E. Littmann in Axum 1906: A FocalPoint and Start for the

Archaeological-Historical Researchon an Ancient Capital

Helmut Ziegert

2008

This article was pre-released online in 2008 and was supposed to bepublished in:

Steffen Wenig and Wolbert Smidt (ed.): In kaiserlichem Auftrag: DieDeutsche Aksum-Expedition 1906 unter Enno Littmann. Band 2: Diewissenschaftlichen Unternehmungen der DAE in Aksum und Umgebung(Forschungen zur Archäologie Außereuropäischer Kulturen Band 3.2).

Aichwald 2009Since it was not included in that publication in the end (for the reasons see

7 Post scriptum, p. 11), it is now an individual online publication.

http: // www1. uni-hamburg. de/ helmut-ziegert/ → PublicationsLast modified: July 14th, 2009.

1 PrefaceE. Littmann’s mission to Axum 1906 was the first survey-documentation of visible an-tiquities, as remains reflecting the importance of this city in history 100 years later aconference remembering this occurrence was held in Mekele.For the main paper on the Littmann-mission R. Fattovich was invited by the organizerS.Uhlig; unfortunately he could not participate, and the colleague St.Wenig presented a

1

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

shorter paper on this event. As the editor of the conference-papers St.Wenig asked theauthor to publish a paper on “E. Littmann and the following”; the author could not par-ticipate in the conference because of lectures in the Hamburg-University and activitiesfor the fieldwork in Axum, but the paper is presented here.

2 IntroductionAxum: a focus of research for political, social and religion history; of worldwide generaland individual interests; of importance for general knowledge and a problem for differentsubjects.

2.1 The topicsThe topics of this paper are to explain the background of the historical research in andabout Axum for better understanding and to increase the interest;to explain the background of the different missions in orientation and methodology;to attract new missions for problemorientated archaeological-historical investigations inAxum.

2.2 The limitsThe following paper shall present a general overview and description of the previ-ous orientation and standard of research, not a presentation of results; the latter willbe presented in a paper by M.Wendowski and H .Ziegert [http://www1.uni-hamburg.de/helmut-ziegert, forthcoming].

2.3 The research historyThe research history shall not be an isolated description but shall explain the develop-ment of the activities in investigations. In Axum we can identify three phases:

1. The E. Littmann-mission 1906, causing the international interest in Axum;

2. many missions of traditional archaeology with “site-excavations”, directed mainlyby political interests of colonial states;

3. the problemorientated archaeological-historical investigations of the “Hamburg Ar-chaeological Mission to Axum” (HAMA) 1999–2008, orientated by the historicalinterests in specific political and religious problems.

2

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

2.4 The source material and its criticismSources of our knowledge are – beside the own results – the publications on the work ofthe foreign missions. These publications have a background influenced by the politicalinterests, the orientation of the missions, the methodological standard, and the accuracyof the work.We must know about these interests for a better understanding of the publications tocheck the real facts, and to know how we can use these mostly reduced results forhistorical reconstructions .

3 The “German Aksum Expedition” (DAE) 1906To remember the “German Aksum Expedition” after 100 years there was held a confer-ence in Mekele.During an official visit of Emperor Menelik II. in Berlin he asked Emperor Wilhelm II.to send an archaeological Mission to Aksum, according to the historical traditions theorigin and base of the Ethiopian state.This fact is based on mentioning in the Bible and in detailed oral traditions documentedin the “Archive” of the monks in Axum till today.The example for such a mission were the German archaeological missions and excava-tions in the Near East.The Aksum Mission was carried out from January 13 to April 6, 1906.

3.1 The membersThe members of the German Mission were Enno Littman, linguist and as the Head;Daniel Krencker, the architect; Theodor von Lüpke, architect and photographer; andErich Kaschke as a medical doctor. As we know now no archaeologist was integrated inthe team.

3.2 The inscriptionsAccording to the qualification of the team the documentation and translation of theinscriptions by E. Littmann was one of the main topics and results [published 1913] anda source for the history of Aksum till today.

3.3 Surveys and excavationsBefore the German Mission 1906 there were only some photos from the Italian colonialera, no investigations with excavations. The German Mission brought first informationsalong the route from Asmara to Aksum: Debaroa, Adi Ugri, Adi Quala, Mareb, DaroTacle, Mai Camaul, Adua; and on the way back along the route from Aksum to Massaua:

3

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

Adua, Jeha, Debra Damo, Senafe’, Matara, Kaskase, Adi Caie’, Tokonda, Cohaito,Asmara, (Massaua).The topics for Aksum were the description, mapping, drawings and photos of the visi-

ble historical monuments; and cleaning (not archaeological evcavations) of some buildingremains as e. g. the grave-monuments for the King Kaleb and his son Gebre Masqal onthe hill Terer, without identifying the king’s graves themselves.

3.4 The standard of research and resultsThe interests of the German mission to Axum focused on inscriptions and the visibleobjects, ruins or structures as churches, houses, palaces, tombs, columns and stele, thewater basin – the interests of a linguist and of architects. There was no regard to “as-semblages” (associations, closed finds), known in their basic importance for archaeologysince O.Montelius 1885 and 1903; the context of findings was ignored which results in aloss of information and impossibility of reconstruction. Only the plans of buildings andruins are of a good standard, but not sources for complex questions: even “outstanding”finds as a king’s tomb without context are isolated; we can imagine by remembering thevalue of single finds after one year.The result of the Littman-mission to Axum can be summarized: A collection of in-

scriptions and their translations; a map of the surrounding of Axum; the city-plan withthe Church-Center and some sites, including the first Ezana three language stone, thestele-fields and six palace-ruins in the ‘Old City’, the upper parts visible on the slopedeposits; and by the publication 1913: the start of an international interest and laterscientific missions.

4 Archaeological investigations at Axum since 1906Following the E. Littman-Mission (DAE 1906) many missions contributed “archaeologi-cal excavations” in Axum and published their documentations.

4.1 The missions (selection)1. 1958 Henri de Contenson in the Axum Church-Center before the building of the

Cathedral

2. 1972 Francis Anfray at Axum-“Dungur”

3. 1972–74 Neville Chittick [published by S.C.Munro-Hay 1989] at different sites

4. 1974, 1993–97 David Phillipson (BIEA) at different sites

5. 1993–2007 Rodolfo Fattovich and Kathryn A. Bard at the plateau of Beta Giyorgis

4

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

4.2 The methodological backgroundAccording to the development of “Archaeology” to an object-orientated subject closelyrelated to mediterranean “History of Arts” all missions to foreign countries in the NearEast and the same to Axum concentrated on objects (cf. D.Krencker), listing structuresfrom buildings and assemblages from tombs, chamber tombs and cemeteries, but ignoringthe context. Even recent excavations show a concentration on “sites” and ruins.

4.3 The resultsAccording to the methodological background the results and contribution to the historyof Axum of the Foreign Archaeological Missions were limited to plans and descriptionsof structures and object-collections. This gives light to the importance of Axum in thehistory, but no historical knowledge.

5 The “Hamburg Archaeological Mission to Axum”(HAMA) since 1999

The interest of the author in Ethiopian history started with lectures in “Äthiopistik”by E.Hammerschmidt, studied as a minor subject, and continued for information besideother research activities in North Africa.A start for archaeological fieldwork in Ethiopia were two visits in Addis Ababa 1971

for the “International Conference on African Archaeology” with Excursions to Omo-River and Awash-River, and in Addis Ababa 1994 in the University, a workshop on“Ethio-German and Ethio-European Cultural and Scientific Contact and Cooperation:History and Perspectives”, with a paper “The Joint Ethio-German Aksum-Expeditionof 1906”, and with a visit in Axum as a first survey .

5.1 The topicsThe main interest, in Ethiopian history in Ethiopia and abroad concentrate on the be-ginning of the Ethiopian State and of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, both questionsconcentrated in Axum. Therefore we choose these questions as our main topics and thehistoric time of the 3rd and 4th century as the base for our archaeological-historical re-search in the “Hamburg Archaeological Mission to Axum” (HAMA) [Marlies Wendowskiand Helmut Ziegert] from 1999 to 2008.Specific aims of HAMA-research are:

• Axum as a ‘central place’ in its surrounding;

• man and environment;

5

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

• chronological sequence BC and AD;

• beginning of the capital Axum in the 10th century BC;

• the ‘Ark of the Covenant’ and the Jewish religion in Ethiopia;

• the coming of Christianity;

• adaptation of belief and behaviour – church and culture to previous belief;

• settlement continuity, cultural changes and immigration.

5.2 The methodological background of HAMADifferences in the methological background lead to misunderstandings:object-orientation versus problem-orientation; antiquities sampling and description inthe traditional “Archaeology” versus problemorientated historical research, archaeologyas a historical discipline. It starts with the differences in the topics – ancient objectsand “arts ” versus historical knowledge.In Axum especially we can see the difference, cf. the dominance in previous missions

using single finds as e. g. pottery and its ‘seriation’ according to Fl. Petrie’s ‘sequencedates’ and “periodization” to “Axumite I–IV” [R.Wilding, 1989] versus “associations”in the findings, with related methods for dating.These differences started in the kind of fieldwork:

Claim-limited cleaning – so called “excavation” – of ancient objects as building-remains,gravegoods, etc.versus topic-directed fieldwork to solve open questions in the steps:

• general topic/classification for detailed questions/development of

• models of previous behaviour and events/selection of useful sources/

• topic-directed “excavations”/possible enlargements/documentation

• with description (protocol), photo, drawing, sampling, analysis/

• identification by actual comparison/check by experiments/historical

• conclusions/check of agreement with models and topics/if

• disagreement: start again.

Unfortunately the object-orientated and claim-limited “excavation” destroys the find-ings, and results in the reduction of information for later problemorientated investiga-tion.

6

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

The methodological development of archaeology during the last 50 years is charac-terized by the integration of methods of natural sciences, cf. microstratigraphy; 14C-measurement and -dating (but for volcanic areas as Axum we must consider fossil 12C-contamination, the samples are measured 375–585 years too old [H. Z., publicaton forth-coming]; and the integration of the term ‘association’ (‘closed find’, ‘Geschlossener Fund’after Oscar Montelius, 1885 and 1903) for assemblages and the relative dating methodof ‘combination statistics’ instead of ‘typology’ and ‘seriation’.Archaeology must be problem-orientated as every scientific discipline, not limited to

object-collecting and typological descriptions. We can find more artifacts, more tombs, adozen of columns or one more building: but possibly without an increase of the historicalknowledge.Archaeology as history: focusing on historical questions, archaeological fieldwork as

a tool to solve historical problems, for a better cooperation with historians and inter-disciplinary with other subjects, in time-saving investigations: measured not by squaremeters of excavation but by the new knowledge on history.

5.3 The historical resultsThe contribution of HAMA to the knowledge of history of Axum can be summarized asfollows:

• The development of methods and corrections, and reasons for a reliable chronology;

• contributions to the environmental history, especially the part of ’slope deposits’for agriculture and conservation of cultural remains;

• the check and use of oral traditions for historical investigations;

• the identification of the palace of the ‘Queen of Sheba’ and of her son Menelik at‘Dungur’ from the 10th century BC;

• the history of the ‘Ark of the Covenant’ from Jerusalem to Axum;

• the settlement history of pre-Christian palaces outside the city with the kingsgraves – the “Stele Field” – in the centre;

• copper-ore mining and metal-production in connection with pre-Christian palaces;

• the palaces of king Ezana and his father, and the grave of the father at ‘BerikAudi’ North of the Terer Hill, his move to the ‘Church Centre’, the baptism on hisway in a baptisterium on Terer hill, the ritual burial of his former palace at ‘BerikAudi’;

7

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

• the palace of the first Christian king Ezana in the Church Centre [acc. H. de Con-tenson, 1963], his building of the first Christian Church on the place of the firsttemple for the ‘Ark of the Covenant’, and the building of the second temple forthe ‘Ark’, entrance from West, with a room from East for the Church Treasury;

• the explanation of the history of the Church Centre with a lake in the rainy season,the correct oral traditions, the crash of the dam of the water basin “Mai Shum”and the cover of the Church Centre with 4m mud;

• new buildings in the Church Centre, and move of the third king after Ezana to hisnew palace high on the slope of Beta Giyorgis-hill in the “Old City”;

• sequence of 13 palaces of the Christian time in the “Old City”, in a line down to‘Taka Maryam’;

• the last Christian palace in ‘Dungur’ again 600AD [F.Anfray, 2008] on the wallsof the palace of king Menelik;

• orientation of all ritual buildings to the star “Sirus”:– 10th century BC: E 18℃S (altar for the ‘Ark of the Covenant’ at ‘Dungur’

and the palace of king Menelik around);– c. 300AD: E 16℃S (first church ‘St. Maryam; 2nd temple for the ‘Ark’; bap-

tisterium on Terer-hill; grave of Ezana’s father at ‘Berik Audi’);

• the tradition of the Osiris-cult from ancient Egypt beside the Jewish religion, inAxum till c. 640AD in Christian time:– Ritual killing of calf and cow with pottery in ‘Dungur’;– the sign of the “Plejades” on the grave-pit of Ezana’s father at ‘Berik Audi’

and on both sides of the top of the grave-stela no. 3 in the kings-cemetery“Stele-Field”.

6 Perspectives of future archaeological-historicalinvestigations at Axum

For the future priority could be given for higher information on specific questions, butnot as destruction of the findings by “cleaning” in traditional “excavations” but only asproblemorientated archaeological-historical investigations: we only can find what we areasking for.

8

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

6.1 The topicsSome topics for the future could be:

• More information on the palace of the ‘Queen of Sheba’ at ‘Dungur’ by space-excavation in the centre;

• more information on the ‘Osiris-cult’ till Christian time by investigations of moreof the six offerings in the upper palace of ‘Dungur’;

• more detailed information on the Christian time by complete excavations of e. g.3 palaces in the “Old City” of Axum;

• information on life and death of Christian kings by identification and investigationof the graves the kings Kaleb and Gebre Masqual.

Beside the important place for the Axumite history, ‘Berik Audi’, the first palace ofking Ezana and the grave of his father, could be presented as an open air museum.The excavations were carried out 2000–02 by Marlies Wendowski and the author; thedirection and plan to leave this place open was stopped after quarrels in the Ministryby the activities of Yonas Beyene as a member of a “Committee”.

6.2 The “Archive” in Axum as a source for historicalinvestigations

The numerous documents in the “Archives” of the Monastery in Axum – oral traditionswritten down, documents and texts – should be used for historical research, as onepaper [2006] on the earliest history of the ‘Ark of the Covenent’ in Axum shows withnew information on keeping this holy shrine in a tent before building a temple. Historicalquestions could be listed – as the author did – and presented for the priests and monksto search in the scriptures.

7 ConclusionsFrom the Enno Littmann documentation of Axumite antiquities 1906 and many fol-lowers with “site-excavations” at different spots in and around Axum-City till recentarchaeological-historical investigations: we must conside

• the development of archaeology as a scientific discipline;

• the development of and critics on special methods;

• the different orientation of archaeology from objectorientated description and ty-pology of finds, to problemorientated archaeological-historical investigations in-cluding the findings in the fieldwork for opening up the remains as sources.

9

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

The aim of our work is historical knowledge, and modern archaeology can contribute awide range of methods in the investigation to solve historical questions for the History ofAxum as a historical sample for Jewish religion and independent state far away from thecentre around Jerusalem, and as a sample of development of an early Christian Churchindependent from Rome.

References1. Anfray, F.: “L’archeologie d’Axoum en 1972”, in: Paideuma 18, 1972, 60–78

2. Contenson, H. de: “Les fouilles à Axoum en 1958”, in: Annales d’Ethiopie 5, 1963,1–16

3. Fattovich, R. et al.: The Archaeological Area of Aksum: a Preliminary Assessment,Napoli 2000

4. Littmann, E.: Vorbericht der deutschen Aksumexpedition, Berlin 1906

5. Littmann, E. (ed.): Deutsche Aksum-Expedition, 4 vols., Berlin 1913

6. Munro-Hay, S. C.: Excavations at Aksum, London 1989(publ. of the documentation of N.Chittick 1972–74)

7. Phillipson, D.W.: Archaeology at Aksum, Ethiopia, 1993–7, 2 vols., London 2000

8. Wendowski, M. and Ziegert, H.: “The Queen of Sheba and the History of Axum”,in: http: // www1. uni-hamburg. de/ helmut-ziegert (→ Publications) forthcoming

9. Wilding, R.: “The Pottery”, cf. S. C.Munro-Hay, London 1989, 235–316

10. Ziegert, H.: “Objektorientierte und problemorientierte Forschungsansatze in derArchäologie”, in: Hephaistos 2, 1980, 53–65

11. Ziegert, H.: “Der Aktualistische Vergleich als Grundlage archäologisch-historischerInterpretation”, in: Ethnographisch-Archäologische Zeitschrift 35, 1995, 177–198

12. Ziegert, H. : “The Joint Ethio-German Aksum-Expedition of 1906” (Paper forthe workshop on Ethio-German and Ethio-European Cultural and Scientific Con-tact and Cooperation: History and Perspectives at Addis Abeba University, Jan-uary 14, 1994)

13. Ziegert, H.: Archaeology as History, Hamburg 2002 (Books on Demand)

14. Ziegert, H.: “Hangfußablagerungen. Ein geomorphologisches Phänomen in derarchäologischen Forschung”, in: Hephaistos 23, 2006, 7–40

10

E. Littmann in Axum 1906 Helmut Ziegert

Post scriptumFor the “Conference 100 years E. Littmann (DAE, 2006)” in Mekele I myself did notget an original invitation, probably because of my lecture 1994 in Addis Ababa on thearchaeological background and results of that mission, consisting of one linguist, twoarchitects, and one doctor.S.Uhlig as the organizer of that conference invited R. Fattovich for the main paper on

the “DAE”, but he suddenly canceled his paper. For him the colleague St.Wenig helpedout, but did not want to publish his paper in the Conference-Papers. In March 2008he visited me during fieldwork in Axum-‘Dungur’ and asked me to write this paper asa contribution to the Conference-Volume. I agreed, handed over in August 2008, andpublication projected for end of April 2009.At the same time I published this paper – as all my publications with new ideas and

results – in my Internet-address, in order to be independent of incompetent or in polit-ical dependence – e. g. of the “German Archaeological Institute (DAI)” – being editors.As the author I am myself responsible for my publications and must reject any falsifica-tion or “adjustment to the mainstream” by anonymous editors.In June 2009 the editor St.Wenig informed me that the series-editor of the “KAAK”

of DAI in Bonn, B.Vogt, rejected my paper in principle; later B.Vogt wrote:

Grund für diese Entscheidung sind gravierende sachliche, methodische undsprachliche Mängel Ihres Manuskripts, deren Behebung über den Rahmenüblicher redaktioneller Eingriffe weit hinausgehen würde. Darüberhinaus pu-blizieren wir grundsätzlich keine Beiträge, die bereits an anderer Stelle ver-öffentlicht wurden. [25. Juni 2009]

Reason for this decision are serious objective, methodical and linguisticdeficiencies of your manuscript, whose correction would by far exceed thecommon editorial interventions. Furthermore, we generally do not publishpapers that have already been published elsewhere. [June 25th, 2009]

I recommend the critical reader to compare the personal publications of the DAI-editorand to check by which results he could be qualified for such a “general” judgement.

11