reinterpretation” in Kasa ana
Kasa, Papers on the Lives, Times and Images of Emperor Tewodros II and Yohannis IV (1855-1889) (Addis
Ababa: Addis Ababa University Book Center, 1990), pp. 52-53.
30
Fitsum Wolde Mariyam, p. 244;
31
Shiferaw Bekele, “Reflections on the power Elite of the Wara Seh Masfenate (1786-1853)” in Annales
d’Ethiopie. Vol. 15. Annee, 1990. P. 159.
32
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, pp. 291-320.
33
Ibid.
7
Yejju rulers themselves were officially not only the inderasie of the kingdom but also lords of
Begemidr34.
Initially, there was a rivalry between Ras Wolde Silassie from Enderta and Ras Gebre Meskel
from Tembien for the position of governorship of Tigray. They were aspiring not only for the
governorship of Tigray but also the position of inderasie in Gonder. For instance, Ras Gebre
Meskel enthroned his own ceremonial king Ase Be‟idemariam to mobilize support for the
position of inderasie. At this stage, Ras Ali I was siding with Ras Wolde Silassie against Ras
Gebre Meskel. Because of this, Ras Ali had got at least the neutrality of Ras Wolde Silassie in
his confrontation with Ras Gebre Meskel. As a result, Ras Ali was successful in defeating Ras
Gebre Meskel and killed Ase Be‟idemariam. Ras Ali maintained his alliance with Ras Wolde
Silassie and urged him to fight against Ras Gebre Meskel who escaped death and retreated.
Accordingly, Ras Wolde Silassie confronted Ras Gebre Meskel and defeated him. Finally, he
became the sole governor of Tigray, and Ras Ali secured his suzerainty in Tigray35.
The successor of Ras Ali was his own son Ras Aligaz. We cannot see clear confrontation
between the lords of Tigray and Ras Aligaz from the available sources. What we can see from
the sources is only the refusal of Abuna Yosab and Ichiegie Wolde Iyesus to give recognition
for Ras Aligaz as inderasie under the pretext that “they would not submit to the Galla”. As a
result, he had battle with them in which they were defeated. Ras Aligaz also had strong
problem of power competition with his Yejju relatives and with Ras Asrat and Ras Wolde
Gebriel of Lasta36 who interrupted the Yejju Dynasty for six years (1794-1800) after the death
of Aligaz of Yejju37.
The death of the Lasta brothers resulted in power vacuum at the position of inderasie. Then,
Gugsa came to the position by the help of his brother, Alula; “አሉላም ጉግሳን አለዉ ባልጋዉ አንተ
ተቀመጥ.... ጉግሳም ማን ሰጠን ብለን ቢለዉ፡፡ አሉላም መለሰ ረቢ ሰጠን ብለን ብሎ፡፡”; “Alula said to Gugsa
„sit on the throne!‟ Gugsa replied, „Who gave us?‟ Alula said, „God gave us!‟”. So, the second
Yejju ruler who had long dealt with Tigray was Ras Gugsa (1800-1826). He had hard times
with Ras Wolde Silassie throughout his period of rule. The sources from the Tigrian side
presumed that Ras Wolde Silassie did not accept the suzerainty of Ras Gugsa directly38. Of
course, they did not have direct confrontational battles with each other; rather they were using
a third party. Ras Gugsa instigated different opponents of Ras Wolde Silassie so that the latter
could not have time to strengthen his force even if he had access to modern European
weapons in comparison to other provincial lords because of his proximity to the outlet39.
As usual, Ras Gugsa enthroned his ceremonial king Ase Eguale Tsiyon immediately after he
came to the position of inderasie. Then, the new king became focus of attention for both Ras
Gugsa and Ras Wolde Silassie. Ras Wolde Silassie, even if he was an old man, requested for
34
Ibid; Guluma Gamada, “The Glory and the price of serving Empire: The Oromo Elite and the Ethiopian State,
c. 1600-1900” in The Journal of Oromo Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1, August, 2014, pp.27-53.
35
Tabor Wami, pp. 330-332.
36
Ibid.
37
38
Berhanu Belachew, pp, 39, 43-45.
39
8
the hands of the daughter of the king and married her. On the other hand, Ras Gugsa “forced”
the king to marry Gugsa‟s sister, Wolete Iyesus and the king, Ase Eguale Tsiyon, married her.
As a result, the king stretched between his son-in-law and his brother-in-law. Still, Ras
Wolde Silassie could not be confident enough on this alliance that he was secured from the
attack of Ras Gugsa as long as he did not accept the latter‟s suzerainty. Then, he allied with
Ras Gebre of Simien against Ras Gugsa40.
In the middle of this, Ras Gugsa confiscated 500 ounce of gold from the then old abun who
stored such amount of gold for a gift to the government of Egypt to bring an abun that would
take the position of church leadership after the former‟s death. Ras Gugsa took the gold
justifying that how such amount of gold was going to be given to a foreign government from
his country. Ras Gugsa was accused by his northern opponents, Ras Wolde Silassie and Ras
Gbrie, who tried to mobilize the Christian population against him under the pretext that he is a
Muslim Oromoo and working against the church so that the church could not get its abun. At
this moment, Ras Gugsa became wise and gave back the gold, plus compensations to avert the
coming challenges41.
After this incident, he was working to separate their alliance. Then, he was instigating internal
rivals for power in Tigray and the Raya Oromoo persuading that “he is their brother” against
Ras Wolde Silassie. Thus, he could divert the attention of Ras Wolde Silassie from the
alliance with Ras Gebrie. Then, Ras Gugsa was going to confront Ras Gebrie alone in the mid
of rainy season when Ras Wolde Silassie could not cross to Simien for support. Unfortunately
for Gugsa, Ras Gebrie disbanded his army and retreated to Amba Gishien. While Ras Gugsa
was waiting for Ras Gebrie to descend from the amba, the rainy season passed and Ras Wolde
Silassie became ready to support the latter. Now, Ras Gugsa could not be confident enough to
confront the allied forces of the two, and went back to Begemidir. He continued urging the
Raya and other opponents against Ras Wolde Silassie particularly, when the latter left his
territory for Simien. However, he did not support both opponents of Ras Wolde Silassie up
on their confrontation. As a result, the internal opponents and the Rayas begged for mercy and
seem reconciled with Ras Wolde Silassie. But, after a while, they set the camp on fire
including the home of Ras Wolde Silassie in Tigray. Anyways, after a certain period of time,
Ras Wolde Silassie died naturally and Ras Gebrie was confined to his own territory. By then,
Ras Gugsa secured his suzerainty in Tigray and Simen42.
The same struggle continued between the Yejju and lords of Tigray and Simen after the death
of Ras Gugsa in 1826. However, his successor and son Ras Yimam was not as wise as Ras
Gugsa. He rushed and made battles with these lords of Tigray and Simien, but failed to defeat
them. Particularly, the son and successor of Ras Gebrie, Dejach Haile Mariam of Simien
claimed that he was an inderasie of Ase Be‟idemariam. But Ras Yimam confronted and
defeated him at Waleb and Gonder. After a year, Dejach Haile Mariam died and his son and
successor Dejach Wubie also refused the suzerainty of Ras Yimam. They made a battle at
40
Ibid.
41
Tabor Wami, p.334.
42
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, pp.304-305.
9
Wegera and Dejach Wubie was defeated and returned to Simien. Thus, Ras Yimam became
his suzerain43.
After the death of Ras Yimam, only after two years in office, Ras Mariyie, his brother
succeeded him. Dejach Wubie of Simen accepted the suzerainty of Ras Mariyie after his own
defeat and the death of his ally Dejach Matentu at Inchet Kab. But Dejach Sabagadis of
Agamie-Tigray refused the suzerainty of Ras Mariyie and prepared for battle. Here, Dejach
Wubie allied with Ras Mariyie getting a promise for governorship of both Simien and Tigray,
after defeating Sabagadis, from Ras Mariyie. Finally, they fought at May Islamay in which
both Ras Mariyie and Dejach Sabagadis were killed44. It seems that the battle gave safe
position for Dejach Wubie who returned home with glorious victory and began to govern both
Simien and Tigray as far as Hamasien. Ras Mariyie‟s brother Dori, who was in the support of
the former in the war, managed to settle the disorder and secured Gonder. Immediately, he
became inderasie with the title of ras. He also recognized Dejach Wubie as the governor of
Simien and Tigray and in return secured his suzerainty. Surprisingly, his period of rule was
only for three months, after which he died in a natural cause45.
Ras Dori was succeeded by Ras Ali II (Ali Alula), another son of Ras Gugsa who died before
his father46. A challenge to Ras Ali Alula from Simen-Tigray was Dejach Wubie himself who
was planning to refuse the suzerainty of the former, and struggled to take the position. At first,
Dejach Wubie did not refuse the suzerainty of Ras Ali. He was paying annual tribute. They
also made marriage alliance and Ras Ali married Hirut, the daughter of Dejach Wubie47 But
still, Dejach Wubie was working against Ras Ali. Particularly, he tried to attract Dejach
Goshu of Damot-Gojjam and ceremonial king Yohannis III by then the husband of Etege
Menen, the mother of Ras Ali. Dejach Goshu was promised Hirut Wubie as a wife in case
they could defeat Ras Ali. Conversely, Ras Ali instigated the brother of Dejach Wubie,
Dejach Merso, against Wubie48.
By that time, Dejach Wubie was confident and was proud of the large number of army he
mobilized from his vast territory. Moreover, he had amassed much more weapons from
abroad because of his access to the outlet or the then colony of Ottoman Empire. He was also
successful in bringing a patriarch Abuna Salama II from Egypt for his possible coronation
ceremony. Moreover, he built a beautiful church at Deresgie, Mariyam, designed by a
foreigner Schimper Wilhelm for the ceremony49.
43
Tabor Wami, p.336-337; Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, pp. 313-314.
44
45
Ibid, p.320.
46
Tesfaye Akalu, Ate Tewodros, Be Sositu qedemt Tsehaft: Be debtera Zeneb Itiyopiyawi, Be Aleqa
Woldemariam ze Mehuy, Baletaweq Tsehafi (Addis Ababa:Far East Trading PLC, 2004),p. 39; Donald
Crummey, “Family and Property amongst the Amhara Nobility” in The Journal of African History, Vol.24.No. 2
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 213, 219; Mordechai Abir, Ethiopia: The Era of The
Princes, The Challenges of Islam and Re-unification of the Christian Empire, 1769-1855 ( London:
Longmans,Green and Co Ltd, 1968), p. 37.
47
Tabor Wami, p. 342, 345.
48
Tekle Tsadik Mekuriya, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, pp. 342-347.
49
Ibid.
10
All these activities were not out of the knowledge of Ras Ali, but he did not react directly but
waited for Dejach Wubie to wage the war. After a while, as already expected, Dejach Wubie
refused to pay the annual tribute and the suzerainty of Ras Ali. He then rushed to Debre Tabor
with large army and the patriarch for the final battle. Ras Ali also mobilized his army and got
ready for the same purpose. On the incident, the patriarch was excommunicating the army and
the people saying, “I excommunicate those who ally with Ras Ali and fight Dejach Wubie!
50
”. However, the army of Ras Ali did not worry about the excommunication of the patriarch.
At the climax of the fighting both Ras Ali and Dejach Wubie, retreated from the war front
before knowing their final fate in the war. For a moment, the forces of Dejach Wubie seemed
victorious and occupied the town of Debre Tabor and the court of Ras Ali. However, Dejach
Wubie was captured suddenly by a certain band of Ras Ali‟s army under the command of a
man called Aligaz51. Consequently, Ras Ali‟s army was victorious and Dejach Wubie became
prisoner of war and Dejach Goshu retreated to Gojjam. Of course, he was in Debre Tabor
during the brief days of Dejach Wubie‟s victory and it is said that he met Hirut Wubie during
this time assuming that Ras Ali was defeated and she was to become his wife52. However,
after Ras Ali came back and secured his town and court, he made peace with all of his
opponents, Dejach Wubie and his allies. Then, Dejach Wubie was released and returned to his
previous position accepting the suzerainty of Ras Ali, but leaving the patriarch behind for the
latter. Then, he became one of Ras Ali‟s vassals until the rise of Emperor Tewodros II. The
ceremonial king Yohannis III was also brought back to his position53.
The second provincial lords who tried to refuse the suzerainty of Yejju inderasies throughout
the period of the dynasty, but without success, were those of Damot-Gojjam. They were
Oromoo like that of the Yejju, but were Christianized and fully converted to the Amhara
identity. So, their identity was not questioned unlike that of the Yejju rulers who were
considered as Oromoo and Muslims54. Regarding, their relations with the Yejju inderasies, the
sources do not indicate the position of earlier lords, like Ras Hailu I and his son Ras Merid.
What we know from the sources is that Ras Merid was active participant in the conflict
between the two indersasies, Ras Asrat and Ras Wolde Gebriel. Ras Asrat had the
collaboration of lords of Tigray, Simien and Gojjam, whereas Ras Wolde Gebriel had the
collaboration of Gugsa, the future inderasie. Finally, Ras Asrat and Ras Merid were killed
whereas Ras Gebrie and Ras Wolde Gebriel retreated55. Then, Gugsa came to the position of
inderasie.
Now a lord from Damot that did not recognize the suzerainty of Ras Gugsa was Dejach
Zewde who had also battles horizontally with Dejach Gualu the son and successor of Ras
Merid. Because of this horizontal conflict between Dejach Zewde and Dejach Gualu, the
latter became loyal to Ras Gugsa so that he could withstand the attack of Zewde. In fact, his
50
Ibid, p. 344; Birru Tsegaye, p. 330.
51
52
Tekle tsadik Mekuriya, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, p. 345.
53
Birru Tsegaye, p.330.
54
Shiferaw Bekele, “Reflections on the Power elites ...”, p.166.
55
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, pp. 302-305; Fitsum Wolde Mariyam, p. 226.
11
father Ras Merid was also an Oromoo. And that was why Gugsa declared “የሞትንም እኛ ያለንም
እኛ... ያለዉ ራስ መርዕድ የጎዣሙ ኦሮሞ ነዉና”56; “„It is we who died, and it is also us who are alive
‟....said since Ras Merid of Gojjam himself was an Oromoo”. In this multiple struggle for
political power, Dejach Gualu also got the collaboration of Dejach Elias of Agewmidr. So,
Dejach Zewde was alone and began to design a strategy on how to deal with them separately
and he defeated both Dejach Gualu and Dejach Elias one after the other. Of course, he had
mobilized a large number of Oromoo and Amhara armies57.
Now, Zewde went for another battle with Ras Gugsa. However, he was defeated and captured
at the war and imprisoned on an island in Lake Tana. His son Goshu Zewde took the position
of leadership in Damot. Still, Gojjam continued its loyalty to the Yejju inderasie but Damot
refused it under the leadership of Dejach Goshu Zewde. Ras Gugsa came to Damot supported
by Dejach Gualu to defeat Goshu but Goshu retreated to the fort mountain of Jibela.
Fortunately enough for Goshu, both Dejach Gualu and Ras Gugsa died after awhile. Then, he
took Gojjam and began to govern both Gojjam and Damot58.
Then, Dejach Goshu remained the strong opponent of the Yejju inderasies one after the other.
For instance, he refused the suzerainty of Ras Mariyie. As a result, Ras Mariyie went for war
with Dejach Goshu and his son Dejach Birru but they retreated to inaccessible mountain as
usual. Then, Ras Mariyie appointed another lord, Dejach Matentu of Simen on Gojjam and
returned to Gonder. Immediately, Dejach Goshu descended from the mountain fort and
chased the appointee of Ras Mariyie to his locality Simien. The successor and brother of Ras
Mariyie, Ras Dori also attempted to bring Dejach Goshu and his son Dejach Birru to the
position of vassals but he could not because they defeated his force and forced them to turn
back from Gojjam to Gonder59.
Still, after the death of Ras Dori, Ras Ali II succeeded him. As usual, Ras Ali sent an order of
loyalty (for his suzerainty) to Dejach Goshu and his son. Both of them refused the order and
got prepared to confront him. Then, Ras Ali sent his three vassals (Dejach Seyum from
Begemidr, Dejach Adoyie Babbu and Dejach Meshesha Babbu from Yejju) to Gojjam for the
fighting. Unfortunately, they were defeated and killed by the force of Dejach Goshu and his
son60. Now Ras Ali approached them for reconciliation. He made marriage alliance, gave his
daughter, Yewubdar, for the son of Dejach Goshu, Dejach Birru61. And, Ras Ali became
successful in breaking the collaboration between Dejach Goshu and his son Dejach Birru62.
The reason for disagreement between Dejach Goshu and his son Dejach Birru was on the
nature of their relation with Ras Ali. Dejach Birru was not ready for the reconciliation with
Ras Ali, his father-in-law but Dejach Goshu recognized the suzerainty of the Ras. Finally, the
56
Fitsum Wolde Mariyam, p. 227
57
58
Ibid, pp. 310-311.
59
Ibid, pp. 314-317.
60
Ibid, pp. 330-332.
61
Genet Ayele (trans.), p.
62
Tabor Wami, p.342.
12
father and the son went for battle in which the son was victorious 63. Now, Ras Ali summoned
both of them to his court for punishment. Dejach Goshu accepted the call and appeared in the
court of Ras Ali but Dejach Birru refused. After a brief imprisonment, Dejach Goshu was
reappointed as governor of Damot and his son Tessema was appointed as governor of
Agewmidr; and pay their loyalty to Ras Ali until the rise of Emperor Tewodros II. But Dejach
Birru remained rebel to the time of Tewodros64.
Generally, the major position that was the bone of contention between the rivals was not the
position of emperorship; rather it was the position of inderasie where the actual political
power was located. This was well understood and explained by TekleTsadik Mekuriya as “…
በአሁኑ ጊዜ ያለዉ ትንንቅ ለንጉሠ ነገሥትነት በመሆን ፈንታ ስልጣን ያለበትን የእንዯራሴነቱን ስፍራ ለማግኘት ብቻ
ሆነ፡፡”65. “Now the struggle was instead of for the emperorship, it was for the inderasie where
the real political power was.” This was one of the genuine analyses contrary to what the
professional historians have been teaching to their students indicating that the rivals were not
struggling for the position of emperorship since they were not from the Solomonic blood line.
However, the actual reason behind was that they were struggling for the position where the
real political power was located. Anyways, these were the inderasies during the period of
Yejju Dynasty (1786-1853), with brief interruption for about six years (1794-1800) by the
Lasta brothers: Ras Ali I (1777-1789), Ras Aligaz (1789-1794), Ras Asrat and Ras Wolde
Gebriel from Lasta (1794-1800), Ras Gugsa (1800-1826), Ras Yimam (1826-1828), Ras
Mariyie (1828-1831), Ras Dori (1831) and Ras Ali II (1832-1853) 66.
The other related manifestation of the Yejju Dynasty was that the politico-military title “Ras”
was not bestowed on anyone except the inderasies themselves; i.e, an indication of their
suzerainty. The earlier lords with the title of ras from Tigray, Simen, Damot and Gojjam,
were given the title before the rise of the Yejju 67. After their death, none of their successors
were given a title above a dejazmach.
The Nature of Political Administration
One of the major characteristics of the social and political systems of the Yejju Dynasty was
the power continuity of the preceding systems both in the court of Debre Tabor and in each
region of the kingdom. Traditional royal houses in each region of the kingdom that were
founded in the early 18th century continued within the same family to the 19th even 20th
century68. If it were the period of disorder and anarchy, they would have been an interruption
and the position would have been overtaken by new classes. The anarchy happened when
Emperor Tewodros attempted to interrupt that position in the middle of the 19th century. The
nature of political administration throughout this period of Yejju dynasty was a kind of center-
periphery relations as it was common during the tenure of other dynasties. The Yejju
63
Ibid.
64
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, p.334.
65
Ibid, p. 297.
66
Tabor Wami, p. 325.
67
Shiferaw Bekele, “Refelections...”, 1990, pp. 157-179.
68
Ibid, p. 164.
13
inderasies were suzerains from the center and the provincial lords outside Begemidr were
vassals69.
The other important characteristics of the Yejju political administration was that it did away
with the absolute power of the emperors and the continuous wars for the position of
emperorship or succession disputes. This was because the ceremonial emperors during this
time were handpicked of the inderasies and had no political power to wage wars or create
disputes. In fact, it also resulted in another form of rivalry for political power as it is
mentioned above.
It can also be understood that throughout all their wars, the Yejjus were not aggressive against
their war captives or opponents in comparison to their predecessors, contemporaries or
successors. After a showdown and achieving victory, the Yejjus let free and re-appointed their
opponents through reconciliation instead of brutal killings or imprisonment. Dejach Wubie
described one of such acts as “ሲቻለዉ ማሪ ዓሊና ፈጣሪ”70; “Ali and God are merciful [although
they could kill]” for the mercy he got from Ras Ali II; contrary to what was common during
the time of Ras Betwoded Sehul Mikael and Emperor Tewodros71.
Besides this, they did not rush to kill their war captives except in the case of Dejach
Sabagadis who was killed after the death of his Yejju opponent, killed by the son of
Sabagadis, Hagos72. They also did not rush to war for every disagreement before attempting
other peaceful means. They attempted to understand the actual power of their opponents. The
case in point was the reign of Ras Gugsa and that of Ras Ali II. They failed to analyse such
issue only in their confrontation with Kassa Hailu, the later Emperor Tewodros II who was
successful in defeating the vassals of Ras Ali II one after the other and finally the latter
himself.
Moreover, unlike the claim of many scholars, the Yejju were strong and wise enough to
collect the annual taxes and tributes in the kingdom. Let alone, those provinces in their own
vicinity, they managed to collect taxes and tributes from Tigray which was strong rival and
fought for complete autonomy73. The declaration of Ras Gugsa about the land ownership of
the kingdom was one of the manifestations of such system of administration; “if a possession
is stronger than its possessor, what is the value in it? Landlords, known individuals, tenants,
there is no inherited lordship. It is given to those who deserved it by God. That is given to me.
I distribute land to the mequanents, balabbats and tenants by my own will. Come to me and
request. I will bestow every rank. 74”
69
Shiferaw Bekele, “Refelections...”, 1990, p. 173.
70
Fitsum Wolde Mariyam, p. 229.
71
72
Tekle Tsadik, Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros, p. 319.
73
Tabor Wami, p. 345.
74
Ibid, p.333.
14
Moreover, Dejach Wubie, one of the strongest lords of Simen-Tigray, was paying huge
amount of taxes annually for Ras Ali II75. As a result, one can safely say that the Yejju were
the actual governors of the kingdom rather than puppets who were denied recognition from
the provincial lords. Therefore, the inward pulling political force was strong enough to save
the kingdom from disintegration. There were also social and political practices pertaining to
the administration of the period that were more unifying agents than dividing one. Marriage
can be a case in point. Almost all provincial lords had marriage alliance or blood relations
with the enderasies. The one at the center himself had his wife and wives for his sons from
those provinces. Particularly, those who became aggressive against the Yejju were teamed
through marriage alliance76.
The peculiar nature of the Yejju Dynasty in their administration was that it was the period in
which the Muslims were not marginalized in the political affairs of the kingdom. Even,
sometimes they became the main actors. As a result, the kingdom during this time was
relatively free from the dominance of the church in the politics or governance system77.
Because of this, the period of the Yejju Dynasty was relatively free from the persistent wars
under the cover of religion. The type of continual wars between the Highland Christian
kingdom and Lowland Muslim sultanates from the last quarter of the 13th century to the first
half of the 16th century were not prevailing during the period of Yejju Dynasty. Both the
travelers and missionaries by then indicated that the political behavior of the Yejju in
comparison to the then provincial lords as generous, kind and disciplined. One can see the
description of d‟Arnauld Dabbadie who described Ras Ali II as kind and disciplined as well as
generous, and Dejach Wubie as arrogant and greedy. Not only Dejach Wubie but his
predecessor, Ras Wolde Silassie was known for his greedy behavior according to the same
historical sources78.
Territorial Extent of the kingdom
Concerning this issue, what has been available in most of the historical literature about the
period is very far from facts. The issue has been treated as if there was no central government
and the country was divided among regional lords who were in constant fighting for extra
territory. However, sources indicate that no territory was lost during the period of Yejju
Dynasty, from what the Gonderine kings administered beginning from the 17th century79. The
only difference between the first half of the Gonderine period and that of the Yejju Dynasty in
this aspect was the detachment of proper Shewa (approximately the districts of Menz,
Merhabete, Moret as well as Tegulet and Bulega which were united under Negasi by the
beginning of 18th century), from the subordination of Gonder in about 1730. As a result,
75
Walter Chichele Plowden, Travels in Abyssinia and the Galla Country with an Account of a Mission to Ras Ali
1848 (London: Longmans, Green, and co, 1868), pp. 376-398.
76
For the detail of this analysis see Shiferaw Bekele, “Reflections on the power Elites...”, pp. 162-167.
77
Donald Crummey, “Family and property...”, pp.213-215.
78
Genet Ayele (translator), Be Itiyopiya Kefitegna Teraroch Qoyitaye (Addis Ababa: Graphic printers, 2009 EC),
pp. 373-391 ; Berhanu Belachew (trans.), Zemene Mesafint: Natinael Preace be Itiyopiya yenebrew Qoyita ina
ye Mister Kofin Ye Gonder Gubgnit Yguzo Mastawesha (Addis Ababa, 2009 EC), pp. 82, 83, 158,159.
79
15
Shewa became an “independent” territory governed by its own rases even latter neguses
(kings) without recognizing the supremacy of Gonder. This status continued throughout the
period of the Yejju Dynasty. So, all the territories which were inherited from Gonderine kings
in 1780s were fully governed with their usual internal autonomy by the Yejju inderasies80.
The major territories of the kingdom after the 16th century were Gonder, Begemidr, Tigray,
Simen, Damot, Agewmidr, Gojjam, Dembiya, Lasta, Wollo and North Shewa81. All these
were also parts of the kingdom during the period of Yejju Dynasty except Shewa. Different
historical accounts put similar descriptions about the territorial extent of the kingdom during
the period of Yejju Dynasty. For instance, the British traveller John Plowden listed the
following regions as part of the kingdom; from Yifat to Sennar including the Aynana and
Worra Himano Oromoo area, the Agew of Lasta, Dembiya, Gonder, Quara, Gojjam, Damot,
Agewmidr, from Bass (Gojjam) to Hamasien82. For d‟Arnauld Dabbadie, the territory
included the following regions, Wollo, Worhimenu, Wag, Lasta, Wadla, Dalanta, Amara
Saint, Begemidr, Gojjam, Damot, Agewmidr, Dembiya and Quara83. Of traditional historians,
Aleqa Taye included the following regions, Yejju, Lasta, Agew, Wadla-Delanta, Wollo,
Begemidr, Simen, Gonder, Wogera, Dembiya, Agewmidr, Damot and Gojjam in his
description84. The only difference between Aleqa Taye and Ato Asmie was that Asmie85
included Tigray otherwise both of them listed down identical regions. The lords of all these
territories were paying annual tributes to the Yejju rulers in Debre Tabor and mobilized army
when they were ordered to do so. Thus, if all these territories were part of the kingdom, no
territories were lost during the time of the Yejju compared to that of the territories of the
Gonderine period to 1780s and that of the reign of Emperor Tewodros (1855-1868).
Economy: Trade and Agriculture

The region south of the Abay became marginal to political power of Ethiopia after the end of
the 16th century. Gonder and its neighbours became the center of political power beginning
from the 17th century. Particularly, in the 18th and 19th centuries, the only constant agent of
connection between the northern and the southern regions of the country was the long distance
trade86. There were trade routes that stretched from the southwestern region to the north and
northeast regions of the country. Here, the focus of this discussion is the one that led to the
north mainly, to the region that was considered to be the political heartland of the 17th century
Ethiopia and the platform for the politics of the “Zemene Mesafint”. In fact, there was also a
minor trace of the eastern branch of the route in Gojjam and Wollo87. These northern trade
routes passed through vast territories and arrived at the town of Gonder. From there, it led to
80
Dechasa Abebe, “A Socio-Economic History of North Shewa, Ethiopia (1880s-1935)” Thesis, Doctor of
Literature and Philosophy in History (University of South Africa, 2015), pp. 57-65.
81
Tabor Wami, p. 296.
82
Plowden, pp. 129-130.
83
Genet Ayele (tras.), p. 44-45.
84
Aleqa Taye Gebre Mariyam, Ye Itiyopiya hizbi tarik (Addis Ababa: Qidus Giyorgis printing press, 1958), p.
50.
85
86
Bahru Zewde, A History of Modern Ethiopia: 1855-1974 (Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Press, 1991),
pp. 21-24.
87
Abir, p. 51.
16
two directions. One of the two routes led to Northwest via Metema to the Sudan and the
second route led to the north via Adwa to the Red Sea88.
So, the period of the Yejju Dynasty was not the time in which the trade activity was
deteriorated, agriculture was stagnated or arts were withered away. Rather it was a period in
which cross-border trade was expanded or prospered. Abir discussed extensively about both
cross-border trade and local markets. Of course, he spent much of his time discussing about
slave trade. European travellers and missionaries‟ accounts tell us that long distance trade
activities were carried out in large magnitude. They also listed down not only the types of
trade items but also a number of trade terminals and taxation posts across the routes89.
Here, one important question has to be asked: how could the long distance and irregular
geographical setting and lands of multiple culture and languages be crossed by merchants if
there was the prevalence of the so-called total political anarchy. The trade activities need a
stable political system to transport such varieties of trade items and amount of human
merchandise from the southern half of the present day Ethiopia to the north since all the routes
passed through the domain of the kingdom. Moreover, a number of markets were located
within the kingdom that needed also relative peace.
Of course, besides, the multiplicity of taxation posts established by local lords within their
territory, the presence of bandits hiding themselves in irregular river valleys along the route
was a big challenge for the merchants. In fact, the merchants had different protections from
the lords along the routes for whom they had paid taxes. Most probably, that was why the
declaration after the coming to power of every local lord or the inderasie who claim that “they
are patrons or protectors of merchants” contains “ሰራተኞች ስሩ ፣ ነጋዴዎች ነግደ...”90; “[you] the
workers work, the merchants trade”.
The Yejju Dynasty was the period in which not only trade but also other economic activities
were in a better situation in relative terms. Donald Crummey explained that it was a period in
which agricultural products including honey wax and cereals were produced in large amount.
He has extensively gone through the travellers accounts of the early and mid 19th century as
his sources for this purpose. Unlike Abir who claimed that all the exported items were from
the southern regions of the country, Crummey listed down a number of exported agricultural
products from the Central Christian highland kingdom of Ethiopia. Moreover, the fertility of
the soil, the ratio of productivity per hectar and other related issues about the agricultural
practices throughout the kingdom were described by the European travellers. Depending on
their descriptions one can argue that all those items for export, items for local consumption
and the level of productivity could not be achieved in the situation of total political instability.
88
Ibid.
89
Plowden, p. ; Genet Ayele, pp. 113, 116, 119, 175; Berhanu Belachew , pp. 125, 138-141 ; Abir, pp. 51-60.
90
Tabor Wami, p. 336.
17
So, it can be deduced that the agricultural activities were even in better situations than the
decades before and after the period of Yejju Dynasty91.
Foreign Relations
The presence of numerous European travellers and missionaries in the country was another
possible indication that there was a relative peace and security rather than total anarchy during
the period under discussion. If there was threat of peace and security like for instance during
the period of closed-door policy of the Gonderine kings and the later policy of Emperor
Tewodros, there could not be such numerous foreigners in Ethiopia. The foreign relations of
Ethiopia during this period were predominated by the British and the French because of the
then global reality92. Portuguese and Spaniards were excelled. Germany and Italy did not
emerge as nation states and were on the process of national unification. That was why we
have a number of foreigners from these two European countries. That does not mean other
Europeans were totally absent in Ethiopia during those decades. The early British attempt to
have economic and diplomatic relations with the kingdom was not successful because they
could not bypass the Tigrian territory to Gonder under the pretext of security problem. But it
seems that the Tigrian lords did not allow them to go to Gonder. That was why the relations of
Valentia, Henery Salt followed by Nathanael Pearce and Coffin were limited to Tigray.
Particularly, the latter two were in Tigray for years serving the lords of Tigray. Mainly
Nathanael Pearce was with Ras Wolde Silassie for years and left after the death of the latter.
Similarly, Coffin was also there for long and he was with Dejach Sabagadis after the death of
Ras Wolde Silassie93.
It can be understood that the contact between Europe and lords and kings in Ethiopia would
resulted in the strength of the latter because it created access to modern weapons as part of
international trade and enabled him to defeat his possible rivals. Probably, this idea was in the
minds of the Tigrian lords. And that was why they prohibited the Europeans from penetrating
into the interior of the kingdom. Once the Europeans crossed the territory of Tigray, they did
not face significant security problems unlike it was presumed. They could move and explore
almost many areas of the kingdom94. If it were in a sort of total anarchy as it has been
described in a number of literatures, they could not have moved from one area to the other
within the entire kingdom.
The travellers and missionaries‟ books and memoirs are not predominated by descriptions of
wars and conflicts rather they were filled with the descriptions of how they were provided
with different types of provisions for themselves and their animals. The situation in the
kingdom enabled them even, to the extent of compromising with the peasants about the
quality of the provisions (metin) they and their animals were provided with. They also
91
Donald Crummey, “Ethiopian Plow Agriculture in the Nineteenth Century” in Journal of Ethiopian Studies,
Vol.16 (Addis Ababa: Institute of Ethiopian Studies, July 1983), pp. 1-23; Plowden, ; Genet Ayele, ;
berhanu Belachew, ;Tabor Wami, p.351.
92
Barbara in den Bosch, “Anglo-Ethiopian relations: 1840-1868” M.A Thesis in History (University of
Nebraska, December 1979), pp.30-53.
93
Berhanu Belachew, Zemene Mesafint, pp. 10-15.
94
Genet Ayele, Pp.112, 118, 146-177.
18
described to what extent the general public were peaceful and needed different medical
treatment from those travellers and missionaries. Some of the travellers and missionaries
moved even to the territory outside the domain of the kingdom by then. Several French
citizens moved to Gonder, Gojjam and to Shewa or Enaria and made a number of
geographical and other related studies. They narrated about the resources, peoples‟ life style
and other detailed issues instead of total lawlessness. Such descriptions came after Tewodros
became an emperor. The threat to the lives of the foreigners began to appear during his reign.
They described that the major obstacles to trade or exploit the products of this part of Ethiopia
was the geographical set up, absence of rivers conducive for transport and the blockade of the
outlets in all directions by the Ottoman Turkish. Still, some of the travellers and the
missionaries were expelled from the kingdom not because of the wars but because of religious
issue that they were preaching their own version of Christianity which disappointed the clergy
of the kingdom95.
The British made a successful official diplomatic relations with the last Yejju indersasie Ras
Ali II by means of Plowden. By the way, the descriptions of Plowden about the kingdom had
stories of wars. He attempted to emphasize his and John Bell‟s role in those wars particularly
in their service to Ras Ali. While explaining the poverty of the country, Plowden underlined
that the poverty was not because of lack of resources but because of the prevalence of such
wars. However, all the European accounts about Ethiopia during the period did not describe
why some Europeans stayed in Ethiopia for long even adapting the customs of the country and
marrying Ethiopian women if the country was in Hobbesian state of nature96.
The Socio-cultural Systems
The Yejju Dynasty was a period of Oromoo government in somewhat a form of limited
monarchy in the present context of the concept97. The rank and file in the army of the Yejjus
at Debre Tabor were Afan Oromoo speakers and affiliated to the religious fathers of the
Muslims Oromoo of Wollo. The Yejju were dependent on those Muslim kinsmen for
counselling purposes98. Unlike what some professionals say99, the sources do not indicate that
Christology was the issue of controversy or reason for conflicts for them. Probably, they gave
priority to national issues; their nature of relationship with the abun was also not strong100.
So, the strong abusive historical interpretation about the time was to persuade that the Oromoo
and non-Christian peoples of Ethiopia were obstacles to the unity and social harmony of the
country. Most of the modern historians were giving emphasis for the divisive political and
social nature of the system to justify this notion. Contrary to this, there were a number of
unifying agents in the political and social systems of the period. One of them was marriage.
The marriage interrelationship among regions and ethnic groups was very strong through the
95
Ibid, pp, 373- 416.
96
Plawden, pp. 38-51.
97
Shiferaw Bekele, “the state in the Zamana Masafent (1876-1853): .....” pp. 49-53.
98
Genet Ayele (trans.), pp. 130-131.
99
Bahru, p. 14.
100
Tabor Wami, p. 334.
19
agency of three social classes of the society; the elites, the clergy and the army101. The
peasants (balagers) who were the over whelming member of the society were relatively static
in their geographical settlement. The interrelationship among the balagers of different region
was very minimal.
The marriage alliance was the basic means of interrelationship for the elites of the national
court and regional lords. It played a very important role in a national integration. Most of the
elites either in the central palace or in the provinces were products of such marriage alliance
and each was kinsmen or relatives of one another. Of course, what is common in the literature
is their consistent rivalry for power. The funeral song “የገዯለዉ ባልሽ የሞተዉ ወንድምሽ፣ ሀዘንሽ ቅጥ
አጣ ከቤትሽ አልወጣ፡፡”; “the murderer is your husband, the murdered is your brother. Your
sorrow is endless, since it is not out of your home” was not only for the marriage alliance and
its outcome for a single family but also for a number of elites faced such problems because of
the interrelationship102. From the very beginning, it was such marriage alliance that brought
the Oromoo to the national palace and it was not interrupted during the period of their dynasty
rather it was strengthened. A given ruler from the national court was the kinsmen of all the
elites in Tigray, Begemidr, Gojjam and Wollo103.
The clergy were also one agent of interrelationship during the period just like that of the
earlier or later period. They were moving from one region to the other where best teachers and
church scholars were available to attend different levels of education. Similarly, they move
from one region to the other where they could be paid better. As a result, they consider each
province as their own “country”104. The governing system of the Yejju family did not interrupt
such practice.
A member of the army also moved from one region to the other to be employed where one
could get better master. A man from Gojjam can be employed in the court of Gonder or the
Tigrian gun bearers were moving from region to region and employed where they could enjoy
better life105. That was why the early Gonderine kings had a number of Oromoo army
regiments and even later Menlik II had a military regiment known as Gonderie in the last
quarter of the 19th century. The other aspect of the army‟s life was their movement from one
region to the other for battles. In fact, the military arrangement of the period was a bit
modified in comparison to the preceding period that strengthened the centrifugal force or
makes it real decentralization in the modern sense of the term. During the preceding period it
was challenging to mobilize army for protest against the Emperor for a regional lord, because
the soldiers may hesitate that in case they were defeated they will lose everything but could
appeal to the king in case there happen the punishment of regional lords because of their
refusal to fight against the king; i.e all the army in general throughout the country were
indirectly under the command of a king, who was a sovereign. This was because it was only
101
Shiferaw Bekele, “Reflections....”, pp. 162-167.
102
Tekle Tsadik Mekuriya, Atse Yohannis ina Ye Itiyopiya Andinet (Addis Ababa:Kuraz Puplishing Agency,
1982 EC), pp. 27-29.
103
Shiferaw Bekele, “ Refelections....”, pp. 162-167.
104
Mengistu Lemma, Meshafe Tizita ze Aleqa Lemma Wolde Tarik (Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University
Press, 2003), pp. 165-185.
105
Shiferaw Bekele, “Refelections....”, pp. 162-167.
20
the Emperor that could grant land for them for their services106. But now the inderasie or
regional lords can do that. The decree of Ras Gugsa mentioned above is a case in point.
In general, most of the clergy and the army got their marriage partner from their area of
destination not from areas of their origin by the agency of their masters or teachers. Here, the
intention of the present discussion is not only indicating that the Yejju‟s continuing the
previous national administration and social interaction in a similar way but also to indicate
that all the Oromoo of the Nile basin were part of all these social interminglings during the
period under discussion.
The fall of Yejju Dynasty
The Yejjus could not establish sustainable Oromoo hegemony to the extent of their active role
in the political history of Ethiopia. One of the reasons for that was the negative reaction of the
Amhara and Tigrian nobility as well as the clergy against their rising to the political power by
referring to their Oromoo and Muslim background. Particularly, the notion that the continuous
territorial expansion of the Oromoo took place at the expense of the others was used as
propaganda by the Amhara and Tigrian nobility and clergy107. Even if it was a gradual
process, the fall of the Yejju Dynasty was resulted because of the rise of Emperor Tewodros
II. Before the actual rise of Tewodros, there were multiple rivals of the Yejju inderasies and
waiting for the right time to dismiss them from their position. Thus, the initial period of the
rise of Tewodros (Kassa) was considered as the golden opportunity for them to do away with
the Yejju. Unfortunately, all of the rivals were dismissed by Tewodros himself one after the
other. None of them allied to confront him together, either because of the reasons mentioned
above or because of their feeling about him. They looked down on him and considered that it
was not up to their status to confront a village bandit in an open battlefield. In fact, Menen the
mother of Ras Ali II attempted to team this newly emerged aspirant as a loyal servant by
giving him the hands of her granddaughter as a wife. Unfortunately, that political strategy did
not work because of the further ambitions of Kassa108. Primarily, the prevailing internal and
external contexts pushed Kassa from being loyal to the Yejju in Debre Tabor. Externally, he
was inspired by the existing political situation that anyone who was capable enough to
mobilize forces can come to the top of the politico-military ladder. He was also disappointed
by the nature of the treatment he got in the court of Debre Tabor and wanted to upgrade his
status. Internally, he had background that connected him with local lords of his birth place as
well as claimed remote blood relations with the monarchs of Gonder. By the way, this attitude
of Kassa about himself pushed him to develop hostility against the Yejju inderasies, the
OromoOromoos. He was claiming that “ያባቶቼን መንግስት ለጋላ ሰጠባቸዉ::”109; “[God] gave the
government of my fathers to the Galla.” He knew that the Yejju were the successors of the
Quaregnoch in the position of inderasie or popularity in Gonder. So, it would be reasonable to
106
Ishikawa Hiroki, pp. 222-225.
107
Abir, p. xxiv.
108
Tekle Tsadik, Ye Itiyopiya tarik: ke Atse Tewodros iske Qedamawi Hayile Silassie (Addis Ababa: Berehanina
Selam Printing House, 1936), PP. 1-13.
109
Ibid, p. 27.
21
assume that he developed hostility against the Oromoo although he joined them through
marriage.
Consequently, he left Debre Tabor for Quara as a bandit. Then, the Yejju began to send series
of forces against him. First a force from Gonder was sent to capture him on Tikimit 14, 1839
EC (October, 1847). But he could defeat that force and captured about a hundred guns from
them. This was followed by another fighting with a force of Menen from Gonder under the
command of certain Dejazmach Wondirad. He confronted and managed to defeat his force.
Thirdly, a force from Gonder, under the nominal command of Menen herself went to fight
him and still he defeated the force and captured Menen herself. All these victories of Kassa on
the forces of Yejju signalled the downfall of their dynasty. At that spot, Ras Ali II attempted
reconciliation and managed to free his mother from the captivity110.
Then, Dejach Goshu of Gojjam was ordered to fight Kassa. Unlike his expectation, Dejach
Goshu was defeated and killed by the force of Kassa. As a result, it was said that:
ጎሹ እንዯ ኦርዮ111 አሊ እንዯ ዳዊት፤
ከጥንት አይዯለሞይ ተልኮ መሞት፡፡
ሓዋርያት አሮሞች ጥለዉት ቢሸሹ፣
አርብ ተሰቀለ አማኑኤል ጎሹ፡፡112.
Goshu as Uriah, Ali as David

Wasn’t it the ancient tradition to be sent and died?
The disciples Oromoo retreated, left him behind
Goshu crucified on Friday like Amanuel.
This poem indicated that Ras Ali was suzerain of Dejach Goshu and ordered him to fight
against Kassa. Still, Ras Ali II did not confront Kassa by himself since he had suspected the
position of Dejach Wubie in the north. After the defeat and death of Dejach Goshu, Ras Ali
mobilized the army of several dejazmaches and sent against Kassa for confrontation on April
5, 1853. They were also defeated. Now, after all those attempts, Ras Ali had confronted Kassa
by himself. He mobilized about hundred thousand number of army and confronted Kassa in
Gojjam at Ayishal on Senie 23, 1845 EC (July, 1853). Unfortunately, he was defeated by the
force of Kassa. Because of this victory, Kassa put the last nail on the coffin of the Yejju
Dynasty113.
Generally, the down fall of the Yejju Dynasty was followed by the reconstruction of a number
of abused histories about the dynasty and the personal behaviour of the rulers. However, all
those abused histories were written to defame the Yejju Dynasty because of their social
background. Particularly, defaming the Yejjus to praise Tewodros was common throughout
the literature of modern Ethiopian history. The earliest in doing that was the chronicler of
Emperor Tewodros, Aleqa Zeneb who wrote that Alula died in his early age because of certain
110
Ibid, p. 1-13.
111
It is an attempt to make comparison with Biblical David and his soldier Uriah mentioned in the second book
of Samuel 11:11.
112
113
Abir, pp. 138-139.
22
stimulant (“አርዝም አዯንድን....”; “enlarge and erect tough…”) for sexual interaction114. Similar
defamation was told against Aligaz, the successor of Ali I who was said to be wronged (had
sex with) his own sister115. Ras Ali II was also labelled as a homosexual116. Those writers
justified that Tewodros was enthroned divinely by God to punish the Yejjus and their
followers because of all such evil deeds. They added that Tewodros was extremely aggressive
and cruel in most of his acts still to serve that purpose117.
Conclusion
The period of the Yejju Dynasty was portrayed negatively in the literature of Ethiopian
history. Facts were abused and descriptions about the period were extremely biased. Unlike
what is common in the literature, the period was characterized by a relative political
supremacy of the Oromoo in which the absolute power of the kings was limited. It was also a
period in which significant continuities and some changes undertook on the nature of political
practices of the preceding dynasties. Thus, a number of historical lessons can be drawn from
the period. Primarily, it is possible to understand that an individual or a group from any ethnic
or religious background can govern the country as long as they have the knowledge and skill
to do so. Secondly, it is possible to deduce that a modern form of government identified as
constitutional or limited monarchy was attempted to be practiced in Ethiopia several centuries
ago.
Moreover, one can understand that the dynasty was the period in which the country was
governed by individuals who were instead of being servants of an emperor but became
appointees of the people. So, it was a period in which a political practice of “popular
supremacy” was attempted. The other lesson that can be learnt from the period of Yejju
Dynasty is the skill of compromise in a political system, how to negotiate with opponents or
claimants of political power as well as how to treat war captives; “ሲቻለዉ መሃሪ ዓሊ ና ፈጣሪ”. It
is also possible to understand from the period that peace and security could not be possible by
force, rather by sharing political power or not by multiplying enemies rather by increasing the
number of friends. The other lesson that can be drawn is that the period was the one in which
religious equality prevailed in relative terms. Thus, it can be deduced that the dynasty was the
period of neither Christian dominant nor Muslim dominant government. Rather individuals
from both religious groups could serve in the rank and file of the politico-military system. As
an extension of this, the then kings were not anointed by the Patriarch rather they were
appointed by king makers who were theoretically the “representatives of the people”. So, it
can be logical to say that a people‟s representative can appoint the ceremonial head of the
state.
References
Abir, Mordechai. (1968). Ethiopia: The Era of The Princes, The Challenges of Islam and Re-
unification of the Christian Empire, 1769-1855. London: Longmans,Green and Co Ltd.
Afework Gebre Iyesus. (1973). Dagmawi Ate Menilek. Addis Ababa: United Printers.
114
Tesfaye Akalu, p. 40.
115
Donald Crummey, “Family and Property...”, p. 218.
116
Tesfaye Akalu, p. 40.
117
Ibid.
23
Alemu Haile. (2005). Ye Itiyopiya Tarik (1597-1625 EC) Ye Atse Susenyos Ziena Mewa’el. Addis
Ababa: Sirak Printing Press.
Asafa Jalata. (1996). “The Struggle for Knowledge: The Case of Emergent Oromo Studies” in African
Studies Review, Vol.39.No.2 .Cambridge University Press.
Bahru Zewde. (1992). A History of modern Ethiopia: 1855-1974. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa
University Press.
Berhanu Belachew (trans.). Zemene Mesafint: Natinael Preace be Itiyopiya yenebrew Qoyita ina ye
Mister Kofin Ye Gonder Gubgnit Yguzo Mastawesha. Addis Ababa, 2009 EC.
Birru Tsegayie. (2002). Ye Silitanie Afrikawi Minchina Beteret Megarejawoch Yetdbqu Iwuntoch.
Addis Ababa: Bedir Printing House.
Bosch, Barbara in den. “Anglo-Ethiopian relations: 1840-1868” M.A Thesis in History. University of
Nebraska, December 1979.
Brain, J. Yates. (2015). “From hated to Häbäsha: Oromo identity shifts in Wällo and
Shäwa during the late nineteenth century” in African Identities vol. 13, no. 4.
Crummey, Donald. (1983). “Family and Property amongst the Amhara Nobility” in The Journal of
African History, Vol.24.No. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crummey, Donald. (1983). “Ethiopian Plow Agriculture in the Nineteenth Century” in Journal of
Ethiopian Studies, Vol.16. Addis Ababa: Institute of Ethiopian Studies.
Dechasa Abebe. (2015). “A Socio-Economic History of North Shewa, Ethiopia (1880s-1935)” Thesis,
Doctor of Literature and Philosophy in History. University of South Africa.
Fitsum Wolde Mariam. (2009). Ye Atsime Giyorgis Gbre Mesih Dirsetoch, Ye Oromo Tarik (1500-
1900 EC). Addis Ababa: Azop Printing.
Gebre Hiyiwot Bayikedagn. (2002). Ye Negadras Gebre Hiyiwot Bayikedagn sirawoch. Addis Ababa:
Addis Ababa University Press.
Genet Ayele (trans.). (2009). Be Itiyopiya Kefitegna Teraroch Qoyitaye. Addis Ababa: Graphic
printers.
Getachew Hailie. (2002). Ye Abba Bahriy Dirsetoch, Oromochin Kmimlektu Leloch Sndoch gara.
Addis Ababa.
Greenfield, Richard. (1965). Ethiopia: A New Political History. London: Pall mail press.
Guluma Gamada. (2014). “The Glory and the price of serving Empire: The Oromo Elite and
the Ethiopian State, c. 1600-1900” in The Journal of Oromo Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1.
Hiroki, Ishikawa. (2002). “Changes in the Military System during the Gonar Period (1632-1769):
Their Influence on the Decline of the Solomonic Dynasty” in Annales d’ Ethiopie, Vol. 18.
Mahteme Silassie Wolde Meskel. (1962). Zikre Neger. Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing Press.
Mengistu Lemma. 2003). Meshafe Tizita ze Aleqa Lemma Wolde Tarik. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa
University Press.
Mohammed Hassen. (2015). The Oromo and the Christian Kingdom of Ethiopia 1300-1700. Oxford:
James Currey.
Mohammed Hassen. (1994). The Oromo of Ethiopia 1570-1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Olana Zoga. (1985). Giztina Gizot. Addis Ababa: Bolie printing House.
Plowden Walter Chichele. (1968). Travels in Abyssinia and the Galla Country with an Account of a
Mission to Ras Ali 1848 .London: Longmans, Green, and co.
Shiferaw Bekele. (1990). “The state in the Zamana Masafent (1786-1853): An Essay in
Reinterpretation” in Kasa ana Kasa, Papers on the Lives, Times and Images of Emperor
Tewodros II and Yohannis IV (1855-1889). Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Book
Center.
24
Shiferaw Bekele. (1990). “Reflections on the power Elite of the Wara Seh Masfenate (1786-1853)” in
Annales d’Ethiopie. Vol. 15. Annee.
Tabor Wami. (1958). Ye Wugena Dirsetochna Ye tarik Iwunetoch. Addis Ababa: Artistic Printing
Press, 2006 EC. Taye Gebre Mariam. Ye Itiyopiya Hizib Tarik. Addis Ababa: Qidus Giyorgis
Printing House.
Tekle Tsadik Mekurya. (1961). Ye Itiyopiya Tarik: Ke Atse Libne Dingil Iske Atse Tewodros. Addis
Ababa: Birehanina Selam Printing Press.
Tekle Tsadik Mekurya. (1982). Atse Yohannis ina Ye Itiyopiya Andinet. Addis Ababa: Kuraz
Publishing Agency.
Tekle Tsadik Mekurya. (1936). Ye Itiyopiya tarik: ke Atse Tewodros iske Qedamawi Hayile Silassie.
Addis Ababa: Berehanina Selam Printing House.
Tesfaye Akalu. (2004). Ate Tewodros, Be Sositu qedemt Tsehaft: Be debtera Zeneb Itiyopiyawi, Be
Aleqa Woldemariyam ze Mehuy, Baletaweq Tsehafi. Addis Ababa: Far East Trading PLC.

25

The Yejju Oromoo in The Politics of The

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Yejju Oromoo in The Politics of The

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Yejju Oromoo in The Politics of The

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gadaa Journal/Barruulee Gadaa

Vol. 4 No. 1 June 2021 e-ISSN: 2616-3985

Full Length Research Paper

Submission Date: November 08/2020

Dechasa, The Yejju Oromo in the Politics …

The Nature of Political Administration

Territorial Extent of the kingdom

Economy: Trade and Agriculture

The Socio-cultural Systems

The fall of Yejju Dynasty

Goshu as Uriah, Ali as David

Dechasa, The Yejju Oromo in the Politics …

You might also like