Frumentius

ON ST. FRUMENTIUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, APOSTLE OF THE EASTERN ETHIOPIANS OR ABYSSINIANS,

ABOUT THE YEAR 380

HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

Frumentius, confessor and bishop, apostle of the Abyssinians. (S.)

BY E. C.

§ I. St. Frumentius came to Ethiopia in the reign of Constantius, not Constantine. The errors of Rufinus and his interpreters.

As we begin to write about St. Frumentius, nothing has seemed more fitting than to set at once before the reader's eyes the celebrated passage of Rufinus, The history of Rufinus is the principal source of his deeds. who is by far the oldest and principal source of his history, and from whom have arisen almost all the difficulties which more recent writers have met. Rufinus, namely, who lived for thirty years in Asia, and spoke at Antioch with Aedesius, brother of St. Frumentius, not long after the year 400, when he was composing his Ecclesiastical History in Italy, did not neglect the narrative which he had received from Aedesius, although he seems to have remembered only a few things accurately. Also in what he places first in that same place about the preaching of the apostles in Asia and Africa at the beginning of the church, that he is not accurate in every respect we have shown elsewhere Volume X of October, page 673, number 39 and following.; from which place we shall transfer here a few things, merely for the sake of declaration.

[2] The passage of Rufinus on the apostles of Asia and Africa In that division of the world, says Rufinus, which was made by lot through the apostles for preaching the word of God, when different provinces had fallen to different men, Parthia is said to have been decreed by lot to Thomas (and perhaps Brahminical India, or the present one, as very many judge, of which there will be speech at the 21st day of December) and Ethiopia to Matthew (the Meroitic, in which Queen Candace ruled) and adjoining it nearer India (that is, Arabia) to Bartholomew. Between which and Parthia lies midway, but far inward in its tract, Further India, inhabited by many and various languages and nations. Here is manifestly signified Brahminical India, or the present one, but carried this side of the river Indus as far as the Persian Gulf. So most ancient geographers in Pliny Book VI, number 23, Hardouin's edition. and the writer of the Acts of St. Arethas in the 6th century Volume X of October, page 722, number 2 and page 747, number 29.. When therefore Rufinus writes that between India, adjoining Ethiopia, or Arabia, and Parthia there lies midway, but far inward in its tract, Further or Brahminical India, these things are not ἀσυστατα, as Ludolf believed Ludolf, Commentary, page 76.. Rufinus goes on: Which (Further India) as being far remote no ploughshare of apostolic preaching had marked; in this place Rufinus plainly denies the apostolate of St. Thomas in Brahminical India; which however, he says, in the times of Constantine received the first seeds of the faith from such a cause. Here begins the manifest error of Rufinus; for in what follows he will call St. Frumentius the apostle of this Further or Brahminical India. A certain Metrodorus, a philosopher, so Rufinus goes on, is said to have penetrated into Further India for the sake of viewing places and exploring the world.

[3] the Indian journey of St. Frumentius, he comes to land in Ethiopia. Invited also by his example, a certain Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre, for a like reason wished to go to India, having with him two little boys, whom, as kinsmen, he was instructing in liberal letters. Of whom one, who was the younger, was called Aedesius, the other Frumentius. And so, having viewed and brought to knowledge the things on which his mind fed, when the philosopher had begun to return, for the sake of water or other necessities the ship in which he was travelling put in at a certain harbour. Here Rufinus wrongly meant to signify a harbour of Brahminical India; for, as will be evident, it was an Ethiopian one. It is the custom of the barbarians there that, whenever neighbouring nations announce that their treaty with the Romans is disturbed, all of the Romans found among them are slain; the philosopher's ship is attacked, and all are killed together with him. The little boys, found under a tree, studying and preparing their lessons, preserved by the pity of the barbarians, are brought to the king, understand of the Ethiopians or Axumites: although Rufinus falsely believed that this king was of Further or Brahminical India. Of these he made one, that is Aedesius, his cupbearer; but to Frumentius, whom he had discovered to be perspicacious and prudent, he committed his accounts and archives; from which they were held in great honour and love with the king.

[4] [The king of Ethiopia being dead, he is called to a part in governing the kingdom; he advances the Christian cause there among the Greeks.] But the king, dying, left his wife with a little son as heir of the kingdom; and to the young men he gave free faculty to do what they wished. Yet the queen humbly begged them, as having nothing more faithful in the whole kingdom, to share with her, until her son should grow up, the care of ruling the kingdom, and especially Frumentius, whose prudence was sufficient to govern the kingdom; for the other simply showed pure faith and a sober mind. And while they did this and Frumentius had the helm of the kingdom in his hands, God urging his mind and spirit, he began anxiously to inquire if there were any Christians among the Roman merchants, and to give them the greatest power, and to admonish them to make meeting-houses in each place, to which they might flock in the Roman rite for the sake of prayer; and he himself much more to do the same, and so to encourage the rest, to invite them by favour and benefits, to furnish whatever was suitable, to provide places for buildings and other necessities, and altogether to strive eagerly that the seed of Christians should spring up there.

[5] [The king having grown up, he goes away to Alexandria and is established by St. Athanasius as bishop of the Ethiopians.] But when the royal boy had grown up, those who were carrying on the administration of the kingdom, all being completed and faithfully handed over, although the queen or her son greatly held them back and asked them to stay, yet returned to our world. And while Aedesius hastened to Tyre, to see again his parents and kinsmen, Frumentius went on to Alexandria, saying that it was not right to hide the work of the Lord. So he sets out the whole matter, as it took place, to the bishop, and advises him to provide some worthy man, whom he might send as bishop to the many Christians already gathered and the churches built in a barbarian place. Then Athanasius, for he had recently received the priesthood, about which there must be inquiry below, considering more attentively and more readily the words and deeds of Frumentius, said in a council of priests: And what other such man shall we find, in whom is the Spirit of God as in you, who could fulfil these things? And having delivered to him the priesthood, he orders him to return with the grace of the Lord to where he had come from. And when he had proceeded as bishop to India, so great a grace of virtues is said to have been given him by God that apostolic signs were done through him, and a countless number of barbarians was converted to the faith. From which, in the parts of India, there came into being both peoples of Christians and churches, and the priesthood began. These things we know to have been so done, not by common opinion, but by the report of Aedesius himself, afterwards made a presbyter at Tyre, who had formerly been the companion of Frumentius Rufinus, book I, chapter 9..

[6] [Rufinus believed that St. Frumentius was the apostle of Brahminical India; Rufinus has been wrongly understood] In this narrative, as we have said, Rufinus gravely slipped, since Frumentius was the apostle not of remoter or Brahminical India, but of Ethiopian India, which scarcely any learned man now denies [Compare Letronne, Materiaux pour l'hist. du Christianisme en Egypte, en Nubie et en Abyssinie, page 131, or volume X of Mem. de l'Academ.; Ludolf, Sapeto and many others to be cited below.]. That Rufinus designates Brahminical India, Letronne manifestly recognized, and he pronounces the same deservedly of Theodoret, who called Further India την ἐσχατην Ἰνδιαν Hist. eccl. book I, chapter 25.. But the most learned man erred in this, that he believed that Socrates and Sozomen, who no differently from Theodoret explained Rufinus Socrates, book I, chapter 15; Sozomen, book II, chapter 23., by these words ἡ ἐνδοτερω Ἰνδια, ἡ ἐνδοτατω Ἰνδία signified Ethiopian India. For each of the Indias, Ethiopian, Arabian and Brahminical, being very wide regions, boundless, and comprising several kingdoms, could be called Inner India and in fact were so called.

[7] by the historians. Thus John bishop of Asia, a Syrian writer, called the Ethiopia of the Axumites Inner India Volume X of October, page 695, number 115.; Philostorgius similarly the Homerites of Arabia: τους ἐνδοτατω Ἰνδους Ibid. page 673, number 41.; and Cosmas Indicopleustes Brahminical India, την ἐσωτεραν Ἰνδιαν. Which last we say was done also by Socrates and Sozomen, since besides, the forerunner of both, Rufinus, seems to call Brahminical India not only further, but also inner. For he writes: Between which (Arabian India) and Parthia lies midway, but far INNER in its tract, Further India. Of the two appositions, then, Socrates and Sozomen selected the former, ἡ ἐνδοτερω Ἰνδια; the latter (Further India) Theodoret: ἡ ἐσχατη Ἰνδια For it was not, as Thomas Wright thought Th. Wright, Early christianity in Arabia, page 30., Rufinus who copied Socrates, but Socrates Rufinus, as Socrates himself testifies at the end of chapter XIX. These things had to be clearly set out here for this reason, that for two hundred years down to this day very learned men, Jacques Godefroy Dissertations on Philostorgius, book II, chapter 6., Ludolf Ludolf, Commentary, page 76., A. Pagi Pagi, Critica at the year 327, numbers 15 and 16., Letronne Letronne, at the place cited, page 139 and following. and Thomas Wright Th. Wright, at the place cited, page 30 and following. have spent much useless effort in distinguishing Inner and Nearer India. And this alone seems to me the reason for which they did not understand Rufinus. For this writer knows only two Indias, namely the Arabian, which he plainly signifies, calling it adjoining Ethiopia and nearer, or closer to the Roman empire; and then the further or Brahminical, inhabited by many and various languages and nations and far remote from the Roman empire, which he carries as far as the Persian Gulf. But Ethiopia he nowhere called India.

[8] When St. Frumentius came to Alexandria, As regards the time at which St. Frumentius went to Ethiopian India, Rufinus writes that when this saint came to Alexandria to inform the patriarch Athanasius of what he had seen, he had recently received the priesthood. And similarly Socrates: τῳ ἐπισκοπῳ Ἀθανασιῳ, τοτε νεωστι της ἐπισκοπης ἀξιωθεντι ὑπαναφερει το πραγμα which Theodoret and Sozomen neglected. Now St. Athanasius was ordained bishop in the year 326, in the month of December; so that, according to the mind of Rufinus, St. Frumentius went to Alexandria at the beginning of the year 327. But in truth, either St. Athanasius had long since been ordained bishop when St. Frumentius came to Alexandria, or Meropius the philosopher, when he set out for India, could by no means have followed the example of Metrodorus, as Rufinus asserts. This is Metrodorus the philosopher, says Valois, whom Jerome mentions in his Chronicle; who, returning from his Indian journey, offered to Constantine many gems and pearls, and several other things which were of much greater price, from Sapor, of the Persians

king had been taken from him, falsely saying so, he furnished a cause for the Persian war, as Ammianus Marcellinus attests in book XXV, at which place of Ammianus, whom he edited, Valois noted similar things. Then on these words of Socrates, Ἀθανασιῳ τοτε νεωστι τῆς ἐπισκοπης ἀξιωθεντι if we weigh the matter more attentively, he says, these things cannot be true. For Meropius the philosopher is said to have set out for India after the example of the philosopher Metrodorus, who had travelled through India before him. But Metrodorus the philosopher returned from his Indian journey not before the year of the Lord 325, indeed 336, as will presently be said. For returning from India he offered to the emperor Constantine presents which he had received from the king of the Indians, as I noted above, partly from Ammianus Marcellinus, partly from the Chronicle of Cedrenus. This then must have happened after Licinius was defeated. For then Constantine received the empire of the East. And Licinius was conquered and defeated at the end of the year of Christ 324. Now Meropius, since he undertook to travel through India following the example of Metrodorus, undertook this journey only some years after.

[9] St. Athanasius, as Valois shows, had long been exercising the episcopate. Then Valois proposes this interpretation: Let us suppose then, he says, that Meropius set out for India in the year of the Lord's birth 327. In the following year, when he was returning to his homeland, he was killed by the barbarians. Aedesius and Frumentius, still young, were brought to the king of the Indians (Ethiopians); and one was made cupbearer of the king, the other set over the archives and accounts. In which ministry both remained until the death of the king. Let us suppose then that they served the king for three years. The king of the Indians then died, leaving a son quite a boy. But the queen, the boy's mother, obtained from Aedesius and Frumentius that they should take up the administration of the kingdom, until the boy should reach full age. Let us grant then that the boy was about eight years old at the time when his father departed from life. Since Frumentius returned to Alexandria only when the boy was now grown and had come out of his guardianship, it is altogether necessary that he administered the affairs of the kingdom for at least ten years. So Frumentius will have returned to Alexandria about the year of the Lord 341, in which year Athanasius had not been recently made bishop, but had passed the fifteenth year of his episcopate. Further, from what I have said it is manifestly gathered that this conversion of the Indians through Frumentius took place in the reign of Constantius, not however in the principate of Constantine, as Rufinus and others following him as authority have reported Valois on Socrates, book I, chapter 19..

[10] In the reign of Constantius, not Constantine, These things Valois wrote aptly, and they almost agree with what we shall presently propose. Yet he did not sufficiently draw back the journey of Metrodorus the philosopher, and so of Meropius and his companions who walked in his footsteps; as we shall now show from Eusebius, Athanasius and the very books of the Ethiopians. But not to do what has been done, we borrow the first argument from Pagi, who of the Persian war, which we say followed the return of Metrodorus, writes in these words: These things, he says, took place under Constantius, not under Constantine. For the peace between the Romans and the Persians was broken in the year 336, on the occasion of the irruptions of the Persians into Mesopotamia and the eastern regions of the empire, as is expressly taught by Eusebius in the Life of Constantine, book IV, chapter LVI etc., Eutropius in his History, Victor on the Caesars and Rufus in his Breviary. And so far is it from being true that Sapor, king of the Persians, did not send back what he had received and did not satisfy Constantine, that Eusebius, an eye-witness, who could not be deceived in this matter, reports that the Persians, after they had burst into the dominions of the empire, greatly feared to engage with Constantine; that having sent envoys they asked for peace from him; and that the emperor gladly concluded peace and friendship with them Pagi at the year 327, number 18.. What therefore Ammianus Marcellinus and Jerome have recorded about the war against the Persians took place in the reign of Constantius, son of Constantine, who waged long wars against them. And Cedrenus, after Jerome, wrongly reported these things at the 21st year of Constantine.

[11] St. Frumentius comes to Ethiopia; the errors Since these things have been duly established and must be firmly held, as will presently appear more fully, it is exceedingly strange that Pagi should write (abandoning what is narrated by Jerome about the Persian war undertaken on the occasion of Metrodorus) that this philosopher went to India about the year 315. For he wished to defend Rufinus and Baronius against the annotations of Valois on the history of Socrates. But to speak truly, Baronius erred much less in interpreting Rufinus than Pagi; for he plainly saw, as will be shown in its place, that according to the opinion of Rufinus St. Frumentius preached the faith in Brahminical India. In this way, however, Pagi, unless he wishes entirely to neglect Jerome and Cedrenus, is forced to admit two journeys of Metrodorus, as Ludolf had long since proposed Commentary, page 382., one in the year 315 and the other in the year 336. So then he writes against the said editor of Socrates: That Rufinus did not err as to the time of the event, it is easy to demonstrate; (which however he by no means demonstrates, as will be evident, except through Rufinus himself, and from him alone he rashly wished to establish the time of the journey of Meropius). Athanasius, he says, who had recently received the priesthood, orders Frumentius, ordained bishop, to return there; … from which in the parts of India there came into being both peoples of Christians and churches, and the priesthood began.

[12] of Rufinus and of Pagi. So Rufinus. But since St. Athanasius was announced bishop of Alexandria in the month of December of the year 326, it is clear that about this time, as Baronius rightly saw, Frumentius was sent as bishop to Ethiopia, called India by Rufinus, which latter is false since Rufinus nowhere called Ethiopia India, and that Meropius with Aedesius and Frumentius, his kinsmen, undertook that journey about the year of Christ 316, and that a year or two earlier Metrodorus, by whose example he was invited, penetrated into true India, which Rufinus wrongly calls Nearer. Which last things are again erroneous, since Rufinus knew only two Indias, the Arabian and the Brahminical; and the former he deservedly called nearer or closer. In this place, therefore, Pagi little understood Rufinus. After which, following the example of several, as was declared above, he interprets the words Nearer and Further India; but altogether wrongly: The India which Rufinus calls nearer, he says, was Further India, and that which he calls further should have been called nearer Pagi at the year 327, numbers 15 and 16.. Which is very far from the truth: for manifestly Rufinus believed, no differently from his followers Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret, that St. Frumentius was the apostle of Further or Brahminical India; which Pagi did not recognize: and this was the source of errors for him.

§ II. The saint came to Ethiopia in the year 341, in the reign of Ela-Eskendi, and in the year 346 he went to St. Athanasius. The kings of the Ethiopians Tzahem and Ela-San, or Aizanas.

[From the catalogues of the kings of Ethiopia it is most certainly proved that the journey of St. Frumentius to Alexandria] We shall obey the counsel of Ludolf, who, having added some hypotheses for untying the chronology of this passage of Rufinus, confesses that light must be sought or awaited from the history of the Abyssinians. Which, he says, will at some time receive light from the history of the patriarchs of Egypt, or of the Abyssinians themselves Ludolf, Commentary, page 282.. The former source has so far supplied nothing; but from the latter I shall draw two arguments, of which I judge the one to be very strong, the other especially suited to confirming and declaring it. It is certainly well known, and we have shown it in fact in our dissertation appended to this volume, that Dillmann, in publishing and comparing several catalogues of the kings of the Ethiopians, has deserved excellently of their history. For down to this time neither Tellez nor Ludolf had dared to use them, nor the others to trust the attempts of James Bruce, Henry Salt and Eduard Rüppell. From the catalogues published by Dillmann, then, we have selected the more approved, as the most skilled geographer Vivien de Saint-Martin already began to do in the year 1865, and we have everywhere added the years of the common era. From which catalogues it is evident that King Ela-Eskendi reigned in Ethiopia from the beginning of the 4th century for 37 years in all, and indeed from about the year 305 to the year 342; and that the king who succeeded in his place, by name Tzahem, sat for nine years.

[14] [could not have taken place before the year 347; indeed it did not take place before the year 346.] Let us grant then that St. Frumentius spent in Ethiopia, until the king's son grew up, not at least ten years, as Valois suggests, or no small time, as Pagi, but even only five years. Yet he could not have reached Alexandria before the year of Christ 347; at which time St. Athanasius had been ordained bishop not recently, but more than twenty years before. For this reason, as in very many things, so too in determining the time of the event, there is no doubt at all that Rufinus wrongly understood Aedesius. He is excused, however, to some extent by what will now be said. St. Athanasius was forced to withdraw from Alexandria and lie hidden in the neighbourhood in the year 339, and thence to flee to Rome in the following year, nor could he return to Alexandria before the year 346, which things were demonstrated in the preceding volume Acta SS. volume XI of October, page 833. from the Festal Chronicle and from the festal letters of St. Athanasius, not long since brought to light. In this year 346, then, St. Athanasius came to Alexandria; and since Aedesius set out for India very young, and could not learn more about Athanasius before his departure, he seems to have spoken in the presence of Rufinus of Athanasius's return without sufficient discrimination: and so it came about that Rufinus understood these things of the ordination itself of the patriarch. However that may be, from Ethiopian history, from the narrative of Rufinus and from the annals of the eastern church, it seems to me to be placed beyond all hazard of doubt that St. Frumentius could not have spoken to St. Athanasius at Alexandria before the year 346.

[15] But in the year 341 These things must now be confirmed and illustrated by that other argument, which we said was similarly drawn from the books of the Ethiopians. Namely in the Life of Tekla-Haimanot, who lived at the beginning of the 7th century, which Life is the most approved of all that have been written by the Ethiopians, as will be shown in the Acts of St. Elesbaas, and, as it seems, also the oldest, in this Life, I say, the following is read to our purpose: Abbot Salama, that is St. Frumentius, as will presently appear, came into the region of Agazi or present Abyssinia in the year of the Lord's birth 333 In Sapeto, Viaggio, page 368.. And this year of the Ethiopians corresponds to the year 341 of the Dionysian era, as is easy to demonstrate. For this the Ethiopians themselves lay down, the learned deduce, and certain chronology shows. For thus it is read in the Chronicle of Axum, which is preserved in the place Dalbo and has been published by Sapeto: The Franks (or Europeans) in the years of the world of the Egyptians

add eight years Ibid. pages 358 and 369..

[16] the same saint had come to Ethiopia. And in fact their whole computation is composed to this rule, as Ludolf showed at length Hist. book III, chapter 6, number 97, Commentary page 385 and following. against Scaliger, who believed that the computation of the Alexandrians and Ethiopians was behind ours by only seven years. But his opinion had long since been refuted by Petau [Petau, De doctr. temp. book IX, chapter 3 and Variar. dissert. book VIII, chapter 1 and following.], whom if Ludolf had read, he would have spoken more aptly on these matters. From the end of the 4th century, namely, at the teaching of a certain Panodorus, a chronologer, the Alexandrians said that Christ was born in the year of the world 5493, whereas before, with Julius Africanus, they had said he was born in the year 5501. But soon, forgetful of the most unhappy emendation of Panodorus, from the years of the world, in order to arrive at the years of Christ, they deducted no longer 5492 years with Panodorus, but again 5500 with Africanus. And so in those years which Panodorus had assigned to Christian events they began everywhere to fall short by eight years. In which the Ethiopians, perpetual pupils of the Alexandrians, faithfully imitated them. Indeed even the Byzantine annalists themselves, George Syncellus, Theophanes and others, labour under the same defect. But to speak now of the Ethiopians alone, the council of Nicaea, for example, which by the consent of all chronologers was celebrated in the year of Christ 325, they, eight years behind, assign to the year 317. For this reason, if Salama or Frumentius arrived in the year 333 of the Ethiopians, it must be said that this took place in the common year 341. Nor would that passage of the Life of Tekla-Haimanot perhaps be so much to be valued, unless it agreed in every respect with what we have so far taught from approved monuments; but as it serves to confirm all that precedes, so in turn it is confirmed by the same in every respect.

[15] His deeds between the years 341 and 353. We approve therefore that year 341, in which we say that St. Frumentius and Aedesius first came to Ethiopia, about one year before the death of King Ela-Eskendi. When he had ended his life, they were asked by the queen to share with her, or perhaps with her son Tzahem, the administration of the kingdom until he should grow up; which was done. In the year 346, however, or the following, when King Tzahem was now fit to take up the helm of the kingdom, they set out for their homeland. But Frumentius wished first to go to St. Athanasius, recently restored to his see, and to inform him of the condition of the Christian cause in Ethiopia, by whom, beyond his expectation, he was made bishop. He certainly remained, however, for some time at Alexandria, to give himself to ecclesiastical science, which neither before the journey nor on the journey could he in any way have gained. He returned therefore to Ethiopia either in the year 350, or rather in one of the next following. Indeed that this took place only in the year 353 we are taught by the already praised Life of Tekla-Haimanot, which, turned into Arabic, is kept at Paris. Ludolf edited the passage in Arabic and Latin, and it must by no means be omitted here. In this way, then, the author of that Life writes: And the king of the Abyssinians gave St. Frumentius gold and silver, and the above-named (Frumentius) set out to the father patriarch Abba Athanasius the apostolic, and announced to him the whole state of Abyssinia and its inhabitants. When the father patriarch had heard these things, he rejoiced with great joy, he and the whole people of the Christians, and he ordained him bishop of Abyssinia, and called him Salama, whose interpretation is: Peacemaker between God and men. And so Abba Salama arrived in Abyssinia, in the two hundred and forty-fifth year from the nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ Ludolf, Commentary, page 435.. On which two things are to be noted: first, that it is by no means likely that the name of Salama was given to St. Frumentius by Athanasius himself, as Ludolf also advised; the other, that it is faultily written: in the two hundredth year, for the three hundredth. But is what follows to be approved: the forty-fifth? On this matter I for one would hardly at all have any doubt. For the number squares aptly with the history, and with all that we have so far argued. For we have already advised above that the Ethiopians are eight years behind the Dionysian computation. So that for the year 345 the year 353 must be put back. If then we say that St. Frumentius, adorned with the episcopal dignity, returned to Ethiopia in the year 353, it is much more easily understood why only in the year 356 the emperor Constantius complains of Frumentius's having been sent among the Ethiopians; of which there will presently have to be a little more said. When St. Frumentius came again to Axum, there is no doubt that King Tzahem had already died. For he did not reign beyond nine years, namely from the year 342 to 351. Nor indeed is it certain in every respect that St. Frumentius and Aedesius left Ethiopia before his death. Yet Rufinus teaches this plainly (number 4), who is not to be abandoned lightly. This King Tzahem does not seem to have been a Christian, since Aedesius taught Rufinus nothing on this matter.

[18] [In the year 351 or 352 Ela-San or Aizanas began his reign: the Axumite inscription.] After him there succeeded to the kingdom Ela-San, from among the kinsmen of King Tzahem, as is likely: for he could by no means have had sons of suitable age when he met his death. King Ela-San was called by the Greeks Aizanas (perhaps by Greek merchants, for the sake of flattery; for the word could in some way signify immortality: Ἀει ζαειν), as he also called himself in the Greek inscription of Axum which we shall presently reproduce in type. From which it is manifest that he was at first a pagan; but from at least the year 355, the fourth or fifth of his reign, and perhaps much earlier, he embraced the Christian rites. This inscription, first taken down by him in the year 1805 and made public in the journey of Viscount Valentia [Lord Valentia, Voyages, London 1809, volume III, page 182 and following; and in French, Paris 1813, volume IV, page 132 and following; Salt, voyage (first), page 225 and following.], Salt copied more diligently in the year 1810 and afterwards published anew [Voyage to Abyssinia, London, 1814, page 411; and in French, Paris, 1816, volume II, page 184.]. Since it signally illustrates the history of Ethiopia both sacred and civil, we could by no means omit it. Further in publishing it we shall follow entirely in the footsteps of Boeckh, who followed Salt's second edition in the Corpus of Greek inscriptions Boeckh, volume III, page 515., except that, in the fourth line, we judge that the word Κασου, as rightly observed by the distinguished Vivien de Saint-Martin, must be wholly restored Salt, in the place above.. For the signs expressed before the numbers, for lack of types, we shall place asterisks. The translation, which Salt Annales des Voyages, volume XII, page 330 and following. and Silvestre de Sacy Le Nord de l'Afrique, Paris 1863, page 231, note 4. attempted not unhappily, we ourselves, with the help of Boeckh in his notes on our inscription, shall subjoin to the Greek.

§ III. The Axumite inscription.

[1] Ἀειζανᾶς βασιλεὺς Ἀξωμιτῶν καὶ

[2] Ὁμηριτῶν καὶ τοῦ Ῥαειδᾶν καὶ Αἰθιόπων

[3] καὶ Σαβαειτῶν καὶ τοῦ Σιλεῆ

[4] καὶ τοῦ Τιαμῶ καὶ Βουγαειτῶν καὶ τοῦ

[5] Κασοῦ βασιλεὺς βασιλέων υἱὸς θεοῦ

[6] ἀνικήτου Ἄρεως ἀτακτησάντων

[7] κατὰ καιρὸν τοῦ ἔθνους τῶν Βουγαειτῶν

[8] ἀπεστίλαμεν τοὺς ἡμετέρους

[9] ἀδελφὸυς Σαἳαζανᾶ καὶ τον Αδηφᾶς

[10] τούτους πολεμῆσαι καὶ παραδεδωκότων

[11] αὐτῶν ὑποτάξαντες αὐτὸυς

[12] ἤγαγον πρὸς ἡμᾶς μετὰ καὶ τῶν θρεμμάτων

[13] αὐτῶν βοῶν τε * ΡΙΒ και προβάτων

[14] * ΣΚΔ καὶ κτηνῶν νωτοφόρων

[15] θρέψαντες αὐτοὺς βόεσίντε καὶ ἐπισιτισμῷ

[16] ἀννών[ης] ποτίζοντες αὐτοῦς ζύτῳτε

[17] καὶ οἴνῳ καὶ ὑδρεύμασιν πάντας ἰς χορτασίαν

[18] οἵτινες ἦσαν τὸν ἀριθμὸν βασιλείσκοι

[19] ἕξ σὺν τῷ ὄχλῳ αὐτῶν τὸν ἀριθμὸν Β *

[20] ἀννωνευόμενοι καθ᾽ἑκάστην ἡμέραν ἄρτους

[21] σιτίνους ΜΒ * καὶ οἶνον ἐπὶ μῆνα ὅλον

[22] ἄχρεις οὗ ἀγάγουσιν αὐτοὺς πρὸς ἡμᾶς τούτους

[23] οὖν δωρησάμενοι αὐτοῖς πάντα τὰ ἐπιτήδια

[24] καὶ ἀμφιάσαντες αὐτοὺς μετοικήσαμεν καὶ

[25] κατεστήσαμεν ἴς τινα τόπον τῆς ἡμετέρας χώρας

[26] καλούμενον Μέτλια καὶ ἐκελεύσαμεν αὐτοὺς

[27] πάλιν ἀννωνεύεσθαι παρασχόμενοι

[28] τοῖς ἑξάσιν βασιλείσκοις βόας ΜΕ ὑπὲρ δὲ

[29] εὐχαριστίας τοῦ ἐμὲ γεννήσαντος ἀνικήτου Ἄρεως

[30] ἀνέθηκα αὐτῷ ἀνδριάντα χρυσοῦν ἕνα καὶ ἀργύραιον

[31] ἕνα καὶ χαλκοῦς Γ ἐπ᾽ ἀγαθῷ,

[20] And in Latin: Aizanas, king of the Axomites, and of the Homerites, and of Raidan, and of the Ethiopians, and of the Sabaeans, and of Silee, and of Tiamo, and of the Bugaites, and of Kasus, king of kings, son of the unconquered god Mars. When the nation of the Bugaites had at some time rebelled, we sent our brothers Saiazana and Adephas to fight against them, and when they had surrendered, (our brothers) after they had subdued them, brought them to us, with their children and 112 oxen and sheep 224 and beasts of burden, furnishing them for nourishment oxen and rations of grain, for drink beer and wine and water for all to satiety; who were in number six chieftains, with their multitude to the number *, receiving for sustenance on each day 42 wheaten loaves and wine, for a whole month, until (the brothers) brought them to us. Them therefore, after we had given them all necessaries and clothes, we transferred and placed in some place of our region by name Metlia, and we ordered sustenance to be supplied to them again, giving to the six chieftains 45 oxen. And in thanksgiving to my father the unconquered Mars, I set up to him one statue of gold, and one of silver and 3 of bronze, under good auspices.

[21] That he rules over a part of Meroitic Ethiopia Of the nations and kingdoms or provinces over which King Aizanas professes to rule, a few things must here be subjoined, since from these names the history of the eastern Ethiopians is not a little illustrated. In which above all we shall again follow the distinguished Vivien de Saint-Martin Journal asiat. October 1863, page 363 and following.. That the Axomites, then, are the same as those eastern Ethiopians of whom we were just speaking, there is now no need to advise; but let the reader notice, I beg, that Aizanas, a little below, also calls himself king of the Ethiopians, and manifestly distinguishes this from the Axomites. Who then are they? Certainly the same whom the predecessor of Aizanas, in the Adulis inscription, claims as bordering on his kingdom See the dissertation appended to this volume., namely the Meroitic Ethiopians; over a part of whom Aizanas now ruled. I wonder that the Parisian geographer did not plainly recognize this Journal asiat. at the place cited, pages 357 and 365..

[22] Aizanas signifies. The eastern Ethiopians were first called Troglodytes; For that Ethiopia lies to the west

of the provinces which he had occupied, and to be, as I said, bordering on them, is signified by that king of the Adulis inscription, and that this is to be understood of the island of Meroë, which is scarcely a few leagues distant from the province of Samen, cannot be doubted. For the rest it is known to all who are even slightly versed in oriental history that the Ethiopian dynasts, leaving Napata, for many centuries their capital, passed to the island of Meroë a few centuries before the birth of Christ, and there built a city of the same name. By Pliny Meroë is assigned to Ethiopia together with present Nubia. Moreover, he says, when the Ethiopians held power, that island was of great renown. They report that it used to furnish 250 thousand armed men, and to maintain 400 thousand artisans. Forty-five kings of the Ethiopians are reported even today Natural History, book VI, number 35.. The word Ethiopia, however, in Pliny and the old geographers extends very widely, but the Greeks who wrote in the reign of the Ptolemies or afterwards, while they gave the eastern Ethiopians this name, at the same time called them Troglodytes.

[23] then Axumites and finally Ethiopians. Ptolemy the geographer writes that Axum is the capital of the nation; but the first to call them Axumites was the author of the Periplus in the year 248, and not much later Vopiscus, writing that in the year 274 they were brought among the captives in the triumph of Aurelian: who I would believe fell into the hands of the Romans in some port of Egypt or Arabia. In the 4th century St. Athanasius again called them Axumites, as did the emperor Constantius; but in the fifth century they seem to have been almost given over to oblivion. For what Rufinus received from Aedesius he understood purely of Brahminical India, as we have shown in its place. In which he was by no means corrected by his followers, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret; so that from this it may be evident how little known Axumite Ethiopia then was. In the same century, however, Philostorgius called them Ethiopians, but at the same time writes that he signifies those who are called Axumites, so as to distinguish them properly from the Meroitic Ethiopians: Θεοφιλος εἰς τους Αὺξουμιτας καλουμενους, ἀπαιρει Αἰθιοπας Philostorgius, book III, 6; compare volume X of October, page 671, number 33.. In the sixth century Cosmas Indicopleustes for the most part called them Axomites, and since he lived among them for a long time, it appears that even then they scarcely called themselves Ethiopians. Procopius, however, later in the same century, no differently from Philostorgius, called the same people by both names: Ἀἰθιοπες … οἱ Αὐξουμιται ἐπικαλουνται Procopius, On the Persian War, book I, chapter 19.. Finally the Acts of St. Arethas, which were turned at the end of the sixth century from the Syriac language into Greek, constantly called them Ethiopians.

[24] [The Meroitic Ethiopians having taken another name, the Axumites now began to be called Ethiopians.] Who then would wonder that Aizanas, in the inscription, distinguished the Axumites from the Ethiopians? But we can also now declare why in the 6th century, the name of the Axumites being dropped, they began to be called simply Ethiopians. For at the end of this century Meroitic Ethiopia was already called Alodaea, and by the Arabs Aloah: King of the most numerous nation of the Alodaeans, that is, of Ethiopia, says John bishop of Asia, who was writing in the year 545. On the Alodaeans, however, not to be longer, and if you please on John, bishop and historian, see more in the book of the distinguished Land In Land, Joannes Bischof von Ephesos u. s. w. page 191, Leiden 1856., and also what we have collected on the said John in volume X of October. At what time the Axumites themselves began to call themselves Ethiopians cannot be accurately settled. Certainly Tazena in the inscriptions, about the year 500, calls himself king of Aksum; but in no way of Ethiopia. But in the book Senkessar, which was written in the fifteenth century, the name of Ethiopia is met with many times. Thus also the present Abyssinians for the most part call themselves Itiopyawan, or Ethiopians, or Agazyan, inhabitants of the region of Agazi See the Historical Dissertation at the end of this volume., very rarely Abyssinians Ludolf, Hist. book I, chapter I; Commentary, page 52 and following..

[25] The place or tract Raidan is not to be sought in Homeritis, In what way Aizanas called himself king of the Homerites will be sufficiently declared later Compare the Historical Dissertation.; but of the region or place Raidan something must here be said briefly, since Ernest Osiander Zeitschrift d. d. morgenl. Gesellschaft volume X 1856, page 18 and following., not long since snatched away from Homerite letters, which he had excellently cultivated, and Vivien de Saint-Martin believed that here is signified the citadel of the city of Taphar *, capital of the Homerites; and the latter besides the neighbouring Rhatini and Rhaetheni, recorded by Ptolemy. I know indeed that this citadel seems to Osiander to be called Raidan in the books of Masudi In Alb. Schultens, Historia imperii vetust. Joctanidarum, page 158., a writer of the 10th century, for which name there is read faultily in the codices of Edrisi Zeidan [Edrisi, page 148, Joubert's edition; compare volume X of October, page 675, number 48 and in the Addenda at the end of the same volume.]. But Osiander by no means demonstrated this, and indeed in the second inscription of King Tazena See below in the Acts of St. Elesbaas. the forces which he led against the rebel Nubians are said to have been enrolled in (the provinces or tracts) Mahaza, Hara, Halen, Selken and Raidan. And nowhere is it read that the kings of Ethiopia summoned Homerite forces from Arabia, especially before the sixth century, since down to the year 519 they held as subject only the province or phylarchy of Negran; but the remaining Homerites and Sabaeans only as tributaries. This will appear clearly from the Acts of St. Elesbaas.

[26] but it was a province of Abyssinia. The tracts Halen and Selken, or Salhen. That Halen was certainly a tract of Axumite Ethiopia we learn from the same inscription, at whose beginning Tazena calls himself Bese-Halen, man of Halen Compare below the Acts of St. Elesbaas.. Nor do I wonder that the distinguished Dillmann, most knowledgeable in Ethiopic, did not interpret these words Zeitschrift d. d. morgenl. Ges. volume VII, page 355., since he had in hand scarcely more than the beginning of the inscription. That Raidan is also read in a second place in this monument of King Tazena, as Sapeto believed, I say the more confidently because already at the beginning of the same inscription it was most plainly read, as we certainly know from the apograph of Rüppell, and the versions of it made by an Abyssinian presbyter and Doctors Dillmann and Roediger. And the same is to be said of the province of Halen. But whether a certain third province was called Selken, as the name is read in Sapeto, we know much less certainly. For this name seems to correspond to the Greek Σιλεη which presently follows in the inscription of Aizanas, and to Henry Salt First voyage II, page 236., to Sapeto himself Viaggio, page 391. and to Vivien de Saint-Martin Journal asiat. October 1863, page 367. it has seemed to signify the city of Zeila, or the neighbouring tract. Besides, in the apograph of Rüppell Sallilu is read, not Selken, as his interpreters teach. Yet Sapeto twice read that name likewise, not in the apograph only, but in the monument itself as well. Now then the names Halen and Raidan seem certainly to belong to the geography of Abyssinia. Of the name Selken there must be much doubt, unless Salt read the Greek incorrectly in this place. But in what way Ern. Osiander believed that Raidan signified the castle of the city of Dhafar in Homeritis, we now understand. For the beginning of the second inscription of King Tazena, which alone it had befallen him to read (since learned men interpreted the apograph of Rüppell with the greatest difficulty), discloses nothing at all about forces enrolled in Raidan and Selken or Salhen. Osiander therefore, since he supposed that Raidan was the name of a fort of Dhafar and knew that another Homerite fort was called Salhin in the book Mudjam-al-buldan Zeitschrift, etc. 1856, page 20., thought that these two forts were recorded by King Tazena. But elsewhere he himself recognizes that he was never lord of Yemen, or governed it by himself or through others Ibid. page 22. How then could he have drawn forces out of it? Silee, therefore, in Greek ὁ Σιλεη, on the authority of the same Salt and his followers, is a region stretching about the port of Zeila: which opinion will certainly seem probable to most; but it is not certain, and we have been taught by experience how cautiously one must proceed in these things.

[27] The Sabaites and Tiamo; But as regards the Sabaites, there is no reason for us to doubt, seeing that by the same word the Sabaeans of Arabia are plainly designated both by the predecessor of Aizanas in the Adulis monument and by King Tazena, a century and a half later, in the Ethiopic monument of Axum. This is confirmed above all from the statement which we shall prove at length in our disquisition, that the words Saba and Hamer, or Himyar, indicate two different nations of Arabia Felix Below at the end of this volume.. And in the same place we shall teach that the Ethiopians made the Sabaeans, or at least the Homerites, tributaries, most probably before the middle of the third century Ibid.. On Tiamo see what we shall note on the Adulis inscription Ibid..

[28] The Bugaites and Kasu The Βουγαειται are called by the king of the Adulites Βεγα, and by the Arabs Bodja or Bisjariin: of whom we have gathered something in the historical dissertation Ibid. Του Καςου… Salt had read του Καεου, or Τουκαεου and at first he did not dare to interpret it; then he believed that it signified the nation Taguie, as he supposed the inhabitants of the province of Taka to be called [H. Salt, Voyage (first) Abyssimie volume II, pages 223 and 237; the same, Voyage (second) etc. volume II, page 185.]. Boeckh in the corpus of inscriptions likewise writes Τουκαεου But at length Vivien de Saint-Martin dispersed the fog, teaching that one must read Του Κασου For among the capital letters in which this inscription of Aizanas is written, ε and σ are distinguished from one another only by the middle stroke with which epsilon is marked. To this the learned man came by comparing with this place the Ethiopic inscription of Tazena, in which he is called, according to Sapeto's version, king of Axum … and Kassu (or Kasu, the repetition of the consonant being omitted, of which Ludolf and Dillmann have written in their grammars). Roediger and the Abyssinian presbyter hardly differ, reading in place of Kasu, Kas Rüppell, Reise in Abyssinien, volume II, page 280 and following.. Dillmann finally reads Kash and believed this to be understood of the biblical Cushites. But, admitting the slight alteration we have mentioned in the apograph of the Greek inscription, the two inscriptions now agree in every respect, both in the last nation they add, and in all the others, as will presently be evident. Besides, from the inscription of Tazena, which we are about to edit below in the Acts of St. Elesbaas, it is manifest that Kasu or Kas belongs to the province of Taka and is neighbouring to the Nubians. And by this name Khas the Bodja, or Bedja, βουγαειται, of the said province of Taka and the neighbouring tracts, to the east, still call their homeland [Ant. d'Abbadie in Bulletin de la Soc. de géogr. volume XVIII, 1842, page 204; Burckhardt, Nubia, page 342.]. In the century

tenth of the Christian era Masudi too called a certain tribe of the nation of the Bedja Khasa, and similarly Abulfeda, in the 14th century, placed the nation Khasa to the north of Abyssinia, between the sea and the Nile, that is, in the very province of Taka. Most happily, then, in this place did the Parisian geographer interpret the inscription of Aizanas [Journal asiat. at the place cited, page 368 and le Nord de l'Afrique dans l'antiquité, page 231, Paris 1863.].

[29] The agreement of the inscriptions of Aizanas and Tazena. Here must now be subjoined the concordance, so to say, of the Greek inscription of Aizanas and the Ethiopic one of Tazena, in which the order of the regions is the same, a few things being added from the very ancient inscription of the king of the Adulites. The order then is of this kind:

1 Ἀειζανας βασιλευς Ἀξωμιτων. Tazena king of Aksum.

2 και Ὁμηριτων. And Hamer.

3 κ. του Ῥαιδαν. And Raidan.

4 κ. Αἰθιοπων. Why King Tazena did not add this name a hundred and fifty years later has been sufficiently declared at number 22. For it signifies Meroitic Ethiopia, which, in the reign of Tazena, had already lost its ancient and most glorious name, and had begun to be designated by a new one. For this reason, although in the inscription of Tazena the names Hamer, Raidan, Saba, Salhen or Selken, of which the first and third belong without any doubt to Arabia, follow in one sequence, it is by no means to be deduced from this that the rest also belong to it. For Tazena copies out the order of his predecessor Aizanas, who had already erected a similar monument in the same city of Axum, in which monument African-Meroitic Ethiopia is written in; which Tazena was forced to omit.

5 κ. Σαβαειτων. And Saba.

6 κ. του Σιλεη. And Selken, Sapeto. Salhen, Roediger and Dillmann.

7 κ. του Τιαμω. And Tzaiom, Sapeto. Tzijamo, Dillmann and Roediger. Tziamo, the Abyssinian presbyter of Rüppell.

8 κ. βουγαειτων And Buga, Dillmann. Bega, Roediger. Ban, Sapeto by manifest error.

9 κ. του Κασου And Kasu, Sapeto. Kas, Roediger. Kash, Dillmann. Of these names the following are also met with in the inscription of the king of Adulis: Τιαμω, τους λεγομενους Τζιαμω … ὑπεταξα … Βεγα … περαν δε τῆς Ερυθρας θαλασσης … ἑως των Σαβαιων χωρας ἐπολεμησα … ἀπο δε δυσεως μεχρι των τῆς Αἰθιοπιας … τοπων.

* Dhafar

§ IV. Aizanas and Sazana are different from Abreha and Atzbeha; the memory of the latter in the Ethiopian liturgy.

Aizanas and Sazana are altogether different from Abreha and Atzbeha This inscription, then, which we have tried to illustrate somewhat, was engraved at Axum by the order of Aizanas, whom we have said is the same as King Ela-San, as is shown from the catalogues of the kings and the added chronology. And we have said that he began to reign in the year 351, in which also, more probably, St. Frumentius, adorned with the episcopal dignity, returned to Axum. Ela-San or Aizanas remained devoted to the rites of the pagans for a few years, or at least for one year, in which the nation of Buga was conquered and the monument set up at Axum. For in that, as the reader will have noticed, he calls himself son of the unconquerable god, Mars. But he had certainly already embraced Christian doctrine in the year 355 or 356, as will presently appear. But first the opinion of many Ethiopians must be weighed, who say that Aizanas and his brother Sazana, whose names appear in the letter of the emperor Constantius, of which there will presently be talk, no differently from the Axumite inscription, were those kings who in the Catalogues are called Abreha and Atzbeha.

[31] who flourished in the fifth century; But in truth the origin of this opinion is discovered without difficulty. For Greek monuments were known at Axum, as is manifest from the summaries of the Acts of St. Hirut or Arethas Volume X of October, page 717, number 190 and following. and of St. Frumentius, as they are read in the Ethiopic Senkessar. Which he will by no means wonder at who remembers that all the Ethiopian bishops were educated at Alexandria, where down to the middle of the 7th century Greek letters flourished. The Axumites knew therefore the letter of Constantius to the tyrants of Axum Aizanas and Sazana; and since besides the kings Abreha and Atzbeha, whose names are Christian and seem to contain the notion of illumination, they did not find in the catalogues any other pair of kings than Zigen and Rema, who indeed reigned in the middle of the second century, they believed without any doubt that the former were signified. That they were the first Christian kings, then, has been handed down by the authors of the Chronicle of Axum in Tellez Tellez, Historia de Ethiopia a alta, page 74. and in Sapeto Sapeto, Viaggio, pages 359 and 369., as will appear from what is to be said below. To these Tellez gave credit, because the missionaries testified that this was believed everywhere in Ethiopia; and similarly Ludolf Historia æthiopica, book III, chapter 2, number 29; Commentary, page 232.. More correctly of these things Génébrard had written in his Chronicle In Tellez, at the place cited, page 77., who is quite undeservedly carped at by Tellez for handing down that Abreha and Atzbeha lived in the middle of the fifth century: for that redounds entirely to his praise, since he had to hand only the catalogue of the kings of Ethiopia edited by Mariano Vittorio In Andr. Schott, Hispania illustrata, volume II, title Æthiopia.. To this catalogue, which was despised by Ludolf Ludolf, Commentary, pages 225 and 232., Dillmann finally restored its authority Zeitschrift d. d. morgenl. Gesellsch. at the place cited..

[32] as from the catalogues of the kings This, then, is by far the principal reason for which we say that Abreha and Atzbeha were by no means taught the faith by St. Frumentius, that all the catalogues of the kings claim that they flourished only in the fifth century. There could indeed be doubt while Génébrard and Antonio Vecchietti taught this from the Catalogue of Mariano Vittorio alone In Ludolf, Commentary, page 225., but after the most accurate edition of the Catalogues prepared by Dillmann there is no longer place for doubt. For in this there agree with the Catalogue of Mariano Vittorio not only those published by Dillmann, but also those which the diligent travellers Henry Salt and Ed. Rüppell brought with them from Ethiopia. Of these, however, the former unhappily wished to correct his catalogue, transferring the kings Abreha and Atzbeha from the middle of the fifth century to the middle of the fourth; of which otherwise he did not neglect to advise the reader Salt, Voyage en Abyssinie (second) volume II, page 248 and following..

[33] is shown in various ways. But not only is it certainly made out, by adding the years assigned to the individual kings, that the kings Abreha and Atzbeha reigned about the middle of the fifth century, but this is noted in the course of the work by the very chroniclers who wrote the catalogues. Thus for example the chronicler of Rüppell notes that Abreha died in the year after the birth of Christ, Col. [ ] 430 Rüppell, Reise volume II, page 343.; which the chronicler of Sapeto also hands down Sapeto, Viaggio, page 359., although in another place he writes that from Bazen, in whose reign Christ was born, down to Abreha 444 years are counted, or adds fourteen years besides. Further in the Chronicle of Axum it is read that between the kings Abreha and Atzbeha, in whose reign Frumentius the bishop was sent from Alexandria to Ethiopia, and the coming of the nine saints [Volume X of October, page 751, annotation bb.; and below in the Acts of St. Elesbaas.], six kings sat at Axum, namely Asfah, Arded and Amoy, brothers, then Arado, Saladoba and Alameda. And we know for certain that Alameda, son of Saladoba, was the father of Tazena and grandfather of St. Elesbaas, who in the year 519 waged the first war against the Homerites and the second in the year 525. From which it is made out, as from the catalogues of the kings themselves (and the same was already shown two hundred years ago by the patriarch Mendez In Tellez, Historia geral de Eth. page 80 and following.), that this Alameda reigned about the year 480, and besides that the three preceding reigns, of which Abreha and Atzbeha held the first, three other brothers the second, Saladoba, father of Alameda, the third, cannot reach back further than the year 420, and indeed the catalogues teach us that they do not reach beyond the year 425, about which Abreha and Atzbeha began to reign. For the rest the Ethiopians are so unskilful in their books that, if we can now trust their catalogues of kings, yet their chronology is by no means to be trusted. The catalogues are therefore to be received from their hands, but the reckoning of the times is to be established by Europeans themselves.

[34] The memory of the kings Abreha and Atzbeha in the Fasti of the Ethiopians. The Ethiopians, then, are to be abandoned and neglected when they write that Abreha and Atzbeha reigned at Axum when St. Frumentius arrived as bishop; for they themselves soon refute themselves, adding that these kings lived about the middle of the fifth century. And whence this opinion arose we have sufficiently declared above. Perhaps too the Christian life of these princes, and the mutual love of them and their subjects, were notable, by which their memory more easily remained surviving. For in the liturgy of the Ethiopians too they are commended in this way: Remember, Lord, the kings of Ethiopia Abreha and Atzbeha Ludolf, Hist. Æth. book II, chapter 4.. Indeed in the Senkessar itself, or menology of the Ethiopian saints, at the fourth day of the month Teqemt (the 1st day of October) this alone is read: today the commemoration of the death of the just kings Abreha and Atzbeha, who reigned in Ethiopia in the days of Aksum Sapeto, Viaggio ecc. page 395., that is, unless I am mistaken, when Aksum was still the royal city, not Gondar, as now. For that Adulis was at some time the capital, the Ethiopians, who suppose their kings sprung from Solomon, keep deep silence. The Senkessar adds nothing here, because namely it was by no means read in the old parchments that these royal brothers received the Christian rites from St. Frumentius. Nor is this read in the most ancient Life, and safer than the rest, of the most renowned monk among the Ethiopians, Tekla-Haimanot (which we shall perhaps edit, if we ever obtain it); but only those few things are added which we excerpted above, at numbers 15 and 17.

[35] At the coming of St. Frumentius there did not reign Ela-Awda, or Ela-Azguagua There must here be weighed briefly also a certain passage of the Ethiopian synaxary, to be edited below, in which Frumentius and Aedesius, seized by the Ethiopians, are said to have been led to their king Ela-Aëda: on whose death the kings Ela-Azguagua would have reigned (for there were several of this name), until his son grew up. But no other Ela-Azguagua are counted among the kings of the Ethiopians than those who reigned from about the year of Christ 144 to 221, and between whom and King Ela-Awda, their predecessor, only five years had passed. Ela-Awda, then, is that king who in the said passage of the Ethiopian synaxary is called Ela-Aëda: by which means the synaxarist, unconscious of anything, hands down that St. Frumentius flourished in the second century; and he adds that when the saint, now ordained bishop, came again to Ethiopia, Abreha and Atzbeha reigned there; so great is the unskilfulness of the Ethiopians in writing!

§ V. The letter of the emperor Constantius to Aizanas and Sazana, from which the chronology of the Life of St. Frumentius is established.

The emperor Constantius wrote to King Aizanas, or Ela-San, King Aizanas, then, or Ela-San, some time after the return of Bishop Frumentius from Alexandria, abjured the rites of the pagans and became a Christian. Which must be said to have taken place between the years 352 and 356. For in the first year of his reign, as we have said, he without doubt remained a pagan, but that in the year 356 he was already a Christian, together with his brother Sazana, we learn for certain from the letter written to them by the emperor Constantius. This St. Athanasius recites in his Apology I, which all chronologers teach was written in the year 356, and a little before and within the same year the letter had been sent to the kings or tyrants of Axum; from which we also learn that Aizanas did his brother Sazana this favour, to share with him the honours of the kingdom.

[37] as St. Athanasius reports, In this apology, then, St. Athanasius complains of many things that were done against the catholics and himself by the Arians and above all by the emperor… For it is not the part of a pious emperor, he says, to wish bishops to be banished, virgins stripped, whole churches disturbed. But as we were so thinking and pressing on the journey we had begun, behold a third report glides in anew, that it has been written to the tyrants at Auxumis that they should take away Frumentius, bishop of Auxumis; and that they should search for me wherever I might be, even among the barbarians, and carry me off to the custody of the prefects, which are called commentaria; and force the peoples and clerics to the communion of the Arian heresy. And after a few words Athanasius copies out the letter of Constantius to the Alexandrians, already mentioned by him before, with this preface: But since your humanity seems to grant me this, here for you is the letter (to the Alexandrians), which they, constantly reciting it, announced death to everyone.

[38] and indeed in the year 356. This letter of Constantius to the Alexandrians was written in the same year as the apology, of Christ 356, when the emperor had received what had happened at Alexandria. By which letter he not only approves what was done, but also pursues Athanasius with insults, and finally exhorts them to send Frumentius to George the Arian. The letter of Constantius to the tyrants of the Axumites is of the same year; for as soon as it became known to the Arians, they at once boasted of it: which soon came to the ears of Athanasius. And indeed Athanasius mentions this letter in the third and last place, in these words: behold a third report glides in anew, by which he signifies that he has very recently heard of it. Confidently, then, we shall say that it was written in the year 356; and it is of this kind:

[39] The letter of Constantius It is our great zeal and care that there should be knowledge of the best; for I judged that this kind of diligence and application ought to be imparted equally to all mortals, that thinking such things of the godhead they may pass their life with hope, without controversies and dissensions about the true and the just. Since therefore we deign to pursue you too with this care, sharing with you the same as with the Romans, we order you to retain one dogma with them in the churches. For this reason send away Bishop Frumentius as soon as possible into Egypt, to the most venerable George, and the other bishops throughout Egypt, who have the supreme authority in creating and judging bishops. You know and remember (unless you pretend ignorance of what is publicly established) that Frumentius was adopted into this order of life by Athanasius, a man guilty of all evils; who, since of all the crimes justly laid against him he could clear himself of absolutely nothing, at once fell from his see, and as in life so in all places wandering, ever changes soil for soil, as though by changing his seat he could escape his crimes.

[40] are recited. If then Frumentius obeys of his own accord, and renders account of the whole sedition, it is certain among all that he dissents in nothing from the ecclesiastical laws and the faith which now holds, and that, judgement being received and account of his life rendered, he must be established bishop by those in whose hands is the authority and censure of these matters, if only he himself wishes to be seen as truly and rightly a bishop. But if he hunts for delays and flees judgement, it is an altogether evident proof that, led on by the words of the most wicked Athanasius, he is acting impiously against God; since he proceeds in the same way in the crimes of which that man has been convicted; and there is danger lest, having travelled through Auxumis, he corrupt your people by wicked and impious discourses, and not only confound and disturb the churches and speak blasphemies against the supreme godhead, but also bring devastation and destruction on the several nations. For I am certain that, when he has learned something, a huge public benefit being obtained from familiarity with the venerable George and the others strong in doctrine, he will return to his see, as being now exactly instructed in ecclesiastical disciplines. God preserve you, dearest brothers.

[41] [From this it is shown that St. Frumentius in the year 356 had by no means been ordained a long time.] Constantius, in this letter to the tyrants of Axum, orders them, says Valois, to send Frumentius, whom Athanasius had ordained bishop at Auxumis, to Alexandria to George, bishop of that city, that he may receive from him the doctrine of the true faith. From which it appears, he goes on, that Frumentius had at that time (in the year 356) been recently ordained by Athanasius Valois on Socrates, book 1, chapter 19.. But this is most clearly made out from these words of Constantius: There is danger lest Frumentius, having travelled through Auxumis, corrupt your people by wicked and impious discourses, and not only confound and disturb the churches and speak blasphemies against the supreme godhead, but also bring devastation and destruction on the several nations. For how could Constantius, in the year 356, write these things to the Axumites, if from about the year 327, as Pagi and others will have it Pagi at the year 327, numbers 15 and 16., St. Frumentius had been carrying on the episcopate at Axum? It would have been ridiculous after almost thirty years to signify such dangers; nor could either the Axumite kings or Constantius hope that Frumentius, now grown old, would depart from his former doctrine. For this reason we have said that St. Frumentius, now ordained bishop, returned to the Axumites in the year 352, and this we have shown both from the deeds of St. Athanasius and above all from the history of the Ethiopians.

§ VI. Constantius, St. Athanasius and Rufinus write of one Frumentius, the same apostle of Abyssinia, not of India or Arabia. His cult is discussed.

St. Athanasius, Constantius and Rufinus write of the same Frumentius, That Frumentius, then, of whom Constantius and St. Athanasius write, and whom the latter established as bishop of the Axumites or Ethiopian Indians, is certainly the same as him whom Rufinus records, and who, ordained bishop by the same Athanasius, was destined for India. This Rufinus indeed understood to be Brahminical, but that is his manifest error. For no other writer, except Rufinus and the contemporary authors Socrates, Sozomen and Theodoret, who copied his words almost to the letter, has committed to writing that any bishop Frumentius was ever sent to eastern India or lived in it. But that Frumentius, brother of Aedesius, who had come with Meropius to Ethiopia, was sent back to it, made bishop, by St. Athanasius, all the books of the Ethiopians faithfully claim.

[43] as against Baronius This Baronius did not know, who certainly grasped well the mind of Rufinus, and did not doubt that he was discoursing of Brahminical India. But Baronius trusted Rufinus too much, and so he writes in the Roman Martyrology, at this day the 27th of October, that St. Frumentius preached the gospel in India, in these words: Among the Indians, of St. Frumentius, bishop, who, there at first a captive, then ordained bishop by St. Athanasius, spread the gospel in that province. In his notes on this place he rightly teaches that so hand down Rufinus, Theodoret, Socrates and Sozomen, and from these Cassiodorus and others. But since Baronius had given faith to Rufinus in all things, he could not deny it to St. Athanasius and the letter of Constantius, which is recited by him. For this reason he soon adds in the said notes: There lived in the same times another Frumentius, bishop of Auxumis in Egypt (read Ethiopia), ordained by St. Athanasius, famous for his confession; for he suffered much from the Arians for defending the catholic faith: against whom a letter of the tyrant was given, which exists in Athanasius, in the Apology to Constantius, column 330. Baronius therefore preferred to recognize two Frumentii, bishops, ordained by the same Athanasius, rather than to accuse Rufinus of error in this place.

[44] and Thomas Wright is shown; That the reconciliation of the writers was discovered by the catholic missionaries, Ludolf hands down Hist. æth. book III, chapter 2.; nor thereafter have two Frumentii been proposed by any historian, except by the distinguished Thomas Wright, who put into print on the occasion of the eastern war, eleven years ago, a little work written in his youth or adolescence, full of varied and most pleasant erudition, without, called to other studies, being able to correct anything Thomas Wright, Early christianity in Arabia, in the preface, London 1855.. In this book, then, he writes that he reads in Pagi's Critica that a certain Frumentius, bishop at Auxumis, in the year 356, because he was an Arian, was despoiled of his episcopate by the successor of Athanasius Wright at the place cited, page 31.. But this is nowhere read in Pagi's Critica, and manifestly contains a double error. For first St. Athanasius had by no means died in the year 356, who prolonged his life to the year 373; then it is far from being true that St. Frumentius was driven from his see by Athanasius on account of the Arian heresy, since Constantius, an Arian emperor, for this very reason, that he was a catholic, did not cease to stir up a most grave persecution against him.

[45] and at the same time that St. Frumentius was by no means the apostle of Arabia. The same English writer also tries to show that St. Frumentius was the apostle of Arabia Felix, not of Abyssinia. In which matter, because he is a recent and learned author, it seems that his arguments should be answered briefly. And they are these Ibid. page 29 and following.: first, Nicephorus Callistus writes that St. Frumentius was the apostle of Arabian India or Homeritis. But in truth Nicephorus compiled his history only in the 14th century, and that unskilfully, and he deserved to be called by Ludolf a historian of slight faith and judgement [Ludolf, Hist. book III, chapter 2; compare volume X of October, page 741, annotation l.]. In the second place, Frumentius was the apostle of India, says Thomas Wright; and Arabia, equally with Ethiopia, was called India, and perhaps even more often. These things are very true, but nothing is made out from them, since the India of the ancients was threefold, as we have shown, namely Ethiopian, Arabian and Brahminical. And indeed Rufinus manifestly believed St. Frumentius to have been bishop of Brahminical alone, nor did he anywhere call Ethiopia India Above number 5 and following.. Third

place, Thomas Wright believed that he had read in the excerpts of Socrates in Pagi that St. Frumentius was the apostle of the India which is neighbouring to Ethiopia; but the same, he says, is said of Bartholomew, who we know preached the faith in Arabia Felix. In the same place, therefore, Frumentius also preached. But these things were by no means said by Socrates, who in the whole of chapter XX of book 1, where he narrates all he had learned of St. Frumentius, mentions Ethiopia only in the following period: When the apostles, he says, about to set out to the nations for the sake of preaching, divided them by lot among themselves, Thomas received the apostolate of the Parthians, Matthew Ethiopia; and Bartholomew was allotted the India neighbouring to it. Which by no means serves the English writer. In these things, then, the man otherwise most learned greatly erred, but he himself noticed in the year 1855 such youthful carelessness and σφαλματα, seeing that he wished to revise his little work, had he not been hindered.

[46] His cult, from the metrical synaxary of the Ethiopians, All these things being shaken out, which we greatly regret are certainly too few for worthily illustrating the life of St. Frumentius, it remains for us to discuss his cult among the Ethiopians, Greeks and Latins. Further the cult of St. Frumentius, who is called by the Ethiopians Feremenatos and Salama or Peacemaker In Ludolf, Commentary, page 435; compare his Lexicon, column 144., is very ancient among them and without doubt begun not long after his death. He is celebrated, says Ludolf, among the metropolitans of Ethiopia in the Ethiopic liturgy Annexed to the Ethiopic edition of the New Testament, pages 160 and 165.; and also by our poet, or metrical synaxarist, as the first who carried a torch before the gospel, in this poem, which the same Ludolf turned from Ethiopic into Latin:

I say greeting to him with a voice of gladness,

Magnifying and extolling him,

Namely Salama, gate of mercy and clemency,

Who made the splendour of the light of Christ to rise in Ethiopia,

Though darkness and shadows had been in it before.

So far the aforesaid synaxarist, at the 3rd day of the Ethiopian month Hamle (27th of June); and again at the 3rd day of the month Tachsas (29th of November) he greets St. Frumentius, or Salama, in these words:

Greeting to you, Salama, who were bidden

To manifest the doctrine hidden before;

Because it arose in it (Ethiopia) like the morning star,

Through your sweet light and your pleasant beauty,

To this day Ethiopia rejoices and exults In Ludolf, Hist. æth. book III, chapter 2..

By the same poet St. Frumentius is celebrated also at the 26th day of the month Hamle (20th of July), the 23rd of the month Maskaram (20th of September) and again the 18th of the month Tachsas (14th of December) Compare Ludolf, Commentary, page 389 and following..

[47] from the Greek Menaea, A summary of his Life, or deeds, is furnished by the Menology of the Ethiopians, called Senkessar; from which we shall presently borrow it. From the Apology of St. Athanasius also and the letter of the emperor Constantius the editors of the Greek Menaea composed a fuller synaxary, which we now recite here turned into Latin: In the days of Constantine the great king, a certain philosopher of Tyre went away to travel through furthest India, taking with him two young brothers. And when on the return they had put in at a certain harbour for the sake of watering, they fell in with barbarians, who of all who were in the ship threw some into the sea, killed others, among whom the man of Tyre too was added to the slaughter. And the rest, among whom were those two young men, bound with chains, were brought to the king of India. The one was called Aedesius, the other Frumentius. Further the king, when he perceived that the young men were skilful in everything he had in mind, made them procurators of the royal treasury. And afterwards when the king died his son succeeded him, with whom they gained greater honours, and came to the point that they confidently ordered the merchants who had put in there to assemble according to the custom of the Romans to celebrate the divine liturgy. Not long after, they go to the king and ask of him, for the sake of a reward, to return to their homeland. Having obtained their wish, they set out for the Roman empire. Aedesius indeed, seeking his parents and his own, came to land at Tyre. But Frumentius, through zeal for divine things, put aside the sight of his parents. Carried therefore to Alexandria, he showed to the president of this church how greatly the Indians desired to receive the light of faith. To whom at once blessed Athanasius (for he himself at that time was ruling the church of Alexandria): But who is more fit than you to dispel the darkness of error from their eyes, and to show the brightness of the divine word? And having said this, he adorned him with episcopal grace and sent him to cultivate this region.

[47] which pursue the deeds of St. Frumentius at greater length, Frumentius, then, leaving homeland and parents, and despising the great sea for the sake of the faith, attacked the uncultivated nation. And he cultivated it diligently, heavenly grace working with him. For using the doctrine and prodigies of the apostles, he not only healed the possessed and cured any other disease, but also his adversaries, and those who did not receive his words quickly enough, he either gave over to the demon, according to the word of the Apostle: 1 Cor. V, 5. To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved, or made to waste away with leanness, or finally deprived of the light of the eyes. And they indeed straightway, rolling at his knees, their health being recovered, believed in Christ. And the miracles that happened daily declare to his praise and that of the Christian religion how the whole people hastened in a crowd to the worship of God. And so in a short time, alone with God, he baptized the whole of India, ordained priests, built very many churches, overthrew the shrines of idols, crushed the images themselves, and finally initiated the whole nation into the knowledge of God. And the king and all the others wondered: Not a few years, they said, you lived with us, nor did you ever show such prodigies: whence then now, O most beloved, has such power been conferred on you, and so suddenly? This gift is not mine, he answered, O friends most dear to Christ, but of the priesthood and of Christ himself. For when I had recognized your good mind, leaving, according to the Lord's word, homeland and family, I set out for Alexandria: informing there the supreme prelate of the church, the great Athanasius, of what concerned you, and receiving from him the sacred anointing, enriched with apostolic grace, by his prayers to God, I was sent to you. And since you have faithfully received me, the grace of the priesthood, or rather of God himself, has worked through me what you see before you. That holy man, after he had lived piously with them for a long time, and had taught them the precepts of the Lord, and had wonderfully formed them to divine worship, according to the strength of each, passed to the Lord at about a hundred years old. And his precious relics bring health in various diseases to all who approach them, to the praise of our true God.

[49] and from the Latin Fasti. From the Menaea and the other authors whom we praised above the eulogy of St. Frumentius was excerpted by Pietro de' Natali in book nine, chapter CXIII, and Sirleto, in the Menology of the Greeks, at the same day the 30th of November, and from there it passed to the more recent martyrologists See above number 41.. That the Slavs also sought the memory and the day of announcement from the Greeks is demonstrated by Ivan Martinov in the Greco-Slavic year. Now, however, we shall append to this commentary what, from the Ethiopic Senkessar at the 26th day of the month Hamle, or the 20th of July Sapeto, Viaggio, page 395 and following., we have promised to edit, a few things being noted at the end as usual. Nor could there by any means be omitted the passage which, from the old and among the Ethiopians most praised Chronicle of Axum, Tellez published in Portuguese in his History, page 73 and following, and which we after him shall make Latin. Let these be for Acts and documents, of which, besides the places brought forward in the Commentary, absolutely none survive about St. Frumentius.

EULOGY OF ST. FRUMENTIUS FROM THE ETHIOPIC SYNAXARY.

Frumentius, confessor and bishop, apostle of the Abyssinians. (S.)

On this day died Abba ^a Salama ^b, revealer of light, bishop of Ethiopia, whose history is this. A certain man from Greece, called Meropius, a prince of wise men ^c, came for the sake of visiting Ethiopia; with whom were two young men of his kin; one's name was Fere-Menatos ^d, the other's Adesios (or as others say, Sidrakos) ^e; and he came with a ship to the shore of the sea of Agazi ^f, and having inspected all the beautiful things that pleased him, when he wished to return to his own region, enemies rushed upon him, and killed him with all his companions, except the two young lads, who were assigned to slavery by the inhabitants, and taught to slaughter. Then they were given to the king of Axum, who was then Ela-Aëda ^g, and he made Adesios steward, and Fere-Menatos keeper of the archives and scribe of the kingdom of Axum. After some time had passed the king died and left a little son ^h with his mother, and the princes Azguagua ⁱ reigned. Adesios and Fere-Menatos brought up the little boy, and gradually taught him the faith of Christ the blessed. They also built for him a tent ^k, in which they gathered the young lads, teaching them the psalter and singing. When the little boy had now grown up, they asked him to release them to their own region. Adesios went to his homeland Tyre, to see his parents again, and Fere-Menatos to Alexandria, and to the patriarch Athanasius, whom he found recently elected ^l. To him he narrated all that had happened to him, and as regards the faith, how the people of that land of Agazi, although they had neither bishops nor presbyters, had believed in Christ the blessed. After this Abba Athanasius consecrated Fere-Menatos bishop of the land of Agazi, which is Ethiopia, and sent him off with pomp to that land. Arriving then, when Abreha and Atzbeha were already reigning ^m, he preached Christ the blessed in peace in all parts of the empire. For this reason he was called Abba Salama ⁿ, and after he had given the faith to the Ethiopians, he died in peace.

ANNOTATIONS.

EULOGY OF ST. FRUMENTIUS FROM THE CHRONICLE OF AXUM, WRITTEN IN PORTUGUESE BY TELLEZ.

Frumentius, confessor and bishop, apostle of the Abyssinians. (S.)

After many years had passed there came a certain merchant from Tyre with two boys, of whom one was called Fremonatos, the other Sidracos ^a. And when the merchant had fallen ill ^b and died on the sea-shore in the land of Ethiopia, the young men were led to the king, who was much refreshed by their presence, and he ordered them to live and spend their time with his sons ^c. And they greatly wondered at the manner of life of the nation of the Ethiopians, and asked them how they had believed in the faith of Christ ^d. For they saw them making prayers and adoring the most holy Trinity, and the women ^e fortifying themselves with the sign of the Cross. For this reason they gave many thanks to God that he had granted such great mercy to this nation, that it believed without sermons, and received the faith without an apostle ^f. As long as that king lived, they dwelt in his house; who, death coming, released them and allowed them to go wherever they wished. Sidracos then returned to his homeland Tyre, but Fremonatos went to the patriarch of Alexandria, desiring that a remedy be applied for working the salvation of the Ethiopians ^g. For this reason he narrated to him all that he had seen, and how they believed from the time of the apostles ^h. At which things the patriarch rejoiced greatly, and gave thanks to God for the great mercy he had carried out towards them, manifesting to them his holy faith. Then he said to Fremonatos: You will be their pastor, since God has chosen and exalted you; and consecrating him priest he established him bishop of Ethiopia. Who, returning to it, baptized its inhabitants, and created many priests and deacons to help him; and all made much of him and venerated him. And because he had brought peace to them, they called him Abba Salama (that is, father of peace, or peaceful) ⁱ. He came to Ethiopia in the reign of Abra and Azba, brothers ^k, who received the holy doctrine as the dry land the rain of heaven In Tellez, Historia geral, page 73 and following..

ANNOTATIONS.