Government and Administration of the Aksumite Empire – Part 1

The Aksumite empire was a multinational empire that embraced diverse African and Arabian ethnic and linguistic groups. It utilized territorial and hegemonic mechanisms to achieve its goals. Through direct military conquests, it subjugated a large section of the Horn of Africa and parts of southern and western Arabia. It instituted a system of tribute over its subjects. It maintained control by influencing the selection of local rulers or in some cases by directly appointing them, through manipulation of local rivalries, by the occupation and garrisoning of selected locations, by providing military support and protection, as well as through economic dominance.

The navy was an important element of Aksumite power. Headed by the Bahir Negas,¹ it enabled it to project power to the Arabian Peninsula and to control the trade routes of the Red Sea. This in turn made it to become the facilitator of commerce between the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean, between Interior Africa and Asia.² As such trade was a major contributor to Aksumite wealth and military power.

The Metropolis of Aksum with its “Negusê Nêgést” (“King of Kings”) acted as the imperial center. The imperial constituency consisted of highly autonomous kingdoms, chiefdoms and provinces that were subordinate to the Aksumite monarchy.³ The sub-kingdoms were ruled by sub-kings whose title was “Nêgas”. The chiefdoms belonged to nomadic tribes who were ruled by chiefs. The provinces were administered by governors whose title was “Siyum”. These in turn ruled over petty chieftains and village heads.

The constituent kingdoms had an independent existence prior to the formation of the Aksumite empire. In fact, some of them were older than Aksum itself. For example, Adulis had been an important regional trading center long before the rise of Aksum.⁴ What Aksum did was bringing them together under a single unified political umbrella. The sub-kingdoms and chiefdoms were governed by native local ruling families.

Aksumite administration relied on a multilayered bureaucracy. Imperial authorities had the title “siyum”.⁵ The imperial government of Aksum was the core of the bureaucracy, whose structure of power seems to have been that of an absolute monarchy. In the pre-Christian period the form of kingship implied a semi-divine ruler. The king’s immediate family retained important supportive military and administrative posts. For example, At the beginning of the 200s AD, the Himyarite capital, Raydan, was occupied and garrisoned under the command of a son of Emperor GDRT (Gadarat), named BYGT (Baygat).⁶ Similarly, in the 240s, Emperor ADBH (Adhebah) sent his son GRMT (Girmat), on a military expedition to South Arabia.⁷

The foremost authority of the empire was vested in the Aksumite monarch, whose title was King of Kings. The supreme authority of the Emperor is clearly seen on the Aksumite coinage, where the image of the king appears on both the obverse and the reverse of the gold coins, accompanied by his name and the title “King of the Aksumites”.⁸ From the coins we also learn that an image of Taff-stalk was the emblem of the empire.⁹ This seems to celebrate the fertility of its land and highlight the importance of natural produce for the empire. In addition, the state religion in the form of a disc and crescent in pre-Christian times (representing pantheism), and the cross after the conversion to Christianity, were prominently displayed on the Aksumite coins.

In pre-Christian times the King of Kings was considered to be the son of Maharem, who was the god of war and justice of the Aksumites. In Greek inscriptions, he was often identified with Ares, the Greek god of war, courage and civil order. This boast of divine birth was a favored ruling tactic of most ancient rulers. It was intended to reinforce the emperor’s status in the eyes of his subjects, raising him to a quasi-divinity, which set him in a special category, apart from and above all other men. After the introduction of Christianity, Aksumite emperors relied instead on the legacy of their forefathers to strengthen their legitimacy.

The evidence available indicates that succession to the Aksumite thrown was patrilineal, from father to son, and when that was not possible between consanguineous brothers.¹⁰ For example, both Ezana and Kaleb followed their fathers on the throne, while at least two of Kaleb’s sons ruled successively. To what extent primogeniture was involved cannot be determined. Neither do we know whether monogamy prevailed or not. Nor how any complications in succession were resolved. There is no evidence in any local source of the time for full royal authority being held by a woman. It seems, however, that a woman could act as regent for a minor crown prince.

The Aksumite imperial government preferred indirect rule of its subjects whenever possible. It arranged for the administration of the imperial constituents by confirming existing local rulers or by appointing new ones from local families, and by exacting tribute as a sign of dependence. The founder of the empire informs us that after the various African tribes that he conquered submitted to his authority, he restored their territories to them, subject to the payment of tribute. He also tells us that after he subjected the Arabian tribes, that he allowed their rulers to retain their authority, but imposed on them a land tribute as well as the policing of land and sea routes. As such, failure to pay due tribute was considered as an act of rebellion and a declaration of war against the King of Kings. One Aksumite imperial inscription presents the Aksumite government’s response to such an issue: “Those who obeyed him, he spared; those who resisted him, he put to death.”¹¹

Reference Notes

1. Abbadie, Arnaud-Michel (1868) Douze ans dans la Haute-Éthiopie (Abyssinie). p.539. Tome premier. L. Hachette et ce: Paris. ↩︎
2. Kobishchanov, Yuri M. (1979) Axum. Edited by Joseph w. michels and translated by Lorraine T. Kapitanoff. Pennsylvania State University Press: Pennsylvania. ↩︎
3. Munro-Hay, Stuart (1991) Aksum: An African Civilisation of Late Antiquity. Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh. ↩︎
4. Zazzaro, Chiara (2013) The Ancient Red Sea Port of Adulis and the Eritrean Coastal Region. Archaeopress: Oxford. ↩︎
5. Guillaume, Alfred (1955) The Life of Muhammad. A translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, Islam’s canonical biography of Muhammad. P.152. Oxford University Press: Oxford. ↩︎
6. Munro-Hay (1991) p.72. ↩︎
7. Ibid: p.73. ↩︎
8. Ibid: p.149. ↩︎
9. THE British Museum. Aksumite Coins – Humanities LibreTexts. Retrieved from https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Art/SmartHistory_of_Art_2e/04%3A_SmartHistory_of_Art_IV-_Africa/06%3A_East_Africa_and_the_Horn_of_Africa/6.02%3A_The_art_of_Ethiopia/6.2.01%3A_Aksumite_Coins ↩︎
10. Munro-Hay (1991) pp.157-158. ↩︎
11. Inscription attributed to Emperor Ousanas (310-330 AD), whose text can be found in Munro-Hay (1991) pp.223-224. ↩︎