Talk:Mungo Park (explorer)

DOB
Many sources give Sept 10 as his D.O.B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.220.141.60  (talk • contribs) 09:44, 10 September 2004 (UTC)

translation from german article
This article should be replaced by the german article (i.e. complete rewrite), which is up to date and also much better and which also includes a map. Please see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mungo_Park

I (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Nachtigall) have written this article and frankly, there are many aspects in the engl. article which are not correct. I do not want to go into detail, because a translation will clean it up anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.73.46.40 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That would be great! -- Stbalbach 13:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I've made a start, from (where else!) the beginning of the article, drawing on Nachtigall's text in the German and my own knowledge and texts on Park. I will go over the rest as I get the chance, although would welcome a hand since even with Babelfish my German translation skills aren't great. Greycap 18:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Greycap and Stbalbach. I would be willing to review the article (and assist in this way), but my english is not fine enough to translate it myself. I also added a request to German-English_translation_requests/biographies Do not be put off by the lenght of the German article, there are quite a few cites in it that can be copied'n'pasted. Nachtigall 22:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

DOB
My name is Ben Park and I am a direct descendent of Mungo. Many sources on the net and in books state Mungo’s actual DOB been the 10th Sep, not 11th as listed on wikipedia. As a descendent of Mungo, my farther inspired my imagination as a young boy with tales of his expeditions and theories of his death in 1806. I also share what I believe to be his DOB the 10th Sep. (B Park) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpa599 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The latest biographies state that the BoD is probably 11 Sep 1771. For instance, Mark Duffill: Mungo Park: West African Explorer aus der Reihe Scots’ Lives, NMS Publishing Limited, Edinburgh 1999, ISBN 1901663159 says:
 * Mungo Park was born ... very probably on the 11 September 1771. This is the date recorded in the baptismal register, though in several biographies and other works of reference 10 September is the given date.


 * Also Kenneth Lupton: Mungo Park the African Traveler, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1979, ISBN 0-19-211749-1 (the best biographie) states it in a very similar manner (do not have the book at hand right now) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nachtigall (talk • contribs) 21:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

hi...error about surviving family.
hi.

not being funny but im one of his desendants and i can tell you we dont have family living in canada. we have most of his stuff so can you please take out the bit about family left. thanks.

if you wanna redo it thats fine but the family wont last long cos their are no more boys in the family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.6.91 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Mungo Park
'What is Mungo Park????/' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rinishka (talk • contribs) 02:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Son's grave
I found the grave of Mungo Park's last surviving son at Stone Parish Church today 11th October 2008-I am adding it to Findagrave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.52.184 (talk) 23:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Dissenter?
Is it right to call him a Dissenter? I thought the term had a meaning only in England and Wales. As I understand it, if he was a Calvinist in Scotland he would have been one of the orthodox and not have suffered from any civil disabilities. Or was he unorthodox in his Calvinism?Campolongo (talk) 05:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Piece Missing
The section headed "Death" begins in the middle of a sentence. Some text has been lost. Can it be reinserted?Campolongo (talk) 05:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Soted 86.149.30.237 (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Date of death
This letter in the Geographical Journal of February 1921, from the then Governor of Nigeria, Sir Hugh Clifford, to Alfred Milner, 1st Viscount Milner, Secretary of State for the Colonies, suggests Mungo Park did not die until 15 June 1806. This was the day before an eclipse of the sun was visible at Boussa.

This is 5 months later than the accepted date of January 1806.

Has this evidence been considered by modern-day historians? --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  20:49, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I have the 1979 book by Lupton - one of the sources used in the article. Lupton mentions the Clifford letter but doesn't take it seriously. Appendix III in Lupton contains a chronological list of reports of Park's death. The Clifford letter is mentioned in number 32 (of 33) on page 239 (google snippet here). An eclipse of the sun on the day following Park's death is mentioned in a 1913 report by a Mr Clarke. There was a partial eclipse of the sun visible in Bussa on 16 June 1806 and a full eclipse on 29 November 1807. Lupton continues: "neither of which fitted the theory well. Clifford said he had caused further inquiries to be made but could not obtain any further information." Aa77zz (talk) 17:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Issaco was elsewhere.
In the following lines from the Death section, this article says Issaco was captured, then rescued by Park. Yet earlier, Issaco had been sent to Gambia with letters instead of continuing with the party for the final section of the journey. Months later, Issaco would be sent back to the Niger to investigate. I can't see how he could possibly have been the captive at the island near Caffo. Surely the text must be taking about Amadi or another of the group instead? "After a close encounter with a hippopotamus they continued past Caffo (3 canoes) to an island where Isaaco was taken prisoner. Park rescued him, and 20 canoes chased them. This time they merely asked Amadi for trinkets which Park supplied." - Egmonster (talk) 13:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

He was the first Westerner known to have travelled to the central portion
The original claim in the lead was that he was "the first Westerner known to have travelled to the central portion". Whatever knowledge the indigenous people had of the river, they were not Westerners. Therefore if the lead is left alone it is accurate and uncontentious.

The question over discovering the course (which introduced) is harder to be certain about. There clearly were people living along its banks, and indeed there was the Timbukto civilisation. These people would have known the river in their vicinity but possibly only as far as the next village or trading settlement. As Park discovered, travelling along the river into other people's territory was not without risk. The question posed implicitly by 2600:6c5a:5080:3000:148:1205:1837:4e8 is how much of the course of the river people would have known. Without some sort of evidence it is difficult to say, and hence should not be claimed within the encyclopaedia (see WP:RS). What is documented is that Park explored at least 1000 miles of the Niger. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

"Mungo Park (explorer" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mungo Park (explorer and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Non-encyclopedic writing
"If the African Association was the "beginning of the age of African exploration" then Mungo Park was its first successful explorer;"

This line begins a paragraph in the introduction. There is no previous mention of any "African Association". What is it?

Who said it was the "beginning of the age of African exploration"? This is a direct quotation. From whom? Amandajm (talk) 17:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The answer is in the body of the article. The WP:LEAD section is (typically) unsourced summary of key points of notability from the body of the article. --  Green  C  18:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Anglocentric, inaccurate, should be recontextualized
Leaving aside the obvious stylistic error of this being written like a biographical essay rather than a reference article, African exploration was hardly pioneered by Park, and the focus entirely on British society and exploration of Africa is wildly blinkered. Also leaving aside the question of Eurocentricity generally, and neglecting the indigenous inhabitants of Africa, who doubtless did not considered their homelands to be 'unexplored', there was thriving trade and frequent visits and exploratory missions made by, among others, the Portuguese, who were trading from the interior of central Africa in the 1400s. Before that, medieval North Africans and Mediterreans conducted vigourous trans-Saharan trade for gold with the sub-Saharan Ghana Empire. Mansa Musa famously went from the Sahel to Arabia for hadj in 1324-Arabians led him there. The Royal Geographical Society in Britain was founded in the 1600s, a century before the African Association and devoted a great deal of resources to exploring Africa. All of this is documented historically and researched and written about in modern scholarship; in no way can Mungo Park be described as "[Africa's] first successful explorer; he set a standard for all who followed." Rather, he was following standards already set out long ago and his primary claim to notoriety (notability) is writing a popular travel book about Africa, and not for setting any kinds of precendent. Another example is Olaudah Equiano, who published his autobiography, which included an extensive travelogue of Africa, in 1789, ten years before Park. I am not an expert andthere are doubtless many more examples, these are simply off the top of my head. This article should be rewritten to remove the inaccurate and misleading hagiography of Park as a 'man of firsts', and winnowed down to supported facts presented in proper historical context. 74.104.130.145 (talk) 16:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * To say his primary claim to notability is writing a popular travel book is grossly inaccurate, it completely misses the Niger/Congo source question, which obsessed Europeans since the time of the Greeks, it was an ancient mystery as big as the source of Nile. Park moved that knowledge forward and set the ground for the eventual discovery of the Niger source. For some reason, I don't understand, modern readers don't consider the Niger/Congo source mystery mattered, much less notable - apparently, Park was out there for no real reason, other than to write a book about his random adventures in some random bush country. The Niger question was even deleted from the lead section of this article, here is what it used to say: This context matters for understanding Mungo Park's notability, but some users don't want to hear it, they just don't consider it important. Maybe it needs a catchy name like Source of the Nile, but all we have is Niger_River, which is not bad, but doesn't do the mystery this question held over Europeans justice.
 * To say native people's have been exploring Africa is out of context, the article concerns a European explorer. To point to previous explorers misses the significance of Mungo Park, the topic of this article. If you read European exploration of Africa it says "Overall, the European exploration of Africa in the 17th and 18th centuries was very limited. Instead, they were focused on the slave trade, which only required coastal bases and items to trade. The real exploration of the African interior would start well into the 19th century." Well, who were the first Europeans to venture in the interior of sub-Sahara Africa that fired off the whole 19th century opening up (colonization) of Africa? You might also ask, why was the popularity of Park's memoir so significant to later events in the 19th century.
 * Frankly, I have seen this article degraded over the years. Here we are the bottom, where the only thing we can say why Park is notable is because his book sold a lot of copies, like Stephen King a best-selling author.  --  Green  C  19:12, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, while you are free to express your opinions on the talk page, the article expresses reliable sources. Your statement "his primary claim to notoriety" is concerning, because that word, notoriety, means a "the state of being famous or well known for some bad quality or deed", which suggests you personally hold a negative opinion of Mungo Park, for whatever reason. --  Green  C  19:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Personally I hold no negative opionions of Mungo Park. I've never met the man, and thus he has had no occasion to offend. However, in serious historical circles, Park is a bit notorious as a prime example of blinkered colonial exploration-as-exploitation pop culture in the period. Dane Kennedy is one reputable scholar that holds this view, but it is hardly unique among legitimate historians. Citations are easily available and reframing this article to reflect that truth, without opprobium, would be all to the good. Hagiography serves no one but the writer, and the gullible. 74.104.130.145 (talk) 03:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no question explorers advanced geographic and ethnographic knowledge, and at great risk and often death to themselves. By "knowledge", I mean books that people could read around the world, not locked away or lost somewhere. You mention Dane Kennedy and I looked around and found this quote:
 * [Burton] lamented the loss of the bold independence of action that characterized the late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century expeditions in Africa by James Bruce, Mungo Park, and René-Auguste Caillié, not to mention the fifteenth and sixteenth-century adventures of the Portuguese in Africa and Asia.
 * Clearly, Park was influential with later 19th century explorers/colonizers of Africa. It's true there is a sub-text of colonization in every exploration mission, including to the Moon and Mars by NASA, or attempts to find a Northwest Passage. But this is no reason to discredit or discount what they accomplished as explorers. Indeed, it is how globalization itself happened, and is still happening. I do believe the colonization POV is important, but it is only one POV.
 * Please see "Geography, Enlightenment and the Book: Authorship and Audience in Mungo Park's African Texts" (2010). It says his fame rests on three things: 1. that he was the first person to personally observe the west to east course of the Niger River which helped solve a 2,000 year old mystery concerning the Niger's course. 2. The popularity of his book. 3. His heroic failure and death (c.f Robert Falcon Scott's enduring fame for heroic failure and death). Pg. 192.
 * On pg. 195:
 * Enlightenment concerns to extend geographical knowledge of Africa were paralleled by interest's in the continents commercial possibilities: both matters came together in attention to the Niger River.
 * Thus, I believe your quote "colonial exploration-as-exploitation pop culture" stems from looking at Park only from the colonization perspective ("commercial possibilities"), while overlooking or discounting the "concerns to extend geographical knowledge of Africa". Of which Park did sincerely set out to discover, and did contribute. Nor did he exploit anyone himself, like some later explorers. -- Green  C  20:33, 15 December 2023 (UTC)