GEOGRAPHICAL
REMARKS AND INQUIRIES
CONCERNING
THE TRAVELS OF M. CAILLIÉ,
IN CENTRAL AFRICA,
BY M. JOMARD, MEMBER OF THE INSTITUTE;
COMPRISINGAN ANALYSIS OF THE MAP OF THE ROUTE AND THE GENERAL MAP OF THE TRAVELS, DRAWN UP BY THE SAME; FOLLOWED BY VOCABULARIES COLLECTED BY M. CAILLlÉ, HIS ITINERARY DAY BY DAY, EXPLANATIONS OF THE PLATES, AND NOTES ON SEVERAL POINTS OF NATURAL HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY; CONCLUDING WITH DOCUMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS.
CONCERNING
THE TRAVELS OF M. CAILLIÉ,
IN CENTRAL AFRICA,
GENERAL RETROSPECT OF THE PUBLISHED INFORMATION ON THIS SUBJECT PRIOR TO M. CAILLIÉ’S TRAVELS.
A powerful interest is attached to travels in central Africa: any attempt, therefore, to explore this part of the world can scarcely fail to excite curiosity, provided, at least, that it makes some addition to the knowledge previously acquired and supplies one of the deficiencies of geographical science; that is to say, if it furnishes authentic documents concerning the respective situations of places, their topographical positions, and relative distances; concerning the natural productions and physical geography of the country; the population, commerce, interior navigation, industry, and agriculture; the manners, customs, religious worship, superstitions, and language of the people, or the physical conformation of the inhabitants; in short, provided it is calculated to interest the geographer or the naturalist, the historian or the person engaged in commerce and manufactures. The merit and usefulness, indeed, of a narrative of travels consists in these positive results. The attentive reader will discover in the simple journal before him more than one such result, especially in matters of geography, the nomenclature and position of places, the course and importance of rivers, the situation of mountains, and generally speaking, every thing relating to the accidents of the soil. The various tribes, also, visited by M. Caillié, and in the midst of which he lived, presented so many subjects of observation that it was impossible he should not attempt, at least, to sketch their portraits. To the well-informed public it belongs to appreciate whatever is new and interesting in this simple and inartificial picture of nations and tribes scarcely known in Europe, even by name. I must not, however, rest here, but will turn my undivided attention in the first place to examining and discussing all the points of geography connected with M. Caillié’s route. Before I proceed, to this discussion, for which I shall need all the indulgence of the reader, I shall take leave to cast a glance upon the explorers who preceded him, and the information we possessed anterior to his travels. Notwithstanding the advantage which M. Caillié has over all his predecessors, in having brought to Europe a description of the city of Timbuctoo, written on the spot, several motives induce me to recapitulate here the prior attempts which have been made by others, each of which enterprises has formed an additional step in the career which he alone has been enabled to pursue to its accomplishment. After this examination of the discoveries and relations of preceding travellers, I shall analyse the map of the route annexed to this work. It has been constructed from the materials furnished in minute detail by the journal of the French traveller, and which also form the basis of the general map of the journey. I shall then treat of the nomenclature of the countries through which he has travelled, of the course of the great river, which, like Mungo Park, he has navigated, and of the acquisitions for which science is indebted to him, without neglecting the questions connected with the theatre of his discoveries.
Whoever studies the history of the discoveries in the interior of Africa is obliged to go back to the learned cosmographer el-Edricy, who may be styled the Prince of Arabian geography. Till now, an extract only of his description has been known, but a learned oriental scholar[23]has just discovered a much more complete manuscript than that which was translated into Latin at the commencement of the 16th century, and which the learned Hartmann has commented upon. While waiting for the benefit of the translation preparing by M. Amédée Jaubert, I shall quote from the Latin version[24]the description of the countries which M. Caillié has visited, but which form only a very small portion of the theatre of his peregrinations. According to el-Edricy, Segelmassa or Sidjilmessa, a town in the country of Tafilet, is forty days’ journey from the Soudan, that is to say, from the inhabited districts and fertile soil of this immense region; it is also computed to be forty days’ journey to Tocrur or Takrour, to Salla or Sala, and to Ouhl. Sala is on the northern and Takrour on the southern bank of a river called Nile. Sala is two days’ journey from Takrour whether by land or water.
The place named Oulil, described as an island properly so called, is the great mart for salt in those parts, and is situated sixteen days’ journey from Sala. Eastward of Takrour are several large towns; Ghana, at a distance of twenty four days, and Berissa of twelve; from the latter Aoudeghest[25]is twelve days’ journey towards the north and the district of Lamlem six to the south; this contains Wangara, Maleb, and Dau, four days’ journey from each other; to the west is Meczara, to the east, Vancara, to the north Ghana, and a desert to the south.
Many of these statements agree sufficiently with M. Caillié’s marches across the desert; I can here only slightly mention this conformity, because it would be necessary otherwise to enter into details on the extent of a day’s journey and on the different kinds of days’ journeys; an important question which shall be discussed elsewhere. Takrour corresponds perhaps with the locality which has since become the seat of Timbuctoo[26]: the importance of this ancient town is proved by the name of Takrour, then given to the whole of the Soudan, and applied to it by the natives even to the present time. Sala is a point known to M. Caillié, but to the right of the route from Timbuctoo to Tafilet, and not to the west of Timbuctoo; and it must not be confounded with Ain-Salak, the oasis of Agably.
May not the Oulil of el-Edricy, so long sought, be an island in the sense understood by the word oasis, as surrounded on all sides by an ocean of sand? this place would then correspond well with Tychyt, celebrated for its salt-mines; it is true however that the Arabian geographer seems to place Oulil upon the sea itself.[27]
With respect to Ghana, which is thought to answer to Kano, visited by the last English travellers, its position in el-Edricy appears too much towards the west; unless these travellers (as has been already suspected) have placed Kano and other points of the Soudan between Bornou and Saccatoo, too far to the east.
Above two centuries before el-Edricy, Ebn-Haukal, another not less esteemed Arabian writer, had fixed the relative positions of Sidjilmassa, Oulil, and Ghana; these equally agree with the itinerary of our traveller; every well informed reader will inquire whether the same agreement exists with the marches of the celebrated Ben-Batouta. His travels are known by the fragments which Messrs. Kosegarten and Burckhardt have translated from the extract given by el-Bilouni.[28]
It is known that, in 1352, Ben-Batouta quitted Sidjilmessa for Timbuctoo and central Africa: in twenty-five days he reached the salt mines of Teghazza;[29]ten days afterwards, Tas-hal; ten or twelve days farther on Aboulaten (Ejulat or Eiwelaten);[30]beyond that, Maly, at a distance of twenty-four days; from Maly to Zaghary (or Sagher), ten days; and thence to Karsendjou (or Karseckou).
This place is washed by the great river,which is the Nile, and runs to Kabera and Zaghah (or Sagha); from Zaghah, the Nile flows towards Timbuctoo, Koukou (Kok), Mouly the last place of the country of Maly and Bowy (or Youy), one of the largest towns of the Soudan. Thence the Nile descends to the country of Nouba and passes Dongolah. From Karsendjou, Ben-Batouta proceeded to the river of Sansarah, ten miles from Maly, which he left after a residence of two months; some days afterwards he reached Timbuctooon the Nile, Koukou, Berdammah, and Takadda (or Nekda). On his return to Sidjilmessa, he visited Touat, Kahor, Dekha, and Bouda; a journey of more than twenty-eight days or stages.
The obscurity of this recital must be confessed: it arises chiefly from the different ways of reading proper names, in supplying the orthographical signs often wanting in manuscripts. Thus Burckhardt has read تغاري Tegherry, the same name which Kosegarten had read تغازا Taghazza, which would bring the traveller into the country of Fez very far from the Sahara. Tas-hala, a commercial town is perhaps Tychyt: Aboulaten ابولاتن is confounded with Eyoulaten ايولاتن or Oualet. Maly or Mala ماي is perhaps Sala سالي, Nekda نكدا for Tagada تكدا &c.
The places in the neighbourhood of Timbuctoo, according to Ben-Batouta, are Kabera and Zaghah. We still know Cabra, and the second of these names reminds us of the Meczara of el-Edricy, and the Mar-Zaghah or Marzarah of other accounts. Thus the distance of the places with which M. Caillié became acquainted, and which in consequence I have placed upon the general map of the Travels, Tychyt, Oualet, Sala, Cabra, and Timbuctoo, would nearly agree with the description of Ben-Batouta: I say nothing here respecting the direction of the rivers.
Few itinerary distances are to be found in the relations compiled from the discoveries of the Portuguese on this coast of Africa. They have carefully concealed the positive documents which they may have collected, lest the other nations of Europe should rival them in their commerce. We read in the Decades of Barros that they had much intercourse with the two kingdoms of Toucourof and Timbuctoo. It is not demonstrated that the first of these names is identical with Takrour,[31]and consequently this passage will not prove that the countries of Takrour and Timbuctoo are distinct.
In the time of Leo Africanus, who travelled in the early part of the sixteenth century, the prosperity of Timbuctoo had declined in favour of the town of Djenné, which is still, by the report of M. Caillié, more considerable and commercial than the former city. According to Leo, the river which runs near Timbuctoo takes a westerly direction. “We navigated,” says he, “coming from the kingdom of Tombuto,to the east, and following the course of the stream, towards the kingdom of Ghinea, and as far as the kingdom of Melli, which are both to the west of Tombo.” This assertion is not confirmed by the French traveller. Even if we suppose that one of the two branches, which he saw near that city was a tributary, and not a derivative branch, and that he had not perceived the distinction, (which must appear very extraordinary), this hypothesis would be contradicted, since it was reported to him by the inhabitants that this arm rejoined the principal stream at some distance.
With the exception of Leo, (who was a Moor born at Grenada), and the Portuguese, concerning whom we have but uncertain accounts, transmitted by Marmol and Barros, the first European who reached Timbuctoo was Francis Paul Imbert, born at Sables-d’Olonne, in the native province of Réné Caillié; his journey was anterior to the year 1670. He accompanied his master, a Portuguese renegado, sent to Timbuctoo by the governor of Tafilet. From the little that is known of his travels, we learn that the distance from Morocco to Timbuctoo is four hundred leagues, and that it is considered a two months’ journey. This route was nearly the same as that followed by M. Caillié, at least as far as Tafilet: the time also is the same. Again, the calculation of four hundred leagues agrees very well with that of M. Caillié. Three other routes have been attempted by Europeans for penetrating to the centre of Northern Africa; that of the Senegambia, that of Tripoli, and that of Egypt and the Upper Nile. The first is certainly the shortest; the second is full of obstacles; and the last, though the longest, will probably be one day preferred by the intelligent traveller, as the most instructive, the most fruitful in discoveries, and for other reasons. I say nothing of a fourth course, that of the Gulph of Benin, which at this time engages the attention of England, but which, notwithstanding the numerous rivers terminating in that part, seems to offer very little prospect of success. To penetrate into the interior by the Rivers of Senegal, Gambia, or Sierra-Leone, was the most natural enterprize, not only on account of the proximity, but also with a view to the necessity of tracing to its source that vast stream which runs near Timbuctoo: a question of no less importance than the problem of the sources of the Nile, and, which is become almost as celebrated with the moderns, as the other was amongst the ancients. It is also observable that of forty-two European travellers, twenty-two are supposed to have taken this route, independently of six Europeans shipwrecked on that coast, carried into the interior by the Moors, and who have collected information respecting either Timbuctoo or other central countries. These travellers not having for the most part pursued the same track with M. Caillié, and an abridged history of their discoveries having been already compiled by M. Walckenaer and other learned geographers, I consider it altogether superfluous to review them. The reader will have double cause to rejoice in the curtailment of these observations, and in being at the same time directed to such excellent sources of information. I shall only state from these various authorities, the epoch and extent of the principal journeys, succinctly analyzing those which present a line of route crossed by that of M. Caillié, or which have something in common with it. The reader will thus have before him a striking picture of the several efforts made, with admirable perseverance, by Europeans, during the last two centuries and a half.
To this list may be added Ledyard and Lucas, in 1788, Nicholls, in 1805, Seetzen and Tuckey, in 1816, and P. Rouzée, in 1817, who took different routes, and did not succeed in penetrating into the interior.
Twenty-five Englishmen figure in this list, with fourteen Frenchmen, two Americans, and one German: but there are few of them, alas! since Major Houghton, who have not fallen victims to their heroic devotion, in the midst of their career.
Before setting out on his great journey M. Caillié had visited the interior of the deserts frequented by the Brakna and Dowich Moors; he had also accompanied M. Adrien Partarrieu, attached to the expedition of Major Gray.
He then followed or traversed the route of Major Houghton, going to the Ludamar of Mungo Park, (or rather the country of Eli-Oud-Amar[32]) and those of Major Gray and Surgeon Dochard, the one to Falimé, the other to Yamina. But, as he kept no regular notes of his peregrinations in this portion of Africa, I have no means of comparing them with those of the three former travellers. It is otherwise with the routes of Watt and Winterbottom, who in 1794 arrived at Timbo and Labé by the Rio-Nuñez; there they learnt that a four months’ journey would lead them to Timbuctoo, by way of Belia, Bouria, Manda, Sego, Sousundou and Genati[33].
On examining the general map of M. Caillié’s travels Baleya, Bourré, Amana, Sego, Sansanding and Djenné, names very little differing from the former, will actually be found, in a line, not indeed perfectly direct, from Labé to Timbuctoo. With regard to the four months’ distance, it is worthy of remark that M. Caillié was a hundred and seven days proceeding from Teleouel (nearly opposite to Labé) to Timbuctoo, following a rather more easterly course. In several other particulars the narratives of the two English travellers are in accordance with the observations of M. Caillié, such as the traffic in salt, and its being carried on men’s shoulders, the position of Labé and Timbo with respect to Kakondy,[34]the state of agriculture, and the manners of the Foulahs.
The first journey of Mungo Park, in 1795, conducted him to Sego on the Dhioliba, and thence to Silla: these two places were left to the west of M. Caillié’s route, as may be seen on the general map. The only doubtful question respecting the line between them arises from the considerable difference that exists as to the distance of that line from the ocean: but this question is very comprehensive, and embraces too many different points to be examined here. It may, however, be observed that the population assigned by Mr. Park to Sego (thirty thousand) appears somewhat large as compared with that of Jenné, Timbuctoo, and other towns visited by M. Caillié.
In his second journey, in 1805, Mungo Park reached the river at Bamakou; at Sansanding he embarked upon it, in a canoe constructed under his direction, and followed it to Cabra, Houssa, and Boussa. Thus, from the branch which runs into it below Jenné to Cabra, the two travellers followed the same route, and navigated the same stream. Unfortunately Park’s narrative breaks off at Sansanding, on the 10th of November, at the moment of his leaving that town. There is however, a last piece of authentic information on the 19th of November; this is a note addressed by Mungo Park to his wife. It is known that the bark which he contrived for descending the river was a sort of raft or flat boat, formed of two old canoes.
It cannot easily be credited that the traveller advanced upon the river at the rate of six or seven miles an hour as his journal indicates: it has been seen that the direct progress of M. Caillié on the Dhioliba was scarcely more than two miles an hour; in a different season it is true, and at low water. Mungo Park, according to his guide, perished at Boussa, four months after his departure from Sansanding, which account, unless erroneous would infer a stay either at Timbuctoo, Houssa, or Yaour.[35]It is not possible here to institute any comparison between the two narratives, and I think it superfluous to seek other points of resemblance; I confine myself therefore to the observation, that the map of Park’s second journey aggravates the error committed in the first map, in placing the course of the Dhioliba too far eastward of the city of Timbuctoo.[36]It is not consistent with my subject to enter into further particulars concerning that unfortunate expedition, with the commencement and issue of which every one is acquainted; but of the most essential points of which all are equally ignorant, namely the navigation of the river above and below Timbuctoo, and all those observations that were undoubtedly made and written by the celebrated traveller on papers, that there is yet some hope of discovering.
Chronological order obliges me to pass from such a man as Mungo Park to the American sailor Robert Adams.[37]Notwithstanding the efforts of M. Dupuis, editor of Adams’s narrative, and the real merit of the notes appended to it by that learned writer, the general opinion of geographers is opposed to the authenticity of these travels; and it is a remarkable fact, that it is least credited in his own country. Critical observations on this subject have appeared in the North American Review, from which we are compelled to conclude that the original declaration made at Cadiz by Adams before the American consul, totally differs from his recital, made in London, to M. Dupuis. I am far from believing in the reality of Adams’s travels in all their circumstances as described; but a comparison of them with those of M. Caillié belongs to my subject. Robert Adams was wrecked on the coast of Cape Blanco, and was carried to Timbuctoo, where he says he remained five months.[38]He afterwards returned through Toudeyni, Oulad-Deleym, el-Thabla, Ouad-Noun, Mogador, Fez, Mequinaz, and Tangier. Even in his description of Timbuctoo, a striking contradiction occurs. “The city,” he says, “is in a very level plain;” and yet two miles beyond the city, runs the river Marzarah, between two rather high mountains. This river flows to the south west, and is three quarters of a mile wide. He repeats elsewhere that there are mountains to the south of Timbuctoo, and says that sulphur is found there. None of these circumstances have been noticed by M. Caillié, who walked from Cabra to Timbuctoo, and who in thirteen days had abundant leisure to observe them. The city appeared to Adams as extensive, without being as populous, as Lisbon; but between two hundred and sixty thousand inhabitants and ten or twelve thousand there is a great difference. There are no mosques, says he, in Timbuctoo; M. Caillié saw three large and several smaller ones.[39]
Adams asserts that he saw a palace built of clay mixed with herbage, and other houses of wood or earth: the greater part of the houses, according to M. Caillié are of brick, and the king’s palace[40]is nothing more than a small and extremely simple house.
Adams asserts thatthe men are tattooed; M. Caillié says nothing of the existence of such a custom at Timbuctoo: thatthere is not a man capable of writing; the new account frequently affirms the contrary: thatmany elephants are to be seen there; M. Caillié scarcely saw traces of one during the whole course of his travels. Nevertheless these differences which may be partly attributed to his ignorance, as well as to a want of memory, are not sufficient motives for absolutely denying the journey of Adams, or rejecting all the information which he procured. The same may be said of the words of the language spoken at Timbuctoo, which Robert Adams has given to the number of sixteen, eight of which are common to the Kissour vocabulary of M. Caillié,[41]but totally differing from them.
Was it easy, in a country where so many different languages and dialects are spoken, to ascertain the genuine words of the Timbuctoo idiom? The words published by well informed travellers, such as Lyon, Bowdich and others, do not agree better with those collected by M. Caillié. If Adams really visited Timbuctoo, it is possible that he may have interrogated strangers instead of natives.[42]Major Denham alone till the present day has learnt the true words of this language. Other features again of Adams’s descriptions are confirmed by certain Arabian travellers and geographers, even what he says of the river flowing in the neighbourhood of Timbuctoo. Yet, supposing him to have seen the river, which is to the south, may he not have been mistaken as to the direction of the stream? May it not be the second branch of the river, which M. Caillié saw at Cabra, and which at first runs towards the north-east? It does not however run two miles south of Timbuctoo, but five miles. The river, he says, is called Marzarah: and this name though unknown to M. Caillié, yet exists; and is the name also of a district cited above, after el-Edricy.[43]
Robert Adams is not incorrect in his journeys beyond Timbuctoo: 1st from this city towards the E. N. E., as far as the river mentioned above, where he arrives after ten days’ journey; 2ndly from this point to Toudeyni, twelve or thirteen days’ journey N. N. W. These distances and bearings agree tolerably well with M. Caillié’s route from Timbuctoo to Telig.
Riley, the American, also wrecked on the west coast of Africa, and detained in slavery by the Moorish Chief Sidi-Hamet, gathered from the latter some correct notions relating to the city of Timbuctoo. According to hima small river(it was then dry) runs near the walls of Timbuctoo, and a large river flows to the east at an hour’s distanceon horseback. This is undoubtedly the same with that of which he elsewhere speaks as the Zolibib, which is two hours’ march to the south. The city is five times as large as Soueyrah, situated in a vast plain, and built of stone, earth, and reeds. On leaving Timbuctoo, Sidi-Hamet travelled fifty-five days towards the N. E., and eighteen to the north, before he arrived at Touat, and afterwards he proceeded to Fez. M. Caillié did not perceive the little river close under the walls of Timbuctoo; but what is said by Riley shews that it might be dried up. The great river at two hours’ distance to the south, is evidently the Cabra branch, flowing between the east and north. The word Zolibib is unquestionably the same as Dhioliba. The situation of the oasis of Agably (or of Touat), is not consistent with the data by which I was guided in drawing up the general map, namely the astronomical observations made by Major Laing at Ain-salah.[44]
We have seen above that Major Peddie and Captain Campbell took the way of the Rio-Nuñez, to penetrate into the interior: the second alone was able to advance to within a short distance of Timbo; but he could not reach that place. Both swelled the list of victims to the climate and martyrs of science. Captain Campbell, and M. Caillié, as well as Watt and Winterbottom, travelled in nearly parallel lines: their accounts, far from contradicting, mutually confirm each other; but the marches of the French traveller present a multitude of instructive details, and local circumstances which the others had not the opportunity of observing. The rivers and rivulets crossed by these travellers, some of which flow northwards and fall into the Rio-Nuñez, and others south towards the district of Sousou, are distinguished. By combining the observations of all the four a complete idea may be formed of the tract which separates Kakondy from the Fouta-Dhialon and the mountains of Timbo.[45]
We are indebted to the expedition of M. Mollien for some interesting particulars of the unknown parts of the Senegambia, and of the plain of the Fouta-Dhialon. Nothing was wanting to this expedition of discovery but mathematical observations, which it would be unjust to require from him who traverses, for the first time, unknown countries, inhabited by a fanatical population. Geography is a great gainer when it can obtain any positive information, either respecting the lines travelled over, with their bearings, or the relative situation of places, and their nomenclature; or even a view of the importance and population of the country, and the state of agriculture, commerce and industry. A learned geographer, M. Eyriés, has shewn the merit of M. Mollien’s travels, and the acquisitions for which science is indebted to him; it only remains therefore, for me to notice that part of his journey, which coincides with that of M. Caillié. Both crossed the Fouta-Dhialon, but in different directions. The first went from Labé to Timbo; the second passed between those two towns. Their lines of route intersected each other at a point nearer to Timbo than to Labé, but where there is no village; at least the list given by M. Mollien does not present, at the point of meeting which results from the construction of the two routes, any name in common with the much more extended list of M. Caillié. But the latter, in giving the position of Labé with regard to Teleouel, and that of Timbo with regard to Dité, will be found to agree with the itinerary of M. Mollien. In the list of the latter, we find indeed Cambaya and Bandeia; but Bandeia, placed far north of Labé, is a totally different place from Bandeya, which is south west of it. The same may be observed of Cambaya to the north and near Labé, while the Cambaya of M. Caillié lies south-east of that place, and at a considerable distance. The description of the mountains, the cataracts or falls of rivers, the physical aspect of places amid those lofty mountains, (which in some respects may be called theCentral Alpsof Northern Africa), are features common to both narratives.[46]This spot, as will be seen farther on, is a line of division between immense streams which flow from it in every direction. There is no less analogy between the observations of the two travellers respecting the Foulahs, the Mandingoes, and the various tribes inhabiting those countries.[47]
I now come to a traveller whose recent loss is regretted throughout Europe, the unfortunate Major Laing. A first journey made him advantageously known to the friends of science; a second rendered him illustrious; and both are more closely connected with that of M. Caillié than all the expeditions I have just reviewed. It is fortunate for the French traveller, that he has these points of contact with Major Laing, especially since their discoveries upon comparison appear in perfect accordance. No one is ignorant that, in 1822, Major Laing, after having explored the Timmanie, the Kouranko, and the Soulimana, determined the situation of Timbo and Falaba, the sources of the Mongo and the Rokelle, and penetrated nearly to the source of the Dhioliba, or at least but a short distance from that point so long sought after. He assigned the position and elevation above the level of the sea of Mount Loma, whence this great river takes its rise; and he marked on his map the first part of its course northwards, to the extent of about twenty-five leagues. Amongst these observations are two which serve to verify those of the French traveller: the situation of Timbo and that of the Dhioliba. Now this confirmation, as a single glance at the general map of the travels will shew, leaves nothing to be desired. I placed Timbo there from the documents of the Major, and M. Caillié’s route perfectly coincides. The French traveller met with the Dhioliba, for the first time, at Couroussa, and observed its course. This point and this course, from the mere construction of the new map of the route, are found to continue that traced by the English traveller. At the point of meeting, there appears to be a very small interval left, and I have therefore had no difficulty in supplying this hiatus. Henceforward our knowledge of the thirty-five or forty first leagues of the course of this great river may be considered as perfectly established.
The second expedition of Major Laing, as all the world knows, had for its object the city of Timbuctoo, which he endeavoured to reach by way of Tripoli, not across the Bornou, like his immediate predecessors, but by the direct route of the oasis of Agably. The work, which, in the course of this paper, I have had frequent occasion to quote, has made the reader acquainted withl’Itinéraire de Tripoli, de Barbarie à la ville de Temboctou, by the sheik Hagg-Cassem, revised by M. Delaporte, vice-consul of France; an itinerary which I congratulate myself upon having submitted, in 1818, to the Institute, since my learned colleague M. Walckenaer, declares that it induced him to favour the public with hisRecherches géographiques sur l’Intérieur de l’Afrique septentrionale. This document places Timbuctoo at eighty-one days’ distance from Tripoli, and the oasis of Ain-Salah and Agably at thirty-three days, or three sevenths of the way. We are yet ignorant what observations Major Laing made on this route; we only know that he passed Ghadamès and Ain-Salah, and we possess his observation made in the latter place. This observation carries much farther west the position admitted on the maps; but for several reasons I have felt necessary to make use of it: 1st, Major Laing proved himself a correct observer, in his travels in the Timannie; 2ndly, the situation of Timbuctoo, being more westerly than it has hitherto been considered, should carry with it that of the oasis of Touat, which is in the direct line; 3rdly, there is nothing in the itinerary of the sheik Hagg-Cassem, in opposition to the more westerly tendency of this line of route; 4thly and lastly, the computation of the day’s journey appears to me too low, when reduced to fifteen geographical miles. The reasons, which induce me to estimate it at eighteen miles and four tenths, will be found elsewhere: it follows from this calculation, that the oasis of Touat should be brought nearer to the ocean. This result agrees with the more westerly position of the route from Timbuctoo to Tafilet, as shewn by the journey of M. Caillié. Till some of the papers of Major Laing are discovered, (and this hope is not altogether lost, since M. Caillié himself, in traversing the great desert saw a compass, and heard mention of a sextant which had belonged to him), it is impossible to make further comparisons between the travels of the French discoverer and the second expedition of the Major, although both resided in the city of Timbuctoo, almost in the same house, and though the latter nearly reached el-Arawan.
ANALYSIS OF THE ITINERARY MAP, AND OF THE GENERAL MAP OF THE TRAVELS.
In constructing the maps here submitted to the reader, I was unable to avail myself of the information procured by our adventurer in his preceding travels, either in the Bondou, amongst the Brakna Moors, or amongst the people in the neighbourhood of Kakondy, the Nalous, the Bagos or the Landamas: these excursions present no continuous progress susceptible of being traced on a map. The fourth excursion alone, therefore, can enter into the present discussion, namely the great journey from the Rio-Nuñez to Tangier, commenced on the 19th of April 1827, and concluded on the 7th of September 1828; I shall consequently confine myself to a mere glance at the former travels. The examination of this route will be divided into three parts.
1st, Journey from Kakondy to Timé, beyond the Dhioliba.
2nd, Journey to Djenné, and navigation of the river thence to Timbuctoo.
3rd, Journey from Timbuctoo to Arbate, and thence to Tangier.
I shall then devote particular attention to the general map of the travels.
EARLY TRAVELS OF M. CAILLIÉ.
M. Caillié undertook his first excursion in 1819. From St. Louis, he repaired to Goree by the usual route, that is to say, he set out from Gandiolle, and followed the seashore without finding any opportunity for making new observations. The whole of this coast is perfectly well known from surveys by officers of the royal navy.
In 1819, he associated himself with M. Adrien Partarrieu, who was about to rejoin the expedition of Major Gray: the latter was then in the Bondou, reduced to grievous extremities, and he sent for M. Partarrieu, to bring him assistance, of which the expedition stood in the utmost need.[48]It is to be regretted that M. Caillié took no notes of his stages during this journey; the line of route crossed that of M. Mollien, as well as that subsequently followed by Captain Beaufort. The caravan passed Boulibaba, a town inhabited by the Foulahs, and the situation of which is unknown. This whole route indeed, deserves to be determined and traced out on the maps: M.Caillié is amply justified in not having noted these particulars, knowing that M. Partarrieu was in possession of more accurate materials; whatever accounts or geographical observations the latter traveller has transmitted being every way worthy of attention. Information is wanting respecting the desert space which on this side separates Cayor from the Ghiolof, respecting Potaco in the country of Bondou, and the whole transverse line from Gandiolle to Boulibané, the capital of that state. M. Caillié left Boulibaba for Bakel, and returned with his fellow-travellers to St. Louis by water, without having any new observations to make upon the road.
M. Caillié’s third journey is more important, not only on account of its object, his initiation into the African manners and customs, and his preparation for an expedition into the interior and all its attendant hardships but more particularly for the curious descriptions which he has given of the journeys of the Moors in the deserts, of their stations hitherto nearly if not wholly unknown, and of the running or stagnant waters which he met with. It is to be wished that it had been possible to trace these positions upon the map; but I had not the means of fixing them with sufficient exactness. It will be remarked in reading this relation that the residence of the King of the Braknas is continually varying; he frequently dwells in the vicinity of the river Senegal and of the station known by the name of the Braknas. But in the wet season he penetrates farther into the desert; and when he removes his camp the entire population travels with him. The extent of space subject to this powerful tribe has been hitherto known only from east to west; but we learn from this account how far it reaches towards the north.
It would be desirable to geographers to learn the precise position of lake Aleg, that of the mountain called Ziré (a word which however is a generic term), and the limits of the great tribe of the Abou-sebas or el-Abou-sebah, the name of which is very differently and incorrectly written upon the recent maps: those who have supposed that the article formed part of the word, and that the termination might be retrenched have made out of it the wordlabos. Two terminations have been usedsebasandsebah; the last only is correct.
I shall confine myself to a remark upon the relative position of Adar and the lake Aleg. According to our traveller, the distance from the one to the other is seven days’ journey: how then shall we reconcile the situation assigned to Adrar, not far from Ouâd-noun, which is more than thirty days distant from the territory usually attributed to the Braknas? It would be requisite that this territory should extend northwards even to the extremity of the Sahara, which is contrary to our received ideas, but perhaps not to the fact.
M. Caillié, having returned in May 1824 to St. Louis, and despairing to obtain the means necessary for accomplishing his purposes, determined to remove to Albreda on the Gambia, and thence to Sierra-Leone, where he succeeded in collecting some resources, by availing himself of his already acquired information. On the 22nd of May, 1827, he embarked at Sierra-Leone for Rio-Nuñez, where he arrived on the 31st. By the 5th of August he was established at Rebecca (or Rabougga): where he employed himself at once in completing the observations and information already extant upon the neighbouring tribes, the Nalous, the Bacos, and the Landamas[49], and in making preparations for his great expedition. He soon quitted this place for Kakondy: his activity, his perseverance, uncommon intelligence, and finally the fortunate circumstances of which he so skilfully took advantage, enabled him to set out on the 19th of the same month for Kankan. Ignorant as the world was of the situation of this town, it would seem that a happy foresight guided him in making choice of this direction, as in following it he crossed the rivers with which it was most important to be acquainted, in such a manner as to enable us tolerably well to assign their position and their distance from the ocean.