CHAPTER XXIII
Other Apes—The Apes in History—Habitat—The Orangs—The Gibbon
In the various records that constitute the history of these apes are found many novel and incoherent tales, but most of them appear to rest upon some basis of truth. In order to arrive at a more definite knowledge concerning them, we may review the data at our command.
In the annals of the world, the first record that alludes to these manlike apes is that of Hanno, who made a voyage from Carthage to the west coast of Africa, nearly five hundred years before the Christian era. He described an ape which was found in the locality about Sierra Leone. It is singular that the description which he gave of those apes should coincide so fully with the apes known at the present day; but it is quite certain that the apes of which he gave an account were neither gorillas nor chimpanzees. There is nothing to show that either of these apes ever occupied that part of the world, or that any similar type has done so.
The ape described by Hanno was certainly not an anthropoid, but a large dog-faced monkey or baboon, technically called cynocephalus. These animals are found all along the north coast of the Gulf of Guinea, but there is no trustworthy evidence of any true ape living north of Cameroon valley. The river that waters it empties into the sea about four degrees north of the equator. Here begins the first trace of the chimpanzee. As we pass along the windward coast, casual reports are current to the effect that gorillas and chimpanzees occupy the interior north of there; but when these reports are sifted down to solid facts, it turns out to be a big baboon or a monkey upon which the story rests. Its likeness to man, as described by Hanno, was doubtless the work of fancy, and the name troglodytes which he gave to it shows that he knew but little of its habits, or cared but little for the exactness of his statements.
The account given by Henry Battel, in 1590, contains a thread of truth woven into a web of fantasy. He must have heard the stories he relates, or seen some specimens along the coast north of the Congo. There are certain facts which point to this conclusion. The name pongo which he gave to one of them belongs to the Fiote tongue, which is spoken by the native tribes around Loango. Those people use the name, and it is commonly understood to be synonymous with the name njina, used by the tribes north of there. It is always applied to the gorilla. To me, however, it appears to coincide with the name ntyii, as used by the Esyira people for another ape, which is described in the chapter devoted to gorillas. It was from Loango that Dr. Falkenstein, in 1876, secured an ape under that name. It is singular that Baron Wurmb, in 1780, makes use of the name pongo for an orang. I have not been able to learn where he acquired this name, but it appears to be a native Fiote name for more than four hundred years, and the history of their language is fairly well known.
The name enjocko, given by Battel to another ape, is beyond a doubt a corruption of the native name ntyigo (ntcheego), and this name belongs north of the Congo from Mayumba to Gaboon. He may have inferred that these apes occupied Angola, but there is not a vestige of proof that any ape exists in that part of Africa. Even the native tribes of that part have no indigenous name for either of these apes. Other parts of his account are erroneous, and while he may have believed that these apes “go in bodies to kill many natives that travel in the wood,” and the natives may have told him such a thing, the apes do not practice such a habit. With all their sagacity, they have no idea of unity of action. If a band of them were attacked, they would no doubt act together in defense, but it is not to be believed that they ever preconcert any plan of attack. Neither do these apes ever assault an elephant. He is the one animal they hold in mortal dread. I have incidentally mentioned elsewhere the conduct of my two kulus on board the ship when they saw a young elephant. Chico, the big ape that has also been mentioned, was often vicious and stubborn. Whenever he refused to obey his keeper or became violent, an elephant was brought in sight of his cage. On seeing it he became as meek as a lamb and showed every sign of the most intense fear. Mr. Bailey himself told me of the dread both of his apes had of an elephant. Battel was also wrong in the mode he described of the mother carrying her young, and that of the apes in using sticks and clubs.
The ape known as Mafuka, which was exhibited in Dresden in 1875, was also brought from the Loango coast, and it is possible that this is the ape to which the native name pongo really belonged. This specimen in many respects conforms to the description of the ntyii given, but the idea suggested by certain writers that Mafuka was a cross between the gorilla and the chimpanzee is not, to my mind, a tenable supposition. It would be difficult to believe that two apes of different species in a wild state would cross, but to believe that two that belonged to different genera would do so is yet more illogical. I may state, however, that some of the Esyira people advance such a theory concerning the ntyii, but the belief is not general, and those best skilled in woodcraft regard them as distinct species.
To quote, in “pidjin” English, the exact version of their relationship, as it was given to me by my interpreter while in that country, may be of interest to the reader. I may remark, by way of explaining the nature of the “pidjin” English, that it is a literal translation of the native mode of thought into English words. The statement was:—
“Ntyii ’e one; njina ’e one; all two ’e one, one. Ntyii ’e one mudder; njina ’e one mudder; all two ’e one, one. Ntyii ’e one fader; njina ’e one fader. All two ’e one.” By which the native means to say that the ntyii has one mother, and the njina has one mother, so that the two have two mothers, but both have one father, therefore they are half-brothers.