Volume Ii Part 7 (2/2)
Dr. Livingstone himself was haunted by the idea that he was exploring the Upper Congo, not the Nile. From a Portuguese subordinate he ”learned that the Luapula went to Angola.” He asks with some truth, ”Who would care to risk being put into a cannibal pot, and be converted into blackman for anything less than the grand old Nile?” And the late Sir Roderick I. Murchison, whose geographical forecasts were sometimes remarkable, suspected long ago[FN#23] that his ”ill.u.s.trious friend” would follow the drainage of the country to the western coast.
The ”extraordinary quiet rise of the periodical flood,” proved by the first expedition, argues that the Congo ”issues from the gradual overflowing of a lake or a chain of lakes.” The increment in the lower bed, only eight to twelve feet where the Nile and the Ganges rise thirty and the Binuwe fifty, would also suggest that it is provided with many large reservoirs. The Introduction to Tuckey's ”Narrative” (p. xviii.) a.s.sumes that the highest water is in March, but he entered the stream only on July 6, and the expedition ended in mid-October. The best informants a.s.sured me that from March till June there are heavy freshets. As in the Ogobe, the flood begins in early September, somewhat preceding that of the Lualaba, but, unlike the former stream, it attains its highest in November and December, and it gradually subsides from the end of June till August, about which time the water is lowest.
In the middle region of the Tanganyika, I found the rainy season lasting from September to May. At Lake Liemba, the south-eastern projection of the Tanganyika, Dr. Livingstone in 1867 saw no rain from May 12 to September, and in Many-wema-land, west of the central Tanganyika, about south lat.i.tude 5, the wet season began in November, and continued till July with intervals, marking the pa.s.sage of the belt of calms. But, for the Congo to rise in September, we must a.s.sume the rains to have fallen in early August, allowing ten or fifteen days for the streams to descend, and the rest for the saturation of the land. This postulates a supply from the Central African regions far north of the equator.
Even for the March-June freshets, we must also undoubtedly go north of the Line, yet Herr H. Kiepert[FN#24] places the northernmost influent of Congo some 150 miles south of the equator. Under these limitations I agree with Dr. Behm:--”Taking everything into consideration, in the present state of our knowledge, there is the strongest probability that the Lualaba is the head stream of the Congo, and the absolute certainty that it has no connection with the Nile or any other river (system) of the northern hemisphere.” And again: ”As surely as the sun stands over the southern hemisphere in our winter and the northern in our summer, bringing the rains and the swellings of the tropical rivers when it is in the zenith with regard to them, so surely can it be predicated, from a comparison of the rainy seasons and times of rising, that the Lualaba belongs to no river of the northern hemisphere; in the southern hemisphere Africa possesses only one river, the Congo, which could take up the vast water supply of the Lualaba.” The Brazil shows the curious feature of widely different and even opposite rainy seasons in the same parallel of lat.i.tude; but this is not the place to discuss the subject.
Since these lines were written, I have to lament the collapse of the Livingstone-Congo Expedition. In 1872 the great explorer's friends, taking into consideration the prospect of his turning westward, organized a ”relief” from West as well as from East Africa. Mr. J. Young, of Kelly, generously supplied the sinews of travel, and Mr. Clements R. Markham, Secretary of the Royal Geographical Society, lent important aid in preparing the exploration. Navigating-Lieutenant W. J. Grandy, who had seen service on the eastern coast of Africa, landed at S. Paulo de Loanda in early 1873, and set out from Ambriz in March of that year. The usual difficulties were met and overcome, when Lieutenant Grandy was summarily recalled. The official explanation (”Royal Geographical Society,” December 14th, 1874), is that the measure was in consequence of Livingstone's death.
The traveller himself says:--”Complying with instructions, we, with many regrets at the idea of leaving our work unfinished when all seemed so full of promise, commenced preparations for the return, leaving good presents with the chiefs, in order to procure a good reception for those who might come after us.” An Ex-President of the Royal Geographical Society had a.s.serted, ”The ascent of the (Upper) Congo ought to be more productive of useful geographical results than any other branch of African exploration, as it will bring to the test of experiment the navigability of the Congo above the Falls, and thus possibly open out a means of introducing traffic by steam into the heart of the continent at least two thousand miles from the mouth of the river.”
With this explicit and stimulating a.s.sertion before us, we must lament that England, once the worthy rival in exploration of Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, is now too poor to support a single exploration on the West African Coast, when Germany is wealthy enough liberally to subsidize two.
Note.
A nous deux, Dr. E. Behm!
My objections to your paper are the three following: 1. It generally understates the volume of the Nzadi, by not allowing sufficiently for the double equinoctial periods of high water, March to June, as well as September to December; and by ignoring the north-equatorial supply. 2. It arbitrarily determines the question of the Tanganyika, separating it from the Nile-system upon the insufficient strength of a gorilla, and of an oil-palm which is specifically different from that of the Western Coast; and 3. It wilfully misrepresents Dr. Livingstone in the matter of the so-called Victoria Nyanza.
My first objection has been amply discussed. I therefore proceed to consider the second. As Mr. Alexander G. Findlay observed (”Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society,” No. 3, vol.
xvii. of July 28, 1873):--”Up to the time of Stanley's arrival at Ujiji, and his journey to the north of the lake, Livingstone was fully impressed with the conviction that the Tanganyika is nothing more than what he called a ?lacustrine river' (329 miles long by twenty of average breadth); flowing steadily to the north and forming a portion of the Great Nile Basin. The letters contained his reasons for forming that opinion, stating that he had been for weeks and months on the sh.o.r.es of the lake watching the flow of the water northwards” (at the rate of a knot per hour). At times the current appeared to run southwards, but that was under the influence of strong northerly winds. Also by Dr.
Livingstone's letters to Sir Thomas Maclear and Dr. Mann (”
Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society,”No. i of 1873, pp.
69-70), it is evident that the explorer believed only in the lake outlet north of Ujiji. Again, Mr. Findlay, after attentively considering the unsatisfactory visit of Dr. Livingstone and Mr.
Stanley to the Rusizi River in November and December, 1871, holds it to be a mere marsh-drain, which when the south winds prevail, would possibly flow in the opposite direction; and he still believes that Captain Speke and I, when at Uvira, were within five or six miles of the head.
Since Dr. Livingstone's visit we have heard more upon this disputed subject. A native of Karagwah a.s.sured my friend Sir Samuel Baker--who, despite all prepossessions, candidly accepted the statement--that it is possible and feasible to canoe from Chibero,on the so-called Albert Nyanza, past Uvira, where the stream narrows and where a pilot is required, to the Arab depot, Ujiji. He described the northern portion of the Tanganyika as varying much in breadth, immensely wide beyond Vacovia, and again contracting at Uvira. His report was confirmed by a Msawahili, sent by King Mtesa, with whom he had lived many years, to communicate with Baker Pasha at Fatiko; this man knew both Uvira and Ujiji, which he called ”Uyiyi.” Nothing can be more substantial than this double testimony, which wears all the semblance of truth.
On the other hand, Lieut. Cameron, whose admirable work has, so to speak, re-constructed the Tanganyika Lake, discovered, on the 3rd of May, 18-74, the Lukuga River, which he supposes to form the outlet. It lies 25 direct miles to the south of the Kasenge Archipelago, numbering seventeen isles, visited by Captain Speke in March, 1857. Dr. Livingstone touched here on July 13, 1869, and heard nothing of the outlet; he describes a current sweeping round Kasenge to south-east or southwards according to the wind, and carrying trees at the rate of a knot an hour. But Mr. Stanley (pp. 400 et pa.s.sim) agrees with Dr. Krapf, who made a large river issue from ”the lake” westwards, and who proposed, by following its course, to reach the Atlantic. The ”discoverer of Livingstone” evidently inclines to believe that the Tanganyika drains through the caverns of Kabogo near Uguhha, and he records the information of native travellers that ”Kabogo is a great mountain on the other side of the Tanganyika, full of deep holes, into which the water rolls; ”moreover, that at the distance of over a hundred miles he himself heard the” sound of the thundering surf which is said to roll into the caves of Kabogo.”In his map he ?cutely avoids inserting anything beyond ”Kabogo Mountains, 6,000 to 7,000 feet high.”
The gallant young naval lieutenant's exploration of the Lukuga has not yet reached us in a satisfactory form. He found the current sluggishly flowing at the rate of 1.2 knots per hour; he followed it for four or five miles, and he was stopped by floating gra.s.s and enormous rushes (papyri?). A friendly chief told him that the Lukuga feeds the Lualaba which, beyond Nyangwe (Livingstone's furthest point, in about south lat.i.tude 4) takes the name of Ugarowwa. An Arab had descended this stream fifty- five marches, and reached a place where there were s.h.i.+ps and white merchants who traded largely in palm-oil and ivory, both rare on the Congo River. And, unfortunately, ”the name (River) Congo was also mentioned,” a term utterly unknown except to the few Portuguese-speaking natives.
At present, therefore, we must reserve judgment, and the only conclusion to which the unprofessional reader would come is that the weight of authority is in favour of a double issue for the Tanganyika, north and west.
The wilful misrepresentation is couched in these words: ”The reports obtained by Livingstone are if anything favourable to the unity of the Victoria Nyanza (Ukerewe, Ukara,) because along with it he names only such lakes as were already known to have a separate existence from it.” As several were recognized, ergo it is one! Dr. Livingstone heard from independent sources that the so-called Victoria Nyanza is a lake region, not a lake; his account of the Okara (Ukara), and the three or four waters run into a single huge sheet, is substantially the same as that which, after a study of the Rev. Mr. Wakefield's Reports I offered to the Royal Geographical Society, and which I subsequently published in ”Zanzibar City, Island, and Coast.”
You, Dr. Behm, are apparently satisfied with a lake drained by an inverted delta of half-a-dozen issues--I am not. Nor can I agree with you that ”whether the Victoria Nyanza is one lake or several is a point of detail of less importance,” when it has disfigured the best maps of Africa for nearly a score of years. The last intelligence concerning the ”unity” of the lake is from Colonel C. C. Long, a staff-officer in the service of His Highness the Khedive, who was sent by Colonel Gordon on a friendly mission to King Mtesa of Uganda. With permission to descend ”Murchison Creek,” and to view ”Lake Victoria Nyanza,” Colonel Long, after a march of three hours, took boat. He sounded the waters of the lake, and found a depth of from 25 to 35 feet; in clear weather the opposite sh.o.r.e was visible, appearing ”to an unnautical eye”
from 12 to 15 miles distant; nor could this estimate be greatly wrong. After much negotiation and opposition he obtained leave to return to Egyptian territory by water, and on the way, in north lat.i.tude 1 30', he discovered a second lake or ”large basin,” at least 20 to 25 miles wide. The geography is somewhat hazy, but the a.s.sertions are not to be mistaken.
Finally, I read with regret such statements as the following, made by so well-known a geographer as yourself: ”Speke's views have been splendidly confirmed; the attacks of his opponents, especially of Burton, who was most inimically inclined to him, collapse into nothing.” This unwarrantable style of a.s.sertion might be expected from the ”Mittheilungen,” but it is not honourable to a man of science. There are, you well know, three main points of difference between the late Captain Speke and myself. The first is the horse-shoe of mountains blocking up the northern end of the Tanganyika; this, after a dozen years, I succeeded in abolis.h.i.+ng. The second is the existence of the Victoria Nyanza, which I a.s.sert to be a lake region, not a lake; it is far from being a ”point of detail,” and I hope presently to see it follow the way of the horse-shoe. Thirdly is the drainage of the Tanganyika, which Captain Speke threw southward to the Zambeze, a theory now universally abandoned. This may be your view of ”splendid confirmation”--I venture to think that it will not be accepted by the geographical world.
Chapter XI.
Life at Banza Nokki.
I was now duly established with my books and instruments at Nkaye, and the inevitable delay was employed in studying the country and the people, and in making a botanical collection. But the season was wholly unpropitious. A naval officer, who was considered an authority upon the Coast, had advised me to travel in September, when a journey should never begin later than May.
The vegetation was feeling the effect of the Cacimbo; most of the perennials were in seed, and the annuals were nearly dried up.
<script>