Talk:Menelik II

There is an editorial dispute about the 1886 Aanolee massacre. If you disagree with the sourcing and text in this version, which seems to be identical to the version prior to the edit war, then please explain what is wrong with the sources. Two alternative sources that have been suggested include zahabesha and Borkena (federal government news media). If these sources are serious enough, then WP:NPOV might be justified. Boud (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

The references are not the easiest to use.

• Abbas Gnamo's African Social Studies Series book is paywalled, although there's a quote in the Mohammad A. 'opride.com' article.
• Mulualem Daba Tola's article is published by a predatory publisher and presents views for and against the claim of cutting off men's right hands and women's right breasts.
• Rosa Abadir's zahabesha.com article doesn't seem to say anything about the hands and breasts being cut off (except for the comments section).
• Getaneh Yismaw's borkena.com article argues (using the spelling "Anole"), stating the names of several people making apparently public comments on the issue, that cutting off women's breasts was a hoax created by the TPLF to stoke hatred.

WP:NPOV-ing the current text (not deleting it) may be justified, but others should look through the sources, and maybe find better sources. The Abbas Gnamo book seems the most serious, as the only academic source. Boud (talk) 02:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Abbas Gnamo says that his book was "based on extensive research undertaken over two decades" and that "the review process and the preparation of the final text took more one and half years." He claims that he "examined all the available sources in Ethiopian languages, foreign languages (including French and Italian) published and unpublished academic sources, theoretical works, and above all, oral data collected over a long period of time in Arsi-Bale regions from Amhara and Oromo informants." Boud (talk) 02:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC) The second part of the interview with Abbas Gnamo includes a discussion of the Aanolee massacre/mass mutilation and the claims of whether it happened or not, stating that the event "is deeply entrenched in the collective memory of the Arsi Oromo and Oromos everywhere. Some of the survivors lived with the mutilated right hands until the 1950s and 60s. One example which captured my imagination was an Oromo elder who lived with a militated right hand among the Jaawwii clan and who always showed his mutilated hand to the public, and explained how he lost his precious hand in defending their dignity and land." A 16-year-old in 1886 would have been 80 in 1950, and 90 in 1960. Boud (talk) 03:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I added one more reference to a paper by Gnamo Abbas.^[1] This is not small stuff; the man obtained his PhD at Sorbonne in Paris! Thank you, Boud for pointing to his interview also. We'll soon have enough materials to write a separate article in addition on the Aanolee massacre; it would be good if somebody could access the corresponding entry in the Encyclopaedia Aethiopica, Institut f. Afrikanistik und Athiopistik, Universitat Hamburg, Germany, 2004. And, I would suggest to Mooproop1: better to face it, so many countries need to face their past. Rastakwere (talk) 15:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

This is a fake massacre made up by tplf so stop putting it here. Zehabesha and Bokerna are much more reputable than the oromo.com websites you've provided. Menelik saved oromo from colonisation and had a wife and was christan. stop spreading lies. just because oromo region talks about these lies doesnt make them real. they haven't provided any "scientific evidence". it is just a lie to divide the country. i've cited many source proving that. stop spreading lies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooproop1 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh yeah and by the way the picture is not falsified. Tigray just stole the land in 1991. Just becaus every single map shows what you don't want it to doesn't make it falsified. It is the map of gondar and welqait was a part of gondar. Deal with it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooproop1 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

This guy just uses pro oromo websites and all this stuff like oromopride.com this isn't reputable. Many oromo doctors have debunked this myth in my sources. Stop changing and go do something else instead of spreading hate. I've seen your other edits. Just anti amhara stuff. Go do something else or go watch ur tigrai media house stop spreading fake news — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooproop1 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mooproop1: Please read WP:AGF. Wikipedians have patience, but not infinite patience. Understanding and following WP:AGF is one of the fundamental requirements for editing Wikipedia content. Boud (talk) 19:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Why not just lock meneliks wikipedia account? these people keep editing and putting bias sources just let it be the way it was before. why do they get to keep switching it and I can't? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mooproop1 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The reason why others are conserving the status quo of the article is that you have not (yet) engaged fully in the discussion and do not seem to have understood the principles and methods of editing Wikipedia, such as signing with ~~~~, using indenting, and WP:AGF and WP:VERIFIABILITY. You should also use the preview button to check the meaning of what you have typed on a talk page before hitting the save button. People make mistakes, but if you make so many mistakes that others have to guess what you're trying to say, then it's difficult to converge on a decision; for example, you wrote meneliks wikipedia account when what you meant was the Menelik II Wikipedia article.

If you read Talk:Menelik II#Aanolee massacre, then you will see the current state of discussion about the sources. You are welcome to participate in the discussion, but you have to focus on the discussion and present your arguments about the sources clearly, in a structured rational way, seeking editorial consensus based on sources and respect for other editors, and making an effort to understand and discuss the sources themselves. You cannot expect others to do all the work in guessing what you are trying to say. Please read the links (typically shown in blue, but this may depend on your browser) that you have been shown by myself and others. Boud (talk) 05:54, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure how relevant this bit on 16th century Ethiopia is to an article about a late 19th century Emperor, but regardless by real problem is that this term is not explained. Gadaa links to an article about a system of government, so it is not clear what is meant by 'Gadaa conquests'. It is like referring to 'democratic conquests' without even saying who the democrats are. LastDodo (talk) 10:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

@LastDodo: It's not relevant to this article, but Oromo nationalists are promoting Gadaa as a idignous form of ‘‘democratic system’’, someone needs to take a good look at Gadaa article for WP:NPOV. Gadaa conquest only means that the Gadaa system divides Oromos in age classes, and Oromos falling into the warrior age classes are supposed to conquer and kill enemies. It's a barbaric system if you ask me. YonasJH (talk) 10:12, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not here to take a position on a contentious issue, but if you understand the meaning of the term and the history, it would be good of you to bring some clarity to that section of the article. Most people outside Ethiopia will have no understanding of what it means at present. LastDodo (talk) 11:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

@LastDodo: Yes maybe it's should be a subsection background in the centralisation section, but i don't see the need for it to go all the way back to the 16th century, it's kind of crazy if you ask me. I'll work on it when i have more time, and some other editor can help. Thank you for pointing it out, i had to read the whole article to find it. It looks out of place in this article. YonasJH (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Ok great, I'll leave it with you. Btw 'CTRL-F' and 'Gadaa' would have found it instantly (assuming you're on a PC) :) LastDodo (talk) 13:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

@Ozywikieditor I don't believe this was a necessary addition to the page. And per Wikipedia rules this is on grounds for removal, as there is also a copy and paste on the Battle of Adwa page. The title says "Ethnic makeup of Menelik's government and forces" but only talks about the different ethnic and regional groups that served in the army of Adwa. Hence, this is not relevant to the page. Per WP:IRRELEVANT and WP:ANOTHER محرر البوق (talk) 23:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

There's a widely-circulated factoid that this guy ate pages of the Bible whenever he fell ill because he believed Bible pages to have special healing abilities if ingested, and that he died as a result of eating the entire book of Kings. This Wikipedia article about him doesn't mention that at all, and no one has discussed the topic here, so I'll just submit that if anyone can verify that factoid- that Menelik II ate Bible pages, and died from eating the entire book of Kings- it should most definitely be added to this article about him. Just a suggestion. 50.249.29.169 (talk) 05:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

A quote attributed to Menelik II regarding territories ceded to Italy in the Treaty of Wuchale has been removed. The quote appears in Man, Know Thyself by Rick Duncan, but the book lacks citations for the quote, and the author is not a recognized authority in Ethiopian historiography. Furthermore, the book does not meet Wikipedia’s reliable source standards for contentious historical claims (per WP:RS and WP:V). Given the historical significance of the statement, it would be expected to appear in multiple contemporaneous sources (e.g., Italian diplomatic records, treaty documents, or Ethiopian chronicles), but no verifiable primary sources have been found. If someone can provide a reliable source with a clear citation of this quote, it may be reintroduced.

Quintessentialpenguin (talk) 19:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Menelik was King of Shoa, therefore wouldn't know or claim lands not bordering Shoa. Eritrea doesn't border Shoa. NoMenelik (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I want to add that Menelik signed the Wuchale Treaty before the Battle at Adwa against the Italians. He had no problems with the Treaty saying that Eritrea is Italian territory but only that he would be Subordinate to Italy when dealing with Foreign governments, ie Abyssinia being a Protectorate of Italy. Also, you may want to read the discussion happening at Eritrea subreddit, and see how there was a Guy named Blatta in Eritrea who wrote a letter to Menelik telling him he is a coward and a traitor for selling Eritrea to the Italians. This quote really was said by Menelik, you can continue to search for a another source but this source is listed, but the actions and the people of his time calling him a coward, traitor for selling Eritrea off , when he didn't have to... really says everything!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eritrea/comments/1rjkftg/what_do_you_guys_think_about_blatta_gebre/ NoMenelik (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. I would like to address the points which you raised:

1. Menelik’s status as King of Shewa: While Menelik was originally King of Shewa (Shoa), he became Emperor of all Ethiopia, which historically included regions far beyond Shewa. It is therefore not accurate to argue that he “wouldn’t know or claim lands not bordering Shoa.” As Emperor, he would have had at least some awareness and nominal authority over peripheral territories, including areas north of the Merab Melash.

2. Wuchale Treaty context: It is true that the treaty was signed before the Battle of Adwa and that the Italian version of the treaty created a protectorate arrangement, with Menelik contesting only the clause about subordination to Italy and not the cession of Ethiopian (Eritrean) territory. This historical context, however, does not validate the Rick Duncan quote, which makes very specific claims about Menelik’s statements regarding Eritrea’s population and territorial ownership. The source itself (Man, Know Thyself) provides no citation for the quote, and there is no verifiable evidence linking Menelik directly to these words.

Furthermore, as I mentioned before, a statement as explicit and legally consequential as this—effectively defining Eritrea’s population and denying Ethiopian authority—would almost certainly have been recorded by Italian officials or other contemporary observers for legal and diplomatic purposes. Such a declaration would have been invaluable in bolstering Italy's claim and demonstrating the legitimacy of Italy’s colonial project to other European powers in the region (i.e., the British and French). The absence of any such documentation therefore raises serious doubts about the quote’s authenticity. According to Wikipedia policy (WP:V, WP:RS), quotations—especially those that are controversial or historically significant—must be supported by reliable, verifiable sources.

3. Reddit discussion / Blatta letter: Referring to secondary discussion forums or interpretations of a letter does not constitute a reliable source under Wikipedia standards. While the Eritrean scholar’s letter does provide useful context about contemporary criticism of Menelik, it does not confirm the Rick Duncan quote. The fact that the quote aligns “with the sentiment” of the criticism cannot be used to verify it. In other words, correspondence criticizing Menelik does not equal proof that he said these exact words. Otherwise it is a great source for historical context.

4. Claim that “the quote really was said by Menelik”: Again, this is unsupported and must be treated as unverified. Until a reliable source explicitly attributes the quote to Menelik with verifiable citation, it should not be included on Wikipedia. The actions of people criticizing Menelik for signing the treaty are contextually informative but cannot be used as proof of the quotation.

Conclusion: The Rick Duncan quote is unverified and does not meet Wikipedia’s standards for historical quotations. It is appropriate to remove it or, at the very least, include a clear qualifier stating that it lacks verification. Using the Blatta letter as context for contemporary criticism of Menelik is acceptable and warranted, but it cannot serve as a citation to substantiate the quote. Quintessentialpenguin (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Either way, the quote adds to the Historical Fact that Menelik signed several treaties defining the Border between Ethiopia and Eritrea and in none of those Treaties did he even argue or fight for Eritrea being within Ethiopia (Abyssinia)...I asked this question "Did Menelik know the border of Eritrea?" and I received this response, essentially Menelik defined Ethiopia's border and Eritrea is NOT in Ethiopia per Menelik II, the quote should remain because it adds to the Historical Fact that Menelik did say by Legal Treaties pre-Wuchale, and post Adwa war, and other Treaties that Eritrea is NOT Ethiopian Territory, that needs to be in this article!:

"Yes, Emperor Menelik II was intimately aware of the borders of Eritrea, as he legally negotiated and defined them through treaties with Italy following the First Italo-Ethiopian War.

Key aspects of Menelik II's role in defining the Eritrean border include:

Treaty of Wuchale (1889): Menelik signed this treaty, which recognized Italian control over the coastal areas they had occupied, forming the basis of the colony of Eritrea.

Repudiation and Recognition: Although he repudiated the Treaty of Wuchale in 1893 after a dispute over Article XVII (which Italy used to claim a protectorate), his victory at the Battle of Adwa in 1896 led to the Treaty of Addis Ababa (October 1896). This treaty reaffirmed the border between Ethiopia and the Italian colony of Eritrea.

The Mereb River Boundary: The border was fundamentally defined along the Mareb, Belesa, and Muna rivers, separating Ethiopia from Italian-occupied Eritrea.

1897 and 1900 Treaties: Menelik engaged in specific border negotiations. Records indicate he was involved in proposing a "60km from the coast" formula in 1897 and formally signed border protocols in 1900 and 1908 to finalize the border.

While some views suggest he viewed the land north of the Mereb as not belonging to his core rule, others emphasize he agreed to the borders strategically. Regardless, historical records indicate he was a direct party to defining the border." NoMenelik (talk) 04:17, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response. However, none of the points you raised address the central issue under discussion, which is the verifiability of the quotation attributed to Menelik II.

The material you provided about Menelik’s treaties with Italy (Wuchale, Addis Ababa 1896, etc) concerns the historical context of Ethio-Italian relations and the demarcation of borders. Whether those treaties acknowledged Italian control over Eritrea or defined the Mareb-Belesa-Muna boundary is a matter of historical record, but it is separate from the question of whether Menelik II ever made the specific statement attributed to him in the quotation currently included in the article.

Wikipedia policy requires that quotations be supported by reliable, verifiable sources (WP:V, WP:RS). The quotation in question appears to originate from Man, Know Thyself by Rick Duncan, but that work does not provide a citation to any primary source or recognized historical scholarship attributing these exact words to Menelik II. Without a reliable source directly documenting the quote, it cannot be verified.

The fact that a quotation may appear consistent with historical events or interpretations does not make it appropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Using historical facts (such as treaties or border negotiations) to justify the authenticity of an unsourced quotation would constitute synthesis (WP:SYNTH), which Wikipedia prohibits.

If there is a reliable historical source (such as scholarly works on Ethiopian diplomatic history, archival correspondence, or documented speeches) that explicitly attributes these words to Menelik II, then providing that source would resolve the issue. In the absence of such a source, however, the quotation does not meet Wikipedia’s standards for verifiability and should not be included.

To be clear, this discussion is not about whether Menelik negotiated borders with Italy or how those treaties are interpreted historically. It is specifically about whether the quotation itself can be verified through reliable sources. Quintessentialpenguin (talk) 17:02, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

• Note that due to the edit-warring over this dispute, the page has been fully protected for three days. Please take this time to establish consensus for the inclusion or exclusion of the deleted content. Resunmption of edit-warring upon expiration of the protection will likely lead to further sanctions. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:57, 17 March 2026 (UTC)