Talk:Colonization of the Congo Basin

bias

This article presents a biased British colonial perspective. Its whole purpose is to redeem Stanley from the atrocities he committed in Africa and to attach these to Léopold. The impression is given that Stanley was forced by the Belgian king to set up his stations and bereave Africans of their land. Moreover, how can his propaganda for colonization of inner Africa be called a 'legacy', if all that resulted from his journees was death, exploitation, and destruction of cultures? otium 21.05.06

References

I can't believe an article of this length and depth doesn't cite a single reference. It's well written, but I just have no idea where this stuff is coming from.

Spelling

• Isn't colonization spelled with z not a s? If it is, then someone has to change the title, because it's wrong.
  • I agree. Should be moved, because the Colonization article is spelled with a Z.

Colonisation of the Belgian Congo

An article entitled 'The Colonisation of the Congo' should also discuss the French Congo and the explorations of Pierre Savorgnan de Brazza. 41.241.52.187 22:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Starting year 1867, 1871, 1876 or ...?

There are multiple years that could be mentioned as starting year: e.g. Livingstone first exploring the Lualaba (upper Congo River) in 1871, and Stanley's first following that river into Congo into the Atlantic (1876). Together they traveled only on Lake Tanganyka 1871-1872, after their meeting. This article now looks like to mix these travels and years (I changed the intro into 1876, but that need not be the final fact). And: we need to describe what is "the Congo"?

• the two current states Congo Brazzaville and Congo Kinshasa (skip Angola's Cabinda?)
• the Congo river basin (includes Lake Tanganika)
• the former Kingdom Kongo (upstream of the Stanley Falls there was nothing Congo at all, just Lualaba river).

Wel, here are the firsts by Europeans:

• (before & until: Arab slave-trading, mainly inland)
• earlier: Portuguese establishing posts in the coastal region
• 1854-1856: Livingstone entering south Congo basin far inland from Lualabe Louanda (now Angola). He did not reach the main river Congo, mostly diverting to the Zambesi river in the south
• Lake Tanganika from the east: 1858, Burton & Speke
• 1866-1871: Livingstone reaching Lualaba river (=upstream Congo) from the southeast, returned
• 1871-1872: Stanly meets Livingstone on the eastcoast of Lake Tanganika, and travels some months with him on the lake. Afterwards he returns to England. Livingstone goes on southwards, Zambesi again, and dies there.
• 1876 Stanley enters Congo basin from Zanzibar, west of Lake Tanganyka, finds and follows Lualaba river and ends up in Boma, westcoast.
• 1879 Stanley starts Congo upwards to make it a private colony for Leopold.

So what should we write? Stanley in 1876 just sailed the river, clearly without claiming any posession. Discovery, trading posts: OK no colonisation. I suggest to say Stanley's 1879 trip, with Leopold at home claiming all of its results. Suggest to rewrite relevant parts, and also introducing the before-situation.-DePiep (talk) 10:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Addings -DePiep (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colonization of the Congo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110512004925/http://congoeconomie.org/growth%20accounting%20%20drc%20version%20WP-DT2-2010.pdf to http://congoeconomie.org/growth%20accounting%20%20drc%20version%20WP-DT2-2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:26, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Early European Exploration

This section grammatically does not lead on from anything, and thus appears to have a deleted first section.

additionally, the phrasing around mystery lends an unscientific and implicitly European focused narrative; I think it would be better to rephrase as 'remained unexplored/unknown/unreached by European colonialists/explorers...' Patrickredma (talk) 14:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)