According to official history, David Livingstone died in Chitambo in 1873.

His body was brought back to the coast by his faithful local attendants, and later buried in Westminster Abbey.

But his heart (and other internal organs) were removed just after his death by the same loyal attendants, and buried under a Mvula tree at Chitambo.

His heart so remained in the Africa that he so loved.



When I read the story, my reaction was... But wait, I've been here for too long, have I???

So I thought about asking the opinion of others. To make the poll relevant, please answer the question according to the group to which you belong.


Group A:
I have never been to Africa or have limited travel experience there

Group B:
I have extended travel experience in Africa for long periods or have been living there for a few months or years

Group C:
I was born and raised in Africa, or have been living in Africa as a full time resident for 5 years or more

Question:
The heart of Livingstone was removed by his loyal attendants, and carefully buried under a tree in the soil he loved.

What do you think of that?

- Yes, Livingstone's heart was buried under the tree at Chitambo.

- Heart removed? Of course!!! Buried under the tree? In Africa?? By Africans??? No friggin' way! Been used for Muti, Juju, or whatever name you want to give to witchcraft rituals and "medicines".

Choices:
I am in Group A and I believe Livingstone's heart has been buried in Chitambo.
I am in Group B and I believe Livingstone's heart has been buried in Chitambo.
I am in Group C and I believe Livingstone's heart has been buried in Chitambo.
I am in Group A and I think "Buried? No way, they used it for witchcraft."
I am in Group B and I think "Buried? No way, they used it for witchcraft."
I am in Group C and I think "Buried? No way, they used it for witchcraft."

 

I'm in group C.

No way that his heart was removed! Utter BS

The Brittish forces would have been all over the place if that was true!

quote:

Originally posted by Jagter:
I'm in group C.

No way that his heart was removed! Utter BS

The Brittish forces would have been all over the place if that was true!

Jagter

I lived in Africa for over 5 years in the past so I voted C. I believe it.

There were no British forces in what is now Zambia in 1873. Or in Kenya or in Tanzania, or in Rhodesia. Or anywhere N of Natal or S. of the Sudan.

Gator,

They needn't be there, they would have deployed their troops soon after the mutilated body arrived.

In 1873 that was a serious offense and would not have been tolerated if done to a famous British citizen.

His faithful local attendants would have respected him too much to do that to his body.

When YOU die, all your innards will likely soon be removed so that the smell won't disturb folks till your shell is in the ground. In the heat of Africa, to get the body thru several months of heat, all the insides had to be removed and the cavity salted, otherwise it would have essentially exploded and stunk to high heaven in just a few days. All dead flesh rots quickly if not frozen or dried; humans are not an exception. His servants would have carefully buried his internal organs before beginning the arduous journey back to civilization with his carefully preserved identifiable remains.

If you understood Livingstone and his life work (the effect it had on locals), you would not have to ask this question.

His body was not mutilated (see Steve's answer) and the Brits would not have "invaded"...and the proof is that they didn't. Was he used for witchcraft? Uh...no.

I am currently reading "Stanely" by Tim Jeal. In it the author notes that David Livingstone died near Lake Bangweulu in present day Zambia. It is also implied that his internal organs were removed to aid in preservation of his body so it could be transported to the coast, and thence to England.

Thus, I am of the opinion that his internal organs, presumably including his heart, were in fact removed, but for the purpose of preservation of the rest of his body, not for the purpose of witchcraft. Jeal is less clear on whether his organs were buried beneath a tree at Chitambo, or tossed to the hyenas.

Guests

Africa has strange ways of entering your soul, and before you/me make a definitive judgement ALL I ask is that we go to the regional tribal areas mentioned and talk to the local chief/s elders and their people, as they have a much better insight into the facts or fables than we can ever hope to.

We (may be surprised) in what we believe after visiting and talking to the decendants of the people

Cheers, Peter

Adding to SGraves post, which is obviously quite correct...... (I'm doing this from memory!) Many tribes of the day, including the Zulus, used to disembowel and remove heart and other organs as a sign of respect for the dead. I can't remember it all, and don't have the time to research it at the moment, but if I remember correctly, it was something to do with the fact that they considered the white folk wizards and the removal of organs had something to do with making sure evil spirits couldn't take the body over. - FWIW, much later, but for the same reason, they did it to a lot of the troops killed at Rourkes Drift and Isaldwana etc. Officers were often impaled - I wouldn't be suprised if the same or a similar belief carried on up to that area.

I'd say there's a good chance it did happen, but of course, as we weren't there, we'll never know for sure............

Thomas Pakenham in "The Scramble for Africa" relates the story, also. He is a meticulous researcher. From that, I believe the the heart and other internal organs were removed and buried.

IIRC, Stanley also believed that one of the group Livingston's close and devoted followers was likely a son of Livingston by an African woman. Livingston's wife had died of malaria about 10 years prior to Stanley's meeting him.