THE FOOD IN UXYAMWEZI. 665 



Before their closer intercourse with the Arabs they kept poultry, 

 but like the Gallas and the Somali, who look on the fowl as a 

 kind of vulture, they would not eat it. Even in the present 

 day they retain their prejudice for eggs. Some will devour 

 animals that have died of disease, and carrion, the flesh of lions 

 and leopards, elephants and rhinoceroses, asses, wild cats and 

 rats, beetles and white ants; while others refuse to touch mut- 

 ton or clean water-fowl, declaring it is not their custom. They 

 seldom eat meat; their ordinary diet consists of the messes 

 common in central Africa, a sort of porridge made from flour 

 of matama — the Holcus sorghum, or Arabic dourra. This is 

 accompanied with leaves of the garden plants, such as the bean 

 and cucumber, boiled and mashed up. When this humble meal 

 is cooked the gentlemen (?) assemble around the pot and pro- 

 ceed to the delightful duty of cramming themselves, in which 

 exercise the only implement employed is nature's ladle. In the 

 season for it, these mush-fed children luxuriate on honey and 

 sour milk, but no matter what they eat or how much, the 

 Wanyamwezi never own repletion until they have "sat on 

 pombe" or, in other words, until they are pretty thoroughly 

 intoxicated. 



There is very little community of interest, and apparently 

 a great lack of family affection in these tribes. The husband 

 when returning from the coast laden with cloth will refuse a 

 single shukkah to his wife, and the wife succeeding to an in- 

 heritance will abandon her husband to starvation. The man 

 takes charge of the cattle, sheep, goats, and poultry ; the woman 

 has control of the vegetables^ and grain. It seems a little re- 

 markable we observe in savage life, in rude realization, so many 

 of the pet projects of certain noisy would-be leaders of an ad- 

 vanced civilization. It is hardly a question whether it is pro- 

 gress or retrogression that must be relied on to restore the 

 balance between the sexes and grant to woman the disenthral- 

 ment in which she may call what is hers, her own. It is a 

 pity that there are so many who are forward to set aside the 

 assertion that dependence is the charm of woman and her title 

 to all things. It is to be lamented that so much is said about 

 the distinctive rights and obligations of the sexes. It ought to 

 be remembered that the true happiness of man and woman is 



