Talk:James Bruce

Validity of Bruce´s claim of being the first european to discover the source of the blue Nile
Most scholars now accept Pedro Paez, to be the first european to have visited the source of the Blue Nile - according to Sir Wallis Budge: A history of Ethiopia,: on april 21, 1618 - However Paez himself wrote : on april 21, 1613 - Father Lobo also says: 1613 - so most likely Sir Wallis Budge misread 3 as an 8.

Bruce went into a frenzy, and attacked Pedro Paez´s claim, by saying that father Athanasius Kircher (1601-1680) had invented the claim , to glorify his fellow catholic Jesuit.

Father Kircher had reproduced Pedro Paez´s account of his discovery in his book: Oedipus Aegyptiacus ( first printed in Rome in 1652) and again later in Kircher´s other book : Mundus Subterraneus ( first printed in Amsterdam 1655) - all lies invented by Kircher, said Bruce. However Bruce did not know, that the original writings of Pedro Paez still existed and confirmed the story - and he also did not know, that the first time the account of Pedro Paez, had been printed, was in Gasper Schott´s book : Anatomia Physico Hydrostatica Fontum in 1633 - long before Kirchers books. The description of the source of the Blue Nile, was reprinted in Tellez: The travels of the Jesuits in Ethiopia, ( without mentioning, that it was father Paez´s description) - so Bruce felt , that he had to attack the book´s credibilty - since there could of course be no description of this site before he ( Bruce) came there. He therefore attacked Tellez book, by saying, that it was strange, that Tellez had not described the killing of capuchin missionaries in Ethiopia in 1714. Actually, it would be even stranger, if Tellez had written about it, since Tellez book was first printed in 1660 ...... 54 years before the killings happened ... The second european to visit the source of the Blue Nile, was Father Lobo, who wrote : A voyage to Abyssinia, apparantly first written by hand in 1640, later printed in german: Lobo,P. Hieronymus: Eines Jesuiten in Portugal ( Nurnberg 1670) and in French : Lobo: Relations de divers Voyage Curiuex... d´Ethiopie(Paris 1672), again later translated into french : Le Grand : Voyage Historique D`Abissinie ( Paris,1728) - and first time in english : Samuel Johnson : A voyage to Abyssinia (London 1735). Lobo also wrote: A short Relation of the River Nile, of it´s Source and Current..... written by an eye-witnesse, who lived many years in the chief kingdoms of the Abyssine Empire. Translated by Sir Peter Wyche. (London 1669). Again Bruce felt, that he had to attack the credibility of Lobo. He refered to Lobo as " a grovelling, fanatic priest " and his writings as " a heap of fables and ignorance " - he unjustly attacked Lobo , for being able to sail on land , and denied the existence of a spitting cobra, descibed by Lobo. To the excuse of Bruce, it must however be said , that the translation by Samuel Johnson of Lobo´s travels , was full of translation errors .... Luckily Lobo´s travels has now been translated into a more correct edition by Lockhart, Costa, Beckingham in 1984.( Hakluyt second series number 162 )

Later research ( Cheesman, Lake Tana and the Blue Nile, London 1936) has vindicated Lobo - Bruce was simply wrong.

Even if Paez and Lobo had never visited the site, then of course Bruce´s greek guide, who apparantly had visited the area before, would have been the one , to have the rightfull claim, to be the first european to visit the source of the Blue Nile - as mentioned in: Moorehead, the blue Nile ( London 1962 )

Still Bruce´s book is full of valuable information about Ethiopia - he simply had the bad luck, that other europeans had been there before him - and would not accept it, since he desperately wanted to be famous - and therefore acted as he did - trying to detract from other peoples achievements.

It is however pretty safe to claim, that Bruce was the first scotsman to discover the source of the Blue Nile - and perhaps ( at best) the fourth european .....

Please discuss the above here on WIKI - do you have any comments ? Do we need further clarification about of the claim of Bruce in the article itself ......... ?

understandable science (talk) 13:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Did he find anything new? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User: (talk • contribs)


 * cf. Bruce Codex. Lisa the Sociopath 20:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, given the above, I think the sentence In June 1768 he arrived at Alexandria, having resolved to endeavour to discover the source of the Nile, [...] could be re-written as In June 1768 he arrived at Alexandria, having resolved to reach the source of the Nile, [...]. Thoughts? Edmarinuk (talk) 11:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

A Freemason?
I see claims on the web that he was a Freemason, what is the actual evidence for this? Thanks.--Dougweller (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.lahistoriaconmapas.co.nr/2010/12/james-bruce-y-el-descubrimiento-del.html
 * Triggered by  on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 17:05, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Is a Greek a European
I don't think that it is correct to say that "The Greek Strates is arguably another European that reached the source of the Nile; however, in the eighteenth century, Greece was politically part of the Ottoman Empire, not Europe". A Greek is a European whether Greece is politically part of the Ottoman Empire - or of Africa for that matter.101.98.175.68 (talk) 08:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

"Part of the Ottoman Empire, Not Europe"
The first problem with this comment is already highlighted - Europe is a geographic region, not a political entity. Greeks are usually considered European, so a greek citizen of the Ottoman Empire is still European. The same logic would conclude that, say, a Senegalese member of the French Empire isn't African - that a Spanish subject of Islamic Spain isn't European, etc. It just doesn't make sense. The second problem with this statement is that the Ottoman Empire, depending on context was considered part of Europe. This was all contentious, but still further weakens the line of logic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HiddenHistoryPedia (talk • contribs) 19:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)