# Yoḥannès IV and the Patriarchate of Alexandria: Obtaining Four Coptic Bishops while Ceding Nothing on Jerusalem Issue (1876–1882)

Stéphane Ancel

► To cite this version:

Stéphane Ancel. Yoḥannès IV and the Patriarchate of Alexandria: Obtaining Four Coptic Bishops while Ceding Nothing on Jerusalem Issue (1876–1882). Aethiopica, International Journal for Ethiopian and Eritrean Studies, 2021, 25, 10.15460/aethiopica.25.0.1813. hal-03468662

HAL Id: hal-03468662

https://hal.science/hal-03468662v1

Submitted on 12 Dec 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - ShareAlike 4.0 International License
AETHIOPICA

International Journal
of Ethiopian and Eritrean Studies

Edited in the Asien-Afrika-Institut
Hiob-Ludolf-Zentrum für Äthiopistik
der Universität Hamburg
Abteilung für Afrikanistik und Äthiopistik

by Alessandro Bausi
in cooperation with
Bairu Tafla, Ludwig Gerhardt,
Susanne Hummel and Alexander Meckelburg

25 (2022)
Vignette:

Gold coin of King Aphilas, early third century CE, as drawn by A. Luegmeyer after the coin in Rennau collection. Weight 2.48 grams, diameter 17 mm.

AETHIOPICA. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHIOPIAN AND ERITREAN STUDIES is an internationally refereed academic journal, edited at the Hiob Ludolf Centre for Ethiopian Studies and at the Department of African and Ethiopian Studies of the Asien-Afrika-Institut at Hamburg Universität, Alsterterrasse 1, 20354 Hamburg, Germany, Tel: +49 40-42838-7730/8380; email: aethiopica.aai@uni-hamburg.de.

The journal focuses on philology, linguistics, archaeology, history, cultural anthropology, religion, philosophy, literature, and manuscript studies with a regional emphasis on Eritrea, Ethiopia, the Horn of Africa, and related areas. The editors welcome contributions on relevant academic topics as well as on recent research in the respective field. Each issue of AETHIOPICA contains reviews of books which form a substantial section of the journal.

AETHIOPICA is published mainly in English. Articles in French, German, and Italian are also accepted for publication. An English summary for all articles in any language is provided.

A series of Supplements of monographic or occasional character is also published.

Opinions expressed in articles and reviews in AETHIOPICA are the views of the authors, and not those of the editors, the publishers, or the editorial board.

**Editorial Team**

Sophia Dege-Müller

Francesca Panini

**International Editorial Board**

David Appleyard, London

Maria Bulakh, Moscow

Christina Gabbert, Göttingen

Jacopo Gnisci, London

Alessandro Gori, Copenhagen

Olga Kapeliuk, Jerusalem

Samantha Kelly, USA

Andrea Manzo, Naples

Alain Rouaud, Paris

Shiferaw Bekele, Addis Abäba

Rainer Voigt, Berlin

Publication of this journal is partially supported by the project Beta mašāhəft: Die Schriftkultur des christlichen Äthiopien und Eritreas: eine multimediale Forschungsumgebung, funded by The Union of the German Academies of Sciences and Humanities through a project of the Academy of Hamburg, and includes immediate Open Access.

© Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG, Wiesbaden 2022

This journal, including all of its parts, is protected by copyright.

Any use beyond the limits of copyright law without the permission of the publisher is forbidden and subject to penalty. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems.

Printing and binding by Memminger MedienCentrum, Memmingen

Printed on permanent/durable paper

Printed in Germany

https://www.harrassowitz-verlag.de/

ISSN 1430-1938

eISSN 2194-4024
Table of Contents

<table><tr><td>Editorial</td><td>6</td></tr></table>

Articles

<table><tr><td>STÉPHANE ANCEL, Yohannès IV and the Patriarchate of Alexandria: Obtaining Four Coptic Bishops while Ceding Nothing on Jerusalem Issue (1876–1882)</td><td>7</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MICHAEL KLEINER, Disputed Translations from The Life and Struggles of Our Mother Walatta Petros (2015) Reconsidered: Some Notes on Gəʿəz Philology</td><td>36</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>SOPHIA DEGE-MÜLLER, JACOPO GNISCI, and VITAGRAZIA PISANI, A Handlist of Illustrated Early Solomonic Manuscripts in German Public Collections</td><td>59</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>HAGOS ABRHA, The Gəʿəz Manuscripts Collection from the Monastery of Däbrä Ṣəyon (Abunä Abrəham, Təgray, Ethiopia)</td><td>99</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MARIA BULAKH and YOHANNES GEBRE SELASSIE, New Readings and Interpretations on the Inscribed Stele from Hənzat (HS1)</td><td>125</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>SOLOMON GEBREYES, The Confession of King Gälawdewos (r.1540–1559): A Sixteenth-Century Ethiopia Monophysite Document against Jesuit Proselytism</td><td>160</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MARIA BULAKH, MAGDALENA KRZYŻANOWSKA, and FRANCESCA PANINI, Bibliography of Ethiopian Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic Linguistics XXV: 2021</td><td>182</td></tr></table>

Miscellaneous

<table><tr><td>AARON BUTTS, SIMCHA GROSS, and MICHAEL HENSLEY, Once Again on ʿbk wdm in Ethiopian Sabaic</td><td>193</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>ALESSANDRO BAUSI, I manoscritti etiopici della Biblioteca Statale di Montevergine a Mercogliano, Avellino</td><td>201</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MICHAEL WALTISBERG, Nachträge zur Edition einer syrischen ṭablīto in Aethiopica 24 (Bausi und Desreumaux 2021)</td><td>215</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>ALAIN DESREUMAUX, Le texte syriaque de la ṭablītō éthiopienne : une réponse aux remarques du Pr. Dr. Michael Waltisberg</td><td>220</td></tr></table>

Personalia

<table><tr><td>Academic News</td><td>223</td></tr></table>
## Review Article

<table><tr><td>BITANIA ZE'AMANUEL and PETER UNSETH, <i>Amharic Folkloric Oral Traditions: Collections for Insiders and for Outsiders</i></td><td>226</td></tr></table>

## Reviews

<table><tr><td>ZEMENFES TSIGHE ET AL., eds, <i>International Conference on Eritrean Studies, 20–22 July 2016: Proceedings, I–II (DENIS NOSNITSIN)</i></td><td>241</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>INGVILD SÆLID GILHUS, ALEXANDROS TSAKOS, and MARTA CAMILLA WRIGHT, eds, <i>The Archangel Michael in Africa: History, Cult, and Persona (SOPHIA DEGE-MÜLLER)</i></td><td>246</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MERON T. GEBREANANAYE, LOGAN WILLIAMS, and FRANCIS WATSON, eds, <i>Be-yond Canon: Early Christianity and the Ethiopic Textual Tradition (CALUM SAMUELSON)</i></td><td>250</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>ABRAHAM JOHANNES DREWES, eds MANFRED KROPP and HARRY STROOMER, <i>Re-cueil des inscriptions de l'Éthiopie des périodes pré-axoumite et axoumite, III: Traductions et commentaires, B: Les inscriptions sémitiques (ALESSIO AGOSTINI)</i></td><td>253</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MICHAEL LAUSBERG, <i>Geschichte und Kultur Äthiopiens (SIEGBERT UHLIG)</i></td><td>257</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MARIE-LAURE DERAT, <i>L'énigme d'une dynastie sainte et usurpatrice dans le royaume chrétien d'Éthiopie du XI<sup>e</sup> au XIII<sup>e</sup> siècle (NAFISA VALIEVA)</i></td><td>258</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>VERENA KREBS, <i>Medieval Ethiopian Kingship, Craft, and Diplomacy with Latin Europe (SAMANTHA KELLY)</i></td><td>261</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>SHIFERAW BEKELE, UOLDELUL CHELATI DIRAR, ALESSANDRO VOLTERRA, and MASSIMO ZACCARIA, eds, <i>The First World War from Tripoli to Addis Ababa (1911–1924) (NICOLA CAMILLERI)</i></td><td>264</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>MELAKU GEBYOE DESTA, DEREJE FEYISSA DORI, and MAMO ESMELEALEM MIHRETU, eds, <i>Ethiopia in the Wake of Political Reforms (SARAH HOWARD)</i></td><td>266</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>ANNEGRET MARX, <i>When Images Travel to Ethiopia ... Impact of the Evangelium Arabicum printed 1590 in Rome on a 17th Century Ethiopian Gospel: Documentation and Synoptic Presentation of their Images (JACOPO GNISCI)</i></td><td>269</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>JOSEF TROPPER and REBECCA HASSELBACH-ANDEE, <i>Classical Ethiopic: A Grammar of Ge'ez, Including Sample Texts and a Glossary (MAIJA PRIESS)</i></td><td>272</td></tr></table>
Table of Contents

DERIB ADO, ALMAZ WASSE GELAGAY, and JANNE BONDI JOHANNESSEN, eds,
*Grammatical and Sociolinguistic Aspects
of Ethiopian Languages* (MARIA BULAKH) .................................................. 273

MARLENE GUSS-KOSICKA, *Die Verbalsysteme des Amharischen
und Tigrinischen: Eine vergleichende Analyse*
(MAGDALENA KRZYŻANOWSKA) .................................................................... 279

**Dissertation Abstracts**

HAGOS ABRHA ABAY, *Critical Edition (with translation) and
Textual Analysis of Gädlä Yəmšatta* ................................................................. 284

CARSTEN HOFFMANN, *Das geographische Traktat in der Weltgeschichte
des Wäldä 'Amid – Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar* ................................. 286

SISAY SAHILE BEYENE, *A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation
of the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Century Treatise:
Tārik Zamədra Gondar (The History of the Land of Gondar)* .................... 288

LEAH MASCIA, *The Transition from Traditional Cults to the Affirmation of
Christian Beliefs in the City of Oxyrhynchus* .................................................... 292

JONAS KARLSSON, *The Diachronic Development of the Dəggʷä: A Study
of Texts and Manuscripts of Selected Ethiopic Antiphon Collections* ..... 295
## Editorial

The present issue of *AETHIOPICA* is the twenty-fifth since the journal’s founding in 1998. It is also the thirteenth issue I have worked on as editor-in-chief, one more than that of founder Siegbert Uhlig. The present time, however, does not lend itself to celebrations of any sort. The global political crisis and the situation in the Horn of Africa are having a deep impact on the scholarly community, which appears divided and radicalized on opposite or increasingly diverging positions as never before. The growing influence of diaspora communities is at times marked by waves of resurgent nationalism. The challenge posed by main-stream policy in countries of established scholarly traditions gives less and less space to small fields—as is the case of Ethiopian and Eritrean studies. The consequent lack of resources triggers the fragmentation of the scholarly scene. New balances based on mutual legitimation and acknowledgement of a common scholarly method are not obvious. The consequence of this complex situation, which reflects global changes, is that scholarly and academic freedom can be put at risk. Of all priorities envisaged in the mission of *AETHIOPICA*, preservation of academic freedom along with scholarly quality has been, is, and will remain the top priority of the journal.

I regret that in the past, and still now, the lack of available qualified authors has prevented *AETHIOPICA* from duly commemorating distinct colleagues and researchers recently passed away who were more than deserving of an obituary. I would like to remember at least some of them here, by name, as a very modest tribute to their work and memory: Johannes Launhardt (1929–2019), Mesfin Wolde Mariam (1930–2020), Steffen Wenig (1934–2022), Girma Fisseha (1941–2020).

To end on a positive note, three colleagues active in Ethiopian and Eritrean studies have received important awards this year, and we would like to mention them here: Samantha Kelly (Professor of Medieval History at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, also on our International Editorial Board), has won the Choice Outstanding Academic Title 2020, and the African Studies Review Prize for the Best Africa-focused Anthology or Edited Collection 2021, for her *A Companion to Medieval Ethiopia and Eritrea* (Leiden–Boston, MA: Brill, 2020); Verena Krebs (Junior-Professorin für Mittelalterliche Kulturräume at Ruhr-Universität Bochum) has received the Dan David Prize for her *Medieval Ethiopian Kingship, Craft, and Diplomacy with Latin Europe* (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021); and Massimo Zaccaria (Professore Associato in Storia e Istituzioni dell’Africa at Università degli Studi di Pavia) has received the Giorgio Maria Sangiorgi award of the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei ‘per la Storia ed Etnologia dell’Africa’. To all of them—the warmest congratulations from AETHIOPICA!
Yohannäs IV and the Patriarchate of Alexandria:
Obtaining Four Coptic Bishops while Ceding Nothing
on Jerusalem Issue (1876–1882)

STÉPHANE ANCEL, Centre de recherche français à Jérusalem

**Introduction**

On 8 July 1881, the Holy Synod of the Coptic Church decided to appoint four bishops (one metropolitan and three bishops) for Ethiopia.<fnref n="1" /> This decision was exceptional: for the first time since the reign of King of Kings Zär'a Yaʻqob (r.1434–1468), Ethiopia accommodated several Coptic bishops. King of Kings Yohannäs IV (r.1872–1889) had made this particular request a few months earlier, for every part of the kingdom to have a bishop and it had been accepted. The Copts, Bishops Pĕtros (1881–1917), Matewos (1881–1926), Luqas (1881–c.1900), and Marqos (1881–c.1882), arrived in Mäqälä on 18 October 1881.<fnref n="2" /> Marqos died very soon after arriving. In 1883 Yohannäs kept Pĕtros with him in Tăgray and sent Matewos to the Năguś Mənilək (later Mənilək II, r.1889–1913) in Şăwa, and Luqas to the Năguś Täklä Haymanot (r. c.1850–1901) in Goğğam, thus establishing for the first time bishopric regionalization in Ethiopia. Although officially Pĕtros was the metropolitan while the other two were simple bishops, each held the same diocese powers and no real hierarchy existed between them.<fnref n="3" />

According to historian Zewde Gabre-Sellassie, the appointment of four bish-
ops for Ethiopia in 1881 (henceforth the ‘1881 appointment’) is ‘rightly regard-
ed by Ethiopian historians as one of Yohannes’ greatest achievements’.<fnref n="4" /> How-
ever, it was not until the work (completed before 1912) of Gäbrä Śəllase Wäldä
Arägay on the life of Mənilək II that the exceptional and innovative character of
the event was properly emphasized and explained.<fnref n="5" /> Prior to his work, Ethiopian
sources noted the event but explained little if anything at all and certainly did

<footnote n="1">¹ Murad Kamil 1950–1957, 1.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Simon 1885, 344; see also Hartmann 1883, 110–112; Stecker 1883, 473.</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Krzyżanowska and Ancel 2014, 125–126.</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 169.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ Guèbre Sellassié 1930, 303–304.</footnote>
not point out its exceptional character.<fnref n="6" /> Gäbrä Śəllase’s work was, however, not published until 1930 and the Ethiopian ‘pioneers’<fnref n="7" /> of the modern historical method initially said nothing about the event.<fnref n="8" /> Only when Ḩəruy Wäldä Śəllase’s work on Yoḥannəs reign was published in Amharic in 1917/1918, did a publication highlight the exceptional and innovative nature of this event for a wider audience.<fnref n="9" /> Thereafter, Ethiopian historians referred to the 1881 appointment extremely frequently to this day making it, as Zewde Gabre-Sellassie says, one of the greatest achievements of Yoḥannəs’s reign.<fnref n="10" />

Historians, both Ethiopian and foreign, have investigated the reasons why Yoḥannəs requested several bishops from the Copts more specifically. They

<footnote n="6">⁶ The chronicle (in Gəʻəz and Amharic) considered to be the oldest (believed to be written in 1887) mentions the appointment of 1881 very succinctly: see MS BnF Éthiopien 259, fols 48v, 60v; about this manuscript, see Chaîne 1913a, 43–44; for the edition and translation of the Gəʻəz version, see Chaîne 1913b, 184–185. There is still a doubt concerning the date of completion of this chronicle and its authorship by *Aläqa* Lämläm: see ‘Lämläm’, *EAe*, III (2007), 492b–493b (D. Nosnitsin), esp. p. 493a, cf. Bairu Tafla 1977, 15; Orlowska 2006, 26–27. *Aläqa* Lämläm mentioned the appointment of 1881 in his Amharic chronicle dated 1894/1895, but not in his short chronicle dated 1902: see MS BnF Éthiopien 259, fol. 27r–v; Turaiev 1910; MS BnF Éthiopien 260, fols 51v–52r; Ricci 1947, 48, 53. The chronicle published by Bairu Tafla (undated but assumed to have been written shortly after the death of Yoḥannəs) mentions also the appointment of 1881: see Bairu Tafla 1977, 150–153. Four other chronicles (three undated and one dated 1909 authored by *Azmač* Gäbrä Mika’el Gərmu) have to be mentioned here but none bring new elements to the 1881 appointment: see Bairu Tafla 1977, 16–21; Orlowska 2006, 22, 27–28.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ As Bahru Zewde called them in Bahru Zewde 2000, 5–6.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ In their historical works, Fəššəha Giyorgis ‘Abiyä Əgzi’ (between 1890 and 1900), Afäwärq Gäbrä Iyāsus (in 1908/1909), Aşmä Giyorgis (between 1900 and 1909), Gäbrä Ḩəywät Baykädañ (in 1912) and Tayyä Gäbrä Maryam (in 1922) did not mention the appointment of 1881: see Fesseha Giyorgis 1987; Afäwärq Gäbrä Iyāsus 2007/2008; Bairu Tafla 1987; Guebrè-Heywèt Baykedagne 1993; Täyya Gäbrä Maryam 1921/1922.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Ḩəruy Wäldä Śəllase 1917/1918. See Italian translation Fusella 1943, 202.</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ Among other works, see chronologically Ḩəruy Wäldä Śəllase 1922/1923, 13; Ḩəruy Wäldä Śəllase 2008/2009, 138–139 (1st edn 1928/1929); Ḩəruy Wäldä Śəllase 2006/2007, 125, 131 (written between 1934 and 1936); Kidana Wald Kefle 1986, 123–124 (written in 1942); Gebre-Igziabiher Elyas 1994, 200 (ed.), 493 (tr.) (finished in the 1940s); Afäwärq Adafre 1948/1949, 51; Märsə’e Ḩazän Wäldä Qirqos 1963/1964, 16; Täklä Ṣadəq Mäkʷäriya 1967/1968, 56–60; Sergew Hable Selassie 1997, 34–35 (1st edn 1970); Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Joachim Motovu 1970, 11; Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 139, 168–169 (1st edn 1975); Täklä Ṣadəq Mäkʷäriya 1989/1990, 205, 231–232; Bahru Zewde 2002, 48 (1st edn 1991). We have to notice the unpublished work dated 1940, authored by Qānn̄ azmač Fəššəha Wäldä Mika’el and intensively used by Zewde Gabre-Sellassie and Isabella Orlowska. See Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 433–434; Orlowska 2006, 31–32.</footnote>
concluded that the King of Kings used them as instruments to promote both the unification of the Ethiopian Church and its reform, and as means to establish a national and territorial unity based on a new relationship between the aristocracy and the monarchy.<fnref n="11" /> However, these historians did not question the Copts’ motivation in accepting Yoḥannəs’s singular and exceptional request. Such lack in the historians’ analysis can be explained by the nature of the available sources. Firstly, the Coptic patriarchate archives remain totally closed and very few of the Copts’ documents have been publicly revealed.<fnref n="12" /> Secondly, Ethiopian sources never mention the Copts reasons for acceptance. It is perhaps to be presumed that such absence indicates Yoḥannəs’s proposal to be so legitimate the Copts accepted it immediately, without discussion.<fnref n="13" /> Thirdly, the first Ethiopian historical works, and those of the first foreigners to consider the appointment in their historical analyses,<fnref n="14" /> were written and published during the 1916 coup d'état and the confrontation between two bishops (Πετros and Matewos), followed by Matewos's death in 1926, and finally *Ras Täfari's negotiations with the Copts to obtain Ethiopian bishops (1924–1930)*. Undoubtedly, these events motivated the consideration and explanation of the 1881 appointment: indeed, it marked an important step in the history of an ecclesiastical system strongly contested at that time.<fnref n="15" /> But these same events influenced the historians of the period: as the Ethiopian power negotiated the obtaining of several bishops, the historians saw Yoḥannəs’s demand as legitimate a posteriori, and thus indisputable by the Copts. The negotiations leading up to the autocephaly of the Ethiopian

<footnote n="11">11 See especially Täklä Şadaq Mäkʷäriya 1967/1968, 56–60; Crummey 1978, 441; Täklä Şadaq Mäkʷäriya 1989/1990, 205, 231–232; Kefelew Zelleke and Heyer 2001, 24–25; Bahru Zewde 2002, 48; Orlowska 2006, 258; Ancel 2011; Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 139, 168–169. Curiously enough, the appointment of 1881 is not mentioned in Caulk 1972.</footnote>

<footnote n="12">12 As far as I know, only the works published by Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid and Sven Rubenson provided documents coming from Coptic archives dated to this period. See Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 1985, 117–129; Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 2003, 124–139; Rubenson 2000, 252, 290, 314–315; Rubenson 2021, 32, 37, 41, 48, 50, 69, 79.</footnote>

<footnote n="13">13 This is especially visible in MS BnF Éthiopien 259, fol. 27r–v; Guèbre Sellassié 1930, 303–304; Gebre-Igziabiher Elyas 1994, 200 (ed.), 493 (tr.); Bairu Tafla 1977, 150–153.</footnote>

<footnote n="14">14 In addition to the works of the Ethiopians already mentioned, see Guidi 1922, 255; Pollera 1926, 165–172; Conti Rossini 1937, 185. It is to be noted that Harry Middleton Hyatt did not mention the appointment of 1881 and ‘forgot’ Πετros in his list of the Ethiopian metropolitan. See Hyatt 1928, 46.</footnote>

<footnote n="15">15 Gäbrä Ḫgzi‘abher Elyas and Kidanä Wäld Kəfle clearly referred to the current political context in their works. See Kidana Wald Kefle 1986, 118–133; Gebre-Igziabiher Elyas 1994, 199–200 (ed.), 492–493 (tr.). On the contestation of Coptic hierarchical authority, see Adugna Amanu 1969, 11–17; Wudu Tafete Kassu 2006, 46–79.</footnote>
Church, from 1941 to 1959, influenced some historians similarly. The 1881
appointment was interpreted as the first step towards autocephaly, confirming
Yohannas's foresight and the pragmatism (or benevolence) of the Copts.<fnref n="16" />

But, at the same time, some studies questioned the motivation of the Copts in accepting Yoḥannəs’s request, claiming the Copts accepted due to the pressure Yoḥannəs exerted upon them. Some stated, Yoḥannəs wanted Ethiopian bishops and the Copts, unwilling to accept this, chose an alternative in four Coptic bish- ops.<fnref n="17" /> Others posited that Yoḥannəs entered into negotiations with other church- es, thus threatening the link with the Copts, forcing the latter to accept his re- quest.<fnref n="18" /> According to these studies, the Copts had nothing to gain from negotia- tions with Yoḥannəs, other than maintaining their link with Ethiopia. Thus, the Copts would have renounced any compensation, despite an exceptional request (four bishops) which went beyond the normal limits of the previous negotia- tions, whereas they had asked for compensation for the appointment of Metro- politan Atnatewos in 1869.<fnref n="19" /> In these studies, the reason for such renunciation is implied: Yoḥannəs would have been in a strong position, and thus able to either make the merits of his request heard, or pressuring the Copts to accept it.

However, in carefully contextualizing the events from 1876 to 1882, a doubt appears concerning this idea. Firstly, it seems that the balance of power between Ethiopians and Copts was far more balanced than previously thought: Yoḥannəs was far from a strong position against the Copts. Secondly, events were taking place in Jerusalem at exactly the same time as the negotiations and appointment of 1881. The Copts attempted to claim the monastery of Dayr al-Sulṭān for themselves. The coinciding of events in Jerusalem, Cairo, and Ethiopia suggests the Copts sought compensation in exchange for the appointment of the four bishops. However, as will be seen, this attempt failed. Yoḥannəs thus had it both ways: he obtained four bishops while safeguarding the integrity of the Ethiopian community in Jerusalem.

1876–1880: From the Death of Atnatewos to Yoḥannəs’s Official Request

On 16 November 1875 at Gundät and 9 March 1876 at Gura', Ethiopians defeat-
ed the Egyptian armies, thus putting an end to the claims of Egypt and Khedive

<footnote n="16">16 See Murad Kamil 1950–1957, 1; Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Joachim Motovu 1970, 11; ‘Ethiopian Church Autocephaly’, *CE*, III (1991), 980a–984a (Mirrit Boutros Ghali); Sergew Hable Selassie 1997, 34–35.</footnote>

<footnote n="17">17 Märsə‘e Ḩazän Wäldä Qirqos 1963/1964, 16.</footnote>

<footnote n="18">¹⁸ Meinardus 1970, 391; Mara 1972, 25; Rubenson 1976, 340; Erlich 2002, 75.</footnote>

<footnote n="19">19 Tedeschi 1999.</footnote>
Ismail (r.1863–1879) over the Horn of Africa.<fnref n="20" /> Shortly afterwards, on 29 June 1876, the Coptic metropolitan of Ethiopia Atnatewos (1869–1876) passed away.<fnref n="21" /> As a result, Yoḥannəs no longer had a bishop and was in a delicate situation: he had, on the one hand, to come to an agreement with the Copts and, on the other, to obtain authorization of Khedive Ismail for a metropolitan to be sent to Ethiopia. As early as 19 July 1876, Yoḥannəs wrote to the Coptic Patriarch Kīrillus V (1874–1927) announcing Atnatewos’s death requesting the link between Ethiopia and the Coptic patriarchate not to be broken, despite the recent conflict with Egypt.<fnref n="22" /> Then in August of that year he sent Śahlu Gäbrä gzi’abher as a negotiator to Cairo, in charge of negotiating both peace with Egypt and the appointment of a metropolitan for Ethiopia.<fnref n="23" /> However, Śahlu was not received by the Egyptian authorities and returned to Ethiopia in December 1876.<fnref n="24" /> Muḥammad Rātib, the general-in-chief of the Egyptian army, had indeed advised Khedive Ismail not to receive the Ethiopian negotiator for, to his mind, the king of kings of Ethiopia would have no sovereignty without a bishop.<fnref n="25" /> The Egyptian authorities were thus well advised to obstruct the appointment of the bishop in order to weaken the king of kings. Thereafter, a long process of peace negotiation commenced between Ethiopia and Egypt that was to hinder the arrival of a bishop in Ethiopia.

In January 1877, Charles G. Gordon, the new general governor of the Sudan, was appointed by Khedive Ismail to head the peace negotiations with Ethiopia. In March 1877, he submitted proposals to Ras Alula (r.1847–1897), who was responsible for forwarding them to Yoḥannəs. Among these proposals was the appointment of a metropolitan. But, in June 1877, Yoḥannəs refused Gordon’s

<footnote n="20">²⁰ About this conflict, see Douin 1941; Rubenson 1976, 310–329; Täklä Ṣadəq Mākʷäriya 1989/1990, 91–151; Erlich 2002, 66–77; Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 2003, 80–124; ‘Egypt, relations with: Modern Egyptian–Ethiopian relations’, *EAe*, II (2005), 241a–243b (H. Erlich); Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 95–124.</footnote>

<footnote n="21">²¹ The exact date is given by the chronicle edited by Marius Chaîne: ‘the 23 of säne during the fifth year of Yohannes’s reign’ (Chaîne 1913b, 184–185; translation from Gə’əz by the present author). It is also mentioned in Yoḥannəs’s letter to Kīrillus V dated 19 July 1876; Rubenson 2000, 252.</footnote>

<footnote n="22">²² Rubenson 2000, 252. This letter was published in Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 1985, 117–129.</footnote>

<footnote n="23">²³ Śahlu Gäbrä Əgzi’abher (also called simply Gäbrä Əgzi’abher) had led the Ethiopian delegation to Cairo in 1869 that negotiated the coming of Atnatewos to Ethiopia. See Tedeschi 1999, 106; Rubenson 2000, 13.</footnote>

<footnote n="24">²⁴ Douin 1941, 1090–1092; Rubenson 2000, 252, 268–269. Gerhard Rohlfs mistakenly dated this embassy to 1887, see Rohlfs 1883, 68–69.</footnote>

<footnote n="25">²⁵ Douin 1941, 1092. See also Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 117.</footnote>
proposal, deeming the compensation—the recognition of Egyptian conquest of some Ethiopian territories—too high.<fnref n="26" />

Yoḥannəs was without a bishop for the moment, but relations with the Coptic Church were not interrupted. Two months after subduing his rival Mənilək, prince of Šäwa, in May 1878, Yoḥannəs convened an ecclesiastical council in Boru Meda. The council's aim was to put an end to the theological quarrel dividing the Ethiopian Church at the time, and to have the yāṣägga ləğ doctrine condemned in favour of the tāwahədo doctrine, the doctrine closest to that professed by the Coptic patriarchate.<fnref n="27" /> According to Gäbrä Śəllase Wäldä Arägay, a letter from Patriarch Kīrillus V, in which the yāṣägga ləğ doctrine had been condemned, reached Yoḥannəs and was read at the council.<fnref n="28" /> However, he was the only one to report this fact, and it was not until the publication of his text in 1930 that this information appeared in the writings of later historians.<fnref n="29" /> What is certain is that, after the council, Yoḥannəs sent a letter to the Patriarch, dated 26 November 1878, explaining how he had convened a council and requesting a letter from Kīrillus V absolving former followers of the condemned doctrine.<fnref n="30" /> The Patriarch sent the letter of absolution and Yoḥannəs thanked him in a reply dated 28 April 1879.<fnref n="31" /> In 1878–1879, Yoḥannəs was clearly the champion of the Alexandrian faith and in constant contact with the Coptic patriarchate despite Egyptian power continuing in its refusing Ethiopia’s request for a bishop.

Negotiations with Egypt meanwhile focused on the problem posed by the Egyptian-allied Ras Wäldä Mikaʻel in Ḩamasen and Bogos. Gordon led the discussions on the Egyptian side, facing Ras Alula, the powerful Ethiopian prince in the region. Ras Wäldä Mikaʻel finally submitted to Yoḥannəs's authority in 1878, and in January 1879 Gordon, resumed peace negotiations directly with the King of Kings.<fnref n="32" /> In a letter dated 9 January 1879, Gordon stated his negotiating strategy: 'if the king [Yoḥannəs] would be quiet, I would see that he got an archbishop from the Coptic Church of Alexandria'.<fnref n="33" /> Thus, Gordon believed the obtaining of a metropolitan to be a very important issue for Yoḥannəs.

<footnote n="26">26 Rubenson 1976, 337; Erlich 1996, 18.</footnote>

<footnote n="27">27 About this council, see among other works Tesfazghi Uqbit 1973, 83–86; Crummey 1978, 440–441.</footnote>

<footnote n="28">28 Guèbre Sellassié 1930, 151–152.</footnote>

<footnote n="29">29 For example, Ḩoruy Wäldä Śəllase did not mention it in his works. See Ḩoruy Wäldä Śəllase 2006/2007, 116–119; Ḩoruy Wäldä Śəllase 2008/2009, 155–156.</footnote>

<footnote n="30">30 Rubenson 2000, 290.</footnote>

<footnote n="31">31 Rubenson 2000, 314–315; This letter was published in Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 1985, 117–129.</footnote>

<footnote n="32">32 Rubenson 1976, 338–340; Erlich 1996, 22–24.</footnote>

<footnote n="33">33 Hill 1881, 332.</footnote>
The letter sent by Yohannès to Queen Victoria, dated 2 May 1879 shows Gordon to be correct.<fnref n="34" /> Gordon sent William Winstanley to the court of the King of Kings in April 1879, but discussions failed to progress.

At the same time, in Egypt, the political situation was changing. A serious financial crisis hit the country in 1879 and the British were increasingly in control of the country. In August 1879, Khedive Ismail was forced to leave power, to be replaced by his son Muhammad Tawfiq (r.1879–1892). When Gordon went to Däbrä Tabor in October 1879, he now represented Tawfiq and brought with him a letter in which the new khedive expressed his wish for a reconciliation between Ethiopia and Egypt. Negotiations, however, went very badly. Yohannès still found the compensation in exchange for a bishop far too high,<fnref n="35" /> and in November 1879 sent a letter to Tawfiq expressing his anger and refusal of the peace offer.<fnref n="36" />

Relations with Egypt remained extremely tense until April 1880,<fnref n="37" /> at which time the situation improved. According to Rohlfs, during 1880, the Egyptian government finally accepted Ethiopia's requests for Coptic bishop,<fnref n="38" /> confirmed by a letter written by the French consul in Massawa Achille Raffray, dated 10 December 1880:

> Egypt had sent a Coptic priest to King Iohannes to deal with the disposal of an Abouna or bishop. This priest returned to Massauah, accompanied by a high religious dignitary from Abyssinia. He was well received by the King, and took with him, for the Patriarch of Alexandria, a considerable sum [of money] (estimated to be at least 50,000 francs) to buy a bishop. I was informed, from a good source, that the King, deprived of Abouna for several years, wants to obtain one from Egypt at all costs and that he makes the most seductive promises to reach his goal, determined moreover not to fulfil them when he will have been granted what he wants.<fnref n="39" />

<footnote n="34">³⁴ Rubenson 2000, 316–317.</footnote>

<footnote n="35">³⁵ Rubenson 1976, 344–348.</footnote>

<footnote n="36">³⁶ Rubenson 2000, 329.</footnote>

<footnote n="37">³⁷ As evidenced by the letter sent by Yohannès to Queen Victoria on 29 April 1880. See Rubenson 2021, 8–9.</footnote>

<footnote n="38">³⁸ Rohlfs 1883, 75–76.</footnote>

<footnote n="39">³⁹ CADC, 14CPC/4, fols 176v–177v (translation from French by the present author), Raffray to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Məssəwa (?), 10 December 1880. Zewde is wrong when he dates the same letter to 10 January 1881, which corresponds to the date when the French ministry received the letter. See Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 168, n. 95.</footnote>
Nevertheless, the French consul was obviously not very well informed and did not know that Yohannas wanted four bishops. Already in 1879 it was rumoured the King of Kings wanted several bishops for Ethiopia.<fnref n="40" /> It was also unlikely that Yohannas would have sent such a large sum of money (50,000 francs) through such a small delegation. Below, it will be seen that the payment was actually sent later. Raffray's testimony therefore should be treated with caution. As he was in Massawa, however, there is a good chance he did indeed see a small delegation leave for Egypt with the stated objective of resolving the Coptic bishop of Ethiopia problem. In terms of the amount of money, Raffray perhaps echoed the rumour circulating locally, people having in mind the considerable amount paid for Atnatewos.<fnref n="41" /> At any rate, this was, as far as is known, the first Ethiopian delegation with such an objective since 1876. It may be deduced, therefore, that Yohannas most likely made his official request to the Copts for four bishops in December 1880.

Unfortunately, the content of Yohannas's official letter is unknown. The chronicle Bairu Tafla published, however, reported the King of Kings to have said, 'I beg your Holiness to send me four bishops. These bishops shall preach us the Gospel in their respective lots and dioceses, for behold, your vast preaching district is the country of the reign which God, your Lord, has given me'.<fnref n="42" /> The need to send bishops to different parts of the kingdom appears to be the request's main justification. Some historians later made Yohannas render the reasons for his request more explicit: Ethiopia was now too vast, the faithful too numerous, for a single bishop.<fnref n="43" /> And so, between December 1880 and April 1881, Kīrillus V accepted the request: in a letter written in Arabic, dated 5 April 1881, Yohannas thanked the Patriarch for agreeing to send him a metropolitan (*muṭrān*) and three bishops (*'usquf*).<fnref n="44" />

## 1876–1880: The Temptation of Separation?

It appears that as early as 1876 Yohannas wished to pursue negotiations to obtain a Coptic bishop for Ethiopia and that only external politics, in particular the

<footnote n="40">40 Simon 1885, 344; Massaja 1930b, 121.</footnote>

<footnote n="41">41 The amount of money paid for the Metropolitan Atnatewos would have been 20,000 Maria Theresa thalers. See Tedeschi 1999, 107.</footnote>

<footnote n="42">42 Bairu Tafla 1977, 151, 153 (tr.).</footnote>

<footnote n="43">43 Guèbre Sellassié 1930, 303; Gebre-Igziabiher Elyas 1994, 200 (ed.), 493 (tr.); Täklä Ṣadəq Mäkwäriya 1989/1990, 231–232; Ḥəruy Wäldä Śəllase 2008/2009, 138.</footnote>

<footnote n="44">44 Rubenson 2021, 54. In another letter, written in Gʻəz, sent to Khedive Tawfiq and dated the same day (5 April 1881), Yohannas used the words *paapas* and *epis qoʾos* to translate the meaning of *muṭrān* and *’usquf*. See Rubenson 2021, 52–53.</footnote>
refusal of the khedive prevented him doing so before 1881. According to some historians, the five year absence of a bishop had been due to Yoḥannəs's reluctance and that he had been tempted to put an end to the subordination of the Ethiopian Church to the Copts.<fnref n="45" /> This is based on Guglielmo Massaja's memoirs, published from 1885. Firstly, the Italian missionary claimed that Yoḥannəs and Atnatewos were in conflict in 1876: allegedly Atnatewos was accused of betraying the Ethiopians to benefit his native country, and the rumour circulated that he had been murdered on the King of Kings' orders after the victory at Gura'.<fnref n="46" /> Secondly, again according to Massaja, Yoḥannəs no longer wanted to accommodate a Coptic bishop, 'because after his wars with Egypt, and after finding that the Egyptian Atnatewos was an infidel, he would no longer admit any Abûna of that race into his house'.<fnref n="47" /> Thus, Yoḥannəs would have been willing to receive one or more Greek Orthodox bishops.<fnref n="48" />

However, Massaja is anything but a neutral witness here. He was expelled from Ethiopia in 1879 and was a great failure for the Catholic mission. According to Massaja, Yoḥannəs and Metropolitan Atnatewos were responsible for this failure. Thus, back in Europe, Massaja had to do all he could to justify his expulsion (i.e. his own failure), causing him to denigrate and slander his two opponents. Furthermore, he had to show his readers there was still hope for the Catholic mission in Ethiopia. By claiming Yoḥannəs and Atnatewos had quarrelled, and that Yoḥannəs was ready to welcome bishops of another Church than those of the Copts, Massaja wanted to create the belief that the king of kings had the power to change ecclesiastical alliances, that the position of the Copts was not inevitable, and that nothing (aside from Yoḥannəs) could to prevent Catholic bishops being appointed in their place at some point in the future.

Thus Massaja's information has to be treated with caution. Particularly as he was the only one, to this author's knowledge, to spread the rumour of Atnatewos's assassination. On the Ethiopian side, the metropolitan's death was explained in the chronicle written by Lämläm: Atnatewos is said to have died of wounds received at the battle of Gura'.<fnref n="49" /> There is undoubtedly little information on the circumstances of Atnatewos's death, and choosing one or the other explanation is not without risk.<fnref n="50" /> In terms of the accusation of Atnatewos's betray-

<footnote n="45">45 Meinardus 1962, 58; Märsə'e Hazän Wäldä Qirqos 1963/1964, 16; Meinardus 1970, 391; Mara 1972, 25; Rubenson 1976, 342; Erlich 2002, 75.</footnote>

<footnote n="46">46 Massaja 1930a, 177.</footnote>

<footnote n="47">47 Massaja 1930b, 121 (translation from Italian by the present author).</footnote>

<footnote n="48">48 Ibid., 120–121.</footnote>

<footnote n="49">49 MS BnF Éthiopien 259, fol. 21v.</footnote>

<footnote n="50">50 Cf. Tedeschi 1999, 109; 'Ethiopian Prelates (d. 1876–d. 1950): Atnatewos (d. 1876)', *CE*, IV (1991), 1036b–1038a (S. Tedeschi); Erlich 2002, 75.</footnote>
al for the benefit of Egypt, Massaja was only repeating an Ethiopian topos about the Copts. The Copts had been accused many times of collusion with the Egyptian government. Not long before Atnatewos's death, King of Kings Tewodros II (r.1855–1868) accused Patriarch Kīrillus IV (1853–1862) himself of treason when he visited Ethiopia.<fnref n="51" /> Such an accusation against Atnatewos made in Ethiopia—a country with so many opponents of the Christological doctrine as proffessed by the Coptic bishop—comes as no surprise. But no evidence proves it was made by Yoḥannas. Ernest de Sarzec, French consul in Massawa at the time, says nothing of a conflict between the monarch and the bishop; on the contrary, he claims Atnatewos declared holy war against the Egyptians.<fnref n="52" /> An Egyptian source, however, questioned Atnatewos's loyalty. Muḥammad Rif'at, an Egyptian officer commissioned by Muḥammad Rātib to participate in negotiations with the Ethiopians after the defeat of Gura', talked in a book published in 1896/1897 of a conversation held with Atnatewos.<fnref n="53" /> The latter told Rif'at of his disagreements with Yoḥannas and smoked a cigarette with him, indicating that the very act of smoking could get him into trouble for the King of Kings had prohibited smoking. How is one to interpret this conversation? Some feel it demonstrates collusion between the prelate and the Egyptian army.<fnref n="54" /> Others, describe Atnatewos as a character who, thanks to his origins, facilitated negotiations with the enemy, to benefit Ethiopia.<fnref n="55" /> Thus such a conversation could well exemplify such benefits for Ethiopia? The lack of certain knowledge means it remains difficult to draw any secure conclusion.

There is more information regarding the rumour of an alliance with the Greek Orthodox Church. Massaja himself started the rumour: the presence at Yoḥannas's court of the Greek vice-consul of Suez, Demosthenes Mitzakis.<fnref n="56" /> Mitzakis was indeed present at the royal court from March to November 1879, and then during the year 1880 until early 1881.<fnref n="57" /> Europeans in Ethiopia were unanimously opposed to the Greek consul, as he was competing with their own ambitions: Gordon openly accused Mitzakis of deliberately thwarting negotiations between Egypt and Ethiopia;<fnref n="58" /> Raffray saw him as the main actor preventing French ambitions and the one responsible for the misfortunes of the Catholic mission, as did the Spanish consul Juan Víctor Abarguès de Sostèn, and the missionary in

<footnote n="51">51 Rubenson 1976, 208–223.</footnote>

<footnote n="52">52 Coursac 1926, 306.</footnote>

<footnote n="53">53 Erlich 2002, 75.</footnote>

<footnote n="54">54 Erlich 2002, 75; ‘Atnatewos’, *EAe*, I (2003), 393b–394a (S. Rubenson).</footnote>

<footnote n="55">55 Gäbräyoḥannas Gäbrämaryam 2000/2001, 77.</footnote>

<footnote n="56">56 Massaja 1930b, 121.</footnote>

<footnote n="57">57 Natsoulas 1985.</footnote>

<footnote n="58">58 Ibid., 23–25.</footnote>
Kärän Monsignor Touvier.<fnref n="59" /> Mitzakis certainly strove to establish an alliance between Ethiopia and the Greek Orthodox which his correspondence of the day clearly shows.<fnref n="60" /> And the Europeans passing through Yohannès’s court (Gordon, Rohlfs, or Raffray) were aware of Mitzakis’s objectives.<fnref n="61" /> Was Massaja’s fear of Greek bishops in Ethiopia justified? Apparently not. Gordon, quoted by Rohlfs, was very clear: although Mitzakis promoted a Greek bishop for Ethiopia, Yohannès did not want one.<fnref n="62" /> In Mitzakis’s correspondence, there is no evidence that Yohannès, or the Ethiopian clergy, could have been attracted to his proposal.<fnref n="63" /> Furthermore, no one from the Ethiopian sources mentioned this hypothesis.<fnref n="64" /> From which it can be safely surmised that Yohannès never thought of separating the Ethiopian Church from the Coptic Church in favour of the Greek Orthodox Church.<fnref n="65" />

This is not to say that the fear, or hope, of an agreement between Yohannès and another Church was not on the minds of foreign diplomats and missionaries at that time. Massaja and Mitzakis were convinced such agreement to be possible. When Rohlfs or Raffray reported on rumours regarding a Greek alliance, even following the agreement between the Ethiopians and Copts, it is because they thought it possible. The British, for their part, were extremely concerned about a possible alliance with the Russian Orthodox Church.<fnref n="66" /> This concern of foreigners here was inextricably linked to their hope that Ethiopia would welcome missionaries (Catholics, Protestants, Greek Orthodox) most likely for the purpose of increasing their influence in the country. But this hope or concern was not based on any local factual reality: the Ethiopian Church was (and still is) in total disagreement with the Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants on doctrine. In hindsight, it is difficult to imagine Yohannès imposing a Greek or Russian bishop, running the risk of reactivating theological

<footnote n="59">⁵⁹ CADC, 14CPC/4, fol. 214 r–v, Raffray to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, ‘Adwa, 19 June 1881; Touvier 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="60">⁶⁰ Natsoulas 1985, 22–28.</footnote>

<footnote n="61">⁶¹ Rohlfs 1883, 84–85; CADC, 14CPC/4, fol. 214r–v, Raffray to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, ‘Adwa, 19 June 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="62">⁶² Letter written by Gordon dated 24 July 1881 quoted in Rohlfs 1883, 84, n. 1.</footnote>

<footnote n="63">⁶³ Natsoulas 1985, 26–27.</footnote>

<footnote n="64">⁶⁴ Theodore Natsoulas is wrong when he says that the chronicler of Mənilək mentions the attempt of Mitzakis. This mention was made by Maurice de Coppet in a footnote. See Natsoulas 1985, 27; cf. Guèbre Sellassié 1930, 190, n. 11.</footnote>

<footnote n="65">⁶⁵ After telling in 1972 that ‘it also seems certain that Yohannes felt inclined to turn to other Eastern Churches’, Yolande Mara is obliged to admit that ‘this thesis cannot be proved for lack of necessary documentation’ (Mara 1972, 25).</footnote>

<footnote n="66">⁶⁶ Natsoulas 1985, 25.</footnote>
quarrels that had poisoned the political and religious life of the kingdom since at least the seventeenth century which he had tried to resolve in Boru Meda in 1878.

It is perhaps due to this problem of doctrine other historians have talked of an agreement between Yoḥannəs and the Armenians.<fnref n="67" /> But this statement was based on an unproven assumption made by Hyatt, published in 1928.<fnref n="68" /> Besides, Hyatt (deliberately?) skipped the pontificate of Pētros and the 1881 appointment. He therefore did not refer to the period investigated here. Most likely, Hyatt referred to the situation in 1868–1869, rather than 1879–1881.<fnref n="69" /> A last hypothesis was formulated by Märsə'e Ḩazän Wäldä Qirqos who claimed Yoḥannəs wanted Ethiopian bishops so the solution of four Coptic bishops would have been a second choice.<fnref n="70" /> As with the hypothesis of an alliance with the Greeks or the Armenians, nothing in Ethiopian or foreign sources exists to lend any support to such an hypothesis.<fnref n="71" />

It has to be admitted, however, that the hypothesis of an attempted separation was 'attractive' to historians: it allowed them to give Yoḥannəs a stronger position (compared to that of the Copts) and makes clear why the Copts accepted Yoḥannəs proposal without compensation, as suggested by Ethiopian sources. But, on the contrary, all facts show Yoḥannəs did everything to accord with the Copts and prove to them how much he really wished to ensure their goodwill: he organized the embassy of 1876, the Council of Boru Meda in 1878, the expulsion of Massaja in 1879, and the attack on foreign missions from July 1880.<fnref n="72" /> In a letter to Patriarch Kīrillus V dated 28 April 1879 Yoḥannəs even pledged, not to mistreat the Muslims in his kingdom, attempting a response to the prelate's concern after declarations made at the Council of Boru Meda.<fnref n="73" /> It appears

<footnote n="67">67 Meinardus 1962, 58; Meinardus 1970, 391; Erlich 2002, 75; Ephraim Isaac 2012, 110–111.</footnote>

<footnote n="68">68 Hyatt 1928, 46. Erlich 2002 referred to Meinardus 1970 who founded his own hypothesis on Hyatt 1928, 46 (like he did in Meinardus 1962).</footnote>

<footnote n="69">69 Indeed, as Tedeschi has very well shown, Gobaze (future Täklä Giyorgis) tried to rely on two Armenian prelates, Bishop Isaac of Kharpert and Father Dimothéos Vartabet, who had arrived from Jerusalem, to counter his rival Kasa (future Yoḥannəs IV). See Tedeschi 1999, 105; also Dimothéos 1871, 91.</footnote>

<footnote n="70">70 Märsə'e Ḩazän Wäldä Qirqos 1963/1964, 16.</footnote>

<footnote n="71">71 Maybe this hypothesis is based on a misinterpretation of what Pollera said in his book about Yoḥannəs's demand: 'non si sa bene se sperasse di dare nuovo e migliore assetto alla chiesa di Etiopia o se volesse arrivare a formare une chiesa nazionale', Pollera 1926, 164–165.</footnote>

<footnote n="72">72 About the foreign missions, see Erlich 1996, 33.</footnote>

<footnote n="73">73 Rubenson 2000, 314–315. This letter was published in Antūn Süryāl 'Abd al-Sayyid 1985, 117–129. See also Caulk 1972, 27. A concern that Yoḥannəs reportedly conveyed to</footnote>
Yoḥannəs was not in a strong position vis-à-vis the Copts. But in fact he greatly needed an alliance with the Copts for his political and religious project in Ethiopia.

## 1876–1880: Jerusalem, the Second Issue for Yoḥannəs

Yoḥannəs’s extremely conciliatory attitude to the Copts could pose a problem in Jerusalem. Ethiopians and Copts were in conflict in the Holy City. Since the years 1848–1850, the Ethiopians accused the Copts of wanting to seize the Dayr al-Sultān monastery, located above the Armenian chapel of Saint Helena, in the middle of the Holy Sepulchre complex. This monastery had been the only place for Ethiopians to be accommodated in the city, since the seventeenth century.<fnref n="74" /> In 1848, the Ethiopians accused the Copts, with the help of the Armenians, of seizing the keys of the monastery, locking them up and mistreating them. Violence broke out between the two communities. The Ethiopians complained to the civil authorities in 1850 and managed to obtain better living conditions.<fnref n="75" /> But the problem remained: Copts and Ethiopians each claimed ownership of the monastery and relationship became difficult. Further violence broke out in 1862–1863 and the problem remained unsolved.<fnref n="76" /> The Ottoman authorities agreed with the Copts but, noting that the monastery was occupied by the Ethiopians, maintained a precarious status quo for the moment. Thus, in the 1870s, the Ethiopians were still under the threat of expulsion from the monastery by the Copts.

Yoḥannəs had re-established an imperial ideology based on the great historical myths of Ethiopia and, in referring to himself as the king of Zion, could not do without the spiritual and eschatological link uniting his country to the Holy Land.<fnref n="77" /> Furthermore, at that time, the Western Christian world had become increasingly interested in Jerusalem and fierce competition between Western countries began as they vied for influence in the city.<fnref n="78" /> For reasons of internal and external politics, Ethiopia had great interest in maintaining its presence in

Mənilək, asking him to do the same or Copts would suffer reprisals from the Muslims in Egypt. See Həruy Wäldä Səllase 2006/2007, 149.

<footnote n="74">⁷⁴ ‘Dayr as-Sultān’, *EAe*, II (2005), 117a–119a (K. Stoffregen-Pedersen).</footnote>

<footnote n="75">⁷⁵ Cerulli 1947, 276–288; Filəp̱pos 1959/1960, 1–14; Meinardus 1965, 131–133; Pedersen 1983, 17–23.</footnote>

<footnote n="76">⁷⁶ Cerulli 1947, 313–322, 344–347; Filəp̱pos 1959/1960, 19–29; Meinardus 1965, 134–138; Pedersen 1983, 24–26.</footnote>

<footnote n="77">⁷⁷ Crummey 1988, 24–33; Orlowska 2006, 125–126; Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 18.</footnote>

<footnote n="78">⁷⁸ See Lemire 2017; see also Laurens 1999, 50–64, 75–78.</footnote>
the city.<fnref n="79" /> Yoḥannəs did everything he could to safeguard the Ethiopian community in the city. Even before he was crowned, he sent money to support the community in 1869 and 1870, and again in 1873, as king of kings. He followed its internal affairs carefully, remaining in constant contact with the community.<fnref n="80" /> But financial support was not enough to maintain the community. The legal status of the small community was precarious. Ottoman authorities in the city did not recognize Ethiopians as members of an independent community: they were considered Copts, as well as Ottoman subjects, and were under the protection of the Armenian patriarchate which represented them in interactions with the city's civil authority.<fnref n="81" />

Being in conflict with the Armenians and Copts, the Ethiopians in Jerusalem sought support from foreign consulates. From 1838, British, Germans, French, Italians, Russians, had all settled in the Holy City, all seeking to 'protect' communities and in so doing increase their influence in the city.<fnref n="82" /> The British were approached by Ethiopians for help in 1850, and again during the 1860s.<fnref n="83" /> But the Ethiopians made a habit of soliciting several foreign actors simultaneously, and the French helped them promptly.<fnref n="84" /> In 1875, Ethiopians turned to Antonin Kapustin, archimandrite of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem, due to a conflict with the Armenians.<fnref n="85" /> The Russians had become extremely powerful in the Holy City, particularly since the creation of their huge compound in the city suburbs in 1859. Yoḥannəs had this in mind when writing to Alexander II, the tsar of Russia, on 19 June 1879 in which he reminded the Russian ruler of the difficulties Ethiopians were experiencing in Jerusalem.<fnref n="86" /> The Greek Orthodox Church was also of sufficient power to offer the Ethiopians help in the city. The Greek Orthodox Church was the most influential religious institution in the Holy City and Jerusalem's largest landowners.<fnref n="87" /> Yoḥannəs may not have needed Greek bishops for the Ethiopian Church, as seen earlier, but he certainly required their help in Jerusalem. Yoḥannəs saw the benefit of obtaining contact to the Greek government through Mitzakis and did so by entrusting him with a

<footnote n="79">⁷⁹ Ancel et al. 2020, 151–152.</footnote>

<footnote n="80">⁸⁰ Rubenson 2000, 4, 58, 159, 338. See also Bairu Tafla 1977, 162–163, 168–169.</footnote>

<footnote n="81">⁸¹ Ancel 2020, 1–12.</footnote>

<footnote n="82">⁸² Mazza 2009, 54–55.</footnote>

<footnote n="83">⁸³ Meinardus 1965, 131–138; Pedersen 1983, 17–26.</footnote>

<footnote n="84">⁸⁴ Rouaud 2003.</footnote>

<footnote n="85">⁸⁵ Ancel 2018.</footnote>

<footnote n="86">⁸⁶ Rubenson 2000, 220.</footnote>

<footnote n="87">⁸⁷ See Katz and Kark 2007.</footnote>
letter in November 1879.<fnref n="88" /> Further to which, on 6 December 1880, the Ethiopian
monks in Jerusalem requested the ‘protection’ of the French consulate due to
renewed conflict with the Armenians.<fnref n="89" /> The French, fearing Italy, Germany, or
Russia would appropriate their influence over the Ethiopians, agreed to ‘protect’
them in an unofficial capacity.<fnref n="90" /> Yoḥannəs therefore hoped the Ethiopian pres-
ence at Dayr al-Sulṭān could be safeguarded by this established alliance net-
work.

Due to the risk of expulsion, Yoḥannəs sought to find a new place in Jerusa-
lem, purely for Ethiopians. He sent Wäldä Səmaʻət there in 1870.<fnref n="91" /> The latter
became the head of the community and looked for land to acquire for the com-
munity.<fnref n="92" /> According to an 1920s Ethiopian text, a piece of land—the Ethiopians
called əbnä həywät (‘stone of life’)—was found in 1880.<fnref n="93" /> It was located outside
the walls of the old city, to the west, on the road to Jaffa, next to the large Rus-
sian complex. All that remained was to buy it and build a church there.

Yoḥannəs was well aware the mission to obtain the four bishops for Ethiopia
should not hinder the work to be done in Jerusalem. He did everything to ap-
pease the Copts and protect the Ethiopian community in Jerusalem. But were the
Copts aligned with this? Events in 1881 appear to show the contrary. The Copts
felt the appointment of four bishops for Ethiopia was to have a concrete impact
on the situation in Jerusalem.

1881: the Jerusalem Issue Intertwined with the Bishops’ Appointment Agenda

On 5 April 1881, Yoḥannəs wrote to Khedive Tawfiq and Patriarch Kīrillus V
announcing the sending of an Ethiopian delegation to Cairo,<fnref n="94" /> this delegation
charged with bringing the money required for the appointment of the bishops
and to bring them back to Ethiopia. Among the members of this delegation were
Mäl’akä məhrät Dästa, Şarag masäre Fänta, Mämḥär Wäldä Arägawi, Aläqa

<footnote n="88">88 Mitzakis left Ethiopia temporarily in November 1879 with several letters from Yoḥannəs to Western governments, including Greece (Natsoulas 1985, 28).</footnote>

<footnote n="89">⁸⁹ CADN, 294PO/A/134, fols 19r–20r, translation of a letter sent by the Ethiopian communi-
ty to the French consul in Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 6 December 1880. Quoted also in Rouaud
2003, 71.</footnote>

<footnote n="90">⁹⁰ CADN, 294PO/A/134, fols 21r–25v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 15 December 1880.</footnote>

<footnote n="91">⁹¹ Rubenson 2000, 58.</footnote>

<footnote n="92">⁹² Pedersen 1983, 39–41.</footnote>

<footnote n="93">⁹³ Ibid., 43. The manuscript JE692E (in paper, paginated) preserved in the archives of the community contains a ‘History of Dayr al-Sulṭān’ (pp. 234–290), written during the 1920s. This information is written on p. 269. About this manuscript, see Ancel 2018, 53.</footnote>

<footnote n="94">⁹⁴ Rubenson 2021, 51–55.</footnote>
Aśrat, and *Bāġarond* Abustäli.<fnref n="95" /> In another letter dated the same day, Yoḥannəs announced to the Ethiopian community in Jerusalem that he sent, via the same delegation, a very large sum of money to have a new church built in the city.<fnref n="96" /> The French authorities of the Suez Canal saw the delegation pass and told the French minister of Foreign Affairs of the Ethiopians' double objective:

> I have the honor to inform You Excellency that notables, accompanied by a large company of about 75 Abyssinians, from the close circle of King John, have just passed through Suez to go to Cairo to [visit] the Viceroy, bearing gifts and a sum of 15,000 [Maria Theresa] thalers = 75,000 [French] francs, for the Patriarch of the Coptic Church in Cairo, and 20,000 [Maria Theresa] thalers = 100,000 [French] francs to build a church in Jerusalem.<fnref n="97" />

Announced in April 1881 by Yoḥannəs, the delegation was slow to leave Ethiopia and arrived in Cairo finally on 18 June 1881.<fnref n="98" /> Not long after, on 8 July 1881, the Coptic Patriarch Kīrillus V convened the synod which officially ratified the decision to send four bishops (a metropolitan and three bishops) to Ethiopia.<fnref n="99" /> Just after the synod was held, the Ethiopian delegation went to Jerusalem. On 15 July 1881, the French consul said the Ethiopians had arrived in the city a few days earlier. According to him, the Ethiopians' first goal was to deliver the money sent by Yoḥannəs to the Ethiopian community.<fnref n="100" /> The Ethiopian delegates stayed in the Holy City until the beginning of September 1881, and returned to Cairo<fnref n="101" /> to organize the four bishops' imminent departure to Ethiopia. Everything appeared fine between Copts and Ethiopians.

<footnote n="95">⁹⁵ Ibid., 52–54. Mäl’akä məḥrät was a title used for the ecclesiastical chief of a dābr church dedicated to məḥrät; ṣərag masäre means ‘chamberlain’, bāġarond, ‘treasurer’. Zewde Gabre-Sellassie gave a list, close but slightly different, based on the information collected from the works done by Qāññ azmač Fəśśəha Wäldä Mika’el in 1940s. See Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 168.</footnote>

<footnote n="96">⁹⁶ Rubenson 2021, 56–57; Bairu Tafla 1977, 170–173.</footnote>

<footnote n="97">⁹⁷ CADC, 13CPC/2, fol. 410r (translation from French by the present author), letter from the French consul in Suez to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Suez, 20 June 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="98">⁹⁸ This information was given by the French consul in Jerusalem, quoting an Egyptian newspaper called by him ‘Le Moniteur Officiel Égyptien’. CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 43r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 15 July 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="99">⁹⁹ Murad Kamil 1950–1957, 1.</footnote>

<footnote n="100">¹⁰⁰ CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 43r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 15 July 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="101">¹⁰¹ CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 44r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 6 September 1881.</footnote>
But, during the same period—between April and September 1881—a serious problem had arisen concerning the monastery Dayr al-Sulṭān. On 23 April 1881, the French consul in Jerusalem informed his hierarchy that the Copts intended to open a gate (actually only to enlarge the existing gate) in one of the walls that delimited the Dayr al-Sulṭān monastery.102 This information was given to him by the Franciscans, who were concerned about the safety of the ninth station of the Via Dolorosa, which they managed and which was attached to this very wall.103 The case was crucial to the Ethiopians living in Dayr al-Sulṭān, for were the project to be approved and carried out, it would be official to all in Jerusalem that the Copts are the true owners of the monastery.104 The project was naturally unacceptable to the Ethiopians who requested help from the French consul. The consul agreed to do so (insisting, however, that their help remained unofficial) and, in a letter dated 26 April 1881, announced to his hierarchy that he had succeeded in having the Ottoman authorities suspend the project.105 In his letter the consul wrote that the Ethiopians had also asked the Russians for help, the notion being that he had to act quickly to avoid the Russians taking any advantage of the situation.

Questions are raised by the chronology of events. Was it pure coincidence, that at a time when the Ethiopians and the Copts reached an historic agreement concerning the bishops, and Yoḥannəs was simultaneously sending a delegation to Cairo, the Copts decided to launch a project clearly jeopardizing the Ethiopian presence in Jerusalem? Or were these events connected?

Fortunately for the Ethiopians, the project was blocked in late April. But it was not cancelled, merely postponed by the Ottoman authorities. When the Ethiopian delegation arrived in Cairo in June and then in Jerusalem in July, its members were very probably quite aware of the Coptic project and the danger it represented. In July, the French consul in Jerusalem reported that the first goal of this delegation was to bring money to the Ethiopian community, but also

<footnote n="102">102 CADN, 294PO/A/135, fols 2r–4v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 23 April 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="103">103 The Via Dolorosa is the processional route marking the path Jesus would have taken on the way to his crucifixion. This processional route is marked by numbered stations, stationary places on the route where pilgrims pray in memory of an event that happened to Christ during his Calvary. The ninth station commemorates the moment when Christ falls for the third time.</footnote>

<footnote n="104">104 This was the opinion of the French consul, as he expressed it a little later: CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 8r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 6 September 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="105">105 CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 41r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 26 April 1881.</footnote>
specified the delegation's second goal: to promote the rights of Ethiopians at the holy sites in the city.<fnref n="106" /> There is every reason to believe that the delegates' mission at that time was to prevent the completion of the Coptic project. Why did the events occurring in Jerusalem in April not impact the Coptic synod authorizing the appointment of the four bishops? The Copts, at that time, were unaware their project had been suspended due to the Ethiopians' actions. Naturally, the Ethiopians had no interest in letting the Copts know about their contact with the French consul, which was, for the time-being, a well-kept secret. The synod thus went on as planned.

## Coptic Defeat and Ethiopian Diplomatic Ability

Once the synod was over, the Copts did everything to ensure their project in Jerusalem would succeed. At the end of July 1881, while the Ethiopian delegation was in Jerusalem and the future bishops for Ethiopia still in Cairo, the Copts asked the Ottomans again for permission to work on the Dayr al-Sultān wall. Moreover, they now knew the French consul had blocked their first attempt. So, from the beginning of August they made several requests to meet the consul for him to explain himself. The French consul, however, did not respond to these requests.<fnref n="107" /> The Ottoman governor Rauf Pasha (1877–1889) then lost his patience. On 24 August 1881, he sent a message to the French consul reminding him that he had agreed to suspend the work requested by the Copts. But added that from that point on the consul had to justify his opposition to the Coptic project in absolute legal terms, otherwise the work would gain authorization.<fnref n="108" /> On 28 August 1881, the French consul replied to Rauf Pasha and reiterated his unequivocal refusal of the Coptic works on grounds of them endangering the ninth station of the Via Dolorosa, managed by the Latins. According to the consul, ‘the Copts’ claim is, however simple it may appear, about nothing less than changing a state of affairs that everyone has respected up until now’.<fnref n="109" /> In other words, the French consul, as protector of the Latins, accused the Copts of chal-

<footnote n="106">¹⁰⁶ CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 43r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 15 July 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="107">¹⁰⁷ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 5r–v, note from the French consulate administration, Jerusalem, 17 August 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="108">¹⁰⁸ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 6r–v, letter from Rauf Pasha, governor of Jerusalem, to the French consul in Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 24 August 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="109">¹⁰⁹ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 7r (translation from French by the present author), letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to Rauf Pasha, governor of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 28 August 1881.</footnote>
lenging the status quo, in force since 1852.<fnref n="110" /> There was no mention of the Ethiopians in his letter.

Nonetheless, the French consul was acting for the benefit of the Ethiopians. In a letter dated 6 September 1881, he explained how the location of the ninth station on the wall of the Dayr al-Sulṭān enabled him to kill two birds with one stone: protecting the rights of the Latins officially, while protecting the Ethiopians unofficially.<fnref n="111" /> According to him, the stakes were high: it was vital to prevent the Russians and the Italians from helping the Ethiopians, if not France stood to lose the opportunity to extend its influence both in Jerusalem and the Horn of Africa.

The case was taken very seriously by the Coptic patriarchate and Patriarch Kirillus V himself wrote a letter to the French consul, who received it on 15 September 1881. The French consular agents translated it thus:

> To the most honorable, etc. etc. (protocol) Consul of France in Palestine. You know very well, Mr Consul, that for a long time the Abyssinians have been subject to the Coptic Church [and] are respected as its own spiritual children; when one of the Abyssinians wishes to make his pilgrimage to Palestine, or to Cairo only, it is usual to receive him with respect in our convents and churches, both in the Patriarchate and in our hospices in all parts of Cairo. In the same way, those who go to Jerusalem are usually received in one of our convents,<fnref n="112" /> and to enable them to make their devotions in peace we have assigned them a church in a convent. It is necessary that the one who would like to live in the holy places thanks this charitable Church for its benefits. Unfortunately, the ungratefulness which is found in all nations and the intrigues of several interested persons gave rise at the time of the late Patriarch Peter and at the time of the late Bishop Abraham to the idea that the Abyssinians claimed that the convent inhabited by them belonged to

<footnote n="110">¹¹⁰ This status quo was a principle that governed the use of holy sites by different religious communities, each one having defined rights to one or several holy sites that were acquired and could not be modified. Established for the first time by an Ottoman decree in 1757, it was confirmed in 1852, then accepted by the international community at the Treaty of Paris in 1856, and the Congress of Berlin in 1878.</footnote>

<footnote n="111">¹¹¹ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 8r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 6 September 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="112">¹¹² i.e. Dayr al-Sulṭān.</footnote>
them.<fnref n="113" /> This claim was judged by the local authority courts [...] and they were not successful.<fnref n="114" /> Some years later, during the time of the current bishop Basilios,<fnref n="115" /> and through the intermediary of various interested persons, they raised the same issue and, by the grace of God, after this case was examined and re-examined by the courts of the local authority, it was seen that the Abyssinians had no right to their claims and that the Copts alone had rights over the convent and its churches.<fnref n="116" /> We then obtained minutes, legal documents, and official orders that are in the hands of the said bishop. At this moment and despite all this, some Abyssinians with their superior Giyorgis started to argue with the bishop and to upset him,<fnref n="117" /> claiming from him what does not belong to them and not considering what was done under the predecessors of the said Giyorgis. Now that the Abyssinians find themselves in the impossibility of reaching anything, since they have no paper in their hands to prove what they are saying, they approach both the respectable convents of various nationalities and the honorable consultates of Jerusalem to request their support. As I have just learned, they have come to ask for your benevolent support and protection in this matter, but I am convinced that your honorable person will be able to discern the just from the unfair. As the Abyssinians are subject to the Coptic Church, I will not hesitate to give them hospitality according to the ancient customs in our convents and churches; however, it is my duty to watch over our properties and defend our rights. I hope, Mr. Consul, that when you realize that the convent with the churches is our property, as shown by the minutes and titles which are in the hands of our bishop, you will dismiss their unjust claims. I would like to take this opportunity to express our respectful compliments, and at the same time to give you some explanations on this matter so that you will not give your support to people who do not deserve it and that you will no longer listen to their words which only give trouble without bringing

<footnote n="113">¹¹³ Peter (Būtros) was patriarch from 1810 to 1852 and Bishop Abraham headed the Coptic community in Jerusalem from 1820 to 1854. See ‘Jerusalem, Coptic See of’, *CE*, IV (1991), 1324a–1329b (Archbishop Basilios).</footnote>

<footnote n="114">¹¹⁴ Kīrillus V refers to the events occurred in 1848–1850.</footnote>

<footnote n="115">¹¹⁵ Bishop Basilios headed the Coptic community in Jerusalem from 1856 to 1899. See ‘Basilios II’, *CE*, I (1991), 358a (Archbishop Basilios).</footnote>

<footnote n="116">¹¹⁶ Kīrillus V refers to the events occurred in 1862–1863.</footnote>

<footnote n="117">¹¹⁷ Giyorgis stands for Wäldä Sømaʻt. Indeed, he was often called ‘Djirdjis’ or ‘Giyorgis’ in French and Italian consular documents.</footnote>
any results. I would be grateful, Mr. Consul, if you would honor me
with an answer. Please accept my blessings, etc. etc. (protocol).<fnref n="118" />

Initially surprising in this letter is how Kīrillus V makes no mention of the problem of the ninth station. He focuses on the Ethiopians. Indeed, this letter reveals that the Copts, in September 1881, had just learned that the Ethiopians had made approaches to the French to thwart their project. From their point of view, the ninth station issue was just a pretext. They accused the Ethiopians of being responsible for the French refusal. Thus, Kīrillus V attacks the Ethiopians very violently in this letter to the point by which it is hard to imagine the Ethiopians and the Copts had just sealed a historic agreement concerning bishopric in Ethiopia. The Patriarch uses very harsh terms to describe the behaviour of the Ethiopians calling them ungrateful and unjust. He strongly reaffirms his ownership over Dayr al-Sulṭān. On two occasions in September 1881 (around the 15th and the 24th), a delegation of Copts went to the French consul.<fnref n="119" /> On each occasion, the French consul repeated his refusal and denied any help to the Ethiopians. In his reply to the Coptic Patriarch, the consul even advised him to request an official opinion from Yohannas, for, in his words, ‘only the word of his Majesty the Negus can adjudicate the matter’.<fnref n="120" />

It is easy to imagine the unease of the Copts upon hearing this: it made Yohannas the mediator in a conflict in which everyone knew he was a stakeholder. Furthermore, when Kīrillus V wrote his letter to the consul, the Ethiopian delegates were still in Cairo for the purpose of accompanying the four bishops to Ethiopia. Should Copts require information regarding the King of Kings’ opinion on the matter, they could simply ask them. But the delegates apparently did not intervene in the discussion and the Copts understood they would get no satisfaction from either the French or Yohannas. Thus, on 29 September 1881, they announced that they were to abandon their Day al-Sulṭān project,<fnref n="121" /> at the very moment when the four new bishops embarked for Ethiopia. Nineteen days

<footnote n="118">¹¹⁸ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fols 12r–14r (translation from French by the present author), translation of a letter sent by Patriarch Kīrillus V to the French consul in Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 15 September 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="119">¹¹⁹ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 15r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 22 September 1881; CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 17r–v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 24 September 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="120">¹²⁰ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 20v (translation from French by the present author), letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to Patriarch Kīrillus V, Jerusalem, 4 October 1881.</footnote>

<footnote n="121">¹²¹ CADN, 294PO/A/135, fol. 18r, encrypted telegram from French consul in Jerusalem, Jerusalem, 29 September 1881.</footnote>
later, on 18 October 1881, the four Coptic bishops were received by Yohannès at Mäqälä.

The failure of the Copts in Jerusalem was extreme. The question therefore arises: why did they launch this project at that time? Obviously, at first the Copts were confident thinking they could do it (and thus have their property on Dayr al-Sulṭān accepted), being convinced the Ethiopians did not have any means to prevent them. Negotiations between 1876 and 1880 had made it impossible to think otherwise. Yohannès was in dire need of a bishop for his country. He had done everything to preserve the link between Ethiopia and the Coptic patriarchate and offered the Copts all the guarantees necessary for an agreement. For their part, the Copts granted him a favour: four bishops instead of one, and this without any official compensation. In April and then in August-September 1881, Yohannès could not reasonably enter into conflict with them while the bishops were still in Egypt. Moreover, the King of Kings had sent money to build a new place for the Ethiopians in Jerusalem. The Copts most likely thought he was seeking an alternative to Dayr al-Sulṭān.122 All conspires for the Coptic project to be understood as ‘self-granted’ compensation for the appointment of four bishops, ‘self-granted’ because the Copts operated according to their own will, as it was not negotiated in advance. Yohannès had not agreed or promised anything—contrary to what Raffray may have thought in December 1880—otherwise the Copts would have told the French consul in September 1881.

Ironically, it was Yohannès's lack of official word that caused the Coptic project to fail. The King of Kings never took a stand against the Coptic project, nor did the members of the delegation present in Cairo at that time. The Ethiopians left the French to oppose the Copts alone. As a result, the Copts could not officially accuse them, nor reconsider their decisions concerning the four bishops. The Copts clearly underestimated the network of alliances Yohannès had established in Jerusalem, and his ability to take profit from the rivalry between the Western powers. In asking the French consul for help, and making no secret of the fact that they had also asked the Russians for help, the Ethiopians were particularly clever. The French consul was obliged to react to oppose the ambitions of other powers (Russians, but also Italians and Greeks) in Jerusalem. In doing so, he took a gamble: he helped the Ethiopians without any official compensation from them, in hoping (perhaps naively) that this help would increase French

<footnote n="122">122 It was the opinion expressed in 1898 by the current French consul in Jerusalem about these events. CADN, 294PO/A/135, fols 39r-40v, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 1 July 1898.</footnote>
influence in Jerusalem and enable the French to gain the support of the Ethiopi-
an government for French projects in the Horn of Africa.

Conclusion

In 1881, Yoḥannəs succeeded in obtaining four Coptic bishops to ensure his religious policy in Ethiopia and simultaneously thwarted Coptic ambitions in Jerusalem thus protecting the Ethiopian community in the city. Furthermore, he was not obliged to offer compensation to either the Copts or the French. The latter were subsequently disappointed. Indeed, the French waited desperately for an agreement with Yoḥannəs. But their envoy to Ethiopia, Achille Raffray, was not able to reach any such agreement. Yoḥannəs had other plans. In September 1881, he announced to the Ethiopians in Jerusalem a protection agreement with the Greek government that he had made,<fnref n="123" /> that is, exactly at the moment when the French were arguing against the Copts in favour of the Ethiopians. The French were unaware of this only learning of it a year later, when outraged in the realization that the Jerusalem Ethiopians now had Greek passports.<fnref n="124" />

For their part, the Copts did everything to prevent and thwart the construction of the new church for the Ethiopians in Jerusalem. Yoḥannəs, who now had his bishops at his disposal and was no longer in fear of anything, wasted no time in criticizing the Copts officially. On 20 February 1882 (14 Amšir 1874, 14 Yäkkatit 1874), the King of Kings sent a letter (in Amharic and Arabic) to the Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II (r.1876–1909), vigorously complaining about the actions of the Copts against Ethiopian interests in Jerusalem and requesting sanctions against them.<fnref n="125" />

Without doubt, the year 1881 marked a turning point in the history of relations between Copts and Ethiopians, not only because it was the year of a historic agreement—the last one before the appointment of Ethiopian bishops—but also because, behind a friendship displayed and claimed by both sides, a very real animosity was revealed, which obtained its first and full expression in Jerusalem before articulating itself later in Ethiopia.

<footnote n="123">¹²³ Rubenson 2021, 68; Zewde Gabre-Sellassie 2014, 18.</footnote>

<footnote n="124">¹²⁴ Rouaud 2003, 72; CADN, 294PO/A/134, fol. 48r–49r, letter from the French consul in Jerusalem to the French minister of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem, 6 September 1882.</footnote>

<footnote n="125">¹²⁵ BOA, Y.A.HUS.170–97, docs 5 and 6, letter from King of Kings Yoḥannəs IV to Sultan Abdul Hamid II, ‘Adwa, 20 February 1882.</footnote>
## Archival and Bibliographical Abbreviations

BnF Éthiopien 259 = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Éthiopien 259 (= Collection Mondon-Vidaillet, 72).

BnF Éthiopien 260 = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Éthiopien 260 (= Collection Mondon-Vidaillet, 73).

BOA, Y.A.HUS.170–97 = Istanbul, Başbakanlı Osmanlı Arşivi, Yıldız Sadâret Hususî Maruzât Evraki, Y.A.HUS (call number 170–97).

CADC, 13CPC/2 = La Courneuve, Centre des archives diplomatiques, Archives diplomatiques du MAEE, Correspondance politique des consuls, Égypte, II, 13CPC/2 (1881–1881).

CADC, 14CPC/4 = La Courneuve, Centre des archives diplomatiques, Archives diplomatiques du MAEE, Correspondance politique des consuls, Égypte, Massaouah, IV, 14CPC/4 (1886–1888).

CADN, 294PO = Nantes, Centre des archives diplomatiques, Archives diplomatiques du MAEE, Jérusalem (consulat général).

CE = Aziz S. Atiya, ed., *The Coptic Encyclopedia*, I–VIII (New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1991).

EAe = S. Uhlig, ed., *Encyclopaedia Aethiopica*, I: A–C; II: D–Ha; III: He–N; ed., in cooperation with A. Bausi, IV: O–X; A. Bausi, ed., in cooperation with S. Uhlig, V: Y–Z, *Supplementa, Addenda et Corrigenda, Maps, Index* (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2014).

JE692E = Jerusalem, Ethiopian Archbishop Residence in Jerusalem, Manuscript Section, Golden Gospels, Ms. JE692E.

## List of References

Antūn Sūryāl ‘Abd al-Sayyid 1985. *al-Kanīsa al-miṣriyya al-qibṭiyya wa-l-kanīsa Iṭiyūbiyyā* (‘The Egyptian Coptic Church and the Church of Ethiopia’) (al-Qāhirat: Usqufīyat al-Dirāsāt al-‘Ulyā al-Lāhūtīyah wa-al-Thaqāfah al-Qibṭīyah wa-al-Baḥth al-‘Ilmī, 1985).

— 2003. *al-‘Alāqāt al-miṣriyya al-Iṭiyūbiyya: 1855–1935* (‘Egyptian–Ethiopian relations: 1855–1935’), I (al-Qāhirat: al-Hay’ah al-Miṣrīyah al-‘Āmmah lil-Kitāb, 2003).

Adugna Amanu 1969. *The Ethiopian Orthodox Church Becomes Autocephalous*, BA Thesis, Addis Ababa University (1969).

Afāwärq Adafre 1948/1949. **�کهں ہلہوٹھ ہلہوٹھ کو سکھی (Zəkrä nägäšt zä Ityoptya, ‘Memorial kings of Ethiopia’)** (Addis Ababa: Tənśa e zäguba e mattämiya bet, 1941 EC = 1948/1949 CE).

Afāwärq Gäbrä Iyäsus 2007/2008. Ḫ那一聖王 乃聖王 何乃聖王 (Dagmawi Mənilək nəgusä nägäšt zä Ityoptya, ‘Mənilək the Second, king of kings of Ethiopia’) (Dire Dawa: n.pub., 2000 EC = 2007/2008 CE).

Ancel, S. 2011. ‘The Centralization Process of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church: An Ecclesiastical History of Ethiopia during the 20th Century’, *Revue d’Histoire Ecclésiastique*, 106/3–4 (2011), 497–520.
— 2018. ‘The Ethiopian Orthodox Community in Jerusalem: New Archives and Perspectives on Daily Life and Social Networks, 1840–1940’, in A. Dalachanis and V. Lemire, eds, *Ordinary Jerusalem 1840–1940: Opening New Archives, Revisiting a Global City*, Open Jerusalem, 1 (Leiden–Boston, MA: Brill, 2018), 50–74.

— 2020. ‘Were the Ethiopians in Jerusalem Ottoman Citizens? Ethiopian Essentialism versus Ottomanism (1850–1916)’, *Northeast African Studies*, 20/1–2 (2020 = *From Subjecthood to Citizenship in the Horn of Africa*), 1–26.

Ancel, S., M. Krzyżanowska, and V. Lemire 2020. *Le moine sur le toit: Histoire d'un manuscrit éthiopien trouvé à Jérusalem (1904)*, Locus solus, 6 (Paris: Éditions de la Sorbonne, 2020).

Aymro Wondmagegnehu and Joachim Motovu 1970. *The Ethiopian Orthodox Church*, eds (Addis Ababa: The Ethiopian Orthodox Mission, 1970).

Bahru Zewde 2000. 'A Century of Ethiopian Historiography', *Journal of Ethiopian Studies*, 33/2 (2000 = *Special Issue Dedicated to the XIVth International Conference of Ethiopian Studies*), 1-26.

— 2002. *A History of Modern Ethiopia, 1855–1991*, Eastern African Studies, 2nd ed. (Oxford: James Currey, Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University Press, 2002).

Bairu Tafla 1977. *A Chronicle of Emperor Yohannes IV (1872–89)*, ed., Äthiopistische Forschungen, 1 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1977).

— 1987. *Aşma Giyorgis and His Work: 'History of the Gāllā and the Kingdom of Šawā'*, ed., Äthiopistische Forschungen, 18 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, 1987).

Caulk, R. A. 1972. 'Religion and the State in the Nineteenth Century Ethiopia', *Journal of Ethiopian Studies*, 10/1 (1972), 23–41.

Cerulli, E. 1947. *Etiopi in Palestina: Storia della comunità etiopica di Gerusalemme*, II, Collezione scientifica e documentaria a cura dell'Ufficio studi del Ministero dell'Africa Italiana, 14 (Roma: La Libreria dello Stato, 1947).

Chaîne, M. 1913a. *Catalogue des manuscrits éthiopiens de la collection Mondon-Vidailhet* (Paris: Ernest Leroux, éditeur, 1913).

— 1913b. 'Histoire du règne de Iohannes IV roi d'Éthiopie (1868–1889)', *Revue sémitique d'épigraphie et d'histoire ancienne*, 21 (1913), 178–191.

Conti Rossini, C. 1937. *Etiopia e genti di Etiopia, Con numerose illustrazioni e tre cartine geografiche* (Firenze: R. Bemporad & F.-editori, 1937).

Coursac, J. de 1926. *Une page de l'histoire d'Éthiopie: Le Lègne de Yohannès, depuis son avènement Jusqu'à ses Victoires de 1875 sur l'Armée égyptienne (d'après les papiers de M. E. de Sarzec, Vice-consul de France à Massaouah, réunis et mis en ordre par un ami de l'Éthiopie)* (Romans: Imprimerie Jeanne d'Arc, 1926).

Crummey, D. 1978. 'Orthodoxy and Imperial Reconstruction in Ethiopia, 1854–1878', *The Journal of Theological Studies*, New Series, 29/2 (1978), 427–442.

— 1988. 'Imperial Legitimacy and the Creation of Neo-Solomonic Ideology in 19th-Century Ethiopia', *Cahiers d'études africaines*, 28/1 (1989) (1988), 13–43.
Dimothéos 1871. *Deux ans de séjour en Abyssinie, ou Vie morale, politique et religieuse des abyssiniens*, I (Jérusalem: Typographie arménienne du couvent de Saint-Jacques, 1871).

Douin, G. 1941. *Histoire du règne du Khédive Ismaïl, III: L'Empire Africain, 3: 1874-1876*, B, Société Royale de Géographie d'Égypte, Publications spéciales (Le Caire: Imprimé par l'imprimerie de l'Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale du Caire pour la Société Royale de Géographie d'Égypte, 1941).

Ephraim Isaac 2012. *The Ethiopian Orthodox Täwahido Church. የኢትዮጵያ እርቶዶክስ ተዋሕ ዶፉ ክርስቲያን* (Trenton, NJ: The Red Sea Press, 2012).

Erlich, H. 1996. *Ras Alula and the Scramble for Africa, A Political Biography: Ethiopia & Eritrea 1875-1897* (Lawrenceville, NJ-Asmara: The Red Sea Press, 1996).

— 2002. *The Cross and the River: Ethiopia, Egypt, and the Nile* (Boulder, CO-London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002).

Fesseha Giyorgis 1987. *Storia d'Etiopia*, ed. Yaqob Beyene (Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale, Dipartimento di Studi e Ricerche su Africa e Paesi Arabi, 1987).

Filappos 1959/1960. የና ኢትዮጵያ በሀገር ቅድስት ኢየሩሳሴም በኢየሩሳሴም ስለሚገኙት ኢትዮጵያውያን ከ፲፱፪፫፺ ዓ.ም. ድምሮ እስከ ፲፱፪፫፮ ኢ.ኤ. ድረስ ዝአስተጋብኦ ወዘትጽሕቀ ለአነትሞቱ አባ ፊልጹስ ጳጻስ ዘገዳማተ ኢትዮጵያ እለ በኢየሩሳሴም ፣ በጸጋሁ ወበረድኤቱ ለእግ ኢአብሔር ልዑል ዝ Correspondence Respecting Abyssinians at Jerusalem 1850-1867: Presented to the House of Commons, in pursuance of their address dated December 5, 1867, with further papers presented by Command of Her Majesty, 1868*, I (Aśmära: Tāhatmā bāmaḥtāmā Kokäbā Ṣobaḥ zaMaḥbärā ሞawaryat Fbare Haymanot, 1952 EC = 1959/1960 CE; partial repr. of 1st edn, London: Harrison and Sons, 1868).

Fusella, L. 1943. 'Abissinia e Metemma in uno scritto di Bēlāttā Hēruy', *Rassegna di Studi Etiopici*, 3/2 (1943), 200-213.

Gäbräyoḥannəs Gäbrämaryam 2000/2001. የኢትዮጵያ ቤተክርስቲያን ታርክ ክፍል ፫ (Yä'Ityoöya betäkrəstiyan tarik kəfəl 2, 'The history of the Ethiopian Church, part 2') (Addis Ababa: n.pub., 1993 EC = 2000/2001 CE).

Gebre-Igziabiher Elyas 1994. *Prowess, Piety and Politics: the Chronicle of Abeto Iyasu and Empress Zewditu of Ethiopia (1909-1930)*, ed., tr. R. K. Molvaer. Veröffentlichungen des Frobenius-Instituts zu Frankfurt am Main, Studien zur Kulturkunde, 104 (Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag, 1994).

Guèbre Sellassié 1930. *Chronique du règne de Ménélik II: roi des rois d'Éthiopie*, ed. M. de Coppet, tr. Tèsfa Sellassié, I (Paris: Librairie orientale et américaine-Maisonneuve frères, éditeurs, 1930).

Guebrè-Heywèt Baykedagne 1993. *L'Empereur Ménélik et l'Éthiopie. አጤ ምኒልክና ኢትዮጵያ*, tr. Beletou Kebede and J. Bureau, Bulletins de la Maison des études éthiopiennes, 2 (Addis-Abeba-Paris: Maison des études éthiopiennes, Institut national des langues et civilisations orientales, 1993).

Guidi, I. 1922. 'La chiesa abissina', *Oriente Moderno*, 2/4 (1922), 252-256.

Hartmann, R. 1883. *Abyssinien und die übrigen Gebiete der Ostküste Afrikas, Mit 18 Vollbildern und 63 in den Text gedruckten Abbildungen*, Das Wissen der Gegenwart, Deutsche Universal-Bibliothek für Gebildete, 14, Der Weltteil Afrika in Einzeldarstellungen, 1 (Leipzig-Prag: G. Freytag-F. Tempsky, 1883).
Ḥoruy Wäldä Šəllase 1917/1918. ኢትዮጵያና፡ መተማ፡ የአጤ፡ ዮሐንስ፡ ታሪክ፡ ባጭሩ (I-
tyoöyanna mätämma yä'ađe Yohannəs tarik baçčəru, ‘Ethiopia and Mätämma: a short
history of Ađe Yohannəs') (Addis Abäba: Mattämiya tatäma, 1910 EC = 1917/1918 CE).

— 1922/1923. የሕይወት ታሪክ (Yähəywät tarik, ‘Biographies’) (Addis Abäba: Mattämiya tatäma, 1915 EC = 1922/1923 CE).

— 2006/2007. የኢትዮጵያ ታሪክ ከንግሥት ሳባ እስከ ታላቁ የአድዋ ድል (Yä Ityoöya tarik känəgəstä saba əskä tallaqu yä'adwa dəl, ‘The history of Ethiopia: from the Queen of Sheba until the great victory of Adwa ’) (Addis Abäba: Sentral mattämiya bet, 1999 EC = 2006/2007 CE).

— 2008/2009. ዋዜማ (Wazema, ‘Prelude’), 2nd ed. (Addis Abäba: Goḥ şəbaḥ mattäbiya bet, 2001 EC = 2008/2009 CE).

Hill, G. B. 1881. *Colonel Gordon in Central Africa, 1874–1879, With a Portrait; and Map of the Country prepared under Colonel Gordon’s supervision. From Original Letters and Documents* (London: Thos. De La Rue & Co., 1881).

Hyatt, H. M. 1928. *The Church of Abyssinia* (London: Luzac & Co., 1928).

Katz, I. and R. Kark 2007. ‘The Church and Landed Property: The Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem’, *Middle Eastern Studies*, 43/3 (2007), 383–408.

Kefelew Zelleke and F. Heyer 2001. *Das orthodoxe Äthiopien und Eritrea in jüngster Geschichte* (Heidelberg: Tabor Society, 2001).

Kidana Wald Kefle 1986. ሃይማኖተ፡ አበው፡ ቀደምት ዝ La foi des pères anciens, I: Texte éthiopien: Enseignement de mamher Kefla Giyorgis, composé par alaqa Kidana Wald Kefle, recueilli par son disciple Dasta Takla Wald, avec une introduction sur la vie et l'œuvre de ces trois savants par Berhanou Abebbe, Studien zur Kulturkunde, 79 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden GmbH, 1986).

Krzyżanowska, M. and S. Ancel 2014. ‘Early 20th Century Theological Controversies in Ethiopia: A Letter of the Coptic Metropolitan Pełtros of 1904’, *Aethiopica*, 17 (2014), 121–150.

Laurens, H. 1999. *La question de Palestine*, I: 1799–1922, L'invention de la Terre sainte* (Paris: Fayard, 1999).

Lemire, V. 2017. *Jerusalem 1900: The Holy City in the Age of Possibilities*, tr. C. Tihanyi and L. A. Weiss (Chicago, IL–London: The University of Chicago Press, 2017).

Mara, Y. 1972. *The Church of Ethiopia: The National Church in the Making* (Asmara: Il Poligrafico, 1972).

Märsö'e Hüzän Wäldä Qirqos 1963/1964. የመጀመርያው ኢትዮጵያዊ ፓትርያርክ (Yämäğämmäryaw Ityoöyawi patrəyark, ‘The first Ethiopian patriarch’) (Addis Abäba: n.pub., 1956 EC = 1963/1964 CE).

Massaja, G. 1930a. *I miei trentacinque anni di missione nell'alta Etiopia, Memorie storiche*, IX (Tivoli: Stabilimento tipografico Mantero, 1930).

— 1930b. *I miei trentacinque anni di missione nell'alta Etiopia, Memorie storiche*, XI (Tivoli: Stabilimento tipografico Mantero, 1930).

Mazza, R. 2009. *Jerusalem from the Ottoman to the British*, Library of Middle East History, 20 (London–New York, NY: I. B. Tauris, 2009).
Meinardus, O. 1962. 'A Brief History of the Abulate of Ethiopia', *Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes*, 58 (1962), 39–65.

— 1965. 'The Ethiopians in Jerusalem (erste Hälfte, I–III)', *Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte*, 1/2 (1965), 112–147.

— 1970. *Christian Egypt: Faith and Life* (Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 1970).

Murad Kamil 1950–1957. 'La dernière phase des relations historiques entre l'Église Copte d'Égypte et celle d'Éthiopie (jusqu'en 1952)', *Bulletin de la société d'archéologie copte*, 14 (1950–1957), 1–22.

Natsoulas, T. 1985. 'Yohannes’s Greek Advisers', *Northeast African Studies*, 7/3 (1985), 21–40.

Orlowska, I. 2006. *Re-imagining Empire: Ethiopian Political Culture under Yohannis IV* (1872–89), PhD Thesis, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London (2006).

Pedersen, K. 1983. *The History of the Ethiopian Community in the Holy Land from the time of Emperor Tewodros II till 1974*, ed. G. S. Khoury, Studia Oecumenica Hierosolymitana, 2 (Jerusalem: Ecumenical Institute for Theological Research, 1983).

Pollera, A. 1926. *Lo stato etiopico e la sua chiesa* (Roma–Milano: Società editrice d’arte illustrata, 1926).

Ricci, L. 1947. 'Una cronaca breve in amarico sul regno di Yohannès IV, re d'Etiopia', *Rivista degli studi orientali*, 22/1–4 (1947), 47–59.

Rohlfs, G. 1883. *Meine Mission nach Abessinien. Auf Befehl Sr. Maj. des deutschen Kaisers im Winter 1880/81 unternommen, Mit zwanzig Separatbildern und einer Karte* (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1883).

Rouaud, A. 2003. 'La protection française des Abyssins de Jérusalem (1843–1898), Aperçu', *Transversalités*, 85 (2003), 63–74.

Rubenson, S. 1976. *The Survival of Ethiopian Independence* (London: Heinemann in association with Esselte Studium & Addis Ababa University Press, 1976).

— 2000. *Internal Rivalries and Foreign Threats 1869–1879*, co-edited by Amsalu Aklilu, Merid Wolde Aregay, and S. Rubenson, Acta Aethiopica, 3 (Addis Abeba: Addis Ababa University Press, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers–Rutgers University, 2000).

— 2021. *Colonial Powers and Ethiopian Frontiers 1880–1884*, co-edited by Amsalu Aklilu, Shiferaw Bekele, and S. Rubenson, Acta Aethiopica, 4 (Lund: Lund University Press, 2021).

Sergew Hable Selassie 1997. 'The Period of Reorganisation', in Sergew Hable Selassie, ed., *The Church of Ethiopia: A Panorama of History and Spiritual Life*, 2nd ed. (Addis Ababa: Ethiopian Orthodox Church, 1997), 31–41.

Simon, G. 1885. *L'Éthiopie, ses mœurs, ses traditions, le négouss Iohannès, les églises monolithes de Lalibéla: voyage en Abyssinie et chez les Gallas-Raias, orné de 22 dessins d'après les croquis de l'auteur et d'une carte générale de l'Aabyssinie* (Paris: Challamel ainé, éditeur, 1885).

Stecker, A. 1883. 'Ueber seine Reise in Abessinien', *Verhandlungen der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde*, 10 (1883), 472–476.