To give a more coherent picture of the development of education in the region studied, it is necessary to start with a brief explanation of the development of the church hierarchy in the region and the way in which this was concretized by the religious orders that would become responsible for education. This subject will be covered in this chapter in two parts. The first part handles the evolution of the church hierarchy in a strict sense and the delineation of what would eventually become the mission area of the MSC. The presence and missionary work of the Trappists in the area will be discussed first. Chronologically, this history only begins once this congregation had decided to leave the Congo, but it is useful to consider a number of events from the preceding period in order to understand the activities of the MSC properly. The identity and presence of the other religious orders in the mission region and their involvement in education will then be outlined. Finally, the second part will describe a quantitative development of the schools in the vicariate on the basis of a number of statistical data. This will enable us to give the direct context of the reality in the classroom that will be considered in more detail in the second part.

1. The missionary presence
1.1. How the missionaries of the Sacred Heart obtained a vicariate in the Congo
In the church hierarchy, the area around Mbandaka and the Tshuapa was originally a part of the apostolic vicariate of the Belgian Congo, founded in 1888. It was put under the leadership of the congregation of Scheut, which was the first Belgian congregation to send missionaries to the Congo.[i] Naturally, in subsequent years the evangelisation of the Congo Free State as a whole expanded further, the number of congregations active in the Congo greatly increased and the administrative church structure was repeatedly adapted.

1.1.1. The Trappists of Westmalle on the Equator[ii]
Chronologically, the protestant Livingstone Inland Mission was the first to establish itself at the mouth of the Ruki in the Congo River. That was in Wangata in 1883. In the same year and in the same place, Stanley, together with the officers Coquilhat and Vangele,[iii] founded the state post Equateurville, which was clearly separated from the mission that had been set up earlier.[iv] In 1895 the monopoly of the Protestants in the region ended with the arrival of the first Trappists.[v] The original intention of this contemplative order was the establishment of a closed monastic community in Bamanya, about eight kilometres from Equateurville, “following the example of the monks in the middle ages.“[vi]
Thanks to its strategic situation at the confluence of two important rivers, Equateurville, renamed Coquilhatville from 1892, developed rather quickly to become a so-called circonscription urbaine.[vii]Nevertheless, it would take until 1902 before the Trappists, at the request of the colonial administration, set up the parish of Boloko wa Nsimba, still “forty minutes away from the state post of Coquilhatville“.[viii] Meanwhile, the developing state post was abandoned by the Protestants. The post of Wangata was moved to Bolenge (about ten kilometres outside Coquilhatville) and the Livingstone Inland Mission was replaced by the Disciples of Christ Congo Mission.[ix] Even before the First World War, the Trappists built a church in Coquilhatville and provided evangelical teaching there. Even so, their activities in this urban environment remained very limited. Marchal says in this regard: “The trappists, simple people from the rural Kempen region, had an aversion to great centres.”[x] In the twenties the General Chapter in Rome decided that the Trappists of Westmalle had to leave the Congo and return to their monastic way of life, which was considered irreconcilable with the missionary work in the Congo.[xi] In 1926 the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Issoudun (hereafter referred to by their official abbreviation “MSC”) took over their area.At the take-over of the Congo by the Belgian state, the missionary presence in the area consisted of three main posts (Bamanya, Mpaku and Boloko wa Nsimba) and around a dozen smaller posts.[xii] At the time the Trappists left the region, in 1926, they left five large mission posts behind.[xiii] The following posts were founded, in chronological order:[xiv] Bamanya “St. Joseph“, about ten kilometres to the east of Coquilhatville, founded in 1895; Coquilhatville “St. Eugène” (this was originally the mission post of Boloko wa Nsimba, half an hour upstream of Coquilhatville), founded in 1902; Bokote “Marie-Immaculée“, about 350 km from Coquilhatville, on the Busira, founded in 1905 in Bombimba but transferred there in 1910); Bokuma “Saint-Bernard“, situated a little to the south on the Ruki (originally founded in Mpaku in 1900 and moved there in 1910);[xv] Wafanya “Sacré Coeur“, the most recent and most southerly mission post, founded in 1917, situated the furthest into the bush, on the Luilaka (or Momboye), one of the tributaries of the Ruki, about 300 km to the south-west of Coquilhatville.[xvi]
In the middle of the 1920s, just before the take-over by the MSC, the area had five central boys’ schools and one central girls’ school. The five central mission posts and 120 auxiliary posts were serviced by twenty or so Trappists and 13 Sisters of the Precious Blood, helped by 300 catechists.[xvii] Jules Marchal had a chapter on the Trappists in his two-part Missie en Staat in Oud-Kongo.[xviii] In this he discussed among other things their shrewd manner of working, which could explain the relative success of the congregation in the matter of conversions: convert men by allowing them to have relationships with women of polygamous men, on condition that they enter a Christian marriage with those women.[xix] He added the following evaluation: “While catechists from other mission congregations were closely watched by the fathers, those of the Trappists could work for evangelisation following their own ideas. In this way, they obtained results that were not approached anywhere else in the Congo, in spite of heavy opposition from Protestants, from European civil servants and from a private company.[xx] This meant that the Trappists, who were not allowed to do missionary work and were closed down in 1924 in the Congo, achieved the best results in evangelisation.” In this respect, these ‘best evangelisation results’ must clearly be considered as conversion actions, as education was not a priority for the Trappists.

Honoré Vinck has listed a number of the characteristics of the education by the Trappists in a recent contribution.[xxi] As was explained in the first chapter, the first official school regulation was only proclaimed in 1929. The only guidelines that already existed at that time were the Instructions aux missionaires, published by the Catholic Church itself and these were very succinct on the subject of education. The emphasis was almost exclusively placed on religious instruction and that would, in any case, hardly change when the official curriculum was introduced. It was still explicitly stated in 1930 that “It (the religious instruction) will constitute the main part of the curriculum, and the missionaries will always give it the first place in their teachings.”[xxii] Indeed, as the Trappists themselves reported in their mission periodical, the catechism was learnt first, reading and writing came later.

The emphasis was placed almost completely on proselytism, not only in the articles published in the mission periodical, but also by external commentators. The picture that Marchal gives makes one suspect that the Trappists focused primarily on the development of spiritual life with their civilising work. Again, in a letter of 27 December 1921 the governor of the province, Charles Duchesne, wrote about the Trappists’ mission schools: “In general, (there are) few pupils, who rarely complete their studies.”[xxiii] About the Sisters who taught the girls he wrote: “Admirable for their dedication, that nevertheless achieves little success because the environment in which the girls live and the environment in which they will be called to live are not taken into account.” He was more explicit about the bush schools: “Established in villages, where a catechist teacher is supposed to teach” (…) “in general he is almost illiterate, limits himself to teaching a few religious ideas to a few children and this no more than intermittently.“[xxiv] In similar reports it was hinted that the Brothers in Coquilhatville were busy with anything but education. It was not in any respect their strongest point, Paul Jans, MSC, also reported in 1929.[xxv]
Vinck again referred to sources from which it appeared that the Trappists claimed to have been sabotaged by this same Duchesne when setting up their school in Coquilhatville.[xxvi]In a Notice relative à l’école primaire pour enfants noirs existants à la mission des RR. PP. Trappistes à Coquilhatville from 1924[xxvii] there was indeed a strong condemnation of the Governor, whose behaviour would have been in sharp contrast to that of his predecessor:[xxviii] “Governor DUCHENE (sic) having assumed leadership of the Equateur, began a destructive action against our education.” He was in fact accused of pulling a great number of boys out of school to set them to work in place of (white) planters. After which still more Congolese had left the school to go to work in the service of the administration or private interests.

It is rather difficult to evaluate the standpoint from which Duchesne wrote this in any case. The contribution that appeared about him in the Colonial Biography does give the following indication: “(…) during his 6^th term of office (…) a friendly climate arose between the directors of the private sector and himself, not excluding some passing storms, but eminently favouring appeasal. The same climate moreover arose between the governor and the missions established in his province.”[xxix] The sixth ‘term’ that is spoken of only began in 1924, at the time that the MSC were already present in the region. In the sequel of the note only the MSC were referred to, never the Trappists. Consequently, it may as easily be suggested that there were personal problems between the Trappists and the colonial administration, or that this was a somewhat exaggerated but not unusual manner of reacting. From a letter of October 1924 it certainly seems that the state of education in Coquilhatville was not particularly positively evaluated by Mgr. Van Goethem, MSC. Van Goethem was at that moment still prefect of the Prefecture of the Tshuapa (and in this sense not yet responsible for the area around Coquilhatville). He said in a letter to Edouard De Jonghe: “Native labour and the native military force are considerable over there. Nevertheless, as yet the education of the children has not been given sufficient attention. This education should be in the hands of the Catholics“. This naturally implied that the impact of the Trappists was not very strong, in spite of the presence of large numbers of converted Congolese, which was also noted by Van Goethem. He gave further details of his claims about the state of education and saw two concrete problems: on the one hand the administration hardly intervened at all to support education. On the other hand the Trappists provided only primary schooling, which was quite inadequate in an environment in which there was a great need for trained skilled workers.[xxx]
It therefore seems that Van Goethem considered that the Trappists were right to a certain extent as regards state intervention, though he did not mention sabotage explicitly, even though these opinions are drawn from private correspondence with a ‘friendly’ official. Concerning his remark about the level of education, it must be said that this was at that time applicable to the entire colony and as such cannot be construed as a criticism of the Trappists. In this sense it probably fits in with the missionary pressure on the administrative policies, which increased appreciably, partly under the influence of the three-yearly meetings of the heads of missions in the Congo and which, already in 1919, had led to an action plan for systematic subsidisation of the Catholic missions’ education.[xxxi]

1.1.2. Take-over of the area by the MSC
As from 1926 the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart received the supervision of the former Trappist mission area and, as has been mentioned, they would build this up to a real vicariate. This coincided with the Trappists moving out of the region. The final mission region of the MSC came into existence grosso modo in two important steps. In a first phase a part of the existing vicariate (New Antwerp) was split off and brought under the supervision of the MSC as the Prefecture of the Tshuapa (the tributary of the Congo that runs through the southern part of Equatorial province).[xxxii] This occurred in 1924.[xxxiii]
The original intention of the Trappists of Westmalle was to found an enclosed community (an abbey), which would, through its spiritual aura, exercise a civilising influence on the local population. Already before the First World War, it seemed that the superiors in Westmalle and the General Chapter in Rome were inclined against shifting towards ‘normal’ mission work. This actually happened out of sheer necessity because an enclosed, self-supporting abbey community was apparently unattainable in terra nova and they depended too much on the local population to fulfil their own needs. The discussions between supporters and opponents of mission work would be long drawn out and the colonial abbots managed to somehow or other maintain a large degree of autonomy against the hierarchy. Finally, the hierarchy did succeed in closing down the Trappist mission. Vermeir extensively discusses the long search for a mission congregation that could and would take over from the Trappists.
The Belgian province of the MSC, which was only set up in 1919, started discussions with the Trappists as early as 1921 but it would take until 1924 before they effectively left for the Congo. Though taking over the whole mission had originally been discussed, in the first instance the previously uncultivated area of the Upper Tshuapa (more to the east of the area occupied by the Trappists) was intended as the destination. The first MSC members arrived in Bokote, at that point the only and somewhat westerly situated mission post in the new mission area. The reason why this half-hearted solution was chosen should probably be sought in the fact that a great many of the Trappists who were present in the Congo did not want to go back, and at that time were thinking of becoming ‘ex-cloistered’ as monks, so as to be able to remain active in mission work. However, there were strong doubts about the new status that they would take. In the meantime, Scheut had already made an offer to take on the ‘uncloistered’ in their order and there was also the possibility of setting up a new, separate (monastic) order. After weighing up the different interests, most of those concerned did in fact choose to transfer to the congregation of the MSC.[xxxiv]
As a consequence of these changes, the Tshuapa prefecture was expanded in January 1926 with the more westerly situated part including Coquilhatville, which had, until then, remained in the hands of the Trappists. The area now acquired the name Prefecture of Coquilhatville. Still in the same year, the prefecture was enlarged towards the south and in the following year there were a number of smaller border corrections. In 1931 the independent mission Bikoro was founded and entrusted to the Lazarist Fathers. As a result, the prefecture of Coquilhatville had to give up territory in the South-west.[xxxv] Finally, in 1932, the prefecture was ‘promoted’ to a full mission region and gained the title of vicariate, with the ‘Apostolic vicar’ Van Goethem now at its head.[xxxvi]

To serve the conversion work the school network was also developed. As time went on the work became more systematic. This happened, certainly in this region, along two separate tracks: on the one hand in central schools, on the other in rural schools. Every central mission post where missionaries were actually placed received a school. This seemed logical, since the logistic provisions had to be concentrated and the number of people who could be brought into action was limited. Because of the extent of the area the local population was also called upon for education. The travelling missionaries went to recruit people in the interior and tried to get them to build schools and allow them to function. Consequently, the teaching was entrusted to Congolese who had received some instruction. This system already existed with the Trappists in an embryonic form but it was now carried through. In principle, in every central mission post at least one travelling father was provided. His task was to comb through the area, to visit the different villages one by one, to settle the palavers, to win over the population and to check on the local schoolmasters.
That a two track policy was indeed used is apparent from the fact that the rural or “bush” schools were not only figuratively but also literally much less visible. In official statistics, references are often only found to schools that were situated in more central places. In fact, there was some disagreement between missionaries and administrators concerning rural schools, as is apparent from a report written by Mgr. Van Goethem in 1935. In this he reacted against certain imputations from the educational administration that the missionaries did not do well at all in the rural schools and were not suited for education.[xxxvii]
Under the leadership of the MSC, and with the collaboration of the different congregations which were present in this area, the number of mission posts was expanded in the course of the years to fifteen or so for the whole vicariate. Boende, Mondombe (both 1925) and Flandria (1926) date from the very early years of the Sacred Heart mission. Later, Imbonga (1940) was added. In the post-war period a third parish was founded in Coquilhatville (Coq II, 1956) and a second in Boende (1956) as well as new posts in Iyonda (1945) and Nkembe (1953). The positions of the different mission posts can clearly be seen on the overview map of the Equatorial district reproduced here.[xxxviii]

 1.2. The congregations working in the region
The complete territory of the Belgian Congo was divided into a number of areas for the purpose of Catholic mission work. One particular mission congregation was responsible for each area. Obviously this organisation was partially adapted to historical circumstances. After all, in the first instance Leopold II had asked a number of congregations to go and work in the Belgian Congo. These congregations then called upon other congregations to help them with their mission work. In the case of the MSC in the region of the Tshuapa, one male and four female congregations were involved. The intention here is only to give an overview of these congregations and to briefly consider their foundation and aims, reporting the periods in which they were active in this area and the places where they were working. The source material available on these congregations differed very greatly from case to case, both in quantity and quality. For this reason it seemed appropriate to provide more explanation on this material for each congregation. To avoid interrupting the course of the explanation, this will be done in an extended footnote at the beginning of the paragraph concerned.

 1.2.1 The Daughters of Charity of St Vincent de Paul[xxxix]
The Daughters of Charity are of French origin, a relatively old congregation also active outside Europe from 1839.[xl] They were present in the Congo mission of the MSC from 1926. They initially worked in the hospital for whites and the hospital for blacks in Coquilhatville and were quickly brought into education. Most Daughters actually worked in the neighbouring prefecture of Bikoro. The Daughters of Charity had close ties with the congregation of the Lazarist Fathers who were working there. This was described as follows by Vermeir:
“The Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul went to start a hospital in Coquilhatville and also a few schools. But as these Sisters always needed a Lazarist Father as a Fr. Confessor they could not work in a region where no Lazarists were present. For that reason the Lazarists received a small mission close to Lake Tumba, from which the Fr. Confessor could regularly visit the Sisters in Coquilhatville.“[xli] This appears to be generally confirmed by the history of the foundation of the Bikoro mission, which appeared in 1939 in the common mission periodical of the Lazarists and Daughters of Charity: “But they cannot go very far without having a priest from the Mission close by them, entrusted with maintaining the spirit of the Founder with them, the spirit of simplicity, goodness and poverty.”[xlii] From the same history it also appears that the Lazarists came to an agreement with Scheut about splitting a territory for their ‘independent mission’. In Coquilhatville itself the Daughters supervised the primary school and the nursery school.

1.2.2 The Daughters of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart[xliii]
The Daughters of the Sacred Heart are actually a sister congregation of the MSC. They belong to the same religious ‘family’ and were also founded in 1882 in Issoudun (France) by Jules Chevalier and Marie-Louise Hartzer. The Belgian Province was founded in 1931; their Provincial House was situated in Brussels (Schaarbeek).
The sisters had by that time been working in Belgium for several decades. According to their own chronicle writer they were called there as early as 1892, to “take care of the linen of fathers, brothers, novices and students of the large central training house on the Terloo street in Borgerhout.” Plans to expand their activities in Belgium to a real apostolate apparently came to nothing. The sisters went back to France after a few years only to return to Belgium a couple of years later, fleeing the antireligious policies of the French government.
Their presence in the mission area of the MSC started in 1925 in Bokote. Subsequently, they established themselves similarly in Boende (1927), Mondombe (1930 to 1960), Bolima (from 1934 to 1944), Bokela (1938), Ikela (1941 to 1960), Iyonda (1944, foundation of a leper house and removal of the sisters out of Bolima). After the Second World War they also taught in Coquilhatville (1949). Initially that was only in a school for European children, later they also took over the supervision of a girls’ school for Congolese in the new parish of Coquilhatville (Coq II, 1957).[xliv]

1.2.3 The Brothers of the Christian Schools[xlv]
At the time of colonisation, the Brothers of the Christian Schools were one of the larger religious groups and they still are. As the name implies, they specialized in education. Founded by Jean-Baptiste de la Salle, Canon of Rheims Cathedral in the early eighteenth century, the congregation initially aimed to provide free education for those in need. They were active in the region covering present-day Belgium as from the end of the eighteenth century and established themselves all over the country after Belgian independence. From the second half of the nineteenth century they developed the St. Lucas art schools, which were initially more technical schools. In the early twentieth century their schools had over 25 000 pupils.[xlvi]
In Congo they were active in many places and in different vicariates. Their first establishment was Boma, where they established themselves from 1909. A propaganda brochure of the Brothers from 1946 also reported activities in Matadi, Leopoldville, Tumba and Gombe (a St Lucas school).[xlvii] In 1955, according to their own chronicler, there were supposed to be 65 different schools of the Brothers existing in the Congo, with over 18 000 pupils in total. About a third of these were in Leopoldville, illustrating the fact that the Brothers clearly concentrated their activities in the centres and towns.[xlviii] Their presence in the region of the MSC was restricted to Bamania (from 1926) and Coquilhatville (cité indigène, from 1929-1930).

They came to work there at the explicit request of the MSC, who wanted to take on the education of catechists and teachers professionally and assigned a great deal of competence in this to the Brothers of the Christian Schools. At least that is the tenor of what MSC Paul Jans wrote to Brother Véron Ignace at the start of 1929: “I do not have to tell you the joy with which I received the news of the provisional contract and the coming of your Brothers. During your visit in ’27 you were able to see how much Mgr. (Van Goethem, JB) and I hold to your valuable support for placing education at the top and for preparing catechist-teachers capable of providing this education in all the posts depending on the Mission.”[xlix] In practice, the Brothers would work in the Groupe Scolaire in Coquilhatville and in the teacher training college in Bamania.

1.2.4 The Sisters of the Precious Blood.
The presence of the Sisters of the Precious Blood in the region is specifically associated with that of the Trappists. The congregation was founded in 1885 by François Pfanner, an Austrian Trappist, in Marian Hill (Natal province, South Africa). The missionary history of these Trappists shows similarities with that of the Trappists of Westmalle. The missionary activity of Pfanner gave just as much occasion for tension with the hierarchy and eventually even led to his removal from his post. The conflicts ultimately led to a secession of Pfanner’s followers from the Trappist order, from which the new mission congregation of Marian Hill was formed.
Pfanner, who was working in a new Trappist monastery in Banja Luka (in the present-day Bosnia-Herzegovina, belonging at that time to the Austrian-Hungarian empire), founded the Sister order with the aim of assisting the missionaries in their work. The Sisters finally found a home in Aarle-Rixtel (North-Brabant in the Netherlands), where they established their mother house.

It was the first Catholic order of nuns which was present in the region (and during the first 25 years it was also the only one). They arrived at almost the same time as the Trappists of Westmalle. We can suspect that there was a connection to Westmalle through the founder, who was still working in South Africa at that time.[li] Their presence in the region began in Bamanya (1898), where their work was with the primary school and domestic school. Later they established themselves in Mpaku (1903) but left by 1910 “because of health problems” and transferred to Bokuma. Finally, they also went to work in Flandria (Boteke), where the Huileries du Congo Belge (H.C.B.) had an establishment with associated education (1931).[lii]

1.2.5. The Sisters of St Vincent de Paul from Beveren-Waas[liii]
This was the smallest congregation working in the region. These Sisters came from a local religious community in Beveren-Waas, founded there in 1844 by the village priest Cools. They undertook the traditional tasks of a congregation of nuns: teaching and the care of the sick. Right up to the present day they are associated with the village school in Beveren-Waas. They also fulfilled these tasks in the Congo. They came to this area due to the actions of Mgr. Van Goethem, who, just as his successor Hilaire Vermeiren, came from Beveren-Waas and knew the Sisters from his own village. The published sources mainly report one establishment at Wafanya (from 1929) but they are supposed also to have worked in Bolima, as some of the Sisters reported to me themselves in a conversation, but that was perhaps only the case in the fifties.[liv] Wafanya was the most easterly and isolated mission post in the area of the MSC.

2. Quantitative development of education in the region
It is a very difficult task, if not an impossible one, to give a correct picture of the quantitative growth of education in this region. In the first place, it is certain that exact statistics have never existed about the participation of Congolese in education. There was never a real obligation to go to school and never any effective check on the enrolment. The missions were certainly obliged to give certain data in their annual reports but it was very difficult to check the accuracy of these numbers. Besides that, missionaries and officials of the administration had a somewhat tense relationship with each other which discouraged the objective reporting of statistics and numbers.
Secondly, there is the opaque structure of education. In the course of the years, the curriculum was constantly broadened, while the structure itself evolved from a rather organically grown situation to a rather complex patchwork quilt of guidelines, schools, curricula and nomenclature. Consequently, the comparison of statistics from difference sources must be handled very cautiously, considering that the same type of school could be called by different terms.[lv] These effects are certainly less important at the level that we wish to study, primary education, but even ‘primary education’ is not always an unambiguous term. Let us think for example of the problem we have previously discussed: the problems of the different grades.[lvi]
Thirdly the point of departure is the ecclesiastical organisation of the colony (vicariate), which did not correspond to the political divisions.[lvii] That almost makes trusting in the information from the missions themselves obligatory. This only appears to be an inconvenient element at first sight. After all, the data that the official bodies worked with were also assembled by the missions. Even though the question is not whether the statistics give an honest picture (or can give such a picture), there still remains the enormous problem that it is not always clear which type of school is included in which statistics and which is not. Subsidised and non-subsidised schools could quite often be mingled, for example.

No systematic sets of statistics exist that are valid for the complete period, either in an official source or publication, internal documentation or correspondence of the MSC. The figures brought together here are primarily based on three series of data. Firstly, there are the so-called Annuaires des missions, annual reports from missions which we have already referred to and which were considered a sort of reference book about the Catholic missions in the Belgian Congo, often with comprehensive lists of missionaries, places where they were established, information about foundations, and so forth.[lviii] Secondly, a number of (annual) reports of the MSC directed to their superiors were available. The duty of reporting, which was imposed internally, obliged those responsible at the local level to keep the superiors on the home front informed at regular intervals about the developments in the mission. The mission periodicals are the third source used. These regularly contain statistics or trends, even only as a means of propaganda. They are certainly to be read with the necessary degree of caution. Some data come from other documents such as the Aequatoria Archive. Finally, here and there data from inspection reports, mostly composed by mission inspectors, have been used.
The statistics are reproduced here in the following manner: Firstly, in a general overview, statistics which apply to the global region are brought together. Subsequently, the quantitative development of education is given, mission post by mission post, always referring to relevant citations and statistics. This is done insofar as possible in chronological order. In this account, the mission posts are ordered according to their date of foundation.

2.1. General
2.1.1. In the Interbellum
A report from 1929, composed by Mgr. Van Goethem and intended for the Propaganda Fidei at Rome, reports that there were 10 Scholae inferiores pro pueris and 6 pro puellis, with pupil numbers of 1 074 and 521 respectively.[lix] An overview that was composed at about the same time by the mission’s inspector Vertenten reports in more detail the differing types of schools (nursery schools, primary schools and the teacher training college).[lx] On the basis of a large number of inspection reports that are available for the year 1929, the data from that overview can be confirmed.[lxi] For the situation five years later we can appeal to the Annuaire of Abbé Corman, which has been referred to previously.[lxii] The data for both years are brought together schematically here:[lxiii]

Table 2 – Schematic overview of the congregations present in the MSC mission area

The 1930s were generally considered as the high tide for Catholic missionary activity.[lxiv] The number of central mission posts in the vicariate of Coquilhatville also increased considerably in the second half of the ‘thirties: Bolima (1934), a second parish in Coquilhatville (1934), Bokela (1936) and Ikela (1937).[lxv] For these mission posts, however, there are much less statistical data in connection with education.[lxvi] Besides this, the following casual remark in a travel report by one of the MSC members gives a disappointing picture of the state of affairs of that education halfway through the 1930s: “Still no real education outside the mission posts; teaching of the catechists in the catechism as preparation for baptism, but no more. There are only schools with a real curriculum in the mission posts.”[lxvii] In Mgr. Van Goethem’s report about the operational year 1936-37 some more statistics about the rural schools are given: “Despite the difficulty of regular inspection our rural schools have maintained their activity. I here cite the number of schools and their pupils, for each of our posts.“[lxviii]Table 2– Schematic overview of the congregations present in the MSC mission area

Table 3 – Number of rural schools and pupils in the apostolic vicariate of Coquilhatville, by mission post, 1936 (source: Aequatoria Archives)

These figures are brought together in Table 3. Finally, there are some global figures in a few internal reports on the number of pupils in the primary education of the vicariate at the end of the interbellum: in 1938 there were 118 primary schools with 6 140 boys and 665 girls.[lxix]

2.1.2. After the Second World War
Naturally, there is very little information available for the war years. The Annals published hardly anything about the Congo during the war and only after 1944 can traces be found of the reports from the missions to their superiors. The Annuaire from 1949 does give fairly detailed information. Little is added to this by the internal reports and certainly not by the articles in the Annals. A general reference work of the calibre of these Annuaires is really no longer available for the last decades of the colonial period. The Katoliek Jaarboek (sic) from 1960 does contain some interesting data but is nevertheless less detailed about the schools in the regions and focuses naturally on the end of the colonial period. For the 1950s, therefore, the data from reports of the diocese have to be called upon, if possible supplemented by other information, for example from the Annals.
There are, in fact, good reasons to approach this type of source from the 1950s with extra caution. Colonial self-legitimation and thus propaganda was very common in this period. Criticism and interest grew in the homeland and the polarisation between Catholics and free-thinkers would play an important role in Belgium, and to a more limited extent also in the Congo. A good example of this effect is to be found in the annual report of the mission for the school year 1951-52: “A slight decrease is apparent amongst pupils in the first grade. There were some schools with five or six pupils; the Vicariate could not permit itself the luxury of subsidising the teachers for these schools as the school population was insufficient to be subsidised by the government.”[lxx] An observation that certainly contradicted the general jingoistic mood and the picture of classrooms overwhelmed by eager–to-learn masses, as it appeared in the periodical of the missionaries more than once. Increasingly positive reports were sent out into the world, particularly about the participation of girls in education: “A happy conclusion: the girls are starting to attend school better. This is an appreciable success, given the parents apparent unwillingness to send their daughters to the mission posts.”[lxxi]

In his annual report of 1954 Mgr. Vermeiren gave the following statistics for the whole vicariate: “The total number of pupils in primary schools of the mission is 11 933 of which 10 567 are boys and 1 363 girls. 540 children from the nursery school should be added to this number.”[lxxii] In September 1955 he gave the following statistics, which were split up quite differently: “The number of pupils in the primary school is continually increasing. Thanks to the dedication of our itinerant missionaries the number of bush schools has increased to 29 during the past year. … The bush fathers currently run 195 schools: nursery and primary schools have 13 693, evening schools 174 pupils. Professional schools, middle, teacher training schools and secondary schools, domestic and nursing schools have 546 pupils. A school for educational theory has just opened with 64 pupils.”[lxxiii] In 1956 it was stated much shorter: “The number of pupils in the central and bush schools considerably exceed 15 000.”[lxxiv] The report was also characterised by an aggressive tone, typical for that period, in which the enmity between confessional and ‘neutral’ education shows through strongly. In the Annals from March 1957 the numbers were given in somewhat more detail, in an article based on the annual report of 1 July 1956.[lxxv] On the basis of this, one can indeed conclude that more than 15 000 pupils were involved, of which less than 7% went beyond the level of actual primary education. Broken down the figures are:

Table 4 – Number of schools and pupils in the apostolic vicariate of Coquilhatville, 1956 (source: Annals MSC)

A number of elements that have been discussed above are shown in the considerations that the Vicar devoted to education in his annual report for 1958, the last that we have available before independence: “Let us cast an eye over the education table. The vicariate currently runs 246 central and bush schools. The nursery, primary, teacher training and professional schools house an increasing number of pupils; we are approaching twenty thousand. A happy fact to be observed: as I have already mentioned above, the girls are coming in much greater numbers to the central posts of the mission for their instruction and education. The natives have confidence in our education. In this way in Coquilhatville where the left government has made such efforts to compete with free education, the number of pupils attending the classes run by the Brothers and Sisters totals four thousand. The same is true for the school for European children. The quality of our bush teachers sometimes leaves something to be desired. Nevertheless, we are making every effort to replace them with more and more pupils leaving teacher training colleges each year.”[lxxvi]

Finally a few statistics from just after independence. The Katoliek Jaarboek from 1961 only gives a few general numbers. For the diocese of Coquilhatville those are:[lxxvii] one junior seminary with 85 seminarians and 243 primary schools, with 18 120 Catholic boys and 3 624 Catholic girls, besides 5 200 and 3 672 non-Catholics respectively. This publication also gave a list with all the secondary schools in the Congo. From this it seems that the scarce ‘secondary education’ was mainly concentrated in Coquilhatville and Bamanya and that girls were almost completely ignored (see the list appended).[lxxviii]

2.2. Situation per mission post
2.2.1. Bamanya (founded in 1895)
Interbellum

From the overview of 1929 it is apparent that the MSC had boys’ schools in every mission post, except in Bamanya. The Brothers of the Christian Schools had a boys’ school there. It was also confirmed in the Annals of the MSC that the Brothers, even before they started up the school group in Coquilhatville, were already active in Bamanya: “Even before they (i.e. the Brothers of the Christian Schools, JB) sent the first teachers to Coquilhatville for the government schools, the first three Brothers came to Bamanya. Straight away they organised the primary school and a teacher training college.”[lxxix]Father Rousseau wrote in 1932 in the Annals: “Since I have been here in Bamanya, they have built a large school for boys and another building of 64m by 50m. Already 200 boys are boarding and the beds for the remainder will soon be ready. The Sisters are now asking for the same beds to be made for the girls, that makes another 100 to 150 of these beds that we have to put together.”[lxxx] This indicates that a girls’ school did indeed already exist there at that time.

In 1933 those same Annals stated: “Besides workshops where we teach our black boys a craft, we have just started the first teacher training college under the leadership of a few Brothers of the Christian Schools, the Sisters have opened a similar school for girls.”[lxxxi] The girls were taught in Bamanya by the Sisters of the Precious Blood. Precise data is to be found in an anonymous report about the Sisters for the year 1934-35: “In Bamanya the Froebel school houses 42 pupils and the primary girls’ school 76. These schools are running well.”[lxxxii]

In the general report about the working of the Vicariate, Van Goethem wrote, again in the same year, about the results of that education: “The school at the post houses 350 pupils. The teacher training school awarded eighteen diplomas in this year. Of the new pupils with diplomas ten have been placed in central schools, seven in rural schools and one became a clerk.”[lxxxiii] Most graduates of the teacher training college therefore clearly achieved the positions they were expected to.

After the Second World War
Data for the year 1947 were included in the Annuaire of 1949. According to this data 66 rural schools depended on the mission post of Bamanya. At the mission post itself the primary school of the Brothers now counted 274 pupils. The teacher training college (the only one in the region) had 67 pupils. The Brothers also had a novitiate with 6 novices. Girls’ education included the primary school with 79 pupils, a domestic school with 18 pupils and a department of ‘cutting and sewing’ with 11 pupils. A report from 1946 gave different numbers: the teacher training college still had, according to this source, 300 pupils, somewhat more than given in the Annuaire. Further, there was mention here of a school for ‘half-white girls’ (in the colonial context one usually spoke of ‘mulattos’), also supervised by Sisters of the Precious Blood. The report mentioned, without further details, a hundred or so girls in ‘the girls’ school’, and sixty or so girls and boys in the nursery school.[lxxxiv]
In the 1950s most attention was given in publications and reports to the building of a new school building for ‘the teacher training college’ which had already been set up in 1951.[lxxxv] The new building opened its doors in 1954.[lxxxvi] Statistics report that at the beginning of the fifties there were more than 50 students in the teacher training college. Later this number dropped to under 30.[lxxxvii] However, this local situation illustrates the complexity of the terminology used. In a document from 1956 it was reported that in Bamanya, as well as a teacher training college, there was a ‘school for moniteurs’ (teaching assistants) and a ‘pedagogical school’.[lxxxviii] At that time there were 26 pupils in the école normale secondaire, 45 in the ‘school for moniteurs‘ and 64 in the ‘pedagogical school’.[lxxxix] The only mention of the primary school was that ‘new classes’ were added.[xc]

2.2.2. Coquilhatville (1902)
Pre-war period
There are few statistics available for Coquilhatville in the pre-war period. From an article in the Annals of 1927 it can be inferred that, at that time, there was already a large school with Congolese teachers.[xci] More specific information is not available. In 1937 the activity report of the Vicariate stated: “(native centre): convent for Sisters of Charity, who run the new school for native girls at this place.”[xcii]

After the War
The ‘city’ of Coquilhatville was split into two different mission posts in the Annuaire of Van Wing. Six rural schools were dependent on Coquilhatville “Rive” (the original parish founded in 1902).At this time, the school group of the Brothers of the Christian Schools was apparently brought into the new parish, Coquilhatville “Bakusu” (founded in 1934). The new parish apparently corresponded to the centre ville. At least, that can be inferred from the fact that all educational activity was situated in that part of the town. According to the data from the Annuaire the school group of the Brothers comprised at that time a primary school with 851 pupils and a secondary school (section moyenne) with 94 pupils, all boys. The Daughters of Charity led the school for indigenous girls (founded on the 7 October 1938 according to the Annuaire), which consisted of a nursery school with 52 pupils, a primary school with 5 classes and 360 pupils, and a domestic school with 3 classes and 38 pupils. Besides this, 2 rural schools were also reported.
In the 1950s Coquilhatville, as administrative headquarters and the only ‘city’ in the region, received by far the most attention. It is certain that the town was expanding enormously and that the Catholic Church tried to keep pace with the population increase. The town, which from its foundation consisted of a black and a white neighbourhood, each with its own parish, would get an additional, third, black parish at the end of the 1950s. In the school year 1950-51 a new primary school opened there with 400 pupils.[xciii] At that time plans were already being made for yet another primary school and this was already established in the next school year. At the same time a vocational school was opened. Apparently this very quickly gained 100 pupils, distributed between departments of woodwork and metalwork.[xciv]
Around 1952, according to the Annals, there were supposed to be 2 000 children receiving primary education in the Centre Extra Coutumier (C.E.C.), as the neighbourhood for the indigenous people was officially called.

Of these there were 1 300 boys and 700 girls, a proportion which, coincidently, differed significantly from that of the rural areas, where the participation by girls was far lower.[xcv] The annual report of the apostolic vicar for 1954 gives more precise statistics that reflect the same order of magnitude: 1 125 pupils with the Brothers and 717 pupils with the Sisters.[xcvi]
From 1955 we also find the new parish in the ‘official’ reports. The foundation of the parish occurred at the same time as the school conflict in the Congo, which also left its mark. From that time the results of both school networks were compared. Naturally, this always came out in favour of the mission schools. These still seemed to be undergoing an exponential growth. In the report for 1955-56, for example, more than 4 000 pupils were mentioned in primary education, purely in the original C.E.C.[xcvii] The results of the newly set up ‘state education’ stood, of course, in sharp contrast. The report of 1956 gave figures that were much more in line with the previous ones: 1 200 boys and 1 000 girls in the first neighbourhood, 300 children in the new parish. An honest comment was added: “5 emergency classrooms were built to combat the official state schools: already more than 300 children are enrolled in these classes, mostly girls; two more classrooms are urgently needed.”[xcviii]

For the following years there is only information from the Annals. Again, other numbers were systematically given. Numbers from 3 500 to 4 000 pupils are mentioned in the ‘Congolese’ primary schools. As the nomenclature used is seldom clear-cut, it is almost impossible to find out what is precisely meant by this. However, seeing that separate numbers are given for other levels of education, this appears to relate solely to primary education.[xcix]

2.2.3. Bokuma (1900-1910)
In the Annals of 1928 an article was published called “History of the mission post in Bokuma”, in which religious education and the difficult beginning of conversion work in the area were mentioned. Schools were not explicitly discussed.[c] After this, nothing special appeared about this subject in the Annals, but from the activity report concerning the Sisters of the Precious Blood from 1934 some information can be extracted: “At Bokuma the Sisters have a school for boys with 108 pupils, a school for girls with 51 pupils and a nursery school with 42 pupils.”[ci] Information was still scarce after this. From a report of 1935, about the Sisters of Beveren-Waas in Wafania, the following does appear: “Sr. Julie is the head of a school for boys which currently has 365 pupils. This year there are 17 graduates, of which five have begun their grammar school in Bokuma,…“[cii] This is a reference to the only school with real secondary education in the entire region, the junior seminary in Bokuma, founded in 1930.[ciii]

In the Annuaire about 10 rural schools, primary education at the central school (by the MSC, JB), a junior seminary with 35 students, and girls’ education by the Sisters of the Precious Blood were reported for 1948. The girls’ school consisted of a primary school with 62 pupils and a department for ‘cutting and sewing’ with 32 pupils. The numbers for the seminary are particularly difficult to place. In an article in the Annals in 1948, 45 seminarians were mentioned.[civ] The pupil numbers fluctuated, in fact, rather strongly. For example, the year 1947 began with 50 students and ended with 28.[cv]

The seminary, as the most prestigious educational institute in the region, received the most attention in the publications and reports for the 1950s. The report for 1956 mentioned a start-up girls’ school and a boys’ school that “shot up out of the ground“, a term that applies more to the development of the buildings than to the numbers of pupils. Pupil numbers were only given for the junior seminary, there were about 50.[cvi]

2.2.4. Bokote (founded in 1905, moved in 1910)
In the meantime, in 1926, there appeared to be a nursery school in Bokote.[cvii] Eight years later Sister Henrica wrote in the Annals: ‘About our school colony: After the holidays there are just about a hundred extra new pupils. In the week the sisters now have 702 people in the classes. As far as the number of girls is concerned, there are now 115, and we must add to that the 135 foolish virgins over which Sister Rosa is in charge.'[cviii] What she meant by ‘the foolish virgins’ is not entirely clear. In another, anonymous article a boys’ school led by the Daughtersis also mentioned: “Once past the lokole-house, we arrive at the classes…. Sr. M. Ghislena is very busy: she is already teaching the girls from half past seven, more than a hundred; she is assisted by two black teachers, whom she also has to help along the way …“, and “At a quarter past ten the classes begin for the boys.“[cix]
This is confirmed in the activity report about the Daughters of the Sacred Heart: “The nursery school has 70 children, led by Sr. Aleidis. The girls’ school has 126 pupils and is led by Sr. Josepha. The boys’ primary school has 949 pupils and the teaching is done by Sr. Engelberta, Sr. Josepha, Sr. Alphonsine, and Sr. Aleidis. The dressmaking workshop, that houses around thirty girls, is run by Sr. Henrica.”[cx] The numbers given here for the boys’ school give the impression of a rather large school. This is confirmed in the general activity report of the Vicar, the numbers correspond grosso modo: “Bokote: school at the post has flourished extremely well with its 1 125 boys and 150 girls.”[cxi] Again, Vertenten confirms in his article in the Annals from 1934, which has already been cited, that:

“In the last few years there has been a great influx of male youths at our mission posts: Bokote and Boende above all (Bokote 1000 and Boende 600). In Bokote they have been able to lodge most of the children with the families that live there at the mission. There are guest families which accommodate up to 20 to 30 children.“[cxii]

After the war Van Wing quoted 53 rural schools for this post. Then there was also primary education at the mission post, led by the MSC, with 7 classes for 350 pupils (!), and girls’ education by the Daughters of the Sacred Heart: a nursery school with 39 pupils and primary education with 5 classes for 36 pupils. This last number seems exceptionally strange. A manuscript from 1946 with data about the mission at Bokote reported 310 boys and 26 girls, which is reasonably in agreement with the previous numbers.[cxiii] According to this document, there were supposed to be 949 boys and 46 girls attending in the rural schools.
Again, attention here was primarily paid to the building plans in the fifties, particularly the boarding school for which the first stone was laid in 1950. The scarce numerical data again come from the annual report from 1956: about 450 boys and 100 girls populated the primary school at that time.[cxiv] Another 11 small schools in the interior are also mentioned, but the criteria used here to determine what ‘rural schools’ were differed from those used in the Annuaire.

2.2.5. Wafanya (1917)
In 1930 the following was written about the Sisters of Beveren-Waas in Wafanya: “E.Z. Julia, a qualified teacher, is the superior. Besides managing the house and the community she is also the headmistress of the school and is responsible for over 100 boys. She has also already started a sewing school for girls and primary education for girls is already under discussion.”[cxv] The reporting in the Annals was noticeably well-disposed towards the Sisters of Beveren-Waas. In 1931 father Vertenten wrote in an article, titled “Wafanya advances”: “The boys’ school flourishes under the diligent and expert leadership of Mother Julia, she already has 136 pupils. The girls’ school will quickly follow: the sewing school is there already and in a short time the little girls have already learnt a great deal, the larger ones are already learning to work on the machine. The sewing school is a beautiful hall, roomy and light, completely built in stone.”[cxvi] And in 1932 he was even more lyrical: “If you see little Mother Julia, you would never think that she, supported by the moral authority of Father Rector, would have been able to accomplish such astonishing work here: in only a few years she has set up a complete primary school. She has 300 children at school, nearly all boys. At the inspection I found that they knew so much about the curriculum that most of them could move to a higher class. Under her leadership Sister Lutgardis has started girls’ primary schools (the sewing school has already been there a long time) and Sister Andrea is now starting the nursery school.”[cxvii] Clearly the boys’ school of the missionaries was really run by the Sisters of St Vincent. That was confirmed by an activity report from 1935: “Sr. Andrea runs the nursery school and has 23 children. Sr. Lutgardis is responsible for the girls’ school, which houses 45 pupils and the dressmaking workshop. Sr. Julie is the head of the boys’ school which currently has 365 pupils.“[cxviii]
A report from just after the war gives an interesting reference point. It compares pupil and school numbers from July 1944 and July 1945. I will restrict myself to the primary school: In 1944 there were 221 boys, in 1945 that became 252 (first and second grade together). There were again 23 girls reported. For the other school types there is no clear reference point. For example, there is no mention of a domestic school but a teacher training college is referred to.[cxix] Besides the 85 rural schools, which were depending from the mission post, in 1949 there was mention of primary education for boys at the central school, consisting of 6 classes for at least 350 pupils. For the girls the following numbers were given: a nursery school with 1 class and 20 pupils, primary education with 2 classes for 35 pupils, and the domestic school with only 1 class for 15 pupils.
From the Annals for 1954 there is also the following quotation: “Schools: as is the case everywhere it is also very difficult to get girls to school at this mission post: there are only 25 pupils under the supervision of one teacher. The nursery school has 30 infants (1 teaching assistant). The boys’ school has 275 pupils divided over 5 study years (7 teachers). The qualified teacher Sister manages everything. The sewing and washing is taken care of by the big girls. The vegetable garden and nursery form an ideal practice place for our schoolboys.”[cxx]

2.2.6. Boende (1925)
The mission post of Boende was the first one that was set up by the MSC itself. In 1926 Father Marcel Es, MSC reported: “(…) I have just written the number 37 down for the boys; with the girls we cannot begin until Sisters are available.” The Daughters of the Sacred Heart would indeed not arrive in Boende until April 1927.[cxxi] One of the Daughters, Sister Emilienne, reported that year that in Boende there was a girls’ school and a boys’ school and cabinet maker’s training with the Fathers.[cxxii] Father Vertenten reported in 1929 in a travel report: “Every day 48 boys and 25 larger girls came to school and there is a small nursery school for about 20 little black infants.”[cxxiii]

In the following period the Annals did not report anything specific about Boende but the activity report for 1934-35 did report that the Daughters of the Sacred Heart took care of the education for boys and girls: “Sr. Mauritsia is responsible for the nursery school and teaching the girls. She has 50 girls in her primary school and 36 infants in her nursery school. Sister superior, Sr. Marie, with Sr. Bernardina and Sr. Magda is responsible for the boys’ school. They have 824 pupils. The dressmaking workshop is run by Sr. Celesta.”[cxxiv] In 1934, Vertenten returned to the subject of the number of boys who went to school in Boende and spoke on that occasion of 600.[cxxv] However, the somewhat more official activity reports about the vicariate also reported strong growth in 1935 and 1937: “Boende: the school is developing and houses almost 700 pupils.“[cxxvi]”Our central schools have started to flourish. The number of pupils has especially increased in the school in Boende. The Commander of the Force Publique has amicably granted us a non-commissioned officer to give the pupils lessons in physical education.“[cxxvii]
In 1941 Father Cortebeeck reported in the Annals about “400 boys of the colony“.[cxxviii] A memo from the end of the war period reported about “550 schoolchildren at the mission post, 1 150 in the interior with 31 teaching assistants“.[cxxix] In the post-war period Boende developed further to become the second centre of the MSC mission area. The Annuaire records 58 rural schools, primary education at the central school (9 classes with 600 pupils), an agricultural school (for boys) with 39 pupils, and a girls’ school of the Daughters of the Sacred Heart (primary education in 3 classes with 22 pupils).
For the fifties, we find rather detailed statistics in an annual report about the school year 1953-54.[cxxx] This reports (here presented as a table):[cxxxi]

Table 5 – Situation of education in Boende, 1954 (source: Aequatoria Archive)

The annual report of 1955 seems to be less precise in its indications, and reports the following numbers: “The cabinet making workshop led by (Father) Verpaele has 27 pupils and his construction school has 21, with 50 nursery schoolchildren, about 700 school boys, 110 girls, about 90 men at the agricultural school, 35 girls in the domestic school, about 60 at the evening school. And the teacher training school is starting shortly.” Concerning the rural schools: “Father N. Jockin is in charge of an immense interior. … 22 bush schools, about 900 pupils.”[cxxxii]
At that time the only particular concern was about the mission post of Boende. Besides this, in the fifties the town began to develop rapidly, something that would quickly disturb the local missionaries: “But the town of Boende is steadily developing a few kilometres from the mission and it is of the utmost urgency that Boende town becomes a whole new parish. There Father De Meyst is nominated as pastor. (…) for the freemasons are also beginning to recognise the value of Boende town…“[cxxxiii]

2.2.7. Mondombe (1925)
There are a few statistics to be found for this small mission post. Vertenten wrote in 1931 about the start of the mission post: “In 1926 they began here at a two hour distance from the state post (…) The children, about 125, begin school at 7 o’clock. One teacher Sister is in charge, she is assisted by native teachers.”[cxxxiv] A few years earlier he had already made mention of “(…) a school with three classrooms, each of which has an area of 6 by 5 meters, the Brother has had 40 large school banks made for it.”[cxxxv] In 1932 the report was: “Straight away the children from the Montessori school of Sister Imelda are ready for a song and a dance after a nice ‘melesi, madame‘(‘merci, madame’, JB). She has thirty-odd.”[cxxxvi]

Although it was not explicitly stated, we can conjecture that this information is about a boys’ school. In the activity report about the Daughters of the Sacred Heart from 1935 it was indeed reported that “Sr. Ludovica ran the nursery school, and has 53 children. The girls’ school has 60 pupils, who receive their lessons from Sr. Imelda. There are 228 boys and their education is given by Sr. Imelda and Sr. Ascanus. The same Sr. Ascanus also teaches the school for around twenty adults. Sr. Léonarda is responsible for learning to cut.”[cxxxvii] The same Sister Imelda wrote an article in the Annals a few years later in which she also talks about the pupils: “Rascals hey, and we are getting up to the 300.”[cxxxviii]

At the end of the school year 1944-45 the school had 324 boys and 35 girls.[cxxxix] Strangely enough it was reported in the annual report for the school year 1947-48 that “a very lovely school colony has been built that may house around 300 pupils.“[cxl] Van Wing spoke in 1949 of 49 rural schools, a primary boys’ school consisting of 7 classes with 450 pupils, and a primary girls’ school, set up in 1930, run by the Daughters of the Sacred Heart. Later, in the fifties, there was only scarce information available about a boys’ school and about the first year of the girls’ school. According to this same information the area had 28 rural schools with over 1 000 pupils in 1955.[cxli]

2.2.8. Flandria-Boteke (1926)
Flandria was a special mission post in the sense that it was set up near the Huilever establishment.[cxlii] That there was a form of cooperation between the two can be seen from Van Goethem’s activity report, in which he writes among other things: “Huilever continues to provide for the upkeep of one hundred pupils. The school has 350.”[cxliii] Frans Maes, former headmaster of the school in Flandria, confirmed that there was a little monetary support from the “company”, which also continued after the war.[cxliv]There was also a Batswa school in Boteke: “In Boteke the sisters run a nursery school with 35 pupils, a school for young girls with 45 pupils and a boys’ school for Batswa with 130 pupils.”[cxlv] The report by Van Goethem, already cited, confirms this: “Boteke: beside the school group at Flandria: boarding school at Batswa with one hundred and thirty pupils.”[cxlvi] These Batswa schools enjoyed a certain amount of special attention. This actually related to a sort of racial segregation, whereby the Pygmies, who were seen as a non-sedentary (nomadic) people, received a ‘specially adapted’ education. The photograph of the kindergarten shown here confirms again the existence of the nursery school (école gardienne), whereas Corman in 1935 only reported two primary schools (and Frans Maes also reported nothing on this matter in the discussion I had with him).
The Annuaire of 1949 gives incomplete information for this post: 70 rural schools, primary education at the central school (no numbers) and a girls’ school run by the Sisters of the Precious Blood (primary school with 117 pupils). The annual reports from the first half of the fifties were mainly restricted to the building of a new school for the Batswa. Flandria therefore had three schools: a school on the H.C.B. ground, one at the mission post (situated next door), and the so-called Batswa school. From what appeared in the Annals it can be deduced that this was the same boys’ school.[cxlvii] A notable observation about the rural schools: the report from 1955 gives 21 rural schools with about 1 300 children in the interior. This differs greatly from the numbers from 1949. Probably the intention of the Apostolic Vicar to reduce the number of rural schools was in fact being carried out, although I have not yet found any convincing evidence of this.[cxlviii]

2.2.9. The other mission posts
There is almost nothing to be found about Bolima (1934) before the war, which naturally has everything to do with the fact that it was a new mission post at that time. Only the following report from 1935 can be quoted: “It is a new post that has around 350 pupils. The school was taught by Sr. Ghislaine and dressmaking is given by Sr. Osmonda.”[cxlix] “Bolima: a new post, a Father, a Brother and four Sisters. The school operates regularly.”[cl] The information about Bolima in the Annuaire was also very brief after the war. There was only mention of primary education at the central school and of 19 rural schools in the interior. Only one MSC worked there at that time. Later, too, there was very little information available. In 1955 there were said to be 250 boys at school there.[cli] In the Annals there was mention of a school for “Pygmies” (in other cases people talked about “Batswa”).[clii]
Before the war the only report about Bokela (1936) was that it was a new post.[cliii] In 1949 there was primary education at the central school with 6 classes and 315 pupils. For the girls there was a primary school with 3 classes and 32 pupils, founded by the Daughters of the Sacred Heart (in 1937). There were also 72 rural schools. For this mission post, figures from 1944 are also available. They seem to be somewhat contradictory, considering that in the same document there is a report of “about 150 schoolboys” and “about 100 Christian boys at the primary school“.[cliv] Most probably a distinction is simply being made between baptised and non-baptised children. As is known, baptism was only possible after a certain period of instruction and, naturally, religious instruction. For the further evolution of this post in the fifties we only have the 1955 report available. This talks of a boys‘ and a girls’ school at the mission post and an unspecified number of schools in the interior at which over 400 pupils followed lessons.[clv]
For Ikela (1937) only its existence is reported before the outbreak of the war. The Annuaire reported primary education for boys at the central school, with 7 classes and 300 pupils, and primary education for girls with 3 classes and 30 pupils (under the supervision of the Daughters of the Sacred Heart and started in January 1941). In the interior there were 21 rural schools dependent on this mission post. In 1944 there were 239 schoolboys and 26 schoolgirls reported for this mission.[clvi] However, in 1955 only the boys’ school with 320 pupils was mentioned.[clvii]
Father De Rop gave a number of details about Imbonga (1940) in a report from 1945: “Founded at the start of 1940 as an auxiliary post of Flandria with the prospect of later becoming an independent post when there was enough staff. The working area: a part of the mission of Flandria and a part of Wafanya.” On education: “What exists: Imbonga post: complete primary education: 5 teaching assistants with 75 boys. … Bangonda: Bilangi school with 2 teachers: 52 boys.”[clviii] In the Annuaire it was only reported that primary education was given at the central school and that there were 51 rural schools dependent on the mission post. There were four MSC working there. In the 1950s the information was also limited here to the construction of a new boys’ school building.[clix]
In 1945, finally, Iyonda was founded. This post was first reported in the general report by Mgr. Vermeiren from 1947-48. This was a leper house, to the south of Coquilhatville. Nothing was reported about education, not even in the Annuaire from 1949. From later information it seems that there was a boys’ school and a girls’ school. There was also mention of a nursery school and an evening school.[clx]

Concluding remarks
On the basis of internal reports, inspection reports and what there is to be made of the publications of the missionaries, only a very fragmented picture of the true state of the numbers of pupils through the thirties, forties and fifties can be formed. We can, however, clearly recognise certain tendencies, which are in themselves not surprising.
First and foremost there is the overemphasis on primary education, which was the case for the whole territory in the form of rural schools. In this context it is useful to cite once more from the Katoliek Jaarboek, which contained a summary of all the schools which went further than the simple primary level at the time of independence.[clxi] A small search on the Vicariate of Coquilhatville yielded interesting results: the top of the school pyramid was formed by the junior seminary of Bokuma, comparable with the Latin-Greek school stream in Belgium. Next to this there was a Groupe Scolaire in both Coquilhatville and Bamania, supervised by the Brothers of the Christian Schools. These were at that time comparable to the modern humanities of six years and were taught in French. Next came secondary schools in both Coquilhatville and Bamania with a reported ‘African’ curriculum, which at that time were changing over to the Belgian curriculum. Whether this refers to the same Groupes Scolaires is difficult to discern. The Groupe Scolaire of Coquilhatville apparently also included at that time an école moyenne for boys. The Jaarboek said about this school type: “(They, JB) comprised a curriculum of four years and prepared their pupils for office work.”
These schools were all boys’ schools. That immediately confirms the second large tendency: the under-representation of girls in education was also a fact in this area. An observation that is both quantitative and qualitative: there was no secondary education for girls and the participation in primary education was very low in comparison with that of the boys. Paradoxically enough there was an important role reserved for women (the mission Sisters) in the development of the school network. In many mission posts the men left the rudder in the hands of the Sisters, who then took over the direction of the boys’ schools and the girls’ schools if that was necessary.
A third point, that more specifically concerns the local situation, is the observation that the higher levels of education were in the hands of the Brothers of the Christian Schools except for the in se very specific case of the junior seminary that was supervised by the MSC itself. Whether this only related to a difference in professional qualifications or to the different characteristics and/or attitudes of the two congregations will have to be investigated further.

NOTES
[i] Geerts, F. (1948). Ontwikkeling der kerkelijke indeling en der kerkelijke hiërarchie in Belgisch Kongo. In Kerk en Missie. 28, pp. 9-18 and 40-49.
[ii] See also Briffaerts, J. & Dhondt, P. (2003). The Dangers of Urban Development. Missionary discourse on education and urban growth in the Belgian Congo (1920-1960). In Neue Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft, vol. 59, 2, pp. 81-102.
[iii] Camille Coquilhat (1853-1891) was a professional soldier, a veteran of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870. From 1882 he participated in the Stanley expedition in the area around the upper course of the Congo. After his return he became a co-worker in the cabinet of Leopold II. In 1889 he was appointed vice governor general. Lieutenant Alphonse Vangele (1848-1939) was involved in the same Stanley expedition. Being also a colonial pioneer, he was also appointed vice governor general in 1897.
[iv] Equateurville would probably have to be translated as “Evenaarsstad” in Dutch or “Equatorville” in English, although I have never seen these versions of the name, which is the reason for the use of the French name here. Vinck, H. (1992). Resistance and collaboration at the beginning of the colonization in Mbandaka (1883-1893), published at: www.aequatoria.be; De Meulder, B. (1994). Reformisme, thuis en overzee. Unpublished doctoral thesis K.U.Leuven, p. 350; Mayota, N. (1990). Poste protestant de Bolenge, inMBANDAKA, Hier et aujourd’hui. Eléments d’historiographie locale, Etudes Aequatoria 10, as published at : www.abbol.com
[v] Delathuy, A.M. (1994). Missie en Staat 1880-1914. Redemptoristen, Trappisten, Priesters van het Heilig Hart, Paters van Mill-Hill in Oud-Kongo. Berchem: Epo.
[vi] Dries, R. (1910). Het beschavingswerk der Cisterciënzers in de Evenaarsstreek. In Onze Kongo, 1, p. 51. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[vii] That was the case from 1895. The administrative organisation of the circonscription urbaine was introduced in 1893, under Leopold II. This denomination was given to the places which were the most suitable for colonisation, with the intention of stimulating the establishment of Europeans there and to avoid speculation and possible later sale of these areas. Cf. Beyens, A. (1992). L’histoire du statut des villes. In Congo 1955-1960: recueil d’études – Congo 1955-1960: verzameling studies. Brussel: Académie Royale des Sciences d’Outre-Mer, p. 16. For more information on the earliest development of Coquilhatville, see: Lufungula, L. (1983). Il y a cent ans naissait Equateurville: l’ébauche de l’actuelle ville de Mbandaka (June 1883-June 1983). In Zaïre-Afrique: économie, culture, vie sociale. 175. p. 301-312 or de Thier, F.M. (1956). Le centre extra-coutumier de Coquilhatville. Institut de Sociologie Solvay. Etudes Coloniales 2. Bruxelles: Université Libre, p. 7-31.
[viii] Report about the principal chapel. In Het missiewerk in Belgisch Congoland distrikt van den evenaar door de EE. PP. Trappisten, hervormde cisterciënzers der abdij van Westmalle, 5 (1908-1909), p. 70.
[ix] In 1884 the Livingstone Inland Mission was replaced by the American Baptist Missionary Union, which moved the mission post in 1899 to Bolenge. Ten years later this congregation transferred all its mission posts in the Upper Congo to the Foreign Christian Missionary Society, later renamed the Disciples of Christ Congo Mission. Cf. Smith, H. (1949). Fifty years in Congo. Disciples of Christ at the Equator. (Indianapolis, United Christian Missionary Society), p.15.
[x] Delathuy, A.M. (1994). Missie en staat in Oud-Kongo (1880-1914). Deel 2. p.89-181. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xi] Concerning the discussions about the end of the Trappists’ Congo mission, see Vermeir, O. (1976). De missie van de paters Trappisten in Belgisch Congo, 1894-1926. Unpublished Master’s thesis K.U.Leuven, pp. 55-77 of Delathuy, A.M. (1994). Missie en staat in Oud-Kongo (1880-1914) Deel 2. Redemptoristen, trappisten, norbertijnen, priesters van het H. Hart en paters van Mill-Hill. Berchem: Epo, pp. 171-176.
[xii] Hoe staat het op de Missie? In Het missiewerk in Belgisch Congoland, 1906-1907, VII, p. 126. “Het Missiewerk in Belgisch Congoland” was the mission periodical of the Trappists from 1904. Before thattime, reports about the Trappist mission were published in the mission periodical of the Norbertines of Averbode.
[xiii] These posts may be found on the overview map on p. 132-133.
[xiv] Afrika Archief, “fonds missions”, n° 635, letter from Father Kaptein, abbot of the Trappists of Westmalle, from 26 July 1920.
[xv] This “removal” was often explained in the periodical articles by “health problems” but was actually due to a conscious policy of the local heads which allowed them to broaden the mission activities in spite of the hierarchy forbidding the foundation of yet more posts.
[xvi] The Trappists certainly already had a catechist from 1911.
[xvii] AAVSB. Mission des Trappistes, Report of 1924. (AAVSB stands for “Reports on schools and vicariate/bishopric Coquilhatville/Mbandaka 1924-1963”, a collection of documents from the Aequatoria Archive by Honoré Vinck bound in three volumes, unpublished).
[xviii] Delathuy, A.M. (1994). Missie en staat in Oud-Kongo (1880-1914). Deel 2.
[xix] See also Eggermont, B., Se marier chrétiennement au Congo Belge. Les stratégies appliquées par les Missionaires de Scheut (CICM) au Kasai, 1919-1935. In Missionering en inculturatie, Bulletin van het Belgisch Historisch Instituut te Rome, LXIV, 1994, p. 113-147.
[xx] This refers to the S.A.B., abbreviation for Société Anonyme Belge pour le commerce du Haut-Congo, which acquired the absolute rule over a territory with a surface area of more than a million hectares in 1904 and which maintained tense relations with the missionaries, whom S.A.B. found a threat to their own position of power with respect to the local population. Concerning this tense relationship, see among others Claessens, A. (1980). Les conflits, dans l’Equateur, entre les Trappistes et la Société Anonyme Belge (1908-1914). In Revue Africaine de Théologie, 4, p. 5-18 and Delathuy, A.M. (1994). o.c. p. 145-160 and 177-179. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxi] Vinck, H. (2003). Les manuels scolaires des Pères Trappistes au Congo Belge (1895-1925). In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H., Manuels et Chansons scolaires au Congo Belge. Leuven: Presses Universitaires. pp. 95-131.
[xxii] Conférence des supérieurs des missions catholiques du Congo Belge (1930). Recueil d’instructions aux missionnaires. 6eme édition. Leuven: Kuyl-Otto.
[xxiii] Duchesne was governor of the province Coquilhatville (Equatorial province) from 1921 to 1933. Jadot, J.M. (1956) Duchesne (Charles-Marie-Nestor). In Bibliographie Belge d’outre-mer, vol. V, 272-285; see also Lufungula L. (1986) Les gouverneurs de l’Equateur: 1885-1960. In Annales Aequatoria. 7, 149-166 and at http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Congo-K_Provinces_1960-1966.html (01/2004). [Original quotation in French]
[xxiv] Afrika Archive, Fonds Missions, portefeuille n° 635 “Trappistes Coquilhatville”. Letter from the Governor General a.i. Duchesne to the Governor General, 27 December 1921. [Original quotation in French]
[xxv] AAFE 5.2.6-8. Letter from Paul Jans to Frère Visiteur (Véron Ignace). Bamania, 8 January 1929. (AAFE stands for Aequatoria Archive, “Fonds Ecoles”).
[xxvi] Vinck, H. (2003). Les manuels scolaires des Pères Trappistes au Congo Belge.
[xxvii] Scheut Archives, Rome, “Fonds De Jonghe”. Copy in the possession of Honoré Vinck.
[xxviii] It is not in fact about his predecessor; the letter refers to Georges Van Der Kerken (1888-1953), whom Duchesne replaced during his leave in Belgium in 1921. Van Der Kerken wrote a still very well-known work, “L’ethnie Mongo”, in which he was the first to draw attention to the threatened extinction (falling birth rate) of the local population.
[xxix] Jadot, J.M. (1956). l.c. [Original in French]
[xxx] Letter from Edward Van Goethem to Eduard De Jonghe, Dated 29 October 1924, Scheut Archives, Rome, “Fonds De Jonghe”. Copy in the possession of Honoré Vinck.
[xxxi] Letter from Leon Derikx (in the name of the heads of missions of the Belgian Congo present) to the chairman of the mission orders in Belgium, Kisantu, 23 July 1919, cited in Depaepe & Van Rompuy (1995). o.c. p. 56. For a discussion of this letter, with extended citations, see also Briffaerts, J. (2002). l.c. p. 193-194, and the accompanying notes.
[xxxii] The precise development of the church province, with a detailed description of the border corrections, may be found in the overview, published by the MSC, Symbolum historiae M.S.C. (Rome, 1966) p. 234-238.
[xxxiii] Vermeir, O. (1980). La fin de la mission des Trappistes à L’Equateur (1920-1926). In Annales Aequatoria, I, p. 213-238. This article is taken from the master’s thesis that the author wrote on this subject (already cited previously) and which he based mainly on the archives of the Abbey of Westmalle, of the MSC in Borgerhout and the Scheutist Marcel Storme in Leuven.
[xxxiv] That means that by the end of 1926 27 MSC were already active in the prefecture, certainly a very respectable number. Naturally, the overwhelming majority were ex-Trappists. See Vermeir, O. (1980). o.c. p. 235.
[xxxv] Geerts, F. (1948). Ontwikkeling der kerkelijke indeling en der kerkelijke hiërarchie in Belgisch Kongo, Kerk en Missie, p. 9-18 en 40-49.
[xxxvi] Van Goethem was already prefect from the beginning in 1924 and would remain vicar until 1946. In 1947 he was followed by Hilaire Vermeiren, who became the first Bishop of the bishopric Coquilhatville (later Mbandaka) in 1959. See Symbolum historiae M.S.C., Rome, 1966, p. 234-238.
[xxxvii] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du Vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 40 p. 1 March 1935. p. 31.
[xxxviii] Map published in MSC, 50 jaar in Zaïre (August 1975), an information brochure published on the occasion of the jubilee of the MSC presence in the Congo.
[xxxix] Concerning the sources for the mission activities of the Daughters of Charity, information is chiefly to be found in the common mission periodicals of the Lazarists and the Daughters of Charity, which can be found in the Provincial house of the Lazarist Fathers in Leuven (Belgium). Three periodicals are concerned, of which the latter appeared in two different editions (one in Dutch and one in French): Annales de la congrégation de la mission (et de la compagnie des Filles de la Charité): 1925-1960. De kleine bode van de H. Vincentius a Paulo en van de gelukzalige Louise de Marillac: 1930-1940. Sint Vincentius A Paulo. Driemaandelijks tijdschrift van de Lazaristen en de dochters der liefde: 1939-1960. Saint Vincent de Paul. Revue trimestrielle des Lazaristes et des Filles de la Charité. 1939-1953. In addition, I interviewed two of the Daughters of Charity who were living in Belgium. These were Sister Suzanne Carbonelle, active in the Belgian Congo (including Coquilhatville) from 1952 to 1985 and Sister Gisèle Van Minnenbrugghe, active in the Congo after independence.
[xl] The congregation was founded in 1633 by Vincent de Paul and Louise de Marillac. They were also active from as early as 1671 in the Liège region. Like the Brothers of the Christian Schools, this congregation was closed down under the French regime. From 1834 the activities were restarted, also in Belgium which had become independent in the interim. Dochters der Liefde (1926). De dochters der Liefde van den H. Vincentius A Paulo. Tilburg: Dochters der Liefde. p. 167.
[xli] Cited from a letter of 16 march 1925 from Father Rutten, general superior of Scheut, to Father Robert Brepoels, superior of the Trappist mission, from the MSC archive Borgerhout. Vermeir, O. (1980). l.c. p. 229. [original in French]
[xlii] Vandekerckhove, C. (1939). Les Lazaristes au Congo. In Saint Vincent de Paul. Revue trimestrielle des Lazaristes et des Filles de la Charité. pp. 112-118. [original in French]
[xliii] This was by far the best represented of the Sisters congregations in the vicariate of Coquilhatville. Repeated attempts to establish contact with the congregation on my behalf, including via the MSC, were not successful. The Sisters claim to have neither information nor documents nor archives. They systematically refuse any requests for verbal contact. In spite of this, a British Sister, Mary Venard, published a biographical work in 1992 about the Belgian Province of the Daughters: Venard, M. (1992).Geschiedenis van de Belgische provincie van de Dochters van O.L.Vrouw van het Heilig Hart, Provincialate of the Daughters of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart, Brussels. (translated by Lauwers, J., MSC). The book contains a separate part about the mission to the Belgian Congo, pp. 121-148. This work is not distinguished by a critical approach, does not contain an academically responsible note structure and is certainly somewhat brief about the activities in the Congo. It does, however, report the existence of a provincial archive in Belgium. Besides this there are only two older publications from the colonial period (a slim recruitment brochure from the thirties or forties and a more extensive information brochure from 1955): Dochters van Onze-Lieve-Vrouw van het Heilig Hart (ed.). (1955). Congregatie van de dochters van Onze Lieve Vrouw van het Heilig Hart. Lescuyer: Lyon. 148 p. en idem (s.d.). Dochters van O. L. Vrouw van het Heilig Hart: missiezusters, De Bièvre: Brasschaat. 23 p. The scarce specific information that can be found about this congregation therefore corresponds, as far as the sources are concerned, with the documents of or about other congregations.
[xliv] Most of this data comes from the MSC, 50 jaar in Zaïre. Additional sources were: Annuaires des Missions Catholiques by Corman (1924 and 1935) and Van Wing (1949) and the work cited here about the sisters.
[xlv] As far as the source material is concerned this male congregation presents markedly fewer problems than the female. There is an extensive archive of the Brothers in their Generalate in Rome that had already been consulted on site by Lies Van Rompaey in the context of research for “In het teken van de bevoogding”. She made her extensive notes available to us. Apart from this there was a somewhat brief contact with the archivist in Rome, via e-mail, which allowed a number of clarifications and supplementary information to be obtained. A number of documents were also copied from the archive in Fexhe, a personal collection of documents collected by Brother Jules Cornet. A written reflection was made of others. In the training house in Dilbeek there remain only two large albums with a collection of documents, photos and souvenirs of the Congo. This was also consulted and described in a report. Processing of this data was done in 2001 by Pieter Dhondt. As far as published sources are concerned, use was made of the Bulletin des écoles chrétiennes, the general periodical of the Brothers in Belgium, in which the missions are reported in a more or less systematic fashion. The years 1 (1907) up to 41 (1960) were consulted. There was also a periodical of the alumni of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in the Congo: Signum Fidei. Up to now we have only been able to find one copy of this potentially very interesting periodical. A question about possible copies of this was similarly directed to the archivist of the Brothers in Rome but has received no answer.
[xlvi] http://www.relins.be/scherm12_26.html 01/2004.
[xlvii] Mission work of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in the Congo, Zaaiers onder de Afrkaanse hemel.
[xlviii] Frère Alban (1970). Histoire de l’institut des frères des écoles chrétiennes. Expansion hors de France (1700-1966). Rome: FEC. p. 641-643.
[xlix] AAFE 5.2.6-8. Letter from Paul Jans to Frère Visiteur (Véron Ignace). Bamanya, 8 January 1929. [Original in French]
[l] http://www.mariannhill.org/anglais/index.htm 01/2004
[li] Marian Hill was at least mentioned in the correspondence of the Flemish Trappists when their own problems with the hierarchy arose. See also Vermeir, O. (1980). l.c.
[lii] According to Honoré Vinck they were also in Imbonga from 1949 or 1950.
[liii] Practically nothing about these Sisters is available as source material, apart from the personal memories and probably a few photos that the surviving mission Sisters have preserved themselves. In view of the small size of the congregation they did not have their own periodical or publication. The sisters were, however, very approachable and prepared to cooperate in an interview. On 13 September 2002 I spoke with Sister Rafaelle, Sister Innocentia and Sister Hilde, in Beveren-Waas.
[liv] Interview with Sister Rafaelle and Sister Innocentia, at Beveren-Waas, 13 September 2002. See also: Pauselijke Missiewerken (1961). Katholiek Jaarboek voor Kongo, Ruanda en Urundi, 1960-1961. Brussels: Pauselijke Missiewerken. p. 65.
[lv] Depaepe & Van Rompaey dedicated just eight pages to the problem of educational statistics.
[lvi] The Mission annual report “Katoliek jaarboek voor Kongo, Ruanda en Urundi. 1960-1961” (sic) elucidates this matter due to the overview that is given in relation to the various “types” of schools, in which what the various types actually stand for is briefly explained.
[lvii] In official publications the government subdivision was assumed.
[lviii] Finally, there is also the “Katoliek Jaarboek voor Kongo, Ruanda en Urundi” from 1960, which has been referred to previously.
[lix] AAVSB. Rapport de 1929, présenté par Mgr. Van Goethem.
[lx] AAVSB. Année scolaire 1929-1930. Nombre des élèves et du personnel enseignant, Vertenten, December 1930. According to the information from Honoré Vinck, nursery schools were not considered to be separate schools but the pupils in the nursery schools were still not considered to be pupils of the primary school.
[lxi] The data originate in both cases from the same author, Petrus Vertenten, who was, at that time, mission inspector for the whole missionary area.
[lxii] This dated from 1935 and claims to give the state of business on the 30 June 1934.
[lxiii] The schools were not systematically treated in this publication, neither is there a separate ”education” section provided. Teaching is repeatedly reported among the other activities that a congregation practiced at a particular place. This data must be compared with similar data from other sources. For the period 1930-1934 our collection of inspection reports is not as complete as that for the year 1929. These inspection reports come, almost without exception, from two collections: the booklist “Missions” in the Afrika Archive in Brussels (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and the Aequatoria Archive, booklist “Ecoles” in Borgerhout.
[lxiv] See also Depaepe & Van Rompaey.
[lxv] Van Wing, J. & Goemé, V. (eds.) (1949). Annuaire des missions catholiques. Bruxelles: Edition Universelle.
[lxvi] The number of inspection reports in our possession for the period 1935-1939 is much lower, while annual reports from this period are not available. A updated version of the Annuaire des missions catholiques was only published at the end of the forties under the editorship of Van Wing. The periodicals of the missionaries and the internal reports also contain much less detailed information.
[lxvii] Delafaille (1934). Mijn eerste dienstreisje in Kongo. In Annals van Onze Lieve Vrouw van het Heilig Hart, 9, p. 197. My emphasis. This publication is cited below as Annals. [Original in Dutch]
[lxviii] AAVSB. Vicariat Apsotolique de Coquilhatville, activité missionnaire durant l’exercice 1936-1937, Mgr. Van Goethem, 7 p. [Original in French]
[lxix] AAVSB. Document with statistics and an overview of mission life, s.n., 4 p., dated 1938. Similar data for 1937 report 111 schools with 6,143 boys and 578 girls.
[lxx] AAVSB. Commentaire au rapport annuel 1951-1952, Vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville, typed, s.n., 3 p. [original in French]
[lxxi] Ibidem. [original in French]
[lxxii] AAVSB. Rapport annuel du vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, signed by H. Vermeiren, 8 October 1954. [original in French]
[lxxiii] AAVSB. Rapport annuel du vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville 1955, s.n., 21 September 1955. [original in French]
[lxxiv] AAVSB. Vicariat Apostolique Coquilhatville (rapport 55-56), s.n., s.d. [original in French]
[lxxv] “Coq. 25 jaar Vikariaat” In Annals, maart 1957, p. 46.
[lxxvi] AAVSB. Rapport annuel 1957-58 vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville. [original in French]
[lxxvii] Church hierarchy was introduced in November 1959. The organisation into vicariates became obsolete and the Congo consisted from then on of six ecclesiastical provinces, each divided into a number of dioceses. From then on Coquilhatville was the name of one of the ecclesiastical provinces that was about equal in surface area to the Equatorial Province. This ecclesiastical province was divided into five dioceses and an attached prefecture. One of these dioceses, the archdiocese of Coquilhatville, corresponded to the former vicariate of the MSC. Hilaire Vermeiren became Archbishop.
[lxxviii] The statistics that were published by the (in the meantime) Congolese Bureau de l’Enseignement Catholique (B.E.C.) in Leopoldville contrast sharply at first sight. They reflect the situation of October 1962, a little over two years after independence. At that time there were 9 656 boys and 4 777 girls in Catholic primary education of the bishopric. Considering that a maximum of one year can lie between the two publications, there certainly seems to have been different criteria used in their compilation. Bureau de l’Enseignement Catholique (1963). Statistiques de l’enseignement national catholique 1962-63. B.E.C.: Léopoldville. p. 24.
[lxxix] Vertenten, P. (1932) Nieuws uit Bamania bij Coquilhatville. In Annals, 4, p. 78. [original in Dutch]
[lxxx] Rousseau, L. (1932). From a letter by E. Broeder L. Rousseau. In Annals, 1, p. 6. [original in Dutch]
[lxxxi] Moeyens (1933). Over Bamania. In Annals 1, p. 11. [original in Dutch]
[lxxxii] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Soeurs du Précieux Sang, 1934-1935, s.n. [original in French]
[lxxxiii] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, typed, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935.[original in French]
[lxxxiv] AAVSB. Missie-post van Bamanya (bij Coquilhatville), G. Wauters, 20 April 1946.
[lxxxv] See Annals, September 1955, p. 131.
[lxxxvi] AAVSB. Rapport annuel 1950-1951, Vicariat Apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n.; AAVSB. Rapport annuel du vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, H. Vermeiren, 8 October 1954; Annals, December 1954.
[lxxxvii] AAVSB. Commentaire au rapport annuel 1951-1952, Vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n., 3 p.
[lxxxviii] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956; also the Annals report in 1957 a training college, a pedagogical school and a “school for moniteurs” (teaching assistants).
[lxxxix] Ibidem: this last document gives numbers for the three schools.
[xc] AAVSB. Rapport annuel 1957-58 vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n.
[xci] Dubrulle, M.(1928). Robert Longundo. In Annals, 2, p. 32.
[xcii] AAVSB. Vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, rapport sur l’activité missionaire durant l’exercice 1936-1937, E. Van Goethem, s.d. [original in French]
[xciii] AAVSB. Rapport annuel 1950-1951, Vicariat Apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n.
[xciv] AAVSB. Rapport annuel 3 July 1952 – 30 June 1953, Vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n.
[xcv] Annals, March 1952, p. 36 e.v.
[xcvi] AAVSB. Rapport annuel du vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, H. Vermeiren, 8 October 1954.
[xcvii] AAVSB. Vicariat Apostolique Coquilhatville (report 55-56), s.n.
[xcviii] AAVSB. 1955 Overview, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956. [original in Dutch]
[xcix] We indicate here in particular two anonymous articles: “Coquilhatstad”, in Annals from December 1956, p. 176 and “Pastoor van een zwarte parochie: interview met Pater De Gols, pastoor van de eerste zwarte parochie van Coquilhatstad” in Annals from May 1957, p. 68.
[c] Brepoels, R. (1928). Geschiedenis van den missiepost in Bokuma. In Annals, 4, p. 81.
[ci] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Soeurs du Précieux Sang, 1934-1935, s.n. [Original quotation in French]
[cii] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Soeurs de St. Vincent de Wafanya de 1934-35, s.n. [Original quotation in French]
[ciii] Vinck, H. (s.d.). Joris Van Avermaet (1907-1956): Bio-bibliographie. To be found on Aequatoria’s website: www.aequatoria.be/BiblioVanAvermaet.html (01/2004). In the MSC’s archive in Borgerhout there is an extensive historical note about the seminary, composed by one of the missionaries, Remi Sanders, a few years after independence. This places the beginning of seminary education at as early as 1923, at the time of the Trappist mission. MSC archive Borgerhout, “Historiek van het klein seminarie te Bokuma”, Sanders, R., s.d., typed, 36 p.
[civ] Heireman, G. (1948). Ons zwart missieseminarie van Bokuma schrijft aan ons blank missieseminarie van Assche. In Annals, p. 118.
[cv] MSC archives Borgerhout. “Historiek van het klein seminarie te Bokuma”, p. 22.
[cvi] AAVSB. Commentaire au rapport annuel 1951-1952, Vicariat apostolique Coquilhatville, s.n., 3 p.; AAVSB. Overzicht 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956;Annals, December 1954.
[cvii] Emiliana, Sr. (1926). Brief uit Bokote. In Annals, p. 127.
[cviii] Henrica, Sr. (1934). Laatste berichten uit Bokote (parts of a letter from E. Sister Henrica). In Annals, 1, p. 12.
[cix] Annals, 1934, 5, p. 109.
[cx] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Filles de N.D. du Sacré Coeur de 1934 à 1935, s.n.
[cxi] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935. [Original in French]
[cxii] Vertenten, P. (1935). Een blijvend loofhuttenfeest. In Annals, 10, p. 221.
[cxiii] AAVSB. Manuscript about Bokote, signed (illegibly), 24 February 1946.
[cxiv] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[cxv] Annals, 1930, 8, p. 176. [original in Dutch]
[cxvi] Vertenten, P. (1931). Wafania vooruit. In Annals, 7, p. 151. [original in Dutch]
[cxvii] Vertenten, P. (1934). Van uit Wafania. In Annals, 6, p. 127. [original in Dutch]
[cxviii] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Soeurs de St. Vincent de Wafanya de 1934-35, s.n. [original in French]
[cxix] AAVSB. Statistiques générales de la mission – 1 juillet 44 – 1 juillet 45, Vicariat Apostolique de Coquilhatville, with report “Wafanya”.
[cxx] “Wafanya – Zusters van Beveren”. In Annals, October 1954, p. 140. [original in Dutch]
[cxxi] Volgens de Annuaire van Corman. [original in Dutch]
[cxxii] Emilienne, Sr. (1927). From a letter from Sister Emilienne, Boende. In Annals, p. 269.
[cxxiii] Vertenten, P. (1929). Van Coquilhatville naar de boven-Tschuapa (vervolg). In Annals, 3, p. 55. [original in Dutch]
[cxxiv] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Filles de N.D. du Sacré Coeur de 1934 à 1935, s.n. [original in French]
[cxxv] Vertenten, P. (1935). Een blijvend loofhuttenfeest. In Annals, 10, p. 221.
[cxxvi] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935.[original in French]
[cxxvii] AAVSB. Vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, rapport sur l’activité missionaire durant l’exercice 1936-1937, E. Van Goethem. [original in French]
[cxxviii] Cortebeeck, Y. (1941). Boende. In Annals, 1, p. 7. [original in Dutch]
[cxxix] AAVSB. Note with data about the Boende mission, manuscript, H. Delafaille, 1944-45. [original in Dutch]
[cxxx] AAVSB. Katholieke missie Boende St Martinus, jaarverslag 1/7/53 – 1/7/54, s.n., 1 November 1954.
[cxxxi] The term “succursale schools” refers to the rural schools.
[cxxxii] AAVSB. Overzicht 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.[original in Dutch]
[cxxxiii] Ibidem.[original in Dutch]
[cxxxiv] Vertenten, P. (1931). Missieleven (uit den missiepost Mondombe St-Theresia). In Annals, 1931, 4, p. 76. [original in Dutch]
[cxxxv] Vertenten, P. (1929). In Annals, 4, p. 78. [original in Dutch]
[cxxxvi] Annals, 1932, 8, p. 176. [original in Dutch]
[cxxxvii] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Filles de N.D. du Sacré Coeur de 1934 à 1935, s.n. [original in French]
[cxxxviii] Maria Imelda, Zr. (1937). Iets over onze schooljongens van Mondombe. In Annals, 3, p. 54. [original in Dutch]
[cxxxix] AAVSB. Note with data about Mondombe, manuscript, Yernaux, July 1944 – July 1945.
[cxl] AAVSB. Report 1947-1948, Vicariat Apostolique de Coquilhatville, Mgr. Vermeiren. [original in French]
[cxli] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[cxlii] Huilever refers to the Huileries du Congo Belge.
[cxliii] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 march 1935.[original in French]
[cxliv] Interview with Frans Maes in Borgerhout on 9 July 2002.
[cxlv] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Soeurs du Précieux Sang, 1934-1935, s.n. [original in French]
[cxlvi] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935.[original in French]
[cxlvii] Theresia, Sr. (1955). Triptiek uit Flandria. In Annals, p. 165. See also Annals, December 1954.
[cxlviii] See below, chapter 5.
[cxlix] AAVSB. Rapport sur l’activité missionaire des Filles de N.D. du Sacré Coeur de 1934 à 1935, s.n. [original in French]
[cl] AAVSB. Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935.[original in French]
[cli] AAVSB. Overzicht 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[clii] Annals, December 1954.
[cliii] Voor Bokela: AAVSB. Vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville, rapport sur l’activité missionaire durant l’exercice 1936-1937, E. Van Goethem. Voor Ikela: Annals, 1938, 4, p. 80.
[cliv] AAVSB. Note with statistical data about Bokela St Pieter, manuscript signed P.Smolders, dated 1944. [original in Dutch]
[clv] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[clvi] AAVSB. Note with data about Ikela, manuscript, G. Michielsen, dated 1944.
[clvii] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[clviii] AAVSB. Report: mission Imbonga, A. De Rop, 1945. [original in Dutch]
[clix] AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[clx] Wijnants, P. (1954). Leprozerie van Igonda. In Annals, p. 149; AAVSB. Overview 1955, s.d, s.n., s.l., dated February 1956.
[clxi] Katoliek Jaarboek voor Kongo, Ruanda en Urundi, 1960-1961. p. 206-255.
[clxii] Dibalu, A. (1969). L’histoire de la formation des maîtres de l’enseignement élémentaire dans l’évolution de l’enseignement au Congo. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Université de Laval, Québec.
[clxiii] Ibidem. p. 127.
[clxiv] AAVSB, “Note additionnelle sur les écoles rurales”, par P. Trigalet, in “Rapport Général 1934-1935”, p. 33.
[clxv] Vertenten, P. (1929). Met de Theresita de Momboyo op naar Wafanya. In Annalen, 12, p. 274. This relates to a village in the vicinity of Flandria, Ifulu. [original quotation in Dutch]
[clxvi] Maria Godfrieda, Zr. (1934). Wat ze zooal te doen hebben. In Annalen, 5, p. 108.
[clxvii] See Dams, K., Depaepe, M. & Simon, F. (2002). ‘By indirections finding directions out’: Classroom history, Sources and Objectives. In Jamrożek, W. & Żołądź-Strzelczyk, D. (eds.), W dialogu z przeszłością. Księga poświęcona Profesorowi Janowi Hellwigowi [Dialogue with the past. In memoriam Professor Jan Hellwig.]. Poznan: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. p. 69.
[clxviii] Dembour, M.B. (2000). Recalling the Belgian Congo: Conversations and introspection. New York: Berghahn Books.
[clxix] For the definition of those themes I again used the marker that was previously used by researchers in the research into “Orde in vooruitgang”. I would particularly like to thank Betty Eggermont and Hilde Lauwers for their willingness to share their experiences on this subject.

In the following chapters I will try to reconstruct the educational reality in the schools of the MSC based primarily on the written sources available. More specifically, this relates to the reconstruction of classroom life and the educational relationship between missionaries and pupils. The closer one gets to the so-called ‘micro level’, the more apparent it becomes that it is almost impossible to make a true reconstruction in the sense of a true representation, “wie es eigentlich gewesen ist”, of the educational relationship between missionaries and Congolese. Naturally, the source material available is important here and defines the boundaries within which the research can be carried out.

A second important matter is that the teaching was not given by the missionaries in the first place, but by the Congolese. This is not unique to the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, it is more generally true for the entire colony. From the beginning an appeal was made to native assistance, to carry out the huge quantity of work caused by the evangelisation project. A decision was already made in 1907 by the bishops in the Congo to establish a central teacher-training course for each church province. The reason for this was of course the unbalance between the personnel available and the population to be reached. The fact that evangelisation was much more important to the missionaries than the educational activity meant that it was “sufficient” initially to train the Congolese as catechists and that it was not necessary in the strict sense to train teachers. This was also emphasised in those first plans: the candidates for training had to be young (maximum 12 years old) and it was explicitly stated that the intention was not to train educationalists but catechists as assistants to the missionaries.[i] According to Antoine Dibalu there were 11 central teacher-training colleges in 1922, of which those closest to the Equator province were situated in Nouvel Anvers (North of Coquilhatstad) and in Tumba (by Lake Tumba, South of Coquilhatstad).[ii] However, it is likely that not everybody who became teaching assistant had actually attended a teacher training college. That was certainly true in the mission region of the MSC.[iii] One example of this can be found in the Annals from 1929: “On Tuesday there is a school inspection. Notwithstanding all kinds of unfavourable circumstances satisfactory results have been achieved. The head teaching assistant, Georges Lobombe, although he has not had any professional training, was given an honorary mention in the inspector’s report.”[iv][v]

From a statistical summary from 1934 it is apparent that a little over 120 “white” religious workers were working in the vicariate Coquilhatstad, together with 90 teachers and 357 catechists. It was also stated that there were another eighty pupils or so at the teacher training college at that time. Consequently, an attempt was made to have trained teachers but that was clearly not always the case. Moreover, the same was true for the missionaries themselves. They had, barring a few exceptions, no educational training. The missionaries’ role was often limited to supervising the teaching assistants and to giving religious education. One of the many testimonies in this regard was given in the Annals by Sister Godfrieda, a Sister of the Sacred Heart, who worked in the newly established mission post in Bolima from 1934: “Here you will find Sr. M. Godfrieda, who tries to keep order with two black helpers among the three hundred and fifty rascals and to drum the first concepts of discipline, prayer and the catechism into them and to teach them some letters and arithmetic.”[vi] Relatively speaking, more people with educational training could be found among the sisters than at the MSC. The MSC were not a teaching order by nature. Consequently, it should not be surprising that when a large school had to be established in a central place, as in Coquilhatville, the Brothers of the Christian Schools were appealed to, being traditionally considered an educational congregation.

The majority of teachers in education were Congolese. Naturally, when considering the educational reality and the classroom life those teaching assistantsare important witnesses. However, in the same way as for the pupils, it is much more difficult to trace their voice than the coloniser’s. A limited number of them did manage to become “évolué” and a number of testimonies about education may, for example, be found in this way in “La Voix du Congolais”. But there we are also dealing in essence with superficial and ideologically distorted messages. Moreover, and that is also true to a great extent for the other parties involved, these sources rather represent experiences of events or behaviours rather than the reality itself. However, as Dams, Depaepe and Simon have remarked, that does not necessarily have to be considered a fatal inadequacy for the historian.[vii] However, insofar as possible the “gap in the memory” is completed by a number of oral testimonies from people involved in education. They will primarily be considered separately in the last part. Oral sources have their own specific interpretative issues. It is not possible to consider them individually without further context. Nevertheless, I would also like to consider them on their own because the aspect of “remembering” is interesting and intriguing enough to consider them separately.[viii] Questions about memories over a longer term are an extension of those about the effects of education. That part of the research may then be properly considered as more “anthropological” in nature (cf. the introduction).

However, the second part relates to the basic material that should make it possible for us to form an idea of the main aspects of education in this region of the Belgian colony (and by extension, and in general, these findings are also true for the rest of the colony). This account is organized around a number of themes, which I used to relate to the source material.[ix] The headings used may of course be debated (what is an “educational climate”?) but the primary intention was to introduce a kind of general, first classification of the material available. Grosso modo these themes can be divided as follows (see diagram). The intention is to consider the field of work in four chapters, each from a different themed perspective. It is almost impossible to make an absolute boundary, hence the warning that this is a “rough” division. The intention is certainly not to divide reality into numerous smaller realities. For that reason it is also necessary for the themes to overlap somewhat.

1. Educational climate:
What was the educational aim and environment?
What was the dominant view of Congolese children?

2. Educational comfort:
Material construction and organisation of schools
Timetabling

3. Content of lessons and implementation of the curriculum:
What was taught?
How were subjects taught?

4. Intercourse and behavioural prescriptions:
How were the pupils approached?

NOTES
[i] Dibalu, A. (1969). L’histoire de la formation des maîtres de l’enseignement élémentaire dans l’évolution de l’enseignement au Congo. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Université de Laval, Québec.
[ii] Ibidem. p. 127.
[iii] AAVSB, “Note additionnelle sur les écoles rurales”, par P. Trigalet, in “Rapport Général 1934-1935”, p. 33.
[iv] Vertenten, P. (1929). Met de Theresita de Momboyo op naar Wafanya. In Annalen, 12, p. 274. This relates to a village in the vicinity of Flandria, Ifulu. [original quotation in Dutch]
[v] Maria Godfrieda, Zr. (1934). Wat ze zooal te doen hebben. In Annalen, 5, p. 108.
[vi] See Dams, K., Depaepe, M. & Simon, F. (2002). ‘By indirections finding directions out’: Classroom history, Sources and Objectives. In Jamrożek, W. & Żołądź-Strzelczyk, D. (eds.), W dialogu z przeszłością. Księga poświęcona Profesorowi Janowi Hellwigowi [Dialogue with the past. In memoriam Professor Jan Hellwig.]. Poznan: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. p. 69.
[vii] Dembour, M.B. (2000). Recalling the Belgian Congo: Conversations and introspection. New York: Berghahn Books.
[viii] For the definition of those themes I again used the marker that was previously used by researchers in the research into “Orde in vooruitgang”. I would particularly like to thank Betty Eggermont and Hilde Lauwers for their willingness to share their experiences on this subject.

Moral foundation and worldview
The clear moralising impact of the curricular was indicated in the previous chapter. This moralising also seems a very good reflection of the climate in which missionary intervention and education took place. This fact was very clearly brought to the fore in the mission periodical of the MSC. It was repeatedly pointed out that, as far as the missionaries were concerned, Christianisation was the most important concern. This remained the same throughout the colonial period, although it levelled off towards the end and was concealed by other, more worldly-oriented educational objectives. In 1926, one of the MSC pioneers, Father Es, wrote about the settlement in Boende: “We are situated on a small plateau in the middle of the tropical forest, far from the state outpost and every native village, so as to reduce the influence of the heathens and the whites to a minimum. The purer the Christian atmosphere, the better the Christians.“[i] The same Father Es wrote about the lessons themselves: “Those classes, as dull and monotonous as they are – we know from our own experience of taking them as children – do not bore them. They constantly ask for more. And together with these reading, writing, drawing and maths lessons, the Christian spirit penetrates their heart drop-by-drop. Everything on the mission breathes this exalted spirit which will only make them more human. Our goal is after all not only to form developed Negroes, but also developed Christians.“[ii]

The statements made in the Annals sound disarming to contemporary ears, sometimes even shockingly naïve. For this reason they are a good indicator of the state of affairs. The opinions in the metropolis were not so different or more ‘elevated’ that they needed to mince words. In the end of year edition of the Annals in 1931 the following could be read: “Why mission expansion? Because we need money, our beautiful mission territory around the equator forest, which is six times bigger than Belgium, needs to be provided with more priests, more Brothers, more churches, more schools. Why mission expansion? Because otherwise the Protestants will take advantage! Because otherwise the Protestants, with all their gold, will stack the best part of the harvest in their own stores. (…) Why expansion? Because the need for souls is so great that the waves engulf the ship of the church.”[iii] That there was a need for souls was obvious to all missionaries and to the home front. That something needed to be done about it was at least as obvious to the missionaries. And the competitive element towards other religious convictions naturally became a part of this.[iv]

Petrus Vertenten, who was an abbot and known as a very cultivated man,[v] wrote in 1930, without mincing his words, that: “Our principal work is the salvation of souls, and it is going well, very well. Here at the station we regularly have about 500 people who come to the catechetic lessons. They stay here a year and then we have to chase them away to make room for others.“[vi] Later he also wrote that Congolese children were interested in the mission station: “To obtain wisdom and knowledge, that is an investment which stays, knowledge to read and write and so many other things and especially to become a Christian.“[vii] This statement reveals much more about the intentions of the author than of the children. Other missionaries also stated the same motivation: “It remains noble work, making decent Christians of the black heathen children. That is for a large part the task of the mission Sisters.“[viii] About the heathens in the bush, in the fifties he wrote: “Through education and prayer exercises they have more contact with God and they hope to become good Christians.”[ix]

This was not only propaganda language, reserved for publications intended to promote the missionary cause to the general public. Although some things were worded in attractive language, these sorts of statements are representative of what the missionaries thought. The ‘pure Christian culture’ element played a big role, which, for example, finds great expression in the writings of Gustaaf Hulstaert. When the influence of the proposed curriculum reform of 1938 filtered through into the region, he was thoroughly annoyed. In a letter to the governor general he lamented the fact that the primary schools of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in Coquilhatville all operated in preparation of secondary education. He was clearly and thoroughly opposed to the proposed ‘two track system’, under which education had to function both as preparatory and as final education:[x] “Through the application of your new directives, all the young men from Coq and its surroundings will be isolated because of the broken lives they would lead. Of course, on the one hand you intend an education without any connection with indigenous life which fatally produces semi-intellectuals and classless people; while on the other hand you advocate sending back to the mass of indigenous population, the greater majority of these pupils for whom the education will be completely inappropriate.”Furthermore, Coquilhatville as a centre had a great influence on the surrounding area and the detrimental consequences would have an impact on the whole region. For Hulstaert, detribalisation was one of the primary consequences of the all too ‘Europeanising’ education. He compared the situation with that of Europe, where urbanisation was ever increasing together with ethical derailment. In the Congo similar developments would now take place: “The disastrous effects of the system to which I am protesting are not limited to a certain ridiculous pride, to a snobbism of speaking French and copying the European. The danger is more serious; it attacks the foundations of the indigenous society itself: it is a question of life or death for them.”

Hulstaert was complaining about the general intention of the education. The stimulation of education in and of the French language was an important signal but it was certainly not the only element in the curriculum that was wrong: “The inappropriateness, the origin of these ills emanates, in my opinion, not solely from the predominant role given to the teaching of French. This is certainly an important element, … It is mainly the orientation and spirit of the education that should be brought into question. It is futile to expect the neutralisation of the damaging effects through a course in agriculture – that the pupils hate because the curriculum and the orientation of education remove them further from it – and to a few other branches of secondary education, without value in their eyes and without any influence on the aim of the utilitarian school. It will not be these few notions of agriculture, a few intuition lessons, no more than the lessons of the catechism etc. that will result in the adjustment of the personal and social life. By its nature the education remains completely oriented towards preparation for a career which the vast majority shall not experience. Consequently, this school will not train man; it will disseminate a superficial erudition, the damaging consequences of which are not wholly known.“[xi]

This extensive quote shows in the first place how Hulstaert himself reacted to the changes in education. He was certainly not alone in this, as was indicated in the first chapter. The inherent contradiction in the proposed structure must have already been generally known and criticised. Even so, as far as Hulstaert is concerned, this statement is not only a ‘technical’ or ‘educational’ critique. He clearly also took a position against ‘westernisation’ and argued for ‘adaptation’, adjustment. However, this did not detract from the fact that the Congolese needed to be Christianised. That basic principle remained unaltered. However much Hulstaert considered himself (or was considered) progressive, he was a very conservatively-minded man.[xii] His visions, which probably were partly the result of the training he received during his novitiate, were staunchly anti-modernist. Whenever he spoke about what was good for the Congolese, there was always a clear anti-modern tendency present. This was very clearly apparent in his aversion to city life and his homesickness for the simple country life. Several authors have pointed to the fact that Hulstaert’s ‘indigenistic’ opinions, with those of the MSC, were more anti-western than pro-African.[xiii]

In any case it is clear that indigenism, as a variant of adaptionism, was not essentially different when it came to the religious and moral principles to be learned at school. The following statement by Mgr. Van Goethem shows that Hulstaert was not alone in holding this opinion: “The natives of Coq, who are developed in the proper sense of the term are rare. The natives in our city are, in general, uprooted, they have turned their backs on their own people, and, with borrowed clothing, follow the whites whom they envy and towards whom they harbour only feelings of revolt. This is an unfortunate situation but not irretrievable. Our natives have not renounced their own people to such an extent that they allow the feeling to develop within them of a revulsion against their own race; they are rather embarrassed of their own because they ignore the beautiful sides of their race and their ambition causes them to follow the white, with whom they want to be an equal but for whom they feel only envy and hate.“[xiv] The educational agenda of the missionaries immediately followed from this: tradition and attachment to their own descent, order and discipline too. “Christian life, science, law, industry, cleanliness, medicine, all these emanate from Bamanya” was declared proudly in the Annals.[xv] That the missionaries were considerably proud of the disciplining of young Congolese is also evident from the contributions that appeared. “I have always admired you for your regularity and seriousness at the school. How hard this discipline must have been for you, you were used to the wild, free life. And yet you managed to bend and force yourself. ‘How is it possible?’ outsiders often asked me, when they saw you in line for class. You were chatting and quarrelling, shouting and screaming: the last bell toll struck and immediately all noise stopped and you were motionless, in line like drilled soldiers. That was discipline!“[xvi] Quotes like these indicate that this was the result desired by the missionaries, to be proudly presented back at home. “We, who are used to an ordered life, can hardly imagine what the loss of freedom means to these children of nature.“[xvii] The longing for order returned again and again: “The Montessori school is housed in a brick building. It is a delight to the eye and the mind to see healthy, spotless, shining children, busy freely and orderly, under the maternal vigilance of their teacher and governess, Mama Imelda.”[xviii] ‘Free’ and ‘orderly’ apparently went together without problems here. From the fact that the Sister also reported a, be it ‘maternal’, control in the same breath, it can be deduced that this order did not come forth spontaneously out of the freedom of the children and that clearly the freedom was limited and defined from above.

The all-seeing, controlling eye of the missionary was essential to safeguard the purity of the products of missionary education. A general aversion to city life and its influence on the Congolese arose with the MSC.[xix] This was not only apparent from the propaganda that was spread but also from the actual policies of the missionaries. Striking examples of both can be found. In one of the ‘founding’ stories that appeared in the MSC mission periodical in the late twenties, the young protagonist arrives in town, which is described by the author, Father De Knop, as follows: “Then you went to the city with Father and Mother (Coq), where the black and white people sweat through life side by side. You will admit that the black city is not ideal: such an impossible collection of people, who only have to build a tower of Babel to complete their downfall. (…) Thomas, live by prayer and the sacraments, be proud of yourself. Do not consume the rot of the big city.”[xx] When, in 1927, Hulstaert became director of the mission in Bokote, where industrial plantations of the Huileries du Congo Belge (HCB) were settled (Flandria), he made sure the schools were situated at a considerable distance from the company grounds because close proximity would only be detrimental to the education and upbringing of the children.[xxi] The same idea could have been at the basis of the answer he gave the plantation management when asked if specific lessons could be taught for training fruit pickers. Hulstaert answered that at that time (in 1929) the school was not yet equipped but: “In fact the project is one of the best and in addition to the benefits for the company, this trade, in the sense you give it, is of such a nature as to keep the natives in their own region.”[xxii] Various developments also need to be linked to the fact that urbanisation was already a known phenomenon during the colonial period.[xxiii] In 1941 Hulstaert wrote in the inspection report on the school in Bamanya: “The most noticeable thing at the school is the decreasing number of students. Of course the establishment of the school of Mpenjele plays a role; yet in my opinion, this is particularly due to the depopulation of the interior and the attraction of the official school of Coq.”[xxiv]

The rejection of everything urban generally seemed to fit into a sort of nostalgia for ‘the good old days’, a sentimental mentality in fact. That “the purity of the Negro” was only professed in a one-sided way can then be deduced from the fact that not all native customs needed to be respected. A nice example of this is the letter which Hulstaert, still in his role as responsible for the mission of Flandria, wrote to the management of the HBC after he had discovered that on a particular night wild native dances had been performed at the work camp. A Congolese woman, the wife of a native chief who came to be treated for an illness at the mission, had apparently participated in this: “Now, this woman participated in a dance here in the workers’ camp on Sunday in the evening, a new dance for this region which, according to the serious blacks (neither I nor any of our catechists went, in fact we never go into the camp), is obscene, not because of the words sung but because of the attitudes and gestures and movements of the principal dancer. The dance is called Mongodji or Wetsi.” That fact was sufficient to complain, even though he only had heard this from somebody else. “There were very many people at this first representation. The manager of your district of Flandria was also present, accompanied by his wife. They joined the group of accompanying dancers; the lady carried out the esaka (clapping the hands to accompany the singing and the movements of the principal dancer) and both distributed money.”[xxv]

The reason why this incident certainly had to be reported to the general management of the camp was that the conversion of the native workforces would be endangered by it: “It is consequently the second evil dance in the workers’ camp. This does not in itself concern us as these dances are not carried out in public places but because we are already unable to have the required guarantees for the baptism of our catechumens working here in your company, as a result of certain events that occurred previously, in my opinion, the latter aggravates the situation even further.”[xxvi] This reasoning fitted the strict rules applicable to the ‘catechumenate’. It also indicates how the worldviews clashed, even in the mind of people setting themselves up as defenders of the local population. Van Goethem worded this incompatibility still differently, in his complaint to the governor general about the development of the Congolese in Coquilhatville: “It is time now to give them their soul, to inspire them to attachment to their environment, to have them appreciate the civility, morality and religiosity of those who gave birth to them. If primary school teaches them all that, they will be enlightened and honest people, better able to understand the white and more capable of helping them.“[xxvii] The concern for national tradition was thus apparently not the actual foundation of education but was always subordinate to the demands and the needs of the coloniser. In any case, whatever the motivation of those responsible in the field was, the Christian life according to the prescribed rules formed the strong overtone. In an inspection report about the school in Bamanya, Hulstaert wrote: “The teaching of religious studies is well taken care of. Rev. Brother Director teaches himself in lonkundo, in addition to the lessons by the priests and teachers. Through this he can better help the students to penetrate the great truths and lay the foundation of a proper Christian life.”[xxviii]

Attendance and control of the children
2.1. Attendance
What were the material circumstances, the real life context with which the missionaries were confronted in the field? The first assertion which must be made is that it was not compulsory to go to school. It was not the case anywhere in the colony and it elicited the complaint from one missionary that it was difficult work: “Because here in Congo, where there is not yet any compulsory education law, one is never sure of one’s children. Today you have them, tomorrow you don’t.“[xxix] For that matter, this compulsory education would never be introduced. In 1930 the inspection report for the school in Mondombe reported: “The irregularity in these two divisions of the preparatory education is large, the order and discipline leave much to be desired, absences are numerous, it must be remedied energetically: unjustified absences shall be punished by small but effective punishments, the pupils have the choice of accepting these or leaving.”[xxx] Reports of similar situations are legion.

Some examples: the MSC established a small school in Mpenjele, a settlement dating from the time of the Trappists, located between Mbandaka and Bikoro. A number of inspection reports are available for the school. In 1935 there was apparently considerable doubt as to the viability of a school in that location because of a lack of children. The inspector further reported: “Passing through the village (…) the Father could find almost no pupils. When questioned, the teaching assistants replied that of the 35 pupils registered in February only 22 remained.”[xxxi] The school was then closed, the report concluded: “The closure of the school in Mpenjele, an inevitability, was consequently brought forward by 8 months.”[xxxii] Oddly enough it seems a new school was then opened because there is also a report for 1941, which, however, indicates similar problems. It reported that for every class, there were about thirty pupils enrolled on the register, of which more than ten had not attended class for a few months. For the neighbouring Beambo the inspector reported in 1934: “The next inspection shall have to decide whether it is worth continuing a school amongst such a small population so little interested in the regular functioning of this school.”[xxxiii] In Injole, another village in the area, the Fathers found the school deserted in July because the children had all gone to work with their parents, harvesting copal.[xxxiv] It caused the missionaries great concern because in the mission periodical they also asserted that colonial industry was largely responsible for the absence of the people and the disruption of daily life in the countryside. Paul Jans complained about these situations in 1936:[xxxv] “If everything goes well, you’ll find your people at home. But often you won’t. Then they are fishing; spread along the river for weeks and months. Or they are out for copal. And as long as the European war industry or others call for copal and the managers fight over it here – in a few months the prices rose from 0.18 Fr. to 1.25 Fr. a kilo and more, irrespective of the quality – so long will your villages run empty. But not only that, the blacks will lay out no more gardens, there will be no pupils in your schools and the roads and villages will become dirty; their health will continue to be ruined.“[xxxvi]

Negligence concerning school performance was also reported in Bamanya in the early thirties. The village youth at the missions were in general much more obedient and regular in their school attendance but there was clearly far more difficulty with the children from the surrounding inland villages: “Of the children of the foreign villages, of the tribes of Ngombe and Balumbe, there are still real children of nature, who cannot stand a day on the school benches, especially in the fishing and caterpillar season.”[xxxvii] In Mondombe, Vertenten remarked that it was very difficult to get girls into school and subsequently to keep them there, especially in the first years of school.[xxxviii] In Flandria a school was run under the permanent direction of missionaries and there also a relatively steep decline was reported at first. The headmaster (Hulstaert) stated in his reports to the management of the local HCB settlement that no great results had been achieved with regard to the number of pupils. He also mentioned multiple “désertations“.[xxxix] Even in Coquilhatville the large number of absentees at the girls’ school was noticed: “Everyday a large number are absent. Only about twenty could be said to be regular.”[xl]

Absences continued to be a problem in rural schools in the forties and fifties, as far as can be ascertained from the inspection reports. It remained difficult to induce girls, in particular, to attend school consistently and diligently. The missionaries themselves reported this frequently in their publications. Father Van Gorp explained it as follows in 1953: “The most obvious, the easiest explanation is this: boys often fight free at home. In the eyes of their parents, who are often egoists, they do not lose so much to see their boys leave them temporarily and go to school. Often the opposite is true: now the boys mostly have to pay their state taxes very early, which is largely an expense for the parents themselves. Boys do not make a lot of money. Girls, in contrast, are looked on far more kindly, better cared for and…better fed. For parents, having daughters means richness, or at least a source of income, which they will exploit as early and as tight-fistedly as possible. Furthermore, providing the daily bread or rather, the daily packet of kwanga (cassava), is almost solely the responsibility of the women.”[xli] The interference from the daily affairs of Congolese families was great and the missionaries could not control this easily. In a letter about the condition of the schools in Bamanya in 1947, it was observed that the attendance of girls at primary school left much to be desired, “And (that, JB) will not improve unless either the Mission or the State intervenes in one way or another.“[xlii] One of the consequences, as was suggested, was the fact that during the ‘fishing season’ all the girls systematically absented. In 1954 in Wafanya it was also stated that it was very difficult to get the girls to come to school. In Coquilhatville, on the other hand, there was clearly a different development. Education boomed there in the fifties, both for girls and boys. Father De Gols, who was parish priest of the ‘black’ district of Coquilhatville, remarked in an interview in the mission paper that it was striking that girls, who had previously not or only reluctantly come to school, now also seemed ‘gripped by general eagerness to learn’.[xliii]

2.2. In the bush
It is important to realise that the general context in which education took place was very different depending on whether one was in Coquilhatville, in a mission post or in a village in the bush. From the internal reports of the MSC it is apparent that by the mid-thirties, the missionaries were showing a great deal of activity, and that they tried fairly actively to involve the Congolese population in Christian community life as the missionaries imagined it. In the report to his superiors in Rome, Van Goethem naturally did his best to emphasise as much as possible the dedication of his troops. In 1934 he reported the establishment of a new parish, the construction of a printing office, primarily to facilitate evangelisation and the publication of schoolbooks. Active work for the Congolese was done through the Cercle Excelsior, a kind of club centre which functioned as the starting point for all kinds of social activities like football, cinema, French lessons, bookkeeping and of course also religious conférences and retraites. As far as the situation in the interior was concerned, however, Van Goethem painted a very different picture. He based his commentary on the reports from his missionaries, who travelled around their assigned territory several times a year. The image sketched in the reports is very heterogeneous. In certain areas there was good contact between the local population and the missions, in other areas there was a strong influence from the Protestant missionaries or there was just less willingness on the part of the people to consort with the MSC. Many areas were plagued by high mortality rates, caused, according to Van Goethem, by venereal diseases. The colonial government imposed considerable burdens: copal needed to be found, the roads needed to be maintained and new roads needed to be laid.

It was apparent from the report that evangelisation and education were at that time strongly interrelated. The chapter devoted to evangelisation is by far the largest, which of course is not illogical, considering the destination of the report. And yet the chapter mentions education almost as much as in its own chapter “enseignement“. Most travelling Fathers inspected schools during their tours through the hinterland of the mission posts. Among other things, it was reported that Jean Cortebeeck, who was responsible for the region of Mondombe, supplied all the catechists with blackboards, chalk, slates and slate pencils. The majority of the catechists also functioned as teachers but had to make do without school buildings and with inadequate equipment.[xliv] In other places, the teaching was considered not good enough. Also in this report, it was determined that school attendance was not regular enough.[xlv]

The report by Mgr. Van Goethem, which is quoted here, is an important source because it is one of the few documents that offer a more detailed view of the condition of rural schools. The report contains a memorandum, requested by the Bishop and written by Father Paul Trigalet, who worked in the area around Flandria. From this it is also apparent that the school is considered the most important aid for evangelisation – in a two-fold way. Firstly, the school was the proverbial carrot (“l’appât“) through which children were enticed into the Kingdom of God. The fact that the catechists could act as wise men in the school context raised their prestige, which also had an impact on the success of evangelisation. Trigalet further described, in a somewhat cryptic way, how the establishment of rural schools was handled. They started with the training of a number of moniteurs [teaching assistants] at the mission post of Flandria. A number of boys, who had been taught for some years at the central mission post, were chosen to go and teach in the mission schools themselves, “under the vigilant eye of an older catechist“.[xlvi] That last addition indicates that in many cases very young people were involved, both concerning the catechists as well as the prospective moniteurs. It had to be ensured that there was a minimal question of authority between catechist and moniteur, which was of course easier if there was an age difference. Indeed, most new teachers came straight from primary school.

At school, age was always a relative concept in itself. There were not really any rules in this regard. Young and old often sat beside one another: “A father sits beside his son, married men next to boys of thirteen or fourteen years old.”[xlvii] In an inspection report of 1930 about the Mondombe school, Vertenten stated that: “Due to the considerable differences between the pupils, their large number, considering the rooms available and the shortage of the teaching assistants we have made five divisions.”[xlviii] This was also the case in the rural school of Beambo: “In addition we have noted an excessive difference in age. Some children are truly too young.”[xlix] Elsewhere it was said that: “The pupils are a little eclectic, there are some very young pupils and others that almost appear too old to me; hence the considerable difficulty for the teacher.”[l] After all, it was often difficult to determine the exact age of the children. When the education administration tried to set age limits for entrance to the school at the beginning of the 1950s this met with a lack of understanding by the MSC. In Flanders Frans Maes even developed a method for determining the children’s age in a ‘scientifically responsible’ way. This method calculated age using observation and comparison of the builds of a large number of pupils. He wrote a ’scientific’ article on this in the Annalen. In a report on his school in 1954 he gave a table showing the average height per class. He stated that he had been trying to get the oldest pupils out of the classes since 1948 but that he could not discover their age and so he made the selection based on how tall they were[li]

When it came to actually founding rural schools Trigalet clearly had more difficulty giving correct and exact information, even though Van Goethem introduced his memorandum with this purpose. In the first instance he referred back to the vicariate’s rapports annuels. Apparently, a few things had gone wrong after an encouraging start. The reasons he gave for the problems with rural schools could be explained for the most part by a lack of control. It can be suspected that there is another reality hidden behind these words. Trigalet lifted up a corner of the veil in his concluding remarks, in which he spoke of the advantages and disadvantages of the reform of the rural schools as provided for by Van Goethem. The bishop wanted to close a number of small bush schools and so strengthen the existing schools and also give them a complete curriculum, conforming to the guidelines of the Brochure Jaune. Trigalet pointed out that this solution would indeed require less manpower and increase control. On top of this less pay would have to be spent on the moniteurs. However, opposed to this there was the fact that larger buildings would need to be erected and that the food transports for the children would be problematic: “Regular contributions should be expected from them (the pupils, JB), we have not achieved that yet. Regular attendance cannot be obtained except through making the pupils pay and – let us say – manu militari. I am talking from experience.”[lii] It points to the fact that at that moment there was quite a bit of resistance in the interior to what the missionaries desired from the local population.

Trigalet also blamed the lack of success of the Bush schools on the Congolese themselves: “Fundamentally we have achieved that which we could have expected from the black left to himself. Except for very rare exceptions, the majority were not capable of working seriously, moved by zeal, love of work or noble ambition. These sub-causes were burdened by a lack of supervision.”[liii] Another good example in this context is an incident discussed in the 1950 Annalen. A travelling priest arrived in a remote chefferie, found the school in total silence, and concluded: “The teaching assistant is up to date with everything: the class register, the list of absences and attendance has already been filled in two weeks in advance.” In the same article the author further concluded that in the village schools it was usually the teacher who gave the example of “haagschool houden” [=playing truant].[liv] The sanction considered in such a case was to transfer the teaching assistant in question to another post, where it would be easier to keep an eye on him. This again tells us more about the way the missionaries experienced things than about the real motives of the Congolese. Nevertheless, it looks very much like a reaction against an overly imposed way of life in general. School attendance was a part of that. The missionaries interpreted a negative reaction or even hesitation to embrace this way of life on the part of the Congolese as an intrinsic weakness on their part. This caused an even greater tendency towards ‘education’ and/or control. What made the difference between the mission post and the rural schools was, of course, the fact that there were by definition always one or more missionaries present who exercised direct control over the teaching assistants and the students and organised the daily time schedule of both groups. This time schedule will be considered later in more detail.

2.3. Escape from the country/urbanisation
Besides this external control element there was another, broader phenomenon in which the absence at school was situated, namely urbanisation. The question arises whether this was caused by a dislike of the missionaries and schools in the mission posts or from a (Congolese) desire for the city. Another possible reason could be the difference between the congregations in the city and in the country. This should be placed in the context of the differences in opinion between the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and the Brothers of the Christian Schools. There was certainly a great appeal to city life, probably for the same reasons the MSC judged and disapproved of it. These reasons can be summarised under the headings ‘opportunities’ and ‘social promotion’. The Brothers must have started from a fundamentally different attitude since they had a far more neutral stance towards the city. Apart from this they also took a much more neutral stance to the educational landscape in globo as a consequence of the fact that they always worked ‘as subcontractors’, be it for the state (in official schools), or for other congregations such as the MSC.[lv]

Van Goethem already stated in a letter to the provincial governor that a lot of children dropped out of the mission school and then appeared to be attending school in Coquilhatville without the local missionaries knowledge. In itself this already shows that the MSC, and probably the missionaries in general, took on a rather controlling attitude to their students. In the letter cited, Van Goethem suggests that he wanted to put up a strong fight against the phenomenon. He felt that people had given the governor the wrong impression that it was the missionaries who sent the children to the city. “If this had been the case, we would have been wrong to express our wish to the Government of keeping the indigenous pupils in their natural environment and our desire to allow pupils from the interior to attend courses at the central school of the mission serving their place of origin.”[lvi] This clearly shows that it was the MSC who, from their intrinsic motivation, wanted to keep the youth in the villages. Rules were created and agreements were made in that respect between urban schools and rural schools.

This also closely fitted with the general restriction on free movement that was in force for all the Congolese. For example, Van Goethem wondered in the same letter how it was possible that the children concerned had all acquired a domicile and consequently residency right in the city. In his opinion it certainly meant that one of the admission rules of the Groupe Scolaire was not applied strictly, specifically the requirement that the parents had to live in the cité indigène. As a matter of fact, a lot of effort was put into keeping children out of the city. From a letter of October 1942, from the head of the Groupe Scolaire, it is apparent that all possible administrative weapons were implemented. He listed the documents a pupil had to submit in order to be accepted: “1. the identity documents of their parents; 2. their own if they are old enough to have them; 3. their medical card; 4. the transfer permit, issued by the administrator of the region from which they are coming, 5. the residence permit from the CEC or the Coquilhatville region; 6. the personal certificates and letters of recommendation from R. Fathers of the mission and the school from which they come.” The letter was a reply to a letter from the governor, who had apparently asked the director to indicate how the admission could be more strictly monitored: “What should be done to strengthen the decisions taken? In my humble opinion it does not appear possible to mend the holes in the net that prohibits access to the Groupe Scolaire to children from the hinterland who want to pursue their studies unless each presenting pupil must provide a certificate from the missionary authority of the place of origin or of Coq/belge stating that the parents of the interested party (either father or mother) are resident in Coquilhatville for supervising and caring for them.”[lvii] There were three enclosures with the letter with overviews of pupils, their place of origin and the person who send them to the city. The writer concluded with the following statement, which unmistakably represented how he felt about this avalanche of ceremonies: “Finally, in order to reply to your wish for numeric accuracy, I have drawn up the attached table, Appendix II. I hope it is to your satisfaction.”

A letter from Hulstaert from 1943 summarises the entire situation well. In the letter, sent to the Brother Director of the school in Coquilhatville, he said: “With regard to the acceptance of pupils to the Brothers’ school in Coq, rules have been established by the government. The principle is: no boys are accepted from the interior; only those whose parents (father or mother) live in Coq may attend lessons there. However, a few exception are allowed; e.g. for boys who were sent by the Fathers or by the regional manager, as well as a few special cases.” That keeping pupils in their own region was truly considered a rule to be complied with is apparent from the following statement from the same letter: “Sometimes pupils are sent by the Fathers. It is not possible to cut off the path to the official school for all pupils from the country. However, the necessary leave is rarely given. However, if it is considered useful to grant such leave, the following precautions must be taken: 1. One ensures that the boy has permission from his own parents. 2. The pupil is given a personal, individual letter addressed to the Br. Director of the Groupe Scolaire, in which a request is made for the acceptance of the pupil. 3. The pupil is given the certificate of primary school education completed (the boys must initially attend the school at the post that runs in their region); and add the necessary information concerning their behaviour, character, etc. As well as: the place of origin, the parents (and their current residence). The pupils must also have their certificate of baptism with them and everything must be in order with the Regional manager and Medical Department. 4. One will ensure that only good students will be sent. 5. Account will particularly be taken of the fact that the pupils in Coq will enter a very dangerous environment; that they must consequently be well trained to be able to face the risks with sufficient confidence, risks both to their Christian life and to the knowledge that was given to them at school; this knowledge presupposes a thorough intellectual training to be accepted without damage. The Fathers must be held personally liable before God and only allow those to go that they judge in conscience to be capable of entering into the danger.“[lviii]

Naturally, it was easier to have this type of control on children at the mission post, in the presence of the missionaries, but it was often hard to maintain with regard to children from the bush. Hulstaert concluded that himself in the letter cited here. Yet the missionaries also tried to monitor the activities of children attending school in the village schools. Not only reports were given, the teaching assistants or moniteurs were also expected to keep the register (appèl list), and a class diary if possible. These were then inspected by the travelling Father on duty, who tried to make a trip to the interior every few months and to visit as many schools as possible, of which a report could then be submitted to the mission superiors. In principle the missionary inspector (one per religious description) had to draw up an inspection report and pass it on to the state inspectors. In the case of the MSC these missionary inspectors were Vertenten (1928-1936) and Hulstaert (1936-1946), Cobbaut (1947-1950)[lix] and Moentjens (1950-1959). Moentjens said in an interview that it was in fact impossible to inspect the entire region himself: “– Father Gaston, I think that you must have a lot of work to be able to inspect all those schools! – If those 364 classrooms were together on a few square metres (…) but the Vicariate is immensely large with an area 4.5 times that of Belgium. To reach the mission post Wafanya on the Momboyo river I have to travel around 600 km on a river boat that moves at 5 km per hour.“[lx]

However there are also a lot of other reports in the archives, drawn up by the school heads themselves or by the so-called travelling Fathers. For example Father Pattheeuws, who wrote stories about his travels in the interior in expressive terms in the mission periodical: “I pretend I allow myself to be convinced by those promises. It would be a great pity for the village if I have to close the school (oh certainly, Fafa). I show him Rosalie with her big eye (his motorbike, JB), which will in future come through the villages at great speed to see where the lofundo mongo are, the Christian ones, and the children or the teaching assistant or all of them at once. I add that I will come and test the boys soon. You may be certain that they will cram hard from today and tomorrow and repeat everything the entire day to perform well at the competition. Although those promises don’t mean much, that has at least been gained.“[lxi] Usually there was a travelling Father for each central mission post. He could also report on specific posts. This created an entire chain of information. One example of this are the reports of Jos Moeyens, travelling Father at the Bamanya post, who reported to the superior, Paul Jans, who sent the reports on to the missionary inspector Vertenten, who, as already mentioned, had to report to the state inspection.

Further education
3.1. Who was allowed to go to Bamanya?
It is clear that a rather restrictive policy was also enforced with regard to the training of teaching assistants. From the correspondence of the Fathers in the interior with the Father rector of Bamanya it appears that there was an explicit request to send as few people as possible from the interior to the teaching assistant training there.[lxii] The local missionary in Mondombe apologised profusely in 1948 when he sent a number of his pupils to Bamanya for the teacher training college: “I hope you will excuse me for sending a few more than the quota allocated to me because there is hardly anyone from Mondombe in Bamanya and because I did not send any last year.”[lxiii] From Bokela a similar quotation: “Dear Father Wouters, I received your letter of 2/11/47 concerning the limitation of children a few days ago. Bokela will probably send 3 new pupils to you. We have no certified teachers in our region. Those from the south will not come here or do not stay: especially when they see that they will be employed elsewhere anyway when they leave here. The Sister in the school would still like a certified teacher for the highest class. I am talking of 3 here but one may drop out as happened last year.”[lxiv]

Innumerable extracts may be found in the Aequatoria of what must have been an impressive correspondence, solely concerning sending pupils from the various mission posts in the interior to the mission post of Bamanya, with a view to further studies at the teacher training college. It was a fixed custom that pupils had to be recommended for this by the local supervisor. Consequently, careful attention was paid to the pupils’ points, their character and whether they were suited in the missionaries’ opinion to achieve anything. That the Groupe Scolaire in Coquilhatville increasingly became a reinforced stronghold as the years went by, has already been shown. But there was also considerable selection in progress at the teacher training college in Bamanya. In any event the missionaries corresponded extensively in that regard. The pupils were put on the boat, which then took them to Bamanya over the Congo river and with which the supervising Father gave a short note with the pupils concerned, in the style of “Imbonga 30-1-48. Reverend Father Rector, Nkolongo Jean, originating from Bolukowafumba (?) will be coming as a pupil (new) to the Bamanya teacher training college. He has the prescribed 100 frs. for purchasing the mosquito net.” Or: “Bokela 6-1-1948. Dear Father Rector. I have sent 3 good pupils for the teacher training college. We need teachers here. I hope you will be satisfied with them.“[lxv] Sometimes the accompanying reference was a little more extensive and some Fathers used the opportunity to write about the young people being sent, like Hulstaert in the following example:

Beste P. Jans,

Theresita onverwachts hier en lijk altijd ongeduldig om te vertrekken. Hierbij de jongens terug: we voorzien geen andere gelegenheid later. Dus …
Bolongo Jos nog niet terug van huis.
De nieuwe:
[4 namen]
4 kristenen
[4 namen]
4 catechisten reeds op school vanaf oktober ‘29, behalve Nsinga reeds vanaf ‘28.

Lokose en Kolongo hebben ‘t 3^e jaar begonnen. De anderen hebben 1^e jaar af en zijn nu in 2^e. Ons schooljaar begint na OLV Hemelvaart (lijk in België)
Over karakter etc. zult u zelf wel gauw ingelicht zijn. Lokosa is nog al een achterbakse. Baosso is wat ruw, maar rechtdoor. Maakt graag plezier, maar is ne schat van ne vent.
Ik maak er een eind aan. Geen tijd meer. Hoop dat ze ’t goed zullen stellen en u erover tevreden zult zijn. Er zijn hier niet veel liefhebbers voor Bamania!
Vele groeten aan Marcel.  

Hartelijk gegroet, Gustaaf Hulstaert.

[Dear P. Jans,
Theresita unexpectedly here and as always impatient to leave. Here are the boys back again: no later opportunity is expected. So…
Bolongo Jos is still not back from home.
The new ones:
[4 names]
4 Christians
[4 names]
4 catechists already at school since October ’29, except Nsinga already from ’28.

Lokose and Kolongo started the 3rd year. The others have completed the first year and are now in the second. Our academic year starts after Assumption (as in Belgium). Concerning character etc. you will yourself quickly draw a conclusion.  Lokosa is rather sly. Baosso is rather coarse but straight. Likes to have fun but is a wonderful guy.
I will finish here as I am out of time. I hope they will do well and that you will be satisfied with them. There are not many enthusiasts for Bamanya here!
Give my regards to Marcel.

Yours sincerely,
Gustaaf Hulstaert]

Extract 1 – Example of an accompanying reference letter when ‘sending’ new pupils to Bamanya. Source: Aequatoria Archives.

It is apparent from these letters that the directors of the teacher training college in Bamanya implemented a more reticent policy with regard to accepting new pupils. They probably wanted to avoid too many students starting the studies at once and thought that the infrastructure would not be capable of coping with the number of interested parties. In any event, administrative steps were also taken to allow the transition to Bamanya (and the same was true a fortiori for the large city Coquilhatville) to proceed smoothly. The pupils sent were not only given an accompanying reference from the Fathers, but also had to be able to prove to the government authority why they were moving from one place to another. They were given a special pass for this.

In the vast majority of cases the intention was that the pupils would return to their village of origin after completing their studies at the teacher training college. Hulstaert was a strong supporter of that principle and not loathe to admit it: “I have a few boys at school here who would like to become teachers. Could I send them to you and when? I trust your promise that those boys will later return here. You probably are thinking: chapel mentality. Of course but if you do not care for your own chapel, not much can be expected from others. Insofar as this should be believed – if you do not provide support it will cave in and ultimately who has to cope with the trouble then?“[lxvi]

The students for the teacher training college could also return home sooner. They were assessed on their behaviour and attitude while at school. If they did not fulfil the expectations or went too far in the missionaries’ opinion, they were sent back. A lot of testimonies can also be found in that regard. The missionaries interfered extensively in the lives of their students. A lot of letters consequently also consider the behaviour, and more particularly the social life, of the young students. That correspondence between the Fathers also shows clearly that morality did weigh heavily in practice. Everyday life was saturated with a number of moral rules and principles which everyone had internalized well. Being good and avoiding gossip were the clearest expressions of this. Again from Hulstaert: “On the issue of little Bakutu, I have already written to you that I believe there is no question of searching for Loisa Bokeo’s sister. He has an eye on a girl here, although Antoine Esale had advised him to take that Bokeo. I believe that it is more an issue of going eating there in the family. But of course that does not mean that it might not be a good thing to prohibit him from going there; and I will also write to him in that regard, even if just to avoid gossip.”[lxvii]

3.2. Practical examples
However it is clear from the following story that took place in 1931 that things did not always go to plan for the missionaries. One of the students, Jean Itoko, was apparently shown the door by Father Jans, but did not want to return to his village. After a few failed attempts to get him on board of one of the riverboats to send him back to his village, the man went underground, apparently in the premises of the provincial medical department, where he got in as a member of the workforce via friends or relatives. The Fathers talked to the provincial doctor (Strada) and one of the officers of the department (Verfaillie). Jans sent a letter to Verfaillie. He answered Jans: “Very Reverend Father Paul, the man Itoko Jean came to the office this morning. As the Provincial Doctor has informed me that he has to be returned to you and that he did not leave on board of the Theresita, I will return him for all useful ends.“[lxviii]

The person involved tried to explain his case himself in a letter, written in the school French he had learned: “Mr Director, Mr A.V. I would like to take advantage of my time today to ask you whether I could return to my work? I am asking this because I have not left for the village. I told the Father at Bamanya that I would not return to my village without a diploma because if I return I would be disgraced. I do not want to leave, I want to continue my studies with the Doctor. And also he told me ‘as you want, my child’. Now I am asking you whether it is possible to continue. I remain yours faithfully, Your servant, Jean Ikolo.“[lxix]

On 10 October Jans sent a letter to the district director, Requile. He explicitly appealed to his competence in tracing Itoko and ensuring that he returned to his village of origin. Even if the person concerned was against it, the Fathers used every means at their disposal to make him do what they thought he should do. Jans played on the feelings of (in)security of the territorial official: “The boy does not want to return to his home at any cost. On the other hand, we have been informed that in order to make him complete his studies, we are morally obliged to return him to his home where he belongs. But having no means of coercion for this (sic) I would like to ask your assistance, convinced that you would not in any way wish to see the number of unemployed people increase in the Belge.”[lxx]
The reply took some time, apparently Itoko had truly succeeded in hiding well. On 2 December, Jans wrote again to the director to make his further action clear: he had somehow managed to get an acquaintance of Itoko to report him to the police. The wording in the letter made it apparent that this type of intervention was not unusual: “Mr director, I have the honour of sending the said … Joseph, with whom, according to your statement, the said Itoko Jean is lodging. I would remind you that this same Itoko Jean, a former pupil at Bamanya, was the subject of one of my previous letters in which I requested he be forcefully repatriated, the boy having had to be expelled from the school and originally coming from the territory of Bokote. Since that date I have not seen the concerned person again. It may be that … Joseph may be able to give you more detailed information about the location where he is hiding or the person with whom he is working.“[lxxi] On that same day the addressee wrote his reply to Jans. Itoko Jean was found in the Belge, the interior district of Coquilhatville. He was immediately brought before the magistrates’ court and judged. After two months the missionaries had managed to find the recalcitrant student and got their own back. The student was punished with imprisonment and a large fine and was obliged to return home.[lxxii] The reasons he gave apparently did not convince anyone. The example indicates that there was a case of ‘transgressive cooperation’ in the sense of good contacts between the missionaries on the one hand and the government departments on the other.[lxxiii]

The strange thing is that the missionaries reacted very differently in the opposite case in which a person refused to continue his studies. They left the matter alone or at least were not so worried about it: “I would also like to inform you that A. LIANJA and NKOI do not want to return to Bamanya: they have given the excuse that they become ill there and receive injuries and they then do not have anyone from the family to help them. As they no longer want to go, there is little more that can be done. I received the message from Bokuma that boys would be coming here who have also left Bamanya, and they have also come: the reason given: their family no longer wants them to go to Bamanya. Consequently, I have registered them here for the time being, they are ISENGE Antoine and BONGANDA Jos.“[lxxiv] Naturally, it did fit the general tendency of Hulstaert to keep young people in the villages. In 1929 he again wrote to Jans: “it is sincerely true that we need good teaching assistants everywhere, we even more than others, as the inspection proved. Moreover, this has been known for a long time. I do not doubt the matter at all. But firstly may I encourage boys to go to Bamanya? Does that not constitute acting against the work of this school here, for which we are also ex-justitia responsible?” [lxxv]

Father De Knop reacted in a similar way in a similar situation: “While the boys are on holiday, we are obliged to give you some bad news about Bonsenge Maurits. He used to be a fantastic student; last year he had a distinction. At the beginning of this academic year he was also very good and had the best results, was at the front of the class. That has gradually declined and he is now at the tail end, although he is still satisfactory. Something must be wrong with that boy; and we suspect – we will just say it frankly then you will know what the matter is – serious moral errors. There is also the greatest risk that he will not come through it and even that he would have to be sent on. Would it not be more desirable in that case for him to stay at home? As long as he is still satisfactory for his studies and he has not been blamed for any specific lack of morality we do not want to oblige him to stay at home. We would like to leave the decision up to your good judgement.”[lxxvi]

The position of teachers
Reference has already been made to the Congolese teachers. It is clear that the education system of the missionaries relied on their dedication and work. One of the witnesses interviewed in the framework of this research said: “If a pupil had not understood something after the class, he needed information. If this was not from his friends, it would be from the teaching assistant, who lived in the district. He would be accessible for this type of demand. And in their absence, from the Sister? No!“[lxxvii] It is difficult to assess the quantitative proportion of the moniteurs in colonial education correctly. Nevertheless, it may be stated on the basis of the available data that they bore the greater part of the actual workload. Just to cite one telling example: according to the statistics of the MSC themselves there were 3883 pupils at school in the vicariate Coquilhatville, in 1932, at the various mission posts (account must be taken of the fact that very little information can be found on rural schools in the statistics concerned, it may nevertheless be assumed that this more or less relates to an overview of those places where the various congregations were effectively present). Apparently, the staff of these schools consisted for 50% of Congolese teachers, as is shown from the following excerpt from those statistics.[lxxviii] That was the situation at a time that the actual educational organisation had just been established, the first educational curriculum had only been announced three years previously.

4.1. Kolokote

Which position did the moniteurs and monitrices hold? How did they see their position? How were they seen by the missionaries? It will have become clear in the meantime: what was true for the pupils and students was also true for the Congolese teachers. The missionaries kept an eye on them. Reference has already been made in this chapter to descriptions of inspections and the attitude towards the teacher in the small bush schools, far from the central mission post. Reference has also already been made to the lack of direct testimonies. Consequently, the case of the teaching assistant Pierre Kolokoto, whose correspondence with the missionaries in French has been preserved, is extremely rare. Kolokoto was a teaching assistant in a small bush school in Beambo. A few letters of his have been copied in the ‘Scholen’ Fund of the Aequatoria archives. These are interesting material because they may contribute to giving an image of the position of a person who acted as a link between the missionaries and the children. For these reasons I thought it worth citing the five letters as faithfully as possible.[lxxix]

The letters were all written in the period between October 1935 and February 1936. In essence they relate to a dispute involving the moniteur, the village catechist and the missionaries. The dispute centred on the relationship and particularly the cohabitation of the teacher with a girl from the village. That was not tolerated by the catechist, which caused problems in the village community and towards the MSC. The teacher repeatedly wrote to Father Vertenten, whom he probably knew from his visit as the travelling Father and inspector. He wanted to pay the dowry for his betrothed as quickly as possible because then he would also be allowed to cohabit with her in accordance with the principles in force then. However, the dowry was much too expensive for him. He consequently asked the missionaries if they would grant him a loan. Vertenten asked for advice from Mgr. Van Goethem. The missionary’s interpretation can be seen clearly in his letter. The moniteur had “caused public scandal“. The hierarchical relationships were clearly sketched in the letter. Kolokote had not obeyed either the catechist or Vertenten himself. The school for which the moniteur was responsible did not attract many pupils and their number was apparently decreasing too much for the Father’s liking because he would not pay his wage and threatened to close the school. That the missionaries sometimes had to calculate very carefully is also clear from the fact that Vertenten remarked in his letter that he still hoped to be able to obtain subsidies for the last school year. He finally asked Van Goethem whether he should dismiss the moniteur or allow him to stay, which would then probably cost the missionaries the payment of the dot.[lxxx] “Mgr. replied“, is stated rather laconically at the bottom of the letter: “Continue to employ him but do not give an advance loan.“[lxxxi]

This correspondence is an illustration of the balance of powers in the villages. There was clearly a distinction between catechists and moniteurs, even if an attempt was sometimes made to have the two go together, as already shown for Flandria. It is clear from the letters that the moniteur had a difficult time due to the fact that the catechist did not approve of his love life. As is apparent from Vertenten’s reaction, the missionaries initially accepted the catechist’s judgement. Stéphane Boale also stated that the teacher was conscious of the fact that there was a person in the vicinity who kept an eye on him. If that was not a missionary, Father or Sister, then it was the catechist, under whose authority he fell, “(…) despite the fact that he was educated, a man who knew many things. (…) If that happened to a moniteur, who did not obey the rules, who hit children and punished them badly, he would be given a bad report from the catechist who operated as a supervisor. He would be subject to a warning, and he would have money docked.”[lxxxii] In any event that seems to correspond well with the case referred to in the letters cited and the approach apparent from it.

4.2. Professional status and wage
It has already been shown from the above that the moniteur was generally in a subordinate position to the missionaries, at least in his or her professional situation. Concretely, the MSC concluded an agreement with the moniteurs which stipulated that these were bound to work for the missionaries for three years. These contracts also stipulated that, in addition to the cases explicitly legislated, “the prefecture reserves the right to terminate this contract under the following conditions:
– due to any court judgement whatsoever;
– due to inability as a result of serious illness or prolonged infirmity;
– due to notable inability, laziness, intemperance or insubordination.”[lxxxiii]

The contract was not the first engagement that the moniteur had to undertake to the missionaries. Already at the commencement of studies the new student had to sign a contract with the school in which he or she undertook to complete the studies and to remain at the mission until completion of the studies.[lxxxiv] Moreover, it is striking how the MSC explicitly appeal to state authority in this model contract. The question is whether the sanctions stipulated in the event of a breach of contract were truly imposed by the State. This indicates that it was necessary for the missionaries to keep this type of big stick available, probably because forcing compensation to be paid for contractual damage was not efficient enough. In the example of the Jean Itoko case it is clearly apparent that the missions were themselves powerless in the face of a pupil who ran away but they could appeal to the cooperation of the colonial upholders of order without any problems.

Je, Bertin Ngoi, soussigné,
fils de Gregorie Ngoi et de …
originaire de Bongilambengi,
Chefferie des Waya,
Territoire des Ekonda,
demeurant actuellement à Flandria,
déclare vouloir suivre les cours de l’Ecole normale Libre de Bamania-Mission,
et m’engage à y rester jusque après obtention du diplôme de sortie.
Je déclare savoir que le présent contrat est protégé par l’Etat, qui peut me forcer de l’exécuter et n’admet la rupture dudit contrat que pour des raisons de santé, d’incapacité ou d’indignité, établies par les personnes, préposées à la Direction de ladite Ecole Normale Libre de Bamania.

Fait à Flandria, le 3 février 1930.
L’élève de l’école normale libre,
Bertin Ngoi.

I, Bertin Ngoi, the undersigned,
Son of Gregorie Ngoi and …
Originating from Bongilambengi,
Chefferie des Waya,
Territoire des Ekonda,
Currently resident in Flandria,

declare my intention to attend courses at the independent teacher training college at Bamanya Mission,
and I undertake to remain there until I have obtained the final diploma.
I declare that I am aware that this contract is protected by the State, which may force me to fulfil it and does not admit any breach of the said contract except on grounds of health, inability or unsuitability, established by persons appointed by the Direction of the said Independent Teacher Training College of Bamanya.

Drawn up in Flandria, on 3 February 1930.
The pupil of the independent teacher training college,

Bertin Ngoi.
Extract 2 – Example of an undertaking that the pupils had to enter into with the missionaries. From Aequatoria Archives.

The position of the native staff was in general subject to the decree of 16 March 1922 (decree relating to employment contracts) that regulated the employment contracts between “travailleurs indigènes” and “maîtres civilisés“.[lxxxv] That decree also established that wages could be docked (“implement fines”) in the event of infringements of the working discipline. That right was also often effectively used by the missionaries. This was also expressed in the correspondence cited concerning Pierre Kolokote. In the letter Vertenten wrote in that regard to Van Goethem, he wondered: “Is a penalty of 70 fr. enough? Or should we close the school and not employ him for the moment?“[lxxxvi]

There is not very much general information available relating to the remuneration of the moniteurs. This was only considered insofar as it constituted a part of (or contributed to) the social position of the moniteurs. A few indications can be found of this. The subsidies for teaching staff were listed in a document from 1936, implemented by the Daughters of the Precious Blood who were active in three mission posts at that time. It gives an idea of the relationship between the missionaries and the native teachers. An annual salary of 5 000 francs was provided for a European teacher, 600 francs for a moniteur or monitrice. Naturally, this relates to subsidies and not wages. From the correspondence with Pierre Kolokoto (from 1935), cited above, it may be deduced that a teacher’s wage could indeed amount to 70 francs a month. Naturally these things related to seniority. Moreover, the 1929 curriculum did not provide for any minimum wages but only regulated the subsidies for the missionaries. In 1948 Cobbaut, who was an inspector at that time, informed the Father rectors at the mission posts of new salary scales for the moniteurs: “Some rectors, seeing that the previous salary scales were truly too low, have already increased them themselves; of which I approve. We must attempt to keep our moniteurs as long as possible for the correct running of the school but as a result we must also provide them with a worthy wage.”[lxxxvii] In any event a distinction was made between certified and non-certified teachers. The basis salary of a certified teacher was 40% higher than that of a non-certified teacher (350 compared to 250 francs a year in 1948). The moniteur could receive a higher wage through seniority and particularly through bonuses related to his family status (having a spouse and children). Towards the end of the fifties the difference in the treatment of certified and non-certified teachers, which existed throughout the colony, would cause annoyance and union action.[lxxxviii]

The statement by Cobbaut indicates that there was a problem with the wages for teachers, particularly when compared to other occupations. The topic was considered at the bishops’ conference in Leopoldstad in 1945. Edouard Van Goethem, MSC, was the observer: “Progress places increasing demands on our education and requires an increasingly qualified native staff. (…) These efforts will however remain ineffective to a great extent if the government, which is responsible together with the missions for the progress of the natives, does not decide to grant our school work an adequate financial contribution, principally to allow us to fairly pay all the native teaching staff.” From the information cited by Van Goethem in his report a number of conclusions may be drawn for his own vicariate. Generally speaking there was excessive financial pressure on the missions, which prevented them from being able to pay their staff properly. Generally, state subsidies only covered half the expenses of the MSC in their vicariate. Moniteurs in the rural schools were particularly expensive because the state paid less subsidies there (60% as opposed to 90% for central schools).

The moniteurs in the rural schools naturally constituted the largest group, precisely because establishing mass education was the goal and consequently required a broad presence. Van Goethem explicitly supported this in his report. This situation resulted in a relatively large staff turnover. A lot of moniteurs found other jobs that paid better and left education. The MSC tried to pay their moniteurs the same wage as an average labourer. Van Goethem stated that this average was an amount of 175 francs a month, while it should really be 400 or 500 francs.[lxxxix] In an anonymous memo from 1944 located in the Aequatoria archives, which contained very many arguments that are also mentioned in the report by Van Goethem, matters were stated even more candidly. In a comparison of the minimum monthly wage of a labourer (130 francs) and the subsidy that was provided monthly for a teacher, it was apparent that the latter only received half of that minimum wage (62 francs). In practice this meant that the missions had to find sufficient funds to adjust the difference.[xc]

Jans and Hulstaert were already confronted by this type of problem in 1932. Hulstaert wrote in a letter to Jans that there were teachers who told him “(…) that their contract for the mission states payment of 700 fr. per month. Consequently, everyone knows that they are important people; they earn at least 700 fr. a month, not small fry and they were apparently told in Bamanya that they would receive here in Flandria, as a special exception, 750 fr.“[xci] Jans replied rather laconically: “I believe that further comment on the initial wage is unnecessary. I have already told you not to overreact as the company makes it possible for you to go far above the minimum. That Botuli and Co. have not understood it differently but have explained it differently to their companions is not my fault. They have signed for three years, in the hope of a gradual increase and the freedom to try their fortunes elsewhere after three years if they are then able to earn and receive the monthly 700 or 750 they now already dream of.“[xcii]

Another striking point is the way in which the women were included in the salary scales. There was clearly less money available for them. Still as late as 1952 that was confirmed by the missionary inspector Moentjens: “I have the honour of informing you, and this in accordance with Monseigneur, that in future the monitrices will also receive the legally prescribed minimum wage of the region per month.“[xciii] Whereas a complicated calculation was required in 1953 to calculate the correct wage for the moniteurs in Bamanya, for the monitrices it was sufficient to state “legal minimum wage of Coq-Bamanya“.[xciv] Consequently, there were no supplements for them. That fitted in with a wider logic that assumed that a woman would no longer work once she had started a family. That was true for the entire colony (and undoubtedly also to a great extent in the motherland). It was also a generally accepted idea with the évolués. The following quotation from an inspection report from 1948 is very representative thereof: “That training for monitrices is very important. It is rather irritating that you must always start again because the teachers leave to get married. However, this is the natural and good state of affairs, the school will only improve to such an extent when we will have native Sisters.”[xcv]

The first articles about women starting a professional career did not appear in La Voix du Congolais until the second half of the fifties. From 1956 onwards, the periodical did publish a whole series of mini-portraits of women who worked, as though they were a curiosity. This usually concerned very young, newly graduated girls, who were obviously also still unmarried even though they sometimes said “that they would certainly continue to work once they were married.” The simple fact that such statements were made and certainly in the context of a publication like La Voix, was very revealing. The editorial team at La Voix, which assumed a progressive attitude in relation to social development, almost always wanted to give the reader a message. This clearly indicates that the actual situation was de facto not developed to such an extent. It is also striking how many of the girls who were mentioned had first been a monitrice.[xcvi]

4.3. Appreciation by the missionaries
In the report already cited, Mgr. Van Goethem explained why the problem of financing the moniteurs was so important: “It is a problem for which we must understand the importance. If we fail in our cooperation, others will take our place. It is not fear of competition that must inspire and support our activity, but our love of the Church and the native populations who must stimulate our enthusiasm. The évolués set the tone for the entire population and this will become and remain Catholic insofar as the leaders are.”[xcvii] He compared the situation of the teachers with those of the working class in Europe, which was oppressed for many centuries until they stood up for their own rights. It is not surprising that he particularly emphasised the role of the moniteur in the bush, considering the social visions the MSC adhered to. However the contribution by Van Goethem is particularly interesting because it gives a good description of what the MSC particularly expected from their native teachers: “Consider the work which the educator fulfils in the village, amongst the populations in the bush. In this backward environment he replaces the Family, the Church and the Government (…) The educator not only educates children to become good Christians and good citizens, he is also the friend of the adults and provides information and advice to the village. He is the person from whom the illiterates in the village are told about news and the explanation of all the events which they do not understand.” Obviously account must be taken of the fact that Van Goethem had a specific aim in mind when writing this report, namely arguing for an increase in the subsidies: “This important, essential role fulfilled by the educator with the natives in the bush must be appreciated properly and fairly supported by the Government.”

The apostolic vicar consequently did see the importance of teachers in the mission project. The fact that he used exaggeration in this to be able to acquire more subsidies in fact only emphasises this. The attitude of the missionaries in relation to the teachers partially corresponded with that. Naturally, the work of the moniteurs was greatly supervised. However, this supervision was often coloured by mistrust and sometimes even contempt. Following on what Van Goethem wrote in his report, it could be stated that the missionaries in the field did see the importance of the moniteurs, but primarily from need. Frans Maes stated in 1955: “The pupils did 2 to 3 small tests in Arithmetic, French and Geography each week which were corrected by myself. They only did examinations for the moniteurs at the end of the school year. In this way their results were only influenced very little by the often overly partial judgement of the moniteurs.”[xcviii]

Casually subtle differences were noted between Congolese and white teachers: “Yes, native teachers had occasionally fiddled with the examinations and they also sometimes accepted bribes: it is impossible for H.B. Director to correct all those papers personally, so he has to rely on his colleagues in education. And that the native teachers have the boys in their class work for them and pay small fines is probably a general occurrence in the Congo.”[xcix] This statement is naturally hard to confirm or contradict from a contemporary perspective. However, in the context of the mission periodical in which it was published, account must be taken of the fact that it was considered completely normal at all the mission posts to have the children work the land or to work in other ways. The proceeds from that work were specifically to the benefit of the missionaries.

The missionaries’ opinion of their moniteurs was certainly not unanimously judgemental, far from it in fact. In numerous inspection reports good impressions were given of the native teachers, although this did fit within a generally dominant and paternalistically tinged triumphalism: “The moniteurs are good and giving courses according to the method. This does not detract from the fact that they still have a lot of progress to make. But it is clearly obvious that perfection cannot be obtained in just a few years.”[c] And at another time: “Nevertheless, it always remains necessary to supervise the native moniteurs closely. In effect they easily forget to implement during their courses the method that was taught them and which they are continually reminded of by the Reverend Fr. Director.”[ci] There was a fundamental lack of confidence in the moniteur, the sources are unanimous in that regard: “(…) two black teachers who try to do their best pretty well as long as the Sister continually checks on them and keeps an eye on them.“[cii] Or again: “It is right to say to the moniteurs that they must follow the curriculum they have been given but I do not believe that the moniteurs are themselves able to determine properly what is part of the curriculum and what is not because they find it so very difficult to resist their inclination to teach things outside the curriculum. In any event, more effective supervision is required.”[ciii] Moreover, the missionaries continued to do so, certainly until the end of the colonial period. The priest from the black parish in Coquilhatville still said in 1957: “Every morning the Fathers go around the classes for an hour to supervise the religion lesson. The supervision of the other lessons is carried out by the Brothers and Sisters.”[civ]

The private correspondence between the missionaries was perhaps more telling than what was stated in the inspection reports or mission periodicals. The level of confidentiality was evidently much higher. In that regard, reference should be made to a number of letters from the later vicar and bishop, Hilaire Vermeiren,[cv] sent to his colleague and friend Paul Jans. Both were pioneers of the Congo mission. Therefore, account should certainly be taken of the fact that they possessed a lot of the typical mission heroism and strongly identified with the traditional image of courageous missionaries. On the other hand, that heroism must to some extent “really” have been experienced by the people involved. They were often isolated and had to rely on themselves. They shared their life with a very limited number of acquaintances originating from the same environment and culture as themselves. Nevertheless, it is surprising to note a number of statements from a person like Vermeiren that did not particularly indicate much humanity or understanding in relation to the Congolese. Vermeiren wrote a number of letters to Jans in which he particularly talked about pupils who were difficult or with whom he was having problems.[cvi]

These letters indicate that corporal punishment was apparently commonly used to inflict punishment on the Congolese pupils or even the trainee teachers. The relationship with students and moniteurs was characterised according to these statements by the use of coarse vocabulary and actions. Moreover, a kind of condescending attitude existed in relation to the abilities of the Congolese in general, which was accepted when talking to other missionaries about them. The moniteurs were no exception. Naturally, it is difficult to establish whether this simply relates to literary exaggeration, to a kind of mission-machismo, or whether there truly was a case of rough treatment, cursing and corporal punishment of the students and moniteurs. A comparison of these statements with later actions by Vermeiren is also difficult and could quickly lead to Hineininterpretierung. In his capacity as apostolic vicar he did not write about these matters. The fact that this does to some extent relate to a character trait or habit can also be deduced from other statements about other Europeans. Vermeiren wrote the following about Van Goethem, his predecessor as vicar: “Although I sometimes feel like fighting with him I still do not know anybody with such great thoughts and broad vision.”[cvii] And about the mission Sisters in Bokote: “I am really in the pits here with those stupid nuns. Sister Berta cannot even be touched with a bargepole: aren’t women evil creations when they get going, my goodness!“[cviii] In the Annalen he wrote, in the 1920s, in an article about a Congolese catechist: “Occasionally his eyes will flash and he will give a distracted listener a wallop on his naked back. Nobody blames him for that; the sore place is rubbed and the spirit is then more ready to understand the truths: don’t the blacks call chastisement: ‘boté ea wanya‘, medicine for the mind?“[cix]

However, it was rather exceptional that physical violence was spoken of so openly in the sources. It is also difficult to deduce from this type of source whether physical violence was used against the Congolese or whether it was justified. It is easier to draw conclusions about the missionary estimation of the service personnel. Consciously, but also often subconsciously, a distance was created between the European missionary and the Congolese moniteur. An additional distinction must also be made here depending on whether it relates to the estimation of men or women. The moniteurs did not really have a special position in relation to other Congolese, although the expectations of them with regard to intelligence or assimilation may have been slightly higher. It is consequently also useful to situate the image the missionaries had of the moniteurs and monitrices within the more general context of the image the missionaries had of the black man and woman. This characterisation is clearly mainly drawn from the descriptions given by the missionaries and in particular the MSC in their periodicals and elsewhere. Moreover, the image shown in the various types of documents does not differ fundamentally. Depending on the author, different nuances may be noted but in general the descriptions correspond quite well.

The missionary image of man
It is striking that some people were occasionally tempted to make condescending – or even racist – statements. As ‘racism’ is in itself a rather charged term, it is perhaps advisable to precisely define what is meant by it beforehand. Here, I would first like to refer back to what Bambi Ceuppens wrote in this regard in her very extensive study Congo made in Belgium. In fact, it is hard not to refer to this book as it considers the theme in a very extensive and detailed way and also dedicates a chapter to Hulstaert and Boelaert,[cx] the two elements of so-called ‘adaptionist’ or ‘scientific’ thinking of the MSC. Those trends did play a role in the image the modern reader tries to form of the position of the Congolese. The important thing in the construction she tries to make in her book is that it is based on a clear and defined idea of what racism is. Ceuppens refers to recent historical research into the concept of race in the Flemish press during the interbellum. In the articles by Marnix Beyen, to which she refers, it was stated that the association of ‘blacks’ with physicality did not necessarily result in negative judgements in broad social discourse.[cxi]

Ceuppens then stated with emphasis that racism is not defined by systematically representing others as negative or inferior but by representing them as ‘different’, by creating differences that cannot be objectified. Unconnected to the concrete context in which this statement was made, and without connecting a moral assessment to that statement, this does make her aim clear. On the other hand it should be noted that what was stated in the passage concerned with Beyen fits remarkably well with the vision of man that may be established for the missionaries and certainly the MSC: “However, statements of the retarded nature of the blacks were mainly made in a cultural civilising discourse.“[cxii] A distinction was made between the positive and negative characteristics of the ‘blacks’, in which the more positive traits did however correspond rather with things that were considered valuable in the observer’s own culture or hierarchy of values. A balanced approach of these two points of view appears essential to make it possible to correctly evaluate the sources considered here. Like Ceuppens I would like to give the necessary reserves: my aim is not at all to show whether this or that person was a ‘racist’ and then to point to this or judge that. My aim is primarily to show that the characterisation of the Congolese by the missionaries illustrates the relationship they had with them and consequently (hopefully) this can throw some light on the relationships that constituted ‘colonial practice’ and, more specifically, teaching practice.

5.1. The Congolese
It is probably useful to start by returning to an interview I made with three mission Sisters from Beveren-Waas.[cxiii] The main interviewee, Sister Rafaëlle, had worked in education at the mission post in Bolima since 1949 and then at Wafanya. When asked what her idea of the Congolese was before she left for the missions, the following rather odd conversation occurred:
R: People told us: are you going to the negroes, and they will eat you and so on… We sometimes laughed at that, these were made up accounts.
J: Did this turn out well, did what you thought beforehand fit with what you experienced when you got there?
R: I will tell you: a black person stays a black, inside and out. And on the other hand I can say that I learned an awful lot from the blacks.
J: Did you not have the idea that they were barbarians yourself?
R: That is completely untrue!
J: But they did tell you that …
R: But that is not true!

A little later the Sister explained her statement “a black person stays a black”. She meant that although the missionaries came to teach religion to the Congolese, the Congolese continued to practice their own customs (“superstitions”). The anecdote is illustrative for the way in which these people interacted with the Congolese. They wanted the best for them and tried to do everything they thought necessary (and that fitted with their task, as described to them). They did not even doubt the personal qualities of the other and recognised them extensively. However, they did not succeed completely in disconnecting themselves from the relationships imposed upon them, partly as a result of the eurocentrism of the society they represented and partly as a result of the way colonial society was constructed. Sister Rafaëlle again: “You know, a black person has no initiative, he has to have someone standing behind him egging him on but they will do it in their own way.”

With the benefit of hindsight it naturally becomes safer to interpret events and situations. However, it is not unimportant here that this relates to people making statements about people they were often in contact with for thirty or even forty years or more. The Sister quoted here had, despite her great age, only been back in Belgium for seven years. Reactions in the same vein were gathered from the other interviewees. During the colonial period itself pronounced opinions were also given about the Congolese. Father Vertenten wrote a remarkable article in 1934 in the Annalen in which he wanted to uncover the soul of the Congolese for the readers at home. At first sight the article was a succession of clichés about the nature of the “negro”. The author placed great emphasis on eating habits.[cxiv] In doing so the gluttony of the African was emphasised but also a kind of beastliness. Whether the food was fresh or not, the black person didn’t care, as long as he could eat. “Flowers aren’t edible, consequently they are less valued than mushrooms, they have no interest in them at all” it was claimed. The main motivation for the African, Vertenten claimed, was the immediately practical, the utilitarian. Eloquence was important because you could achieve what you wanted with it. People called “intelligent” were very influential people. The black person had no skill or interest in ‘higher’ matters (i.e. the beauty of nature). “The negro is not poetically talented, they are all suitable to be salesmen.”[cxv] The emphasis in this article, and in a lot of others, was very much on the ‘difference’ of the Congolese. To some extent this was probably done consciously by the authors. After all they wanted to introduce the people at home to that strange, foreign world and consequently mainly showed the exotic, strange sides – everything that was different from home.

The image drawn by Vertenten was consequently certainly not unequivocally negative. The characteristics listed in the article were probably not interpreted as such. Vertenten wrote that the African certainly also prized skills other than the purely utilitarian: “Other characteristics should not be disdained: patience, compassion, goodness, generosity, self-sacrifice, but ‘intelligence’ is the best.“[cxvi] Nevertheless, it may be stated that Vertenten was in se already an adaptionist: “If a negro can read and write, if he can do arithmetic and has notions of French, then he rises at least a head above the others in their consideration and a head and shoulders in self-confidence. If we do not fulfil that urge they will go elsewhere and we should use that zeal for development, also to encourage the people morally.”[cxvii] This statement is a strange mixture of eurocentrism, paternalism and religious competition. Vertenten apparently already sensed at the time that a number of social developments would arise that did not fulfil the vision of the MSC but which they would have to cope with anyway.

Less disguised (or subtle) words were used in other contributions. Vertenten himself wrote about their attitude to money: “The more a Negro earns, the greater his debts.”[cxviii] The comment by Gustaaf Wauters fits with that: “Negroes are exceptionally motivated to exploit their neighbours, although they are not capitalists.”[cxix] In the fifties this type of comment continued to appear. About city dwellers: “They speak Pidgin French. They sing our Latin songs the entire day, from the requiem to ‘Adesto Fideles’, they serve Mass well and prefer nothing so much as posing.”[cxx] Or country dwellers: “Black Christians easily think that they are already far above simple heathens purely by being Christian.”[cxxi] So-called ‘black’ character traits were easily attributed to the Congolese. They had an unstable character: “We do not hold any illusions: the constancy of the Negro is very relative, especially when they are back in their old environment, so much tempts them onto side roads.” [cxxii] They had no perseverance (and were consequently lazy): “A lot of Negroes will take a first step but they tire quickly. They all feel called to sit at a typewriter once but only few of them have the patience to attend school for a few years. They all stand in awe of a black mechanic who can disassemble an engine and reassemble it but there are few who will want to start the craft by cleaning a machine.”[cxxiii] Father Pattheeuws stated in the Annalen: “There is no greater sluggard than an unsupervised black man.”[cxxiv] The MSC certainly was not an exception from other religious orders in their approach to the Congolese. In one of the publications by the Daughters of Charity the same terms were used to say: “The Sisters in Europe quickly think that the Blacks do all the dirty work here, but that is not true. You always have to stay with them. If our Sisters move away, they laze around. They love eating and resting between meals. According to them that is the best use they can make of their time.“[cxxv]

‘Adaptionism’ is linked closely to the Sacred Heart missionaries in scientific literature. That position then primarily refers to two members of the MSC, Edmond Boelaert and Gustaaf Hulstaert, who were self-declared ‘indigenists’.[cxxvi] Adaptionism then refers to a pair of concepts in which assimilation and adaptation are opposed. Assimilationists would, roughly speaking, assume that the colonised population should assimilate with the coloniser’s culture. Adaptionists however assumed that the coloniser had to adapt the colonisation methods to the nature and characteristics of the colonised population. The contradiction is illustrated by another, namely that between a vertical (authoritarian) and a horizontal evangelisation relationship in which equality was central.

Here we would like to consider the opinion of the people who were already to a great extent ‘indigenistic’ at that time. In addition to Boelaert and Hulstaert there are a few more MSC names to be cited. They were (and are) considered, at least within their own ranks, as people who were greatly interested in the local culture and local morality and customs. Often the conclusion is naturally drawn that they were also convinced of the equality of peoples, ‘races’ and more specifically the equality of Belgians and Congolese. Paul Jans and Alfons Walschap were such people who were thought to have studied native culture and society intensively (even if they were not necessarily scientists in the true sense of the word). According to their obituaries, they specifically carried out “ground-breaking” work in the area of songcraft.[cxxvii] This indicates the dangerous terrain that is embarked upon when interpreting such attitudes. Father Moyens recounted in the Annalen about putting on theatrical performances, in which the roles were played by local pupils. They were directed in this by a Sister Auxilia, assisted by Father Jans and Father Walschap. The fact that these people were pioneers with regard to respect for local culture was emphasised greatly by their colleagues: “Long before a few people who had serious intentions for civilisation drew attention to the ‘natural beauty’ within the Negro civilisation, Sister Auxilia was already very busy with her girls in practising the native art of singing and dancing.” The author of the article, which was only written in the fifties, was consequently considering events which had taken place twenty years previously, then completed his pro-indigenistic position as follows: “Sister Auxilia understood all too well that no European play could simply be imposed and taught. The black people understood little of our talking theatre, in which emotions are expressed more in words and reasoning that through action. For our blacks, theatre is primarily a play. This play develops very naturally, so also very naturally leans to dancing as a representation of every emotion.”[cxxviii] Here the use of natural and playful characteristics threaten to take on a ‘belittling’ function, no matter how much they are represented as ‘authentic’ and ‘defensible’. A sharp duality can be detected hidden within statements such as this one. What seems at first sight to be a respectful attitude could equally be considered a paternalistic, patronising approach.

5.2. Woman
What the missionaries thought about women must certainly have been largely coloured by the attitudes taught to them in Belgium. A good example of the connection between the two is given by Vertenten, who concluded in 1929 that more and more European families were coming to live in the colony: “It is a gratifying phenomenon for the colony that increasingly more brave, physically and morally healthy young women are coming to the Congo. Here more than anywhere in the world young energetic men, facing a heavy duty, need the love, help and support of a woman. In all the colonies the uplifting and strengthening influence of good women has been experienced, the rest are as welcome as cold porridge; they do more damage here than in Europe.“[cxxix] The MSC did not consider the presence of white women as universally positive in a colonial context. They had to prove that they were good and were judged strictly in relation to the man’s well-being. It seems to be an attitude that was based strongly on what was taught in the mission seminary in Belgium.[cxxx] It also appeared to be a general conviction. The mission superiors in the Congo also occasionally stated, “For each young Christian man, a female Christian companion should be prepared.“[cxxxi] An argument that is moreover only one step removed from that of the évolués, who would demand in La Voix du Congolais more and better education for women after the war because they desired an equal marriage partner.

One member of the MSC, Jan Caudron, had written an article in the Annalen about the boys at school in Bokote. Later on he also wrote one about the girls. He was very negative about their behaviour. Girls stole excessively, were always too late for church and stank because they did not bathe as well and as cleanly as the boys. According to Caudron they also performed inadequately in the classroom: “I saw you, girls, in the classroom almost every day. What a difference to the boys! They have a desire to learn, they want to advance, they love reading and arithmetic and writing; but our girls …ah! They could sometimes sit there lazily. And when I questioned them: they could not answer or you had to drag the answer out of them. Still I must confess that there were a couple that were a pleasure to have in the class. However the majority were so lacklustre, without any motivation, without attention, without a desire to learn.“[cxxxii] Indeed, the Fathers preferred not to teach the girls but had Sisters come over for that. Father Es stated in 1926 that he just left the girls aside while awaiting the coming of the female mission staff: “(…) I have just written my number 37 for the boys; we can’t do anything with the girls as yet as long as there are no Sisters.“[cxxxiii] The Sisters were also less enthusiastic about the girls: “Johanna, a 15 year old Negress, was good in class, an exception to our spoiled, giddy girls.”[cxxxiv] Their intelligence, interest and ability to concentrate were sometimes judged as exceptionally low by male and female religious workers: “You can already hear the girls singing; they are allowed to do so relatively frequently because a serious lesson is rather difficult for them as their attention cannot be maintained for too long in one stretch.”[cxxxv]

Alfons Van Gorp, one of the missionaries of the post-war generation also shared that opinion in the Annalen of 1953: “Perhaps more dedication and certainly more psychology is asked of the Sister teaching in the girls’ school.“[cxxxvi] In the same article he also gave his vision of the problem of the low number of girls attending school, already cited in this chapter. In the jubilee issue of the MSC for the 50-year anniversary of the foundation of the missions in 1954 the problem of the school attendance of girls was also on the agenda.[cxxxvii] Neither the Fathers nor the Sisters gave serious criticism of the policy on the education of girls. It is hard to expect any different from the Sisters because their own role was also strongly characterised by traditional practices, imported from Europe. In 1935 Mgr. Van Goethem stated in his report on the Sisters from Beveren-Waas: “As in all our posts, the reverend Sisters are entrusted with the housekeeping in each post. They deal with caring for the schoolchildren and the Fathers and missionary Brothers. They prepare the provisions for the missionaries for use during their travels. They do the cooking for the missionary Fathers and also for the children in the school. They wash and mend the clothes for the missionaries and schoolchildren. They care for the church linen and decorate the church on feast days. They take care of the kitchen garden.”[cxxxviii] This state of affairs continued until after independence and was, as indicated in the quotation, also applicable in general.[cxxxix] Consequently, it should not be surprising that the attitude of the Sisters and Fathers with regard to girls’ education could not be described as particularly progressive or revolutionary.

It is interesting to place this besides the official discourse, as used in the minutes of the bishops’ conferences in The Belgian Congo. After their first main conference, held in Leopoldville in October 1932, it was stated that due to christianisation, and specifically in order to be able to form Christian families, girls’ schools also had to be founded in the countryside. However, great difficulties were expected in the realisation of this aim. Firstly, it was difficult to find girls who could have a career in education as the majority married very young. From then on they would be unavailable for the employment market because they would have too many commitments as mothers and housewives. Secondly, it was claimed: “The female gender, hardly liberated and still very imperfectly in a type of servitude which has chained or dulled the will of the black woman over centuries to make them appear little able to practice the position of teacher in an environment in which she will not be under close supervision and in which she will miss guidance and frequent advice.”[cxl] The Congolese woman had consequently been oppressed by the Congolese man and that was the reason she was “not yet” suited to teach herself. The argument was that the Congolese woman was used to a lot of control and strict guidance from her spouse and family. If this should disappear she would no longer be able to function.

Whether that then meant that the future for Congolese women was seen differently, e.g. without control and guidance? Of course not – and that was true at all levels. The missionaries’ vision of the role of women within a Christian family (and consequently in a Christian marriage) naturally did not deviate from the Western tradition in that regard. That at first sight implied a kind of independence and freedom in comparison to African tradition and in that sense also an improvement in the social situation of women.[cxli] However, it also included the moral duty to bring children into the world and to fulfil household duties: “Also for that reason – if we want to ensure numerous Catholic descendants in the future – we must now dedicate ourselves to the formation of good Catholic mothers.“[cxlii] According to the conclusions of Mgr. Six, at the bishops’ conference in the Congo, that also fitted within the logical political responsibilities that the State had in relation to the happiness of its citizens. Amongst others this included a policy for the benefit of “numerous families,” the payment of child allowances and the prohibition of married women working.[cxliii]

The following advice given at the Plenary Bishops’ Conference in 1936 is more significant, for example. When considering the subject “The press in our missions” the possibility was also mentioned of publications aimed at a specifically female target audience. “It is necessary to provide varied reading matter in the girls’ classrooms, for edification, that interests them, that inculcates notions of respect, true modesty, sincere docility, etc. etc.: that also reveals the women’s faults to them: fickleness, chattering, gossiping, etc. etc.: so that they are taught about true Christian women through well-chosen models.”[cxliv] It is clear that the Congolese woman was considered in a category of her own. She had to bear the shortcomings unique to woman in addition to the shortcomings of her ‘race’. Hulstaert’s view also fitted with this. It was rather harsh for women and the indigenous people in general. In an article published in 1951 in Aequatoria, he primarily tried to refute the criticism towards the missions. From the milieux évolués an increasing demand for more and better education for girls was heard. Hulstaert primarily indicated the responsibility in this regard of the other parties involved: the government, the parents, but also the girls themselves. Finally he blamed the relative failure of education for girls on the total indifference assigned to it by the local people. A gradual improvement could occur but then only for the following reasons: “Either they’ll hope for a direct benefit (teaching assistants, midwives, nurses), or they’ll expect that girls will find more profitable parties to marry, who are of more interest financially.“[cxlv]

Concretely it remained difficult to get girls into school. Hulstaert explained in an inspection report from 1942 that as a result of the inability to obtain a good, enduring atmosphere in the school: “The number of children always remained low in this school. It is a very difficult obstacle because the teaching staff easily lose heart as a result and the children themselves learn less enthusiastically if there is no life or competition in the classroom. Moreover, the girls’ school also has a few smaller boys attending lessons there before going to the Brother’s school.”[cxlvi] The last remark clearly shows the hierarchical relationship between boys’ and girls’ education: a boy that was too young to go to the boys’ school, could already ‘be prepared’ at the girls’ school because it was considered less difficult. In any event the issue of the girls’ school was handled very carefully. Hulstaert even makes an exception to his strict attitude in relation to selective access to the school because he felt the morality of the girls was at too great a risk if they did not attend school. In an inspection report from 1930 about the girls’ school in Coquilhatville, he wrote: “One tries to influence the parents so that they send their children to school more regularly. The considerable distance from the native village remains a major obstacle. The issue of morality – at such risk – of young girls, leads to an indulgence that could otherwise not be tolerated. In future we can and must be stricter.”[cxlvii]

Nevertheless the attention requested for girls’ education was often sincere. In Flandria, where the Huileries du Congo Belge were situated, the establishment of girls’ education was mentioned during the negotiations between the MSC and the company in 1930. Hulstaert drew up a report of the negotiations (“Memorandum”) and tackled the issue in it. He seemed to feel a little awkward about the issue himself but did give the impression of being in favour of the establishment of a girls’ school. The general director of the company had apparently already made it clear two years previously that he would be in favour of having a female congregation in the vicinity that could concentrate on help in the dispensarium, in the hospital and also in the education of the girls. Hulstaert had then remained uncommitted and had passed the question on to Van Goethem, who promptly went in search of a congregation prepared to reside in Flandria. Once it had been found, however, the management of the company became recalcitrant because there would not be enough work for the Sisters due to the lack of girls in the school. Hulstaert did state that he had not insisted but then devoted another half page to listing the reasons for there being a sufficient number of girls in the vicinity of the H.C.B. who would be prepared to attend school.[cxlviii]

A more explicit plea for girls’ education can be found in an inspection report about the school in Bokote, in which reference was made to the bad characteristics of the girls but also in which a workable solution was sought. The report of the missionary inspector Vertenten nevertheless started from the traditional conclusions relating to the nature of the girls: “They are less interested in education, are more capricious, less assiduous, less zealous, less capable of intellectual activity, flightier and often recalcitrant. It is work that requires great patience. I believe that the cause for this difference should predominately be sought in the education of a young girl, she is surrounded by every care, she represents an asset for her parents, she is conscious of her worth, she is spoiled while the boys are not paid much attention. This will only change very slowly. Good results could perhaps be achieved in stimulating the competitiveness between the boys and girls. The more difficult the task, the more meritorious. This inferiority precisely proves the necessity of education and instruction for young indigenous girls.”[cxlix] It is one of the few references in which the inequality between women and men is not used as an explanation for a difference in treatment but in which an insistence is made from the conclusion of the inequality to the removal thereof. Exactly what Vertenten then considered to be concrete equality is not known, however.

Summary
The general atmosphere, the climate within which mission education took place was strongly defined by the assumptions of the missionaries with regard to social questions in general and to the nature of the Africans and the Congolese in particular. The missionaries were and remained tributary to their evangelisation task and the way in which it was informed and taught to them. “Gaining souls for the kingdom of God” always remained somewhere at the foundation of their actions, even if it was articulated differently over the years and connected more with a genuine social concern.

Socially the MSC, and Hulstaert in particular, were rather defensive and conservatively minded. They stood for maintaining the status quo in which they had been educated and trained themselves and in which they believed strongly. They wanted to bring this across to the Congo and also maintain it there. That was expressed in their concern for the language in which the lessons were given and the hostility towards the modern urban environment. The reactions of the missionaries towards the Congolese showed it: Congolese searching for levers to gain further access to the new colonial society were considered negatively unless they were explicitly on the side of the missionaries.

The missionaries consequently considered they had an essential role in colonial society. The controlling of the Congolese was more then necessary to prevent derailment. Beneath this lay the deep gap that existed according to the missionaries between their own culture and that of their pupils. The Congolese were intrinsically inferior. Reading between the lines this is apparent in their official discourse and it is certainly and more explicitly apparent from their more personal communication.

Supervision was consequently an important factor in the education the MSC wanted to organise in their mission area. A great problem in this was the difficulty to get children to school and to keep them there, specifically at schools in the interior. There was no compulsory education and children were often not sent to school willingly in the villages. There were numerous reasons for this but often the children had to help their parents to provide for sustenance for the family. The missionaries were never completely in control of the situation, despite a certain level of authority they had towards some part of the population.

In the same context urbanisation was considered a phenomenon to be combated by the MSC. They tried to keep the children in the villages insofar as possible or at least to bring them back there after their studies. Access to the city schools was dissuaded or made difficult insofar as possible. Strict entry conditions and a complicated registration duty for the village teachers contributed to this but were unsuccessful.

The restrictive attitude of the MSC was noticeable in relation to ordinary transfers of pupils in primary school but also to those who wanted to continue their education. In this region this usually related to people who wanted to attend the teacher training college in Bamanya. Those that did get so far were followed closely in their daily activities. The missionaries did not hesitate to intervene and no distinction was made between life at school or outside school in these matters. Some missionaries did not hesitate to involve the state authorities to make their pupils toe the line.

The Congolese teachers or teaching assistants formed an essential link in the educational organisation of the MSC. They were also supervised carefully and assessed by the missionaries. They were obliged contractually to work for the school for a minimum period. The relationship between the teaching assistants and missionaries did evolve over the years from a strict hierarchical authoritarian relationship to a situation in which economic necessities and developments gradually gave the Congolese a position for negotiation and consequently obliged the missionaries to be more flexible.

Still, it must be said that the MSC generally considered the native teachers as a necessary link in the evangelisation project rather than as a partner with whom good cooperation was possible. That also fitted into the image the missionaries had of the Congolese. The combination of racial prejudices and traditionalist views meant that the Congolese women, in particular, bore the consequences of this.

NOTES
[i] Es, M. (1926). Letter from Pater Marcel Es, Boende. In Annalen, 6, p. 153. The bold passages for emphasis in the quotations are by the author. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ii] Es, M. (1927). Mijn kleine schoolkolonie. In Annalen, 11, p. 246.
[iii] “Onze missie-begrooting voor 1932” In Annalen, 1931, 12, p. 268. [original quotation in Dutch]
[iv] The pro-catholic and anti-protestant sentiment was consequently very present in the Belgian colonial milieus, for example also in the attitude of Edouard De Jonghe, as previously discussed.
[v] Petrus Vertenten (1884-1946) was ordained as a priest in 1909 and initially went to the missions in New Guinea, where he was active from 1910 to 1925. From 1927 to 1939 he lived and worked in the Belgian Congo. Over almost that entire period he was also the missionary inspector of the Vicariate Coquilhatville. Vertenten was also known for his skills as a writer and had a number of friends in the artistic world, including Henriette Roland-Holst-Van der Schalk and August Van Cauwelaert. He was also an accomplished painter; a number of his paintings have been preserved and are exhibited at the Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen [Royal Institute for the Tropics] in Amsterdam (KIT). See www.aequatoria.be (under “bio-bibliographies”) and Vlamynck, J. (1985). Wij gedenken. Tweede reeks biografische schetsen van M.S.C. van de Belgische provincie. Borgerhout, p. 8.
[vi] Smolders, J. (1931). Veel werk te Boende. In Annalen, 2, p. 29. [original quotation in Dutch]
[vii] Vertenten, P. (1935). Een blijvend loofhuttenfeest. In Annalen, 10, p. 222. [original quotation in Dutch]
[viii] Imelda, Zr. (1935). Uit een brief van E. Zr. M. Imelda. In Annalen, 3, p. 60. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ix] Heyde, S. (1954). Regen en zon over Nkembe. In Annalen, July – August, p. 100. [original quotation in Dutch]
[x] There were overlaps in that criticism with the attitude of the scheutist Maus, whose analysis of the 1938 curriculum has been discussed at length in the first chapter. See p.46 et seq.
[xi] AAFE 30.3.1-4. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the governor general. Bokuma, 19 March 1942. My emphasis. [original quotation in French]
[xii] Honoré Vinck, who knew him personally, described him as a rather obedient but humanist Catholic who became a cultural pessimist, particularly in the thirties (a trend which was not alien to the zeitgeist) and developed into an ultra-right wing conservative Catholic in later life. See “Dimension et inspiration de l’Oeuvre de Gustaaf Hulstaert” at www.aequatoria.be/BiblioHulstaertFrameSet.html
[xiii] See also Ceuppens, B. (2003), Congo Made in Belgium? p. 449 et seq. She does indicate that there was a difference between the scientific “tenors” of the MSC, Boelaert and Hulstaert. Boelaert, who is less known but was equally respected in scientific circles, was a stalwart opponent to any form of biological racism and in that sense much more consistent in his anti-colonialism and indigenism.
[xiv]AAFE 30.3.5-7. Letter from Mgr. Van Goethem to the governor general. Coquilhatville, 25 March 1942. [original quotation in French]
[xv] Vertenten, P. (1932). Nieuws uit Bamania bij Coquilhatstad. In Annalen, 4, p. 78. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xvi] Caudron, J. (1935). Ik denk aan mijn jongens te Bokote. In Annalen, 12, p. 269. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xvii] Wauters, G. (1934). Ngonji’s doopsel en eerste H.Kommunie. In Annalen, 4, p. 78. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xviii] Cortebeeck, J. (1932). De houtskool-teekenaar (continued). In Annalen, 8, p. 176. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xix] Briffaerts, J. & Dhondt, P. (2003). The dangers of urban development. In Neue Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft, LIX, p. 81-102.
[xx] De Knop, J. (1939). Een liefdeshistorie. In Annalen, 9, p. 205. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxi] AAFE 32.3.11-4.2. Memorandum sur les pourparlers entre la S.A. des Huileries du Congo Belge et la préfecture apostolique de Coquilhatville à Flandria en date du 5 avril 1930.
[xxii] AAFE 34.4.13. Letter from Gustaaf Hulstaert to the Managing Director of the S.A. des Huileries du Congo Belge [H.C.B.]. Flandria, 17 March 1929. [original quotation in French]
[xxiii] Cf. in an article for the missiological weeks in Leuven: Planquaert, P. (1946). L’exode des populations vers les centres et l’ébranlement de la famille rurale. In La Famille Noire en Afrique. Compte Rendu de la 17^e semaine de missiologie de Louvain. Museum Lessianum – section missiologique 27 bis. p. 66-74. The same theme was also dealt with at the Congo bishops’ conference in 1945. Zie Briffaerts, J. & Dhondt, P. (2003). The dangers of urban development. In Neue Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft, LIX, p. 81-102.
[xxiv]  AAFE 1.5.6. Report on the inspection of the boys’ primary school in Bamanya, October 1941. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, October 1941. The official school in Coquilhatville here also means a congregational school, also run by the Brothers of the Christian Schools. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxv] AAFE 36.1.7-8. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the Managing Director of the H.C.B. Flandria, 12 June 1928. [Original quotation in French]
[xxvi] Ibidem.
[xxvii] AAFE 30.3.5-7. Letter from Mgr. Van Goethem to the governor general. Coquilhatville, 25 March 1942. [Original quotation in French]
[xxviii] AAFE 1.5.6. Report on the inspection of the boys’ primary school in Bamanya, October 1941. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, October 1941. [Original in Dutch]
[xxix] “Het vorstelijk bezoek aan onze missie in Congo”. In Annalen, 1928, 11, p. 244. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxx] AAFE15.3.4-8. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Mondombe, 1930. P. Vertenten, Mondombe, 24 December 1930. The school was under the direction of the Daughters of the Sacred Heart (See chapter 3). [Original quotation in French]
[xxxi] AAFE 25.3.3. Inspection d’avril 1935, Mpenjele. P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[xxxii] AAFE 25.3.3. Inspection d’avril 1935, Mpenjele. P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[xxxiii] AAFE 25.3.4. Inspection de l’Ecole Rurale de Beambo. Inspection de Juin. P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[xxxiv] AAFE 25.3.4. Inspection de l’Ecole Rurale des Injole, 8 avril 1935. P. Jans. The academic year in the Belgian Congo coincided with the civil year until the fifties, i.e. it began in January and ended with the prize-giving at the end of December.
[xxxv]  Paul Jans (1886-1962), was ordained as a priest in 1909. He first became a teacher at the mission seminary of the MSC in Asse but left for Italy in 1920. He was one of the first MSC to go to the Congo in 1926. He was predominately active there as the head of the mission post in Bamanya and from 1930 as parish priest in Coquilhatville. He was also the driving force there behind the organisation of religious and cultural activities. He also dedicated himself to composing liturgical music based on native elements. Vereecken, J. (1985). Wij gedenken. Tweede reeks biografische schetsen van MSC van de Belgische provincie. Borgerhout: MSC. p. 47.
[xxxvi] Jans, P. (1936). Hoe ver staan we in Congo? (vervolg). In Annalen, 5, p. 104. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxvii]  AAFE 15.1.3-7. Bamanya. Report on the girls’ school. Academic year 1934. Sister Auxilia, Bamanya, s.d. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxviii] Afrika Archief Brussel, electronic inventory, no. 12490. Letter from P. Vertenten to the provincial inspector. 1931.
[xxxix] AAFE 33.2.6. Ecole professionnelle H.C.B. Flandria. Rapport sur l’école. Flandria, 31 December 1929. s.n.
[xl] Paters Lazaristen Archives, Leuven. Rapport sur le fonctionnement des Ecoles des Révérendes Soeurs de Saint Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville. P. Vertenten, February 1930. [Original quotation in French]
[xli] Van Gorp, A. (1953). Bokela. In Annalen, October, p. 137. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xlii] AAFE 11.5.10-11. Schoolrapport 1947. Handwritten, probably by Sister Auxilia, 31 December 1947. Includes a report of the situation of the girls’ school in Bamanya. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xliii] “Pastoor van een zwarte parochie: interview met Pater De Gols, pastoor van de eerste zwarte parochie van Coquilhatstad”. In Annalen, May 1957, p. 68. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xliv]  AAVSB, Rapport général sur l’activité du Vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935, Mgr. Van Goethem, 1 March 1935, p. 11.
[xlv] Ibidem, p. 8.
[xlvi]  AAVSB, Note additionnelle sur les écoles rurales, par P. Trigalet, in the previously mentioned Rapport Général 1934-1935, p. 33.
[xlvii] “Uit brieven van Z.E.P. Vertenten aan de studenten der apostolische school in Assche”. In Annalen, 1928, 10, p. 219. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xlviii] AAFE 15.3.4-8. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Mondombe, 1930. P. Vertenten, Mondombe, 24 December 1930. [Original quotation in French]
[xlix]  AAFE 25.3.7. Ecoles Rurales. Beambo. Inspection du 16 octobre 1934, par le P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[l]  AAFE 25.4.8. Ecole rurale de Beambo. Inspection du 12 mars 1934. P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[li] AAFE 96.1.9-10. Rapport Annuel 1954-1955 Ecole H.C.B. Dist. Flandria. F. Maes, Flandria, 10 April 1955.
[lii]  AAVSB, Note additionnelle sur les écoles rurales, par P. Trigalet, in Rapport Général 1934-1935, p. 37-38. [Original quotation in French]
[liii]  AAVSB, Note additionnelle sur les écoles rurales, par P. Trigalet, in Rapport Général 1934-1935, p. 38. [Original quotation in French]
[liv]  Pattheeuws, K. (1950). Rosalie on an inspection trip. In Annalen, September, p. 121. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[lv]  On this see Briffaerts, J. & Dhondt, P. (2003). The dangers of urban development.
[lvi] AAFE 30.2.6-7. Letter from Mgr. Van Goethem to the provincial governor. Coquilhatville, 3 March 1942.
[lvii] AAFE 30.3.11. Letter from P. Warnotte, Directeur Groupe Scolaire Coquilhatville to the provincial governor. Coquilhatville, 22 October 1942.
[lviii]  AAFE 30.5.2. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Brother Director of the Groupe Scolaire in Coquilhatville. Coquilhatville, 10 March 1943. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lix]  AAFE 84.5.13. Letter from the substitute apostolic vicar (J. De Schepper) to the provincial governor. Coquilhatville, 22 October 1947.
[lx]   “Als Kongo op de schoolbank wil: interview met Pater Gaston Moentjes” In Annalen, February 1957, p. 20. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxi]  Pattheeuws, K. (1950). Rosalie op inspectiereis. In Annalen, September, p. 121. [original quotation in dutch]
[lxii]  AAFE 12.2.11. Letter J. Yernaux. Boende, 22 January 1947; AAFE 12.2.14. Letter F. Van Linden. Bokote, 27 January 1947; AAFE 12.2.13. Letter P. Smolders. Bokela, 26 December 1946.
[lxiii]  AAFE 11.2.8. Letter T. De Ryck, Mondombe, 5 February 1948.
[lxiv]  AAFE 11.5.12. Letter from P. Smolders to G. Wauters. Bokela, 24 November 1947.
[lxv]   AAFE 11.2.11. Note of P. Smolders. Bokela, 6 January 1948.
[lxvi]  AAFE 21.4.2. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Pater Rector in Bamanya (Paul Jans). Flandria, 11 April 1930.
[lxvii]  AAFE 21.2.10-11. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Father Rector in Bamanya (Paul Jans). Flandria, 23 August 1932
[lxviii]  AAFE 22.4.4. Letter from P. Jans to Mr Verfaillie. Bamanya, 6 October 1931.
[lxix]  AAFE 22.4.5. Letter from J. Ikolo to the territorial director. Coquilhatville, s.d.
[lxx]  AAFE 22.4.6. Letter from P. Jans to F. Requile. Bamanya, 10 October 1931.
[lxxi]  AAFE 22.4.8. Letter from P. Jans to F. Requile. Bamanya, 2 December 1931.
[lxxii]  AAFE 22.4.7. Letter from F. Requile, administrateur territorial, to P. Jans. Coquilhatville, 2 December 1931.
[lxxiii]  This type of occurrence undoubtedly also contributed to the image among the Congolese that the missionaries were ‘accomplices’ of the government. See chapter 9 in that regard.
[lxxiv]  AAFE 213.4. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Father Rector of Bamanya. Flandria, 19 January 1932.
[lxxv]  AAFE 21.4.4. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Pater Rector of Bamanya. Flandria, 5 August 1929.
[lxxvi]  AAFE 3.3.11. Letter from J. De Knop, rector ad interim Bamanya, to Father Rector in Bolima, 13 July 1937.
[lxxvii]  Stéphane Boale, a pupil at the primary school in Bokote in the forties. Interviews taken in September-November 2003, St Joost ten Node.
[lxxviii]  AAFE 84.1.1-2. Table “Statistiques enseignement année scolaire 1932”.
[lxxix]  This series of letters can be found in AAFE 25. They have been included as appendix 9.
[lxxx]  The dowry.
[lxxxi]  AAFE 25.2.7-8. Letter from P. Vertenten to Mgr. Van Goethem. Bamanya, 26 December 1935.
[lxxxii] Interview with Stéphane Boale in Saint-Josse-ten-Noode, November 2003.
[lxxxiii] AAFE 9.2. includes a number of copies of employment contracts concluded with moniteurs, dated 1931.
[lxxxiv] Example from AAFE 21.2.1.
[lxxxv] Similar agreements between non-natives were regulated by other legal texts. Léonard, H. (1936). Le contrat de travail au Congo Belge et au Ruanda-Urundi. In Les Novelles. Droit colonial, tôme II. Bruxelles: Larcier. p. 357-384.
[lxxxvi]  AAFE 25.2.7-8. Letter from P. Vertenten to Mgr. Van Goethem. Bamanya, 26 December 1935.
[lxxxvii] AAFE 11.2.7. Letter from F. Cobbaut to the rectors of the mission posts. Boende, 1 June 1948.
[lxxxviii] The Centrale des Enseignants Chrétiens (C.E.C.) considered the issue in November 1958 in a specially themed issue of its union paper “Notre Droit”: “Le statut pécuniaire des moniteurs non-diplômés”. AAFE 39.3.4-4.9.
[lxxxix] Van Goethem, E. [Mgr.] (1945). Charges budgétaires de l’enseignement et traitement des moniteurs. In Compte-Rendu de la troisième conférence plénière des Ordinaires du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. Leopoldstad. p. 163-183.
[xc] AAFE 48.3.10-4.1. Rapport 1944. La condition sociale et le salariat des instituteurs. En général, et spécialement au Congo Belge. s.n.
[xci]  AAFE 21.3.7. Letter from G. Hulstaert to P. Jans. Flandria, 30 December 1931. The emphasis is Hulstaert’s own.
[xcii]  AAFE 21.3.6. Letter from P. Jans to G. Hulstaert. Bamanya, 1 January 1932.
[xciii]  AAFE 9.3.1. Circular from Gaston Moentjens to the rectors and school directors of girls’ schools. Coquilhatville, 7 January 1952.
[xciv] AAFE 9.1.3-4. Memo “lonen voor 1953”. s.n.
[xcv]  AAFE 12.5.7. Report on the inspection in the sisters’ school in Bamanya 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 17 November 1944.
[xcvi]  As an example: Colin, M. (1956). Trois femmes Congolaises. In La Voix du Congolais, XII, p. 125-132.
[xcvii] Van Goethem, E. [Mgr.] (1945). Charges budgétaires de l’enseignement et traitement des moniteurs. In Compte-Rendu de la troisième conférence plénière des Ordinaires du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. Leopoldstad. p. 163-183. [original quotation in French]
[xcviii]  AAFE 96.1.9-10. Rapport Annuel 1954-1955 Ecole H.C.B. Dist. Flandria. F. Maes, Flandria, 10 April 1955. My emphasis. [original quotation in French]
[xcix]  Annalen, May 1951. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[c]  AAFE 4.3.12-4.1. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école primaire de Bamanya, 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 18 June 1937. [original quotation in French]
[ci]  AAFE 4.4.5-9. Report on the inspeciton of the boys’ primary school in Bamanya, 1936. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 23 October 1936. [Original quotation in French]
[cii]  Maria Godfrieda, Zr. (1934). Wat ze zooal te doen hebben. In Annalen, 5, p. 108. My emphasis. [original quotation in Dutch].
[ciii] AAFE 9.3.4-4.1. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya, 1952. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 11 September 1952. My emphasis. [original quotation in French]
[civ]  “Pastoor van een zwarte parochie”. In Annalen, May 1957, p. 68. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cv]  Hilaire Vermeiren (1889-1967) was ordained as a priest in 1912 and taught at the mission seminary of the MSC in Asse from 1913 to 1925. In 1925 he was employed in Bokote, where he became the rector of the mission post after a few years. From 1925 he was part of the bishop’s council and in 1947 he was appointed as the successor to his fellow villager Edouard Van Goethem, the apostolic vicar. At the end of the fifties he also became the first archbishop of the new archbishopric Mbandaka. Hulstaert, G. (1983). Vermeiren (Hilaire). In Belgische koloniale biografie, VII, A. 365-369.
[cvi]  These letters, from which a number of longer quotations have been brought together here, can be found in AAFE 22. See appendix 10.
[cvii] AAFE 22.3.5. Letter from H. Vermeiren to P. Jans. Bokote, 29 May 1932. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cviii] AAFE 22.4.2-3. Letter from H. Vermeiren to P. Jans. Bokote, 3 August 1929. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cix] Vermeiren, H. (1926). Tata Paulus en tata Bernard. In Annalen, p. 175. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cx] Edmond Boelaert (1899-1966) was ordained as a priest in 1924. He did not have a higher diploma except a certificate from the University Centre for Missionaries. In the biographical notes on him he is being described as a very good student and an autodidact. After his ordination he was appointed as the person responsible for mission propaganda in Belgium. He left for the Belgian Congo in 1930 and would work there until 1954 in various places and positions. As a teacher and head of the seminary in Bokuma he also began publishing scientific texts on the language and culture of the Mongo population. He was the co-founder in 1938 of the periodical Aequatoria. In addition to a very extensive bibliography (articles and publications), he particularly left an extensive collection of documentation, which is integrated in the Aequatoria Archives (in a separate fund “Boelaert”). Vereecken, J. (1992). Wij gedenken. Derde reeks biografische schetsen van MSC van de Belgische provincie. Borgerhout: MSC. p. 11; Hulstaert, G. (1970). Boelaert (Edmond, Eloï). In Belgische Overzeese Biografie, VII A, 53-58.
[cxi] Ceuppens, B. (2003). o.c. XLVI; Beyen, M. (1998). “Vlaamsch zijn in het bloed en niet alleen in de hersenen” Het Vlaamse volk tussen ras en cultuur (1919-1939). In Beyen, M. & Vanpaemel G. (Eds.). Rasechte wetenschap? Het rasbegrip tussen wetenschap en politiek vóór de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Leuven: Acco.
[cxii] Beyen, M. (1998). l.c. p. 184. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxiii] Interview with Sister Rafaëlle, Sister Innocentia and Sister Hilde, in Beveren-Waas, 13 September 2002.
[cxiv] With regard to eating habits as an instrument of the representation of other cultures and as a “creator” of difference: Ceuppens, B. (2003). Onze Congo? Congolezen over de kolonisatie. Leuven: Davidsfonds, p. 19-28.
[cxv]  Vertenten, P. (1934). Welsprekend of brutaal? In Annalen, 11, p. 247. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxvi] Ibidem. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxvii] “Uit brieven van Z.E.P. Vertenten aan de studenten der apostolische school te Assche”. In Annalen, 1928, 10, p. 219.
[cxviii] Vertenten, P. (1938). Mengelingen uit Flandria. In Annalen, 10, p. 224. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxix] Wauters, G. (1951). Makasa. In Annalen, May , p. 72. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxx]  Carle, J. (1954). Uit Coq. In Annalen, January , p. 5. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxi] Van Gorp, A. (1954). Bokela (vervolg). In Annalen, February, p. 20. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxii] Vertenten, P. (1932). Nieuws uit Bamania bij Coquilhatstad. In Annalen, 4, p. 78. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxiii] Pattheeuws, K. (1950). Rosalie op inspectiereis (vervolg). In Annalen, October, p. 139. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxiv] Ibidem.
[cxxv]  “Brief van Zuster Baptizet, visitatrice.” In De kleine bode van den H. Vincentius à Paulo en van de gelukzalige Louise de Marillac, 1931, 2, p. 44. [original in Dutch]
[cxxvi]  Depaepe, M. & Van Rompaey, L. (1995). In het teken van de bevoogding. p. 85 et seq.
[cxxvii]  Alfons Walschap (1903-1938). The younger brother of the author Gerard. He was ordained as a priest in 1930 and left for the Congo mission in 1932. He is said to have composed numerous songs and also a complete Mass in the African style (“Bantu mass”). Vereecken, J. (1982). Wij gedenken. Eerste reeks biografische schetsen van MSC van de Belgische provincie. Borgerhout: MSC. p. 38. For Paul Jans, see footnote 35, p. 170.
[cxxviii] Moyens, J. (1955). Mama Auxilia Maria en Martha. In Annalen, April, p. 73. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxix] Vertenten, P. (1929). Van Coquilhatstad naar de boven-Tschuapa (vervolg). In Annalen, 3, p. 55. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxx] See the references in chapter two to the worldview of the MSC.
[cxxxi] Six, G. [Mgr.] (1936). L’Action sociale au Congo. In Compte-Rendu de la troisième conférence plénière des Ordinaires du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. p. 155. The quotation is attributed in this article to the Governor general Ryckmans. [Original quotation in French]
[cxxxii] Caudron. J. (1936). Zijn er ook meisjes op de school in Bokote? In Annalen, 9, p. 197. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxxiii] Es, M. (1927). Uit een schrijven van eerwaarde Pater Marcel Es. In Annalen, 1, p. 11. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxxiv] Maria Jozefa, Zr. (1935). Brokkelbrieven. In Annalen, 1, p. 11. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxxv]  Maria Godfrieda, Zr. (1934). Wat ze zooal te doen hebben. In Annalen, 5, p. 108. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxxvi] Van Gorp, A. (1953). Bokela. In Annalen, October, p. 140. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[cxxxvii] “Onze Scholen”. In Annalen, December 1954 (jubilee issue), p. 184.
[cxxxviii]  AAVSB, Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire des Soeurs de St Vincent de Wafanya de 1934-1935. Mgr. Van Goethem. [original quotation in French]
[cxxxix] Interview with Sister Rafaëlle, Sister Innocentia and Sister Hilde, in Beveren-Waas, 13 September 2002.
[cxl] De Clercq, A. [Mgr.]. (1932). Question Scolaire. In Compte-rendu de la première conférence plenière des ordinaires de missions du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. p. 77. [original quotation in French]
[cxli] Eggermont, B. (1994). Se marier chrétiennement au Congo Belge. Les stratégies appliquées par les Missionaires de Scheut (CICM) au Kasai, 1919-1935. In Missionering en inculturatie, Bulletin van het Belgisch Historisch Instituut te Rome, LXIV, p. 113-147.
[cxlii]  “De Lazaristen in Congo”. In Sint Vincentius a Paulo. Driemaandelijks tijdschrift van de Lazaristen en de Dochters der Liefde, 1946, 1, p. 10. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxliii] Moreover, this fitted completely within the general assumptions of Six and presumably also the majority of bishops and religious workers. Sociale Actie (social action) was defined by Six as: “organised action intended to restore and re-establish the social order, and in a more strict area the economic order, on the basis of natural law and evangelical doctrine.” Six, G. [Mgr.] (1936). L’Action sociale au Congo. In Compte-Rendu de la troisième conférence plénière des Ordinaires du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. p. 155. [original quotation in French]
[cxliv] De Clercq, A. [Mgr.]. (1936). La presse dans nos missions. In Compte-rendu de la troisième conférence plénière des Ordinaires des missions du Congo Belge et du Ruanda-Urundi. p. 15. [original quotation in French]
[cxlv] Hulstaert, G. (1951). L’instruction des filles. In Aequatoria, XIV, p. 129-130. [original quotation in French]
[cxlvi]  AAFE 1.1.4. Verslag over de inspectie in de meisjesschool te Bamanya, 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 12 November 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cxlvii]  AAFE 15.4.2-5. Rapport sur le fonctionnement des écoles des Révérendes Soeurs de Saint Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville, 1930. P. Vertenten, Coquilhatville, 8 November 1930. [original quotation in French]
[cxlviii]  AAFE 32.3.11-4.2. Memorandum sur les pourparlers entre la S.A. des Huileries du Congo Belge et la préfecture apostolique de Coquilhatville à Flandria en date du 5 avril 1930.
[cxlix] AAFE 15.5.4-6. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Bokote. P. Vertenten, Bokote, juillet-août 1930. [original quotation in French]

This chapter is primarily concerned with the development of the ‘educational comfort’ in the region of the MSC. This term must be further explained. ‘Educational comfort’ was used by Marc Depaepe to describe a larger body of elements that, taken together, contribute to the ‘comfort’ of education and of being taught. In the first instance I will be concerned here with the material organisation of the educational activity. As was set out in chapter 3, the missionaries built up a network of schools. This building must also be taken in the literal sense of the word. The material aspect of education is often the best documented, in the form of archives and other sources. The schools at the larger mission posts are mainly those referred to in the different articles and reports. This implies that the general picture is unavoidably a little distorted, even here, because the mission posts were much better equipped than the little schools in the bush.[i] ‘Educational comfort’ is naturally not only the material equipment, it is also everything that goes with or is connected with the existence of a building in which education is undertaken. By this I do not mean that I am primarily concerned with everything that is used in teaching in the colonial classroom, although that does contribute to the full picture. ‘Comfort’ includes the integration of the schools in the society as much as in the mission posts and also the upkeep, the material aspect of living. Or, to put it another way, the ‘material management’ of education. Other aspects of the reality of classes, such as discipline and timetabling, will only be considered later.

Appearance of the classroom
Before moving to information that comes from the written sources, I wish to present on a few photographs of ‘classroom life’. Such pictures are rather scarce, certainly within the boundaries of the MSC mission region. They are naturally interesting because they visually present a particular aspect of reality. It is true that this relates more to the material environment than the behaviour, considering that the ‘life’ shown is posed in many cases. Everything naturally depends on what one allows the photographs to tell. The descriptions that follow here give a vague idea of what it was like then, although they raise as many questions as they answer.

The photographs in image 15 show a school in Nsona Mbata (in the neighbourhood of Matadi) in 1922. The pupils are in a building, in any case they are more or less closed off from the environment and they have some protection against the vicissitudes of the climate. It is difficult to say whether this is a room that is specifically meant for education. What is noticeable in the photograph is that there is certainly more than one teacher operating in the same room. The children are evidently divided into groups. At first sight there are four groups of children, on closer inspection five can be distinguished (on the right-hand photograph they can all be seen, three at the back, two at the front). The first teacher stands at the blackboard and teaches something about a text written on the board. It is not clear what the topic is. In an enlargement of the photograph it seems to be about syllables, which could indicate that this was a reading lesson. The second teacher is sitting at a table as are the pupils who are clearly forming his class. There is a pile of papers on his table (exercise books or textbooks?) and there is also a clock (an alarm) and there is something lying there that looks like coins. The second teacher also has a blackboard that (perhaps because of the photographer) is pushed completely to the side. In total there must be between fifty and seventy children sitting together in this room. The group at the back, who are sitting on school desks, clearly have slates and slate pens, which they are using. With the groups at the front these instruments cannot be seen and a few pupils seem to be holding something (an exercise book?).

The photograph in image 16 is a picture of a class in the MSC missionary region from around 1950. The material environment in which the lesson is given is very sober but shows more specific characteristics that are commonly associated with the concept of ‘school’ in comparison to the previous photographs. The teacher – who poses stiffly – stands on a platform before the class. On the large blackboard that is fixed to the wall there are a number of letters on the left, which indicate a writing lesson. A number of arithmetic sums can be seen on the right. The school desks are narrow and more than two pupils sit at them at a time. As far as can be seen, the room being used as a classroom is built in stone and the walls are more or less plastered. On the floor there is also some sort of stone or paving. The school is clearly built from some sort of durable material. Still, this is supposed to be a rural school, going by the clothing of the pupils and above all the assistant. He is wearing a pagne, which would not have been permitted at the mission posts.[ii] Finally, the photographs in figure 17 are taken at a central mission school. The classrooms have glass windows. On the photograph on the left a sort of overhang can be seen behind the frame, probably a barza, which makes one suppose that the classroom is part of a larger school building.[iii] The school desks have a better finish, the pupils sit in pairs. They are not wearing uniforms but it is clear that there is a sort of dress code. On the left there is a map of the Belgian Congo on the wall together with a few other undoubtedly didactical pictures. On the right, pictures are also on display and a cupboard with didactical material (probably measuring vessels). These classes undoubtedly look the most ‘European’.

The last ‘class photograph’ (image 18) is even more richly filled but the quality of this classroom is not necessarily better than the classrooms on the previous photographs. The building, which is visible in the next photograph, also looks to be built in durable materials, although that cannot be said for certain on the basis of these pictures. However, the roof is not tiled, it seems to be covered with thatch or planks, probably ndele.[iv] The wooden lathes of the roof trusses are visible on the inner side and there seems to be a space between the wall and the roof (light is shining through the opening). In contrast, the interior seems to be richly decorated. This impression is naturally partly aroused by the angle of the photograph. In any event there is a large school board, which has been filled for the occasion with writing, arithmetic exercises and in the middle a large drawing which shows the ‘sacred heart’. Above the board a whole series of pictures have been hung. These are more than likely religious in origin. The picture is reminiscent of a religion lesson, partly because of the presence of the nun on the photograph. The school desks look solid and the pupils well groomed, although the dress code does not seem to have been very strict. The pupil in the centre front only has a vest on, the pupil on the right of the photograph has a large hole in his shirt. The description of the photographs makes it clear that in spite of their visual character, they can only reproduce a part of the reality.

Building schools

With regard to the school building in the strict sense we should be able to distinguish three phases, although the chronology can not always easyly be distinguished. There was a start-up phase, which was really more unique to each location in itself than representing a clear period or a clear block within the colonial period. This start-up phase was very often characterised by starting up an activity without a suitable material infrastructure. This logically developed into a sort of consolidation, characterised by building or setting up a room or a classroom specifically intended for and adapted to the provision of education. It is my hypothesis that this was generally accompanied by the consolidation of a mission post, at least in the case where a central mission post was concerned. In the case of the bush schools somewhat more cautious argument is required because the situation there was not as clear. In a third phase, the situation had finally evolved to such an extent that it could be described as the professional management of the school activity and the school buildings. As has been said, the three phases are to be considered more as phases of the life cycle of a mission, the village, or of an individual school. The colonial period cannot be divided into three clearly defined phases. In the next paragraphs I will mainly try to illustrate clearly what these phases looked like at different locations. At the same time, I will attempt to visualise the appearance of the school at the mission post using drawings, illustrations and photographs.

2.1. Start-up phase
When the MSC came to the region in 1924 they were confronted with an existing but limited infrastructure. The Trappists had always given priority to evangelisation in the strict sense. Furthermore, they were never present in very great numbers, which also must have reduced their power considerably. One of them, Father Sebastianus, reported on their Tsuapa mission. He spoke of the “small number of missionaries, which has never been more than thirteen.” He spoke of the achievements up to that time: “situated as the first place up the river, is a town with approximately 250 or so Christians.“ Here it must be remarked that anyone who was not a Christian was systematically ignored in this sort of report. Consequently, it is very difficult to estimate how many people really lived there. The Father continued his report about the different villages in the area he had visited: “nearly all worked for the state or for merchants. A chapel, built in 1913 or 1914, had collapsed. The house in which the Father lodged was at the point of collapse. I believe there is now a chapel and house there.” Occasionally, he spoke of the construction of one building or another. He wrote about Mondombe: “In the month of July of the year 1924 I built a large chapel here thirty metres long by six metres wide.” And about Yalola: ”Yalola is really more beautifully situated. In this place I built a house in 1923, thirty metres long by nine metres wide, with the intention that a mission might come here.“ He added a list of places where there were catechists and added the comment: “At all of the above named places there is a chapel and a house for the Father.” He reported nothing at all about schools.[v]

In a letter from 1920, from the Trappist superior Kaptein to the governor-general, it seems that in each of the five mission posts there was a boys’ school.[vi] In the whole area, in contrast, there was only one girls’ school.[vii] In the first report by the MSC about the Congo in the Annalen (March 1925) there was immediate mention of school buildings. Father Van der Kinderen wrote about Bokote: “First of all a house will have to be built for the Sisters, whom we expect with excitement; then our own house of clay replaced by one of brick, and in between these a new church has to come because the current chapel is ready to fall down. The new school for the boys is almost ready but for the moment it will have to house the newly arrived Brothers and Fathers.”[viii] In the years following the first arrival, more and more missionaries departed for the Congo. The reports, which they sent home, were often printed in the Annalen. Already in 1925 and 1926 they reported on new establishments, where there were always new school buildings to be prepared. At the end of 1925 Edouard Van Goethem reported a new foundation in Boende under the leadership of Father Van der Kinderen, who for the time being was staying “in the house of the State agent” and collected a group of children every day to teach them. At about the same time another MSC member, Van Houtte, wrote about a new post in Mondombe: “After a few hours we stand in the middle of the forest where mighty trees and vines and undergrowth strive with each other. Out of this savage wilderness a Christian village is supposed to arise with its Churches as the middle point, with its houses for Fathers, Brothers and Sisters, with its sections for young girls and women, for boys and youths, with its houses for Christian married couples.”[ix] The choice of words indicates not only the somewhat euphoric mood which was always built up for the public at home but also the central theme of the project: the mission post was there to serve the purpose of the development of Christianity. The church was certainly the beginning, the middle, and the end of the mission project. Van Houtte also reported that he had brought a number of people to start the village up: “A catechist and his wife, three Christians and a couple of catechumen.” The first construction of the new post was a place to pray and to teach: “After work they come together under a roof made from leaves and supported by 6 poles, to pray and to receive teaching.” Naturally, this referred to religious education.

2.2. Consolidation
I have already referred to the fact that the state post Coquilhatville situated on the river Congo rather quickly became considered the capital of the region. The MSC had their own way of looking at this. In the first instance they thought of developing Boteke as the centre of their activities. Finally, they would, however, lean more towards Bamanya, which was only about ten kilometres from Coquilhatville but had a much quieter and more enclosed character than the city.

One of the Fathers was provoked to pronounce: “Coq may certainly be the administrative and commercial capital of the region, Bamanya is now the intellectual capital.” The provincial capital, however, could not be ignored. The most important building project there was that of the official school, the Groupe Scolaire, and was only begun in 1929. As has already been said, a request was made to the Brothers of the Christian Schools for the leadership of the school. The Groupe Scolaire was a rather ambitious project. The teaching began long before the large school building, often seen in photographs, was completed. According to the Brothers’ archives the first school year in that school building was that of 1935-1936. However, the lessons had already begun in 1930. An internal document of the Brothers tells the story of the start of the school. On the 20^th January 1930 two Brothers, Maillard-Lucien and Frans Van Paula, left for Coquilhatville, where they arrived on the 6^th February. They were to start the school. The head in Bamanya, Brother Médard Victorin, had made all the necessary arrangements with the local authorities so that the two could have the classrooms of the old trade school at their disposal. These had been adapted so that they could be used as temporary classrooms. Brother Maillard-Lucien was given the task of managing the school and organising the classes. Van Paula had to give lessons for the first school year. Brother Visitator came by aeroplane to Coquilhatville to inspect the new location and was said to be “satisfied with the provisional organisation of the classes“. On Friday 21^st February the lessons started. According to the Brothers 197 children appeared and these were divided into four separate classes. On the next day only 187 pupils showed up, on Monday 225. This was a bit too much of a good thing, so that a fifth classroom was very quickly sought, “auprès du comité de la Chambre de Commerce“.[x] The Groupe Scolaire was an official school that the MSC, strictly speaking, had not much to do with. There are, however, indications that much earlier – in 1924 – the MSC had received a free concession of land in Coquilhatville.[xi] This land was intended for building a girls’ school and a building for the female teachers. The land was to be found in the zone neutre ou sanitaire, between the European and native neighbourhoods of Coquilhatville, something that happened often in the towns that developed in the Belgian Congo.[xii]

More specific information on the foundation of the schools in Coquilhatville may be found in the report by Edouard De Jonghe about his journey through the Belgian Congo in 1924-1925. His journey can be precisely situated: he was there at the end of October 1924,   when the takeover of the area by the MSC had just begun. He noted in his report that it was also necessary to attract a female congregation because nothing had yet been done about girls’ education. The first real traces of that education are to be found in 1927, hardly two years after the arrival of the MSC. This was a school under the leadership of the Daughters of Charity. The provincial inspector Jardon wrote in his inspection report: “The regular teaching started at the beginning of September 1927, the date on which the temporary room was acquired. The classes are light and well ventilated; they comply with the regulations.”[xiii] There is also an inspection report available on the school year 1928-1929, with comments from the mission inspector as well as from the government inspector. They sound alike where the infrastructure is concerned: “The school has not yet been organised regularly. The Sister responsible for the classes was sent to prepare the ground. The teaching staff will arrive from Europe and the school will be established according to the official regulations once the classrooms that are under construction have been completed and furnished.”[xiv] Jardon, the state inspector confirmed: “It cannot be organised seriously until it has a full staff and a suitable location. We will soon be satisfied concerning these two points.”[xv]

At that time there were two ordinary years in the girls’ school and a ‘preparatory year’. In total 150 girls were enrolled. That number must always be taken with a pinch of salt because absenteeism was a generally widespread phenomenon. Not every pupil came every day and many dropped out. This was what was stated by the Sisters themselves in their report. There were de facto about 90 regular pupils, “(…) despite the monthly remuneration given to the regular pupils“. All in all this is still a relatively large kernel for a school in its starting period and in the context described. The most important theme in this report, which was in other respects very summary, was the lack of space: “during the two years in which the school has been functioning we have occupied a temporary classroom.” And: “Again, the temporary classroom occupied by the pupils is getting much too small, which makes our task very difficult.”[xvi]

All pupils apparently had to sit together in the same classroom. It involuntarily makes one think back to the photographs in image 16. Again, in the report about the school that was composed by the government inspector at the end of 1929, there is still no progress to be reported about the definitive handing over of the buildings. Still, it appears as if at that time they were already being put into use. The inspector wrote: “The school building, the property of the Colony, has not yet been completed.” He went on to describe the building in detail, which indicates that it was in fact already largely completed. Three classrooms, of eight by five and a half metres, were already complete, three others still had to be built. He then reports under the heading “Didactic organization“: “Each classroom has a large blackboard and is furnished with good school desks with two seats.” The three classrooms were populated by the 150 pupils of the primary school, who came regularly according to the class registers, and by the 87 children in the kindergarten, who, however, came less regularly because of the great distance involved.

In this phase the development of the girls’ school was certainly followed up well by the responsible inspectors. The ink on the Jardon report was not yet dry when Vertenten made a new report in February 1930. From this – more detailed – report it can be seen that there were certainly some difficulties during the start-up and that the material infrastructure played a role in some of them. In the first year there were 80 girls. It is true that they did not all come every day but they all sat in one classroom. The teaching assistant found it hard to keep them in hand: “80 pupils is certainly a lot for one classroom and one teaching assistant, who is not even professionally trained. The Reverend Sister Headmistress is doing everything possible but I can understand that she sometimes loses heart. It is absolutely necessary to divide this first year in two but there is no classroom available.“[xvii] In the second grade, which also developed in the meantime, they were confronted with the same types of problems. The two years of the second grade both got lessons from one Sister, Soeur Josephine. She gave lessons in turn to the first year and the second year, always in the same classroom.

Finally, there is an interesting observation in connection with the position of the school, which was built on a strip of ground between the ‘European town’ Coquilhatville and the place where the Congolese lived. As can be seen on the map shown here (p.191), large, grid pattern neighbourhoods developed outside the city centre, where Congolese workers found a place to live. Racial segregation was a fact of life here, too. The only exception must have been the school of the Brothers, which according to Muzuri was housed in the buildings of the Chambre de Commerce, which would normally have been in the (European) centre.[xviii] Naturally, this was an official school, which may have played a part in the assignment of temporary accommodation, until the Groupe Scolaire was handed over. At the girls’ school the distance that the pupils had to travel to and from home seemed to pose a problem, though one of a really ambiguous nature: “With the intention of resolving the distance from the ‘Belge’ and in order to stop too frequent comings and goings we are considering establishing a refectory where a hot meal can be served at midday. In this way they would be (sic) removed for a longer period from their milieu and have more contact with their teachers.”[xix] The suggested solution was typical of the beginning period of mission work in general. The purpose was to separate the children from their environment as much as possible and bring them under the influence of the missionaries. That could only be a good thing, at least according to the Sisters.

The Belge, in this case also called “Coq Bakusu”, was the first city expansion, a neighbourhood populated purely by the Congolese. The girls’ school was certainly established there. The girls therefore seemed to come mainly from the villages around Coquilhatville, maybe also from the military camp in the north of the city. As De Meulder shows, Coquilhatville was much more a loose collection of entities laid down next to each other than a well-considered urban project. A good illustration of this is the description that Paul Jans gave in the Annalen: “On the contrary, the blacks attend well, though the real native village lies a half hour from the church. (…) The misfortune of such villages is that they simply knock them down and replace them as the white city spreads. The houses are made of clay and are erected very quickly. In this way the village has moved so far away from the church that it is absolutely necessary to found a new church, near the village and by the military camp.”[xx] In 1934 a new mission post, specifically for the Congolese neighbourhood, would finally be founded, “Coq Bakusu”, around which the cité indigène would then develop further.

Besides the girls’ school there had in fact been a boys’ school in Coquilhatville for quite a long time. From the information given by Corman in the Annuaire of 1924 it could be deduced that there must have been a school there. This must have been a school founded by the Trappists. In one of their publications from that period there was a report on religious education: “When in 1901 the mission began near Coquilhatville, where Bosekya Norbert was a catechist under the first pastor there, E.P. Gregorius Van Dun, many adult people and some who had already being married in the heathen fashion began to come to the lessons.”[xxi] No information is to be found on the material organisation. The vice-governor general Duchesne reported in 1920 in his political report to the governor general that there were certainly some schools in the mission posts but that they did not amount to much. “The said mission has a so-called primary school. One missionary and one or two teaching assistants enthusiastically teach religion, writing, reading, the 4 major parts of arithmetic, a little on the metric system, perhaps a few notions of hygiene and agriculture.” He is as brief as he is laconic about the results of the education: “In general, very few pupils, who rarely complete their studies.“[xxii]

From the travel reports of De Jonghe it can certainly be deduced that the Trappists had started to build a boys’ school: “The school buildings of the Trappists, constructed 2 years ago, include 4 classrooms. The teaching is done by a missionary in the 4^th class and by 3 teaching assistants in the lower classes. I have counted around 40 pupils in the 1^st year, around 30 in the second, the same in the 3^rd and around a dozen in the 4^th year. Over the last two years, the Trappists seem to have made a serious effort to provide an adequate school. Their efforts should be encouraged.“[xxiii] In the first inspection report from 1927 there is some information that fits with what Duchesne reported. According to his information the primary boys’ school in Coquilhatville had two years, with 60 and 20 pupils respectively. The personnel indeed consisted of one religious worker, the ex-Trappist Bernard Wiedenbrugge, who was assisted by two Congolese teaching assistants. The mission inspector was very brief in his commentary: “Devoted staff do what they can; the lack of assiduity hinders the general progress; the material could be better.”[xxiv] There was no specific information in this report. The next year the commentary was more detailed and the mission inspector (Vertenten) did not even have enough space to write all his thoughts down. He found that the teachers left much to be desired but also reported that an agreement had been reached between the MSC and the Brothers of the Christian Schools to start up a teacher training college in Bamanya. The government inspector clearly got on well with Vertenten, who had had extensive contact with him when he was appointed mission inspector. He also wrote positively about the future projects of the MSC.[xxv]

It looks as if Bamanya took a very important position in the mission strategy of the MSC at the end of the 1920s. The centre of gravity of education came to be there and in Bokuma, where a junior seminary was already operating at that time. Coquilhatville got no privileged treatment in any way. The decision was made to set up the Groupe Scolaire, inspector Jardon reported in October 1929, and in the meantime the MSC did not find it necessary to do anything about the state in which the classrooms were at that time. They chose to use their money to build schools at other mission posts. However, the situation of the existing infrastructure was not ideal. Jardon wrote: “The school has three classrooms situated in a brick building with a sheet metal roof, whitewashed walls, a concrete floor and bilateral lighting. These classrooms measure 5 m in length by 6 m 50 wide. In addition, a hangar classroom has been used for the preparatory courses, where excessively young children are admitted to follow the primary courses. Very well maintained, the primary school classes are inadequate for the number of pupils occupying them. Moreover, their arrangement is wrong in the sense that they are wider than they are long.”[xxvi]

That only seems to strengthen the hypothesis that the MSC did not want to make the big city a priority. In subsequent years schools were extended at other mission posts. As has already been stated in the first chapter, new schools were also built in the new mission posts. Hardly any information can be found on the erection or the interior equipment of these. The reports to the superiors in Rome are missing for this period (the second half of the 1920s). In Boende (founded in 1926) a school building had been erected very soon but just before completion it had been destroyed by a storm. Marcel Es gave an impression: “The rebuilding was begun with courage. Everything seemed to work against us …. but still we will have one. We then will still need Sisters for the girls’ department – which is now being necessarily neglected – and Boende will be fully recovered. And in the meantime? … Two warehouses; a wood warehouse and a shed to dry stones, which serve as a school: a few posts in the ground and a palm roof on them. If there is rain or a thunderstorm, it is impossible to give lessons; open on all sides, there is continual disturbance from the calling and shouting of the workers that keeps them informed about everything that is happening at the mission. (…) Yes, it sometimes gets still worse and they all sit outside at the drop of a hat (…) One of our school warehouses gave up the ghost recently. In the middle of class, suddenly there was a big crack and I and my boys just had time to jump outside.”[xxvii] Some years later Father Smolders wrote in the same periodical that they had had to sacrifice the school because of lack of space, to give the Sisters a roof over their heads, and that they had held the school (four classes) in the church.[xxviii]

2.3. Functional phase
In one of the last issues of the Annals of 1930 a call to raise funds was made: “Considering the new school law introduced by the colonial governor, our missionaries will no longer be permitted to give lessons in barracks erected in wood or stamped earth but innumerable schools must rise from the one end to the other of this continent, which, as much through their strong materials as through their hygienic improvements and also through the demands that are made on their teaching staff, have to conform with the newly posed legal regulations. All this requires a great deal of expenditure and a fundamental professional training for masters and mistresses, so that the Catholic schools will be able to compete with those of the Protestants and Moslems.”[xxix] This referred almost certainly to the first programme brochure, which was issued in 1929. Obviously, this was a half-truth. It would have been rather more correct to state that there were now conditions attached to the subsidies. But it was of course true that people now needed decent schools, which could withstand inspection. And the importance of the infrastructure in this was not to be underestimated.

A minimal infrastructure was also needed outside the schools because a number of mission posts were rather isolated and some posts ‘recruited’ in a rather extended area. There were many children who had to come a long distance to school and who could not just come and go home. A boarding scheme fitted naturally into striving for immersion, insofar as possible, in the Catholic atmosphere. However, the organisation of this was not always straightforward. In Bokote and in Boende the missions were confronted with a great influx of children, while there was no possibility of lodging all the applicants. Vertenten wrote: “In Bokote they have been able to accommodate most of the children with the families who live there at the mission. There are families who lodge 20 or 30 children. In Boende there are not enough married people to arrange this lodging, above all the tribes are too diverse there. The boarding building is much too small for 600 boys. The boys themselves have erected emergency huts and gradually improved these: huts, larger and smaller, but mostly smaller, with sleeping benches made from branches and one or more fireplaces.”[xxx]

A number of the mission posts were probably more developed, in the sense that more missionaries were active there, that the post had a greater catchment area and that education received more care. This has of course to be associated with the development of further education. Although it should be clear by now that the MSC were not particularly great supporters of further education, there were still areas in which they took part. Strictly speaking this was restricted to only two fields, from which one can conclude that these were inspired by a certain necessity: these evidently were teacher training and priestly education. A teacher training college was founded in Bamanya, where a primary school was already established. In Bokuma a junior seminary was set up, in which a great deal was invested too. There was also a primary school there but the seminary certainly recruited in the whole region. Besides this, education also seemed to be developed further in older mission posts, such as Bokote and Wafanya, and newly established posts, such as Flandria and Boende.

Generally speaking, it seems that a relatively long time passed before the infrastructure was in order. Reports of a lack of space were legion. At the school of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in Coquilhatville moving could take place in 1932: “The construction of the primary school is finally completed. After three years of existence the success of this establishment is assured. Because of the lack of space in the temporary classrooms, the school directors had to limit the admission of new pupils.”[xxxi] According to the inspection report for 1934, there were five classes in the girls’ school in Bamanya but only four classrooms. Because of this the two highest classes sat together. They sat with a maximum of 25 girls in a classroom of 7 by 5 metres. Obviously, giving separate courses cannot have been easy.[xxxii] In the teacher training college itself the situation was similar in the lower years. In the first inspection report he made about this school, Vertenten wrote: “I have established that a single group has been made of two groups of children, the one comprises 19 pupils, the most advanced, and the other the remainder, i.e. 27. The teaching assistant in front of this class is especially concerned with the more advanced group, the others (according to the Rev. Fr. Headmaster) have to get what they can from it.”[xxxiii] There seemed to be too few classrooms to split the group in two, but evidently no effort was made to give the people in the first year a suitable course.

There were certainly a number of building projects in the pipeline but they could not always be carried out as quickly as hoped for. Sometimes Fate intervened, as in Boende, in other cases different priorities were simply chosen. That was, for example, the case in Wafanya, the newest of the Trappist missions. In the inspection report for 1931 it was reported that there was a real rush into the school, particularly in the third year: “It is still necessary to be satisfied with the poor school in adobe. The Reverend Father Superior of the Post, the Rev. Fr. Dubrulle, hopes to start the construction of the new brick school this year. As the old Church is threatened to collapse it was necessary first to build a temporary church. A dispensary and a dressmaking school were essential. The plans for the new school have already been approved by Monseigneur.”[xxxiv] The sewing workshop was apparently more necessary than a proper school. At that time there was still no primary education for girls.

Bokuma, also one of the older mission posts, had a primary school that was led by the Sisters of the Precious Blood. Here, too, they were confronted with similar choices: “It has not yet been possible to construct the new building we consider necessary. The house, which has as yet housed the boarders, is threatening to collapse and other very urgent works cannot be postponed, so we have not been able to think of it yet. As the small classroom is still adequate for the number of pupils we have renovated it and whitewashed it. All the desks and chairs are new, still temporary but solid and easy.“[xxxv] In Bokote work was begun on better and larger classrooms: “In the classroom for the first year of the first grade there is overcrowding of pupils. The construction of a fourth, temporary but solid and spacious classroom is in progress. When it has been completed a fourth teaching assistant will be appointed.”[xxxvi] In other places a boarding school was built, as in Bamanya: “Since I have been here in Bamanya they have built a large school for boys, and another building of 64 by 50 metres. Already 200 boys sleep in it and the beds for the rest will soon be finished.”[xxxvii] And in the new posts the school was immediately included in the planning: “Flandria: one kilometre from Flandria, we have founded the mission of Boteke. A priest is in charge and 3 sisters of the Precious Blood have been placed there to take charge of the school. They already have a good group of girls. We intend to concern ourselves particularly with the Batswa.”[xxxviii]

For the third phase of my hypothesis, therefore, many marginal comments and shades of detail need to be added. The school curricula obliged the missionaries to manage the school in an organised manner. It was never straightforward to get everything financed and subsidies became more and more necessary from the 1930s onwards. The degree to which good results were reached was often dependent on very local circumstances and this can best be illustrated by a few concrete examples. In the following section I will consider the development of the mission posts of Flandria and Bamanya in more detail. Flandria was a new mission post, founded by the MSC, Bamanya was the oldest of the already existing mission posts.

A few concrete examples of central and rural schools
3.1. Flandria (Boteka)
3.1.1. Education for the Congolese
Flandria took a special place among the other mission posts of the MSC for three specific reasons. It was a post that was closely connected to a private company, the Huileries de Congo Belge, and it was also partly developed by Gustaaf Hulstaert, who was head of the school from 1927 to 1933 and from 1947 to 1950. Vertenten founded the mission post of Boteke or Boteka, as it was really called, in 1926. That occurred at the request of the company, which had been present in the Congo since 1911.[xxxix] The company owned the rights to a wide area in the region, where they wanted to produce palm nuts. The Lever company did not acquire the rights coincidentally. Negotiations with the Belgian State had preceded it. This finally resulted in a convention, in which, besides the profit margins for the parties to the contract, the rights and duties of the enterprise were also defined. In this way it was, among other things, determined that education must be provided on every plantation.[xl] The enterprise was therefore contractually obliged to contact the missionaries with the idea of the development of education and the social improvement of the working people. The company was not working on its apprentice piece in Flandria, this is apparent from the way it tackled matters. Vertenten, who as director of the school would also control the infrastructure, received a letter in July 1926 in which he was asked, in the future, to make systematic reports (every four months) about the situation of the school. The letter also specified in detail what kind of information was required: it went from the condition of the building to the names of the teachers, the moral education and the observed influence of the school in the region.[xli]

Later on, the precision and the economy with which the company interacted with the missions were apparent. They did not function as a generous Maecenas but did work as a business partner. An internal memo from the managing director to the district manager in Flandria specified in 1928: “As you are aware, the professional schools of the Société that are managed by the Missions in our different Areas received as a certain Capital Grant for the construction of the school buildings and workshops, dormitories, etc. and now receive an annual sum to cover the cost of the teaching staff, scholars clothing and food, school books, stationery, etc. etc. Over and above this one Capital Grant and the Annual grants nothing must be given to the schools or the Missions connected with them except against payment of its cost price.”[xlii] Another good example was the letter in which the school director was himself asked to make copies of the four-monthly reports that he had to send to the HCB. That would be a significant timesaving for the Huileries in Flandria, “and (we, JB) will be certain of avoiding any copying errors.”[xliii] Hulstaert replied to this, with a similar letter, in which he asked them to always send two copies of their letters, for his superiors. He informed them of one difficulty which meant that he could only send four copies of his letters: “The machine and the paper which I have available cannot make 6 copies at a time.”[xliv]

The construction of the school buildings began in 1928. A lot of people had been involved. Vertenten negotiated for a long time with the management of the H.C.B. about the right location, and the necessary space for the school buildings. In the summer of 1927 he wrote the following: “You require the construction plans for the buildings we intend to build as quickly as possible. That is easier said than done, especially as I do not know precisely what it is you require and I would like to reply adequately to your request. According to the letter from the Rev. Fr. Dereime from 4 March 1927: ‘The government curriculum stipulates that the pupils at the school for clerks eat with place settings, knives, etc. The Adm. Baissel, whom I consulted on this fact, intends to extend the measure to all pupils in school.’ – it is thought that the constructions must be erected in the genre of a college or boarding house. According to your sketch attached to your letter of 14 June, it seems that inadequately spacious refectories have been provided to have two hundred pupils eat with place settings, knives, etc.”[xlv] Vertenten was obviously of the opinion that the easiest solution would simply be that H.C.B. should just define what buildings they wanted and that they should simply appoint a construction supervisor.[xlvi]

In September 1928 Hulstaert, who in the meantime had become the director of the school, reported the following state of affairs: There were four dormitories, which were almost all completely finished. One of the dormitories was used as a classroom because the clay building that had been used as a school was already worn out and thus had been demolished. The building of two houses for teaching assistants was still in progress but they had not yet started on the school building itself. They were still busy with the preparatory groundwork.[xlvii] There was a great deal of discussion about the correct placement for the buildings. Hulstaert would not give way and defended a sufficient distance between the work camps and the location of the school to the management of the H.C.B. He wanted a minimum of 250 metres distance between the two. There was a great deal of disagreement about the correct location of the school buildings. In a report to the State, in early 1929, Hulstaert again expressed his dissatisfaction about the progress: “The correct operation of the school is hindered by the fact that the constructions have not been completed. (…) Difficulties a) material: establishment of the constructions (difficulties in obtaining the ndeles required for the roofing, during almost the entire year; insufficient workforce); b) materials to provide the pupils with the necessary nourishment.”[xlviii] He repeatedly asked for support from the Huileries in the form of transport or materials but the repetitions in the correspondence indicated that people at the HCB were not very receptive.

In the summer of 1929 still not much progress had been made. Hulstaert noted in his report to the company that they had even had to replace the temporary classrooms (“hangars“), which were used for teaching and as a workshop, because they were falling apart.[xlix] In the second half of that year the work did proceed better but they had clearly not yet begun the building of the school itself. There were constant removals because they had to manage with a minimum of classrooms, while the school population and that of the mission continued to grow. The dortoirs functioned in turn as a storage area, a classroom and a dormitory.[l] Again, in the Annals Vertenten reported that two of the dormitories were being used temporarily as classrooms.[li] And in October 1930 Hulstaert wrote yet another note to the management of the HCB in Leopoldville concerning the school building, in which he said: “We constantly have to halt the construction of the school itself.“[lii] In the inspection report written by Vertenten in March 1931 no direct allusion was made to the building problems. That probably indicates that it was not really considered a problem. The only remark in the report that could possibly be connected with the condition of the infrastructure is the conclusion: “An attempt is being made to do the five years of primary school in three years and we have every confidence in its success.”[liii]

In an official inspection report (of the government inspector) that was made half-way through 1929,[liv] the state of affairs concerning the infrastructure of the H.C.B. school was described almost completely: “Four dormitories for boarders, each comprising two rooms of 12 metres by six, have been constructed. These are brick buildings with a concrete floor, whitewashed walls, sheet roofing, with bilateral lighting. While awaiting the final construction of the school, one of the two rooms in these buildings will be used as a classroom. These rooms are perfectly adequate. The final plan for the school has been given to me. The installations – primary school and vocational subjects – comprise 7 classrooms: one of 10 m, 50 by 6 m, 40; four by 8 metres by 6 m, 40; two by 6 m, 40 by 5 m, 25. The school will be built in brick and covered by sheet metal. The ground of the buildings will be concreted.” Subsequently, the building programme yet to be completed was unveiled. From this it was apparent that at that moment there was still reckoned to be 18 to 24 months before work on the school would be commenced. The priority was given to the further completion of the dwellings of the European staff (the missionaries) and the remaining provisions for the pupils. It was reported that there was already a kitchen, as well as two dwellings for teaching assistants and a “fosse à fumigation suffisante pour 120 hommes“.[lv] Besides this the report also mentioned a jardin d’essai, which, in principle, was obligatory for all primary schools according to the 1929 school curriculum. Incidentally, “Cultures faites par les élèves” were also reported so that it may be deduced that two different things were truly meant by these references. In any event it was a fact that the pupils were engaged to provide their own living provisions and those of the mission post. They also had to help with the building work. The missionaries considered this a good practical training. Hulstaert declared in a letter to the manager of the HCB: “With regard to using the pupils for light works to be carried out over a part of their time I have the honour of informing you that we have done the same since the very beginning. It is moreover an educational element to accustom them to manual work from a young age.”[lvi] In 1935 the new manager, Trigalet, reported, not without a certain pride: “From a point of view of agricultural work, the upkeep for 40 Ha plantation of Elaïs (palm plantation, JB) is left to the care of our pupils.”[lvii]

One of the biggest problems with which the missionaries were confronted at the post was the provision of food. It was apparently enormously difficult to continuously deliver food for a large number of boarders. The mission post itself had limited ground: “Surrounded from all sides by huge plantations of the H.C.B., the school only has very restricted land available. The buildings and the various subjects take almost all of it.”[lviii] Hulstaert also had discussions with the HCB-management about the provision of food. What the food for the pupils should be allowed to cost was worked out to the centime. According to the H.C.B. it was agreed that for each pupil, each day, one franc was paid for buying food. The government inspector, Jardon, had made remarks in his report about the insufficient rations for the pupils. According to the general management in Leopoldville the allowances were enough. The missionaries must have made agreements with the territorial administration about the delivery of food by the population from the surrounding villages. And they must have developed and expanded the cultivation by the pupils, so as to have sufficient food supplements.[lix] Hulstaert reacted to this a few months later in his typical, detailed style. At the same time it gives a good picture of the sort of provisions available for the pupils:

… Quant aux chickwangues, nous les achetons également ici aux magasins de la Société.[lx] Elles nous sont facturés 0,2795 fr. pièce. Elles ne pèsent pas 1 kg. mais leur poids moyen est de 440 gr. seulement. Et nous constatons encore une tendance à la baisse du poids. En outre il nous est souvent impossible d’avoir la quantité nécessaire. Ainsi pendant le mois courant, nous n’en avons pu obtenir que 200 par semaine, alors que le nombre des élèves dépasse 100. Nous nous voyons donc obligés d’en acheter ailleurs. Or le prix de faveur est de 1 f. les 3 chickwangues.

Je me permets de vous présenter ici deux schèmes faite sur cette base, avec les prix minima et maxima. Les quantités indiquées ne me semblent pas exagérées, vous en conviendrez également en comparant la somme allouée et le prix des vivres tels que vous les indiquez.

See Illustration

Permettez-moi de vous faire remarquer encore que les prix des chickwangues tend à une hausse; les indigènes commencent à exiger 50 centimes pour une seule chickwangue. Ensuite le riz ne saurait pour les gens d’ici remplacer le manioc qu’en partie. D’ailleurs il requiert une quantité d’huile plus grande à cause de la préparation.

Les schèmes n’indiquent pas de légumes etc. vu que les élèves peuvent les cultiver eux-mêmes. Mais la préparation exige de l’huile et une rétribution pour les femmes qui s’en occupent. Cette rétribution est de 0,0193 à 0,0194 f. par élève et par jour. Plus tard il faudra un cuisinier, ce qui augmentera les frais de préparation d’à peu près 2 centimes par élève et par jour, le tout calculé sur la base actuelle de 100 élèves.

… Nous étendons les cultures faites par les élèves, mais le temps et le terrain mis à leur disposition ne permettent que la culture de quelques vivres supplémentaires, comme des légumes, des condiments, fruits, etc.

Excerpt 1 – Gustaaf Hulstaert about the cost of living (1929). Aequatoria Archives.

At the end of his letter he gave another explanation for his extensive and detailed account. He said it was a very important element in the correct functioning of the school. If the provision of food was not in order, the teaching hours also suffered because the pupils had to take care of it themselves. Providing their own means of survival necessarily had a detrimental effect on the time that could be spent on the lessons and consequently on their intellectual training.[lxi] The conclusions by Hulstaert correspond exceptionally well with the memory of one of the interviewees, Jean Indenge, of his time at school in Wafanya during the forties:

La mission, ou l’école organisait des repas. Mais, de quel repas s’aggissait-il? Je vous dessine un chikwangue … Alors, là, c’était cette forme. (he draws a sketch, JB). C’étaient les femmes qui venaient de loin, qui vendaient ça aux missionnaires pour les élèves.

Alors, quand on revenait de la messe, à 7 h. du matin, on recevait chacun un quart (montre sur le dessin). Un petit morceau comme ça. C’est du pain. Mais c’était insuffisant pour un garçon qui devait étudier, et qui devait (fortement) travailler comme un militaire, pour ne pas dire comme un prisonnier.

Alors, ce chikwangue, quand ça datait de plus d’une semaine, ça produisait déjà des champignons. Je suis très content que vous m’avez posé des questions là-dessus, et j’aimerais bien voir un ou une missionnaire qui va me contredire sur ça. Parce que moi, j’étais là, je ne raconte pas ce qu’on m’a raconté.

Donc ce n’était pas suffisant. Alors, on devait manger quoi? Parfois il n’y avait pas autre chose. Parce que si nous attendions le dimanche, ou le soir, nous avions la même chose, plus des petits morceaux, j’ai oublié comment on appelle ça, de peau de cochon. Ils étaient grillés, et on les coupait en petites rondelles, comme ça. Et, parfois le dimanche, on recevait un demi chikwangue au lieu d’un quart. Ajoutez à ça comme légume des petits pois prépares, il y en avaient même qui ne voulaient pas manger ça, quand ils voyaient ça, ou avec un peu de riz. Donc, on sentait simplement l’odeur de viande, mais ce n’était que ce petit morceau, je ne sais plus comment on appelle ça. (“makala“) [lxii]

The letter Father Dereume, head of the HCB school in Alberta, wrote to Hulstaert in 1948 is very intriguing in that context. Boys from the school in Flandria were sent to Alberta with the intention of continuing their education there. But apparently it was difficult to get used to the regime in Alberta because the boys already caused problems after one week. One of the reasons the pupils gave for this was the food: “This morning a group of four boys came to me to tell me they were hungry. They are given the same food as the other boys including those who have come a long way and have no family here. Our boys are all well built and are regularly examined by the doctor, so there is no lack of food. It is not surprising they probably are rather homesick, the eldest who was in Kisantu is trying to convince them of that and we hope that he will succeed. But they are rather demanding: they had 100 grams of fish FOUR times a week in Flandria and meat on all feast days, that is probably not exactly true (sic), our boys do not and could not get that.”[lxiii] Hulstaert himself did not worry too much about that, as he made clear in a letter to the directors of the company. He wrote that he was aware that the Nkundo were rather picky and had also made the same complaints in other schools.[lxiv]

3.1.2. Batswa school
Flandria and the mission post at Boteke were in a region where a large number of Batswa lived, a population group that drew a lot of attention. The Batswa distinguished themselves from the rest of the population by their stature and their lifestyle. They were ‘pygmies’ who formed relatively closed communities. According to the missionaries their lifestyle was even more primitive than that of the Nkundo, who were considered the ‘ordinary’ inhabitants of the Tshuapa. The pygmies were an irresistible attraction for the missionaries. Already in 1922, in other words at a time when no MSC were in Africa, Father Es gave a lecture at the mission seminary about the pygmies. He described the essential characteristics of the pygmy: “The ornamentation of the body and mutilations of all kinds are little known. They dress minimally, do not work more than necessary, in other words not at all, live from the hunt, live in caves or behind a windbreaker or in a house built in 20 minutes used for one night and then abandoned. It is also necessary to work for pottery. Consequently, it is not surprising that these outstandingly lazy people have none: all they have, and they are proud of it, are the woods with their game: they have terrible eyes, their legs are as strong as iron and as flexible as rubber, a bow and arrows and to top it all a (…) trust in Providence. (…) They have a philosophy of common sense for everything they do and for this they are able to become independent from circumstance.”[lxv]

This description was characterised by a form of oversimplification that can also be seen in articles on the Pygmies that were published in the Annalen. In 1942 the following statement could be read there: “The Nkundos dominated the Batswas. The missionaries and sisters themselves also despised the Batswa’s: they are dirty, stink, do not wash their children.” The account by father Wauters in 1935 was slightly more detailed but still clearly aimed at readers in Belgium. Wauters emphasised the fact that the Batswas and certainly the Batswa children hated a settled and ordered life. They much preferred hunting and running around in the woods. Sitting still in a classroom was asking a great deal of the children. He greatly emphasised the ‘wild’ aspect (in the sense of ‘not calm’) of all their activities.[lxvi] Around the time that Wauters’ article was published, Van Goethem also wrote his annual report of the MSC mission that has already been cited, in which he paid a lot of attention to the Batswas. In it he quoted two reports drawn up by the same father Wauters on request of the vicar. Wauters considered the method for converting the Batswas and the general condition of the Batswa population: the location of the villages, the outlook of the villages (“lamentable“), their mentality, which was defined as ‘driven by fear’ and characterised by an inferiority complex in relation to the Nkundos. In addition he also described them as dirty, without any sense of hygiene and victim to all kinds of disorders, from venereal diseases to skin problems. He also described the relationship between Nkundos and Batswas, which was apparently a master-slave relationship. According to a certain tradition the Nkundos exercised mastery over the Batswas and obliged them to carry out a number of duties.

Naturally, it is interesting to compare the explanation he gave here to the text published in the mission periodical. Obviously, these reports were, due to the nature of the text, much more elaborated and much richer in detail and nuances. For example, the psychological element and the relations with the Nkundos were considered much more deeply, something that could not be found in the popularising literature. From that angle it is very educational to study more carefully the text dedicated to the pygmies in the textbook Buku Ea Mbaanda, which Hulstaert prepared at around the same time for use in the Congolese schools: “All the pygmies are very intelligent at working in the forests. They do not make mistakes during the hunt, they know the ways of all the animals, they do not get lost in the forests. Like riverside residents are in water so they are in the forests. They only live in the forests. The pygmies do not have any fields, they do not care for their houses and yards, they do not wash their clothes. They only live in the forests with what they find there. They live in their own way. They do not seek intelligence and pleasure very much. The pygmies are not polygamous like the tribes in the Congo. In this way they have been applying God’s laws since the beginning of time, that one man has one wife. Many do not have the ability to be polygamous because of a lack of funds. When the church arrived in the Congo to teach people the way to Heaven, the pygmies did not want to believe it. Perhaps they will believe afterwards. But at the moment they move and wander through the forests. The State has evicted a large number of pygmies, for them to live in the streets. But they are not yet accustomed to living in villages and often return to the forest. They have not yet abandoned their custom of flight. They are very negligent in matters relating to God and the world.“[lxvii]

This is based on the conclusions that Wauters made in his reports and the points of action he formulated in relation to the Batswas. He assumed that the missionaries could intervene in the pygmies’ lifestyle and make them completely ‘sedentary’: “It is necessary to make the Batswa people, who are essentially hunters, into an agricultural people. The Batswa are healthy, vigorous and strong people; they are suited to agriculture and it will safeguard the future of this tribe.” That was the role of the missions. For its part the State had first and foremost to reduce the taxation on the Batswas, as they had also already done so in the Kasaï province. The State also had to encourage them to build houses in loam instead of the straw huts they lived in. According to the priest the blame for this was partly the Nkundos who prohibited the pygmies from building solid residences. But most importantly schools had to be established and more particularly an agricultural school and a craft school. Both were to be used as aids to make the Batswas sedentary.[lxviii] Father Wauters’ ideas concerning agricultural education at least continued to burn for a long time with the MSC. Apparently, attempts were continually made to have the boys learn agriculture at school, which was not an obvious matter for a people that lived from the hunt. In 1945 Hulstaert congratulated the people of Flandria with the results they had achieved in this area.

There was definitely a Batswa school in Flandria. It is not always as clear what school is being mentioned when checking the courses. Van Goethem was also rather unclear in his annual report for 1934-1935: “The Huilever continues to provide the upkeep for one hundred pupils. There are 350 in the school. Evening courses are also taught there to which 48 assistants attend. At the mission post in Boteke, which is in addition to the School Group from Flandria, we have a boarding school for Batswa with one hundred and thirty pupils. We have succeeded in inculcating serious discipline in this timid and wild people.”[lxix] Whether there were also actually two schools is unclear from this. In an article published in 1954 in De Toekomst, one of the periodicals of the seminary students, it was claimed that the mission at Flandria was actually made up of two sections. The first section situated at the HCB concession, with a church, a presbytery and other facilities, including schools. The other part was ‘the mission post itself’, where more functions were clearly housed: “church, presbytery, convent and girls’ school, sewing room, kitchen, laundry, stables, further on a smithy, carpentry, brick ovens, palm and coffee plantations.” That seems clearer, if it were not that furthermore the text mentions that father Wauters had founded a Batswa mission, in addition to the Nkundo mission, that the Batswas had their own school and moniteurs and that another new Batswa school was founded in 1950, subsidised by the State.[lxx]

A remark in a letter by Hulstaert, from July 1946, gives some clarification. The letter is precisely related to the management of the Batswa school and the effect of it on the subsidies to be allocated. The missionary-inspector (who succeeded Hulstaert in that position) had proposed making the headmistress of the girls’ school also the headmistress of the Batswa school. Hulstaert, who had himself just become the head of the HCB school and rector of the mission, wrote: “For the official inspection, however, it is unacceptable for one person to be the head of two schools. This is also impossible in practice. The same case would however also arise if I should take on the school; in fact it would then be even worse because it is even more work than it would be for Sr. Imberta. The only difference would be that in her case the reports would have to mention her both with the girls and the boys, while the HCB school is not stated in the reports and consequently is not noticeable there.”[lxxi] The HCB school consequently fell under the category of a private school and was not in the system for subsidies.

Frans Maes, who worked in Flandria from 1948, indicated that, when he arrived, there was only a boys’ school ‘at the compagnie’. When asked for a summary of the school situation, however, he said: “(There was) a primary school on the site of the compagnie, just for boys. At the mission there was a school just for Batswas, not for others. With three yearly levels; and a few from the fourth or fifth year came to me. That was the case until ‘55 and ‘56. Then two years were merged into one because the school year was then made the same as in Europe. A girls’ school was also built at the mission, in ‘51 and ’52, which the sisters cared for. Everaert built it, he had also built the mission, in white brick. Consequently at the end there were three schools; the one for the Batswas only existed until ’54, I think. They then came to me at the compagnie.”[lxxii] That seems to confirm that the mission school was intended for the pygmies from the beginning and that the building problems discussed extensively here relate to the same school.

In his inspection report from 1939 on the Batswa school Hulstaert did not mention the material problems in more detail but did mention the subsidy problems. He particularly feared that the school’s subsidies could be threatened due to the irregular attendance of the Batswas. Nevertheless, there was a boarding school connected to the school. That did not appear to be very effective because the pupils would sometimes disappear for many weeks.[lxxiii] It seems that the educational project with regard to the Batswas was taken close at heart by the MSC. At the same time, however, they believed that they should be approached differently. In the same way the Congolese related to the whites, the Batswa related to the Congolese. Hulstaert: “Of course a school for the Batswa will not reach a high ‘academic’ standard in a few years as is the case for the schools for Baoto, nor is that expected. The main thing is that the boys are given a proper education, adapted to their ethno-social nature. (…) One must not be as demanding as elsewhere. The aim must not be set so high.”[lxxiv]

It seems that the school was in fact closed for a while because in the correspondence between Hulstaert and the head of the school (presumably father Cobbaut)[lxxv] the question of reopening is mentioned. Apparently, transferring the school to Bokatola, a few hundred kilometres south of Flandria, where the MSC wanted to found a new post, had been considered: “Thank you very much for your last letter. In relation to it and to my letter nr I.568, I would like to inform you that Monseigneur does not agree with my idea of keeping the central Batswa school in Bokatola. In his opinion it must remain in Flandria and under your management. So please consider my proposal as non existing. I hope that the re-establishment of your school proceeds well. I would especially recommend an experimental garden, as undoubtedly something could be achieved with that people in agriculture.“[lxxvi] Moreover, the plan for the mission post was never realised. At the end of 1943 the head wrote a letter to Hulstaert in which he proposed reopening the Batswa school, which indicates that it had been closed at least during 1943.

3.2. Bamanya
3.2.1. Introduction
I have already stated that Bamanya was considered by the MSC as the “jewel in the crown” of their Congo mission. The village was the oldest Catholic establishment in the region, founded by the Trappists in 1895. Education was also given there, although this was certainly very rudimentary until the beginning of the First World War. The ground plan that was published in the Trappists’ periodical in 1901 did not show any educational infrastructure. It is also apparent from photographs, as shown in chapter 3, that not much more than religion lessons were given in the church. However, both sources only allow conjecture on the real situation. In the Annales Aequatoria from 1990 a (posthumous) article was published which had been written by Hulstaert on Bamanya in the ‘olden days’, in which he wrote down memoirs of the way Bamanya looked at the arrival of the MSC.[lxxvii] He referred on numerous occasions to a plan published in 1910 but that proves to be the same as that from 1901. However, in relation to that plan he already mentioned a great number of changes. Amongst others he described the school buildings: “The building that is currently still located to the right of the former abbot’s residence or common room, but a little to the front and in a perpendicular direction, was the first school for teaching assistants-catechists, run at the time of my arrival by Fr. Georges Lefevere (transferred to Mondombe in November 1927). The classrooms were situated at the bottom; the attic served as dormitories for the students who ascended there using an outdoor ladder.

… Later it was used as the primary school classroom and then as a room for M.S.C. youth foyer“[lxxviii] He continued with some explanations about the construction of the primary school itself: “Parallel to the latter construction there is also a building with temporary classrooms for the primary school. It was demolished when the new one, which is still standing, was built by the lay builders employed by the Vicariate. More to the left, in the direction of the Bonkele marsh, the plan mentioned above shows four rectangles, the no. 21 indicating the brickworks, which still served for the construction of the final school buildings in the 1930s.” Consequently, the school was also started here before there were decent buildings. The Brothers of the Christian Schools already came to Bamanya at the end of the twenties.

In a letter of 8 January 1929 Vertenten, who was the mission superior at that time, wrote to the Frère Visiteur that he had not expected that the arrival of the Brothers would be arranged so quickly and that he would try to have all the necessary measures taken as quickly as possible to allow work to start. Apparently, buildings had already been provided at that time for the primary school classrooms because they were not mentioned, unlike the school equipment, for which there was still a great need. The teacher training school, however, still had to be built and he did consider that in detail. The Brothers had ensured that the government had allocated a considerable amount in subsidies for this school. The Brothers’ house and the classrooms were to be built in bricks made on site by the MSC (the brickworks were also mentioned on the old plan of the mission post). The actual building works would then only begin once the Brothers had arrived and approved the design.[lxxix] Nevertheless, the rector hoped to have completed the work around the beginning of March. That it did not progress so well in reality is apparent from another letter from September of that year in which Jans mentioned the material and workforces for the construction of the Brothers’ rooms. This presumably related only to the private accommodation of the Brothers, for which they were themselves contractually responsible, although the MSC helped them with the organisation. The school buildings were presumably were finished faster.

In his inspection report of 1930 Vertenten noted that a large boarding school had been built, intended to offer accommodation to 200 pupils. In addition the furniture was still being worked on: “We have produced a number of new benches and desks, which are very good although temporary. It has as yet been impossible for us to produce model and final desks.“[lxxx] Van Goethem added a little more in his annual report on the mission in 1931: “A colony for boys has been built, with three hundred beds, a sanitary installation, and a health centre.”[lxxxi] In 1932 he wrote a contribution for the mission periodical of the MSC, in which he was clearly proud of the results achieved after three years. He reported that the first teaching assistants had graduated, eleven in total. He was full of praise for the Brothers: the difference to the past was considerable. He claimed that at that time around 300 pupils, all boys, were at school, of which two thirds were boarders.[lxxxii]

Vertenten’s comment on the contrast with the past was certainly accurate. The division of the school into a school for girls and one for boys was only introduced after the Brothers started their work. The girls’ school and the kindergarten were initially next to each other on the same site. According to the 1933 report there was certainly sufficient space and equipment for the kindergarten: “Two rooms have been allocated for the kindergarten, the larger room 5 x 13 ½ m, with 3 large windows and a small adjacent room.” The primary school accommodated 96 pupils, divided over five years. However, there were only four rooms for this. The two higher years were consequently taught together by a Belgian sister, while the other years were taught by a teaching assistant. In the 1934 report further details were given of the outlook of the school. The classrooms were all in stone, a few with a concrete floor, others only with a clay floor. They measured between 35 and 48 square metres and had windows on both sides with white curtains as sunblinds. The pupils sat at the school desks in threes or fours. In addition sister Auxilia also mentioned boards, cupboards and chests as school furniture and “the elements of the metric system, charts, catechism and bible pictures” as “documentary equipment”.[lxxxiii] The inspector reported that the classes were orderly and clean, each pupil had his own pencil case. In his 1936 report Hulstaert did note in passing that the school desks were not really a blessing for the children: “Despite the unfortunate design of the desks, more care should be taken of the children’s posture (when writing, JB).”[lxxxiv]

How the girls’ primary school had developed was indicated in a report from 1938. At that time it already included five years, divided over two grades. The fact that the girls’ school had also developed that well indicates that Bamanya truly had become an important centre for education. As a good example of how decisive the 1930s were for the development of education: in April 1929 the girls’ school was founded, comprising three years. From February 1931 there was a complete five-year structure (divided over two grades). That was also confirmed in the report by Van Goethem for that year.[lxxxv] In the following year a domestic science school was also started but apparently it did not take off initially. Van Goethem explained this as follows: “For the year 1935 the school of Bamanya proposed organising a 6^th year, followed by 8 girls, who would follow courses in religion, reading, writing, arithmetic, French, drawing, women’s work: cutting, dress-making, embroidery, knitting, crochet, pottery, etc. in addition to domestic science. This is the second attempt of this type, which apparently is more promising than the first because the pupils are younger.“[lxxxvi] In 1935 the domestic science department was reopened and from 1937 comprised three years of study.

3.2.2. The 1940s
More information on the development of the schools was given in a few inspection reports from the 1940s. The following was reported on the boys’ school in 1944: “The situation of the buildings leaves much to be desired, particularly the old school, the roof of which is in a dreadful condition. The pisé-de-terre construction classroom that serves for the first year has become dilapidated. Fr. Rector has his hands so full with all kinds of imposed and extremely urgent works on buildings that he cannot find any means to do up the school classrooms, although they really need it. This condition of the buildings stands out sharply from the carefully tended flowerbeds beside the school.“[lxxxvii] Which points again to the work that the pupils did at the mission post. The report also considered the experimental gardens, which were still the pride and joy of the missionaries. In 1946 Hulstaert also repeated his complaint on the condition of the buildings: “The building for the teacher training college is very satisfactory but the buildings for the primary school, especially the first year’s classroom that is truly dilapidated, should certainly be improved.”[lxxxviii] In the same year the missionary inspector wrote about the girls’ school: “The school building has undergone a remarkable change: it has been given a zinc roof, unneeded door openings have been closed, everything has been beautifully whitewashed and painted. However, an attic is still needed urgently because it gets unbearably hot immediately under the roof around noon and especially in the afternoon.”

One year later the state inspection drew up a more detailed report on the Sisters’ school. The report included the drawing of the school buildings shown here. In addition it also considered the condition of the furniture. The classroom furniture was in order but the dormitories were not as acceptable. There was only one dormitory where mosquito nets were provided and then there were still too few: “There are only 6 mosquito nets for the eleven pupils who sleep there, which clearly results in deplorable promiscuity.” With regard to didactic material, there was also a shortage, especially for the youngest. The sisters had ordered school boards and some tables and chairs for the domestic science school. In addition, there were only two toilets for 131 pupils, which seemed rather limited to the inspector. In any event, it meant that the terrible smell around the toilets was unbearable, as no septic pit had been installed.[lxxxix] The inspector had apparently also made remarks about the boys’ school, on deficiencies in the classrooms and dormitories: “The rain leaks through the ndele roofs of the two said buildings, causing damage to the rooms themselves and to the school furniture. It is almost impossible to teach in these rooms on days of heavy rains.”[xc] The dormitories stank. Although these rooms were very close to the marsh, there were also hardly any mosquito nets there. The inspector also made a vague allusion here to the damaging consequences for the boys: “The few pupils who have a mosquito net invite a few friends to spend the night with them, which is, especially for the boarders, something which is not advisable.”[xci] Why that was the case was not mentioned.

The school head, Father Wauters, responded in a particularly irritated way and wrote a letter to Van Goethem in which he parried the criticism from the state inspection. According to him the inspector had smelled the manure from the cowshed instead of the toilets. However, he did implicitly admit later on in the letter that he was right but attributed that to the unwillingness of the Sisters to move the toilets to a more remote site. He naturally also had to react to the remark relating to “promiscuity“: “Mr. Van Meerbeeck obviously comes from a family with only a few children otherwise he would know that brothers and sisters from large families in Belgium always sleep together. I have never heard those families complaining of ‘deplorable promiscuity’.” He even added a few gibes at the inspector: “If the Department of Education would like to compensate the expenses, I am naturally immediately prepared to buy iron beds for all the children. In addition I have also ordered 500 mosquito nets for the boys and girls at Bamanya. Once they have arrived they will be handed out for use, in the hope that the Department of Education will pay for them.” Furthermore, the Father did not give the impression that he had fundamental problems with the material condition of the school. He thought that the schoolchildren in Bamanya were accommodated much better than in their parents’ houses, which constituted an improvement to their life. He finally also took a swing at the government: improvements and expansion of the building had been discussed for some time but if the state, with all its means, did not succeed in providing some infrastructure within a short period, that was even more the case for private parties, especially as it was difficult to find good workers. It is clear that the priest had to confirm nearly all the inspector’s arguments, no matter how much he tried his best to find counter arguments and excuses.

3.2.3. The 1950s
In the early 1950s the girls’ school was made up of a U-shaped building complex, including six classrooms, probably of 8 by 6 metres. The flooring was concrete and the roofing zinc sheets. Four rooms served as classrooms for the lower grades, two as classrooms for the domestic science department. The kindergarten, which was also integrated in that complex, comprised a single room of 14 by 3.5 metres. There were windows on two sides throughout (“sufficient lighting and ventilation“). The children in the kindergarten sat at small tables and chairs, in the primary school long benches were used and in the domestic science school the girls were given a table and chair. The teachers had a desk and a chair available and taught using a school board, made from wood or cardboard.

The boarding school comprised 3 dormitories, a dining room, a ‘native’ kitchen, a workroom, a sitting room and a storage area. The building was entirely constructed in stone. The flooring was made partially from concrete, partly from terracotta (e.g. in the kitchen) and the roofing was partly zinc sheets and partly ndele. Electric lighting was a major innovation for the evenings. The condition in the boarding school was apparently considerably improved now. The pupils slept in wooden beds or beds made according to the model used in the boys’ school. Each pupil had a mosquito net, a native mat, a blanket and a pillow. There was a chamber pot for every two pupils. In addition, the inspection report of 1950 also stated: “The pupils sit at tables in the dining room covered with a clean table cloth and on benches. Each pupil has a plate and a spoon. In addition there are bottles with clean drinking water on the table, with an enamelled drinking mug per two pupils. The dining room is completely clean and looks especially pleasant in its simplicity.“[xcii]

The report stated the following about the boys’ school: “The first year is established in a room in the boarding school. It is made from durable materials, is covered in sheet metal and the floor is in terracotta. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th years are established in a separate building opposite the Brothers’ house; two of the rooms are 9m x 5m and one is 7.5m x 5m. The whole is constructed in durable materials, with a concrete floor and a roof in ndele, but its outer appearance has changed a lot since last year (…) The 5th and 6th years occupy two classrooms of 7m x 8m each in the normal school complex, which is also made from durable materials, with a concrete floor and sheet metal roof.” There was sufficient lighting and ventilation. According to the missionary inspector a few rooms could do with a coat of paint but except for that everything was in very good condition. In addition, he also mentioned the presence of a small workshop for handicrafts and a few hangars that were used as a brickworks: “In one the earth has been worked and bricks are made from wooden moulds, the other is used for drying the bricks and the third houses the oven where the bricks are baked.” This was consequently also considered a part of the school, although everything points to the missions also trying to earn some money from this by supplying buyers from around the mission posts with bricks.

The boarding school was made up of a separate complex, with an inner courtyard and four dormitories of 24 by 4 metres, a large dining room of the same dimensions, a room of 12 by 4 metres that served temporarily as a classroom (for the first year), two rooms for the Père Surveillant, two storage places and half-open hangars where the children could ‘relax’ and cook “à leur gré“. From the remarks of former pupils it may be deduced that the voluntary aspect of this sometimes had to be taken with a pinch of salt and that the hangars pretty much served as the permanent living area for the children. The beds were made from wooden planks that sloped slightly and that were supported by some bricks. There was a mosquito net for every bed, a mat and a blanket.

Every pupil had a place at the table, a chair, a plate and a spoon in the dining room. The sanitary facility had finally been replaced: “12 installations in durable materials and with a concrete floor have replaced the old portable sheds this year. They are very well maintained but more ventilation at the top would better ensure the elimination of all disagreeable odours.”[xciii] The school furniture included long benches which were old-fashioned (in the inspector’s opinion) and that should be replaced by modern models. More modern pairs of seats were used in the highest classes of the primary school.

In 1951 the report of the missionary inspector did not go into details with regard to the infrastructure. It was simply stated that the changes that had been started at the end of the 1940s had unfortunately not been continued.[xciv] The 1952 report again considered the material aspects of the boys’ school in detail. Strangely enough Moentjens, who had been rather positive about the school in 1950, gave a very detailed but relatively critical report: “All the classrooms are in good condition but the periodic upkeep of the classrooms leaves much to be desired. The layout of the benches themselves sometimes gives an impression of disorder. The 2^nd, 3^rd and 4^th primary classes are too small for the current number of pupils. (…) Unfortunately, the impression of the interior appearance of the classrooms and the furniture is nothing to be proud of in either of the two schools. Almost all the primary school rooms are too small. It would be a major and greatly beneficial improvement if a headmaster’s office and a reception be added in the new secondary school building so that the head would no longer be obliged to receive people in his own residence.”

He was equally critical of the furniture: “That (the furniture) of the 4 first primary years is not worthy of a central application school as Bamanya.” The boarding school was also too small: there were only 196 beds for 208 boarders. Apparently, not much had happened during the two preceding years. Although it was clear that certainly not everything was in order, from the remarks given here it may be deduced that the standards used for evaluation had also shifted somewhat and that the condition of the school had certainly not deteriorated in general. An illustration of this is the plea by the inspector for a school museum: “It would be interesting and useful to organise a school museum of indigenous objects and a collection of colonial products.”

The school for moniteurs was finally the basis for a ‘higher’ teacher training college in the early 1950s. Its construction took a number of years. In the annual report for 1953 Vermeiren already noted that there were seven new classes, an office and a school museum. New sanitary installations, dormitories, a kitchen and dining rooms were in progress. At that time, work was also finally complete on the girls’ dormitories, although no further explanation was given for this in the report. The statements of the vicar make it apparent that the situation in these dormitories was initially not too good: “One had to renovate the girls’ dormitories and the stables and one had to build numerous houses in durable materials for the teaching assistants and workers.“[xcv] The attention in this type of reports was usually primarily paid to the projects pending and the progress that was hoped to be gained. The fact that this point was situated right at the end of the text is consequently also indicative of the importance attached to it. The construction of the teacher training college and its completion was really the only point worth mentioning in the reports for the early 1950s. The opening of the school and the completion of the building were already mentioned in 1954. However, it was considered in detail again in 1955. Presumably the vicar also had his own sales tactics. The construction of a new domestic science school was also mentioned in the years 1954-1955 and in 1958 the completion of new school buildings for the primary school in Bamanya was also reported. Whether this also means that there was a complex of school buildings is another matter. When the number of pupils is considered next to this, it seems that these all related to relatively small groups which probably did not take up too much space.

3.2.4. Les champs scolaires (the school fields)
In the inspection reports a lot of attention was paid to what took place outside the classroom: the garden, animals, workshop. Work on the land is discussed in every report. In Bamanya the children had experimental gardens available and they also maintained the Brothers’ orchard. In one of his reports Moentjens even wrote: “In a purely material field nothing has changed since the last inspection except for moving and expanding the school fields“, to which he added: “A curious matter and one with which I am unable to agree completely is that the products of the school gardens are sold whereas they could be used to feed the pupils themselves.” The mission post also had a real farm: “The school itself does not have the facilities for livestock farming, but the small and large livestock of the mission indirectly served for teaching and the Brothers’ henhouse is looked after by the pupils.” In 1938 a separate report was even drawn up about the ‘experimental garden’, in which the content of the lessons was described and the way in which theory was converted into practice. The pupils also had all the time necessary for that because the report concerned also mentioned the duration of both types of lesson: “Theoretical 30 mnt. a week. Practical 7.30 (h.) a week.”

The 1950 report also included considerably more on the champs scolaires, the petit élévage and autres travaux matériels than on the other material aspects of the school itself. It included a list of the works carried out by the various classes: “With regard to handicrafts and other things imposed by the curriculum, here is a brief summary of what was carried out:

1st A: weaving raffia cords; 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th raffia lace-making; the five first years of primary school: wickerwork, each class according to its abilities; 5th year: chair canework and improvement of the brick oven; 6th year: binding and construction (garage); 1st and 2nd years of teacher training: brick manufacture; 3rd year teacher training: elementary carpentry (mallets, instrument handles, brick moulds, ladders).” In addition, the pupils from both the primary school and the teacher training college spent time on the upkeep of the henhouse and the rabbit run. They mainly worked on the champ scolaire, a field of approximately one hectare and 35 ares (10 350 m²). All kinds of crops were grown on it, both European and African.

In my opinion there are numerous reasons for that attention to school gardens and handicrafts. Firstly, there was the educational argument. Apparently, this was used even then as a kind of excuse to justify the intensive maintenance work the children did. Secondly, the cultivation of a number of crops certainly provided an essential addition to the missionaries’ limited means. However, it is not surprising that the priests would be criticised sooner or later for the fact that the pupils had to do a lot of work for the benefit of the missionaries. It was invariably stated in the inspection reports that the work fitted within the framework of the education of the children but undoubtedly it was not always understood that way. The comment by Moentjens on the sale of the crops is an indication of the limit of the possible criticism, which the missionaries did not in fact ever exceed themselves. Naturally, their argument was that the financial means were limited, often too limited and consequently they saw no difficulty in increasing the funds, even if this was thanks to the pupils’ work. Ultimately it was to their benefit anyway.

3.3. The rural schools
Beyond the mission posts matters were different. Father Delafaille wrote in 1934 that there was still no education provided outside the mission posts. The religion lessons given by the catechists were the only teaching available.[xcvi] In an inspection report from 1932 an attempt was made to present this situation in another, much more positive way: “It is important not to lose sight of the fact that in numerous villages there are “catechumenats” where thousands of children receive some notions of reading, writing and arithmetic with their religious education.”[xcvii] Delafaille’s comment was indeed to the point. The implicit message in this text was also that the education was limited to some elementary notions.

Nevertheless, the MSC needed infrastructure to be able to make their intentions known. A testimony to this is the message that Mgr. Van Goethem gave in his activity report from 1932: “When I talk of pupils, I only mean the children educated and accommodated at the mission posts. Unlike the schools of the majority of the other missions, all our pupils, except for those from Coquilhatville, are boarders who board with us, are dressed and fed by us and for whom the instruction and education constitutes the most important work of the post.”[xcviii] He did not include the rural schools in his statistics, “for honesty’s sake“. From the reports, which are of course written by the MSC themselves, it is apparent that they did want to invest in shaping the material environment of the school and in the children at school. As Van Goethem had already said, the intention there was not to be restricted to the school buildings. However, the financial side of things often weighed heavily and Van Goethem understood that priorities had to be set. He consequently also decided to do good work at the central schools and to provide the complete framework there. Naturally, that was at the expense of the rural schools. Material could be distributed to the catechists but they were then left on their own to decide what to do with it.

The report Trigalet drew up at the request of Van Goethem with regard to the policy for rural schools around Flandria testifies to the delicate balance that had to be found. On the one hand, an attempt was made to eliminate the inefficiency factor of the rural schools insofar as possible, on the other hand the classes were very quickly overcrowded at the central mission post. For that reason he argued for the development of education on as simple lines as possible and to be spread broadly in the bush schools. The costs generated by this would be compensated by the fact that it would be possible to work more efficiently at the mission school and to achieve progress more quickly. His report continued in detail with regard to the educational project set by the MSC in Flandria, where an attempt was made in the years 1932-1934 to make a large number of teaching assistants ready to start up primary schools around the mission post. A lot of time and money was invested in the project. Logistic support was also provided from the HCB. In total over 30 000 francs were invested over two years, which constituted an enormous amount.

The report did not mention the construction of rural schools at all. However, the acquisition of materials: school boards, slates, slate-pencils, chalk, exercise books, reading books and pens (only for the teachers) was mentioned. The evaluation of the project was not as positive, though; the relapse was great after one year. Trigalet primarily blamed this on the lack of inspection: the area was too large and the teaching assistants for a variety of reasons did not function optimally without proper supervision. He also referred to budgetary reasons that were perhaps at least as important. After all, the budget had been reduced. As has been shown previously, this was also the moment at which the subsidies to the missions were reduced for the first time.[xcix] However, conflicting areas of authority also seemed to have been at stake. For some reason Van Goethem himself had obliged the missionaries to have as many children as possible come to the mission post, according to Trigalet. Naturally, that was precisely what they were trying to combat. The consequence was that a tug of war developed between the teaching assistants and the priests about sending pupils on. A second consequence was that the boarding school costs rose greatly.

Van Goethem’s measures are explicable because he assumed that the best approach would be to close as many rural schools as possible. He actually saw more benefits in centralisation, thus following the idea of Walschap, who had travelled in the region and had concluded that the rural schools were too numerous and had no future. The level of education was too low there and the attendance to irregular. Trigalet also saw the benefits of centralisation but still had a few objections to it. It would require a much more developed infrastructure and a system of a continuous supply of food and more importantly it would cost a lot of money in a difficult period. Trigalet did not think it would be possible to appeal to the means of the natives via local taxation because they were too limited: “They are not inexhaustible and often are not flourishing at all as they already have to bear many crushing charges for them, which they cannot escape from“.[c]

At the beginning of the 1950s a dispute arose concerning the inspection of rural schools. Apparently, the provincial inspector, Eloye, had made remarks on the reports relating to the condition of rural schools in the region. The vicar, Vermeiren, had written an angry letter to the provincial governor. The case had reached the governor general. As a result of this a second inspection was carried out by the head of the inspection, Jean Ney.[ci] His report on the work of the provincial inspector uncovered disputes with the MSC. Ney was very critical of the MSC in general and described a number of points for discussion in detail. In addition, he also considered the condition of a number of rural schools, which he had visited. In his opinion the majority of those schools were inadequately furnished, the hygiene was abominable and in some cases the school building was no longer there.[cii]

Summary
The missionaries had to develop a material framework to support their activities. Education almost naturally took a central place in this. That followed automatically from the connection between education and the core business of the missions, i.e. evangelisation. Evangelisation implied education. If that was only externalised in the first phase by defining a separate place for holding sermons or for religious services, it naturally developed into the construction of buildings in which pupils could be separated from their environment.

The fact that this relates to a very natural evolution does not mean that it was realised without any problems. More specifically during the initial stage the teaching was given in a very sober and often inadequate framework. During the first years in the Congo the MSC did the best they could. Their presence in the field and the fact that education was provided seemed more important in that period than the circumstances in which the education was given. In general, it seems normal that the material framework was not always able to cope with the growth of the school population. Indeed the concrete problems for the MSC seemed mainly to relate to overpopulation in the classrooms. Moreover, there was no general framework at that time, or regulations for education and consequently no inspection of those circumstances. That inspection would only develop from the end of the 1920s onwards and we may assume that it did not immediately start operating at top efficiency. Nevertheless, from that moment the missionaries were faced with feedback and criticism of the educational activity and consequently also of the material framework.

The fact that the criticism was not always experienced as just by the people in the field is overwhelmingly obvious from the examples quoted. Both in Flandria and Bamanya, two MSC mission posts that developed in rather different settings, that development was characterised by negotiations and conflicts with the (private and public) partners in the field. The realisation of the material infrastructure required a lot of effort and that was also often strongly emphasised in publications and official reports. That an appeal was very often made to the pupils themselves is emphasised less strongly, although it was not something that was experienced negatively. The missionaries considered using the pupils in work on the infrastructure and in cultivating crops as a normal and positive element of training and education.

NOTES
[i] Vertenten, P. (1932). Nieuws uit Bamania bij Coquilhatstad. In Annalen, 4, p. 78.
[ii] Information from Honoré Vinck, August 2004.
[iii] The barza is a sort of covered terrace, veranda.
[iv] Ndele is the plural of lolele which, according to Hulstaert’s dictionary, means: “feuille de palmier Raphia laurentii D. W. employée soit en entier dans la construction des parois soit pliée et tressée pour former des tuiles végétales.” See Hulstaert, G. (1957). Dictionnaire Lomongo-Français, Tervuren: Annales du Musée Royal du Congo Belge. p. 1284.
[v] AAVSB, Report by Father Sebastianus about the Tshuapa mission. Sebastiaan Van Sitteren, 1924. [original report in Dutch]
[vi] Bamanya, Coquilhatville, Bokuma, Bokote en Wafanya.
[vii] African Archives Brussels, Fonds Missies, n°635 “Trappisten Coquilhatville 1914-1940”. Letter from Kaptein, abbot of the Trappist mission to Duchesne, vice-governor general a.i., 26/7/1920.
[viii] “Brief van den Eerwaarden Pater Van der Kinderen”. In Annalen, 1925, 3, p. 58. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ix] Van Houtte, (1926). De nieuwe missiestatie in Congo. In Annalen, 2, p. 33. [original quotation in Dutch]
[x] Papiers Cornet, Frères des Ecoles Chrétiennes, Fexhe. “Supplément à l’histoire pour l’année 1930. Maison de Coquilhatville, Congo Belge”, written document, s.n.
[xi] African Archives Brussels, Mission Collection, n°635 “Trappisten Coquilhatville 1914-1940”, “diverses”.
[xii] The concept of the Congolese town was often very simple. However, many civil engineering utopias were created around it. Bruno De Meulder states that Coquilhatville is a very good example of this. At around the turn of the century Charles Lemaire, the then district commissioner, had very precise and structured plans for the town development of Coq. Hardly anything was done about it by his successors. On this subject, De Meulder says that it seemed that “Lemaire’s plans were not followed in spite of all the good intentions that the introduction of the embryonic town planning laws brought. There was in fact not much coordinated town planning. With Coquilhatville as it is described, is meant the district commissariat here, the black quarter further up, yet further Coquilhatville-transit, and still further a couple of satellites.” De Meulder, B. (1994). Reformisme thuis en overzee, p. 367-368.
[xiii] African Archives Brussels, Mission Collection, n°647. “Ecole de filles de grands centres. Localité de Coquilhatville. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école dirigée par les Filles de la Charité. Année 1927”. Congo Belge, Inspection Générale de l’Enseignement. [original quotation in French]
[xiv] African Archives Brussels, Mission Collection, n°647. “Ecole de filles de grands centres. Localité de Coquilhatville. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école dirigée par les Filles de la Charité. Année 1928-1929”. Vertenten, missionnaire-inspecteur. [original quotation in French]
[xv] Ibidem. G. Jardon, chef du service provincial de l’enseignement. [original quotation in French]
[xvi] Ibidem, Soeur Cécile Borsu. I assume that the report was written by her. She was the only Sister responsible for looking after the school at that time. She was a certified teacher and nurse herself. She was assisted by two Congolese women, Elisabeth Lombala and Léonie Bongenge, “coloured supervisors“, as they were called in the report. Their task was effectively limited to child-minding.
[xvii] Archives Lazarist Fathers, Leuven. “Rapport sur le fonctionnement des Ecoles des Révérendes Soeurs de Saint Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville”. Vertenten, February 1930. Typed version. [original quotation in French]
[xviii] Muzuri, F. (1990). Le Groupe Scolaire. In Mbandaka hier et aujourd’hui. Eléments d’historiographie locale. Mbandaka: Centre Aequatoria. p. 205-207.
[xix]< Archives Lazarist Fathers, Leuven. “Rapport sur les oeuvres des Filles de la Charité de St-Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville. Exercice 1930”, s.n. [original quotation in French]
[xx] Jans, P. (1927). Aankomst in Congo. In Annalen, 5, p. 104. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxi] Dries, R. (1912). Het beschavingswerk der Cisterciënzers in de Evenaarsstreek. In Onze Kongo, II, p. 358-359. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxii] African Archives Brussels, Missions Collection, no. 635. Letter from the vice-governor general ex officio Duchesne to the governor general, 27 December 1921. [original quotation in French]
[xxiii] Report by Edouard De Jonghe of his travels through the Congo, 1924-1925. KADOC, De Cleene-De Jonghe Papers. [original quotation in French]
[xxiv] African Archives Brussels, Fonds Missions, no. 635. “Rapport sur le fonctionnement des écoles primaires du 1er degré. Mission de Coquilhatville. Année 1928”, G. Jardon, 29 March 1928. [original quotation in French]
[xxv] African Archives Brussels, Fonds Missions, no. 635. “Rapport sur le fonctionnement des écoles primaires du 1er degré. Mission de Coquilhatville. Année 1928”, P. Vertenten, 24 March 1929; G. Jardon, 24 April 1924.
[xxvi] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 16.484, document no. 55. [original quotation in French]
[xxvii] Es, M. (1927). Mijn kleine schoolkolonie. In Annalen, 11, p.248. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxviii] Smolders, J. (1930). Veel werk te Boende. In Annalen, 2, p. 29.
[xxix] “Oproep ten voordele der Missiën.” In Annalen, 1931, 11, p. 247. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxx] Vertenten, P. (1935). Een blijvend loofhuttenfeest. In Annalen, 10, p. 221. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxi] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490, school inspection reports 1932. “Rapport annuel 1932 pour le service de l’enseignement”. [original quotation in French]
[xxxii] AAFE 15.1.3-7. Bamanya. Report on the girls’ school. School year 1934. Sister Auxilia.
[xxxiii] AAFE 15.2.12-3.3. Rapport sur le fonctionnement des Ecoles primaires et normales à Bamania. P. Vertenten, Bamanya, 15 October 1930. [original quotation in French]
[xxxiv] AAFE 15.3.12. Rapport du missionnaire inspecteur sur le fonctionnement des écoles. Ecole primaire de Wafania. P. Vertenten, Wafanya, 1 April 1931. [original quotation in French]
[xxxv] AAFE 15.4.1. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire des R.R. Soeurs du précieux sang à Bokuma. P. Vertenten, Bokuma, 11 April 1930. [original quotation in French]
[xxxvi] AAFE 15.5.3-6. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Bokote. P. Vertenten, Bokote, July-August 1930. [original quotation in French]
[xxxvii] Rousseau, L. (1932). Bamania. In Annalen, 1, p. 6.
[xxxviii] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490. “Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire de la préfecture de Coq. pour 1931”, Van Goethem. [original quotation in French]
[xxxix] Fieldhouse, D.K. (1978). Unilever overseas. the anatomy of a multinational 1895-1965. Stanford: University Press. p. 494-555. A complete chapter is dedicated to the Huileries du Congo Belge, a part of the soap empire of the Lever Brothers that merged in 1930 with the Dutch Margarine Unie into the multinational Unilever.
[xl] Fieldhouse, D.K. (1978), o.c. The author says about the ‘convention’: “Heavy emphasis was laid on the duties of H.C.B. as a paternalistic employer: indeed, Lever’s son later alleged that the support given by the Belgian socialist leader, Vandervelde, in parliament resulted from his knowledge of workers’ conditions at Port Sunlight, which he assumed would be the model for Lever factories in the Congo.” (p. 505).
[xli] AAFE 35.3.3. Letter from the administrator delegate HCB to P. Vertenten. Leopoldville, 10 July 1926.
[xlii] AAFE 35.4.1. Note from the managing director, Edkins, to the district manager of the H.C.B. Leopoldville, 4 October 1928.
[xliii] AAFE 35.4.13. Letter from the director general H.C.B. to G. Hulstaert. Leopoldville, 25 August 1928. [original quotation in French]
[xliv] AAFE 35.1.12. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the administrator delegate of the H.C.B. Flandria, 10 February 1929. [original quotation in French]
[xlv] AAFE 36.4.13-5.2. Letter from P. Vertenten to the district manager of the H.C.B., handwritten, s.d. [original quotation in French]
[xlvi] Ibidem
[xlvii] AAFE 35.4.8. Rapport sur les travaux d’établissement. Septembre 1928. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 28 September 1928.
[xlviii] AAFE 35.1.14. Renseignements annuels sur l’enseignement. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 28 January 1929. [original quotation in French]
[xlix] AAFE 34.3.7. Rapport trimestriel sur les travaux d’établissement. Juin 1929. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 30 June 1929; AAFE 34.1.9. Rapport trimestriel sur les travaux d’établissement. Septembre 1929. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 30 September 1929.
[l] AAFE 32.1.10. Rapport trimestriel sur les travaux d’établissement. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 30 June 1930.
[li] Vertenten, P. (1929). Met de Theresita de Momboyo op naar Wafanya. In Annalen, 1929, 12, p. 270.
[lii] AAFE 32.1.1. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the managing director of the H.C.B. in Leopoldville. Flandria, 28 October 1930. [original quotation in French]
[liii] AAFE 15.3.8-10. Ecole primaire Flandria H.C.B. Rapport sur le fonctionnement des Ecoles. par le Misssionaire Inspecteur. P. Vertenten, Flandria, 16 March 1931. [original quotation in French]
[liv] I deduced this from the fact that reference is made to the following fact in this inspection report: “The frequency and the insistence are not satisfactory at all. During the second trimester of 1929, 17 pupils left the school.” Given the fact that the beginning of the school year at that time still corresponded to the beginning of the calendar year, the second term is consequently the period April-June. In the quarter report from Hulstaert for September 1929 reference is again made to a report from the state inspector of 19 June. Hulstaert stated in his report that account had been taken in the meantime with his remarks. He refers more specifically to two points of criticism that were mentioned in the inspection report, being the total lack of didactic material and the inadequate development of the experimental garden. AAFE 34.1.8. Rapport trimestriel sur l’école. Septembre 1929. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 30 September 1929.
[lv] AAFE 93.4.9-12. Congo Belge. Province de l’Equateur. Inspection de l’enseignement. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école des Huileries du Congo Belge établie à Flandria (district de l’Equateur). s.n., s.d.
[lvi] AAFE 35.1.13. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the responsible manager H.C.B. Flandria, 9 February 1929. [original quotation in French]
[lvii] AAFE 93.4.1. Rapport scolaire. P. Trigalet, Flandria, 22 April 1935.
[lviii] AAFE 93.3.10. Rapport fin d’année 1934. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, s.d. [original quotation in French] letter from the responsible manager of the H.C.B. to G. Hulstaert. Leopoldville, 23 July 1929.
[lx] The chikwangue is a sort of thick pasta with an elastic texture, which is made by wetting manioc roots. Chikwangue is part of the staple diet in the Congo. Massamba, J., Adoua-Oyila, G.M. & Trèche, S. (2001). Perception et acceptation d’une innovation technologique dans la préparation de la chikwangue à Brazzaville, Congo. In Food, Nutrition and Agriculture. A Publication of the FAO Food and Nutrition Division, XXIX. p. 22-31.
[lxi] AAFE 33.3.12. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the managing director of the H.C.B. in Leopoldville. Flandria, 17 November 1929.
[lxii] Interview with Jean Indenge, in Brussels, 14 July 2003. Jean Indenge was born in 1935. His schooling, as for many children from the interior, only started at a later age at the end of the forties and early fifties.
[lxiii] AAFE 29.1.2. Letter from Father Dereume to G. Hulstaert. Alberta, 11 February 1948.
[lxiv] AAFE 29.1.5. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the head of the H.C.B., Flandria, 23 April 1948.
[lxv] MSC-archives Borgerhout. Mission books. Minutes of the meetings of 21 May and 6 July 1922. [Original quotation in French]
[lxvi] Wauters, G. (1935). De Batjwa-jeugd. In Annalen, 3, p. 53.
[lxvii] Lesson no. 125 “Les Pygmées”, Included in Missionnaires du Sacré Coeur (1935). Buku ea mbaanda I (Livre de lecture). Turnhout: Brepols. Original French translation is available at http://www.abbol.com/commonfiles/docs_projecten/colschoolbks/bukuea.php [translated from the French]
[lxviii] AAVSB, “Rapport sur les Batswa”, by G. Wauters, in “Rapport général. Coquilhatville. 1934-1935”, Van Goethem, pp. 15-30.
[lxix] AAVSB, Van Goethem, “Rapport général, Coquilhatville, 1934-1935”, p.2 [original quotation in French]
[lxx] Sablon, C. (1954). Apostolisch Vicariaat Coquilhatstad. In De Toekomst, nr. 30, p. 45-46.
[lxxi] AAFE 100.4.12. Letter from G. Hulstaert to F. Cobbaut. Flandria, 18 July 1946. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxii]Interview with Frans Maes in Borgerhout on 9 July 2002. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxiii] AAFE 101.4.9-11. Report on the inspection of the boys’ school for Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxiv] AAFE 101.4.1. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the Father Director of the School of the Catholic Mission, Flandria. Hulstaert, Bamania, 6 January 1941.
[lxxv] Florent Cobbaut (1910-1997) worked in the Belgian Congo from 1936 to 1950. According to my information he was stationed in Flandria from 1939 to 1946. He succeeded Gustaaf Hulstaert in 1946 as the superior in the Congo. He was also interim inspector. In general, detailed information on who was working where is missing from the war years. Boelaert was also stationed in Flandria during the war. According to information from Vinck he was there between 1942 and 1946. However, in a letter from 16 December 1943 to the head of the school, Hulstaert mentions both Boelaert (“Mon”) and father De Rop, which means it is almost certainly Cobbaut who is being addressed here. See Lauwers, J. msc (1992). Standplaats van de Missionarissen van het H. Hart in Kongo tot 1992. Unpublished document. The biographical information on Cobbaut is from Honoré Vinck.
[lxxvi] AAFE 101.3.9. Letter from G. Hulstaert to the head of the school in Flandria. Coquilhatville, 21 September 1941. My emphasis. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxvii] Hulstaert, G. (1990). Souvenirs du vieux Bamanya. In Annales Aequatoria, XI, p. 429-432. He then wrote of the memories of his first visits: “De ces visites j’ai retenu quelques souvenirs, qui ont été confirmés, peut-être plus ou moins déformés, par des séjours ultérieurs (retraites p.ex.) lorsque j’étais en poste à Flandria (1928-1933).”
[lxxviii] Ibidem. [original quotation in French]
[lxxix] AAFE 5.2.8. Letter from P. Vertenten to Frère Visiteur. Bamania, 8 January 1929.
[lxxx] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490. P. Vertenten, missionary inspector to the provincial inspector in Coquilhatville, 23 February 1931. [original quotation in French]
[lxxxi] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventary, no. 12.490. “Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire de la préfecture de Coquilhatville pour 1931”, Van Goethem. [original quotation in French]
[lxxxii] Vertenten, P. (1932). Nieuws uit Bamanya bij Coquilhatstad (Vertenten). In Annalen, 4, p. 80.
[lxxxiii] AAFE 15.1.3-8. Bamanya. Report on the girls’ school. School year 1934. Sister Auxilia.
[lxxxiv] AAFE 4.5.1. Bamanya. Inspection of education. October 1936. Girls’ school. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 20 October 1936. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxv] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventary, no. 12.490. “Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire de la préfecture de Coquilhatville pour 1931”, Mgr. Van Goethem.
[lxxxvi] AAVSB, “Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire des Soeurs du Précieux Sang 1934”, Mgr. Van Goethem. [original quotation in French]
[lxxxvii] AAFE 12.5.3. Report on the inspections in the primary and teacher training college in Bamanya. 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 4 November 1944.[original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxviii] AAFE 12.5.2. Inspection of the primary and teacher training college in Bamanya. 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 28 September 1946. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxix] AAFE 11.3.3. Rapport d’inspection de l’établissement des Soeurs Missionnaires du Précieux Sang à Bamanya. Ecole primaire mixte pour indigènes et école ménagère. Vanmeerbeeck, inspecteur-adjoint au service provincial de l’enseignement, Coquilhatville, 8 May 1947.
[xc] AAFE 12.1.1. Letter from G. Wauters to Mgr. Van Goethem. Bamania, 23 September 1942. [original quotation in French]
[xci] Ibidem, the underlining is in the original. [original quotation in French]
[xcii] AAFE 10.2.14-3.3. Inspection report of the girls’ school at Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 5 December 1950. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xciii] AAFE 10.3.8-13. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire pour garçons indigènes à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 3 December 1950. [original quotation in French]
[xciv] AAFE 9.5.7. Rapport d’inspection de lécole primaire et de l’école de moniteurs de Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 10 September 1951.
[xcv] AAVSB, “Rapport annuel 1952-1953. Vicariat apostolique de Coquilhatville”, Mgr. Vermeiren. [original quotation in French]
[xcvi] Delafaille, H. (1934). Mijn eerste dienstreisje in Kongo. In Annalen, 9, p. 197.
[xcvii] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490, school inspection reports 1932. “Rapport annuel 1932 pour le service de l’enseignement”. [original quotation in French]
[xcviii] African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490. “Rapport sur l’activité missionnaire de la préfecture de Coq. pour 1931”, Mgr. Van Goethem. [original quotation in French]
[xcix] See the Liesenborghs’ table in appendix 5.
[c] AAVSB, “Rapport général sur l’activité du vicariat de Coquilhatville de 1934-1935”, Van Goethem, 1 March 1935, with the corresponding report “Notes additionnelles sur les écoles rurales” by P. Trigalet. [original quotation in French]
[ci]Ney was not popular in missionary and Catholic circles, he was known as a fanatic anticlericalist. See Briffaerts, J. (1995). Over Belgische politiek en Congolese scholen.
[cii]African Archives Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.452, Inspection Vicariat Apostolique Coquilhatville 1949-1953. “Contrôle des inspections faites pendant l’année 1951, province de l’Equateur”, Jean Ney, Leopoldville, 11 December 1951.

In the previous chapters, what was actually happening during lessons became dimly visible here and there. In this chapter this will be examined more closely. Learning in a class situation can be approached in many different ways. I assume in any case that a combination of various points of view is needed to achieve a picture of ‘reality’. What was taught? This can be deduced from the content of curricula tested by the commentary in inspection reports. It can also be partially deduced from the subject matter in the textbooks used. How was this taught? This is actually a question of the pedagogical principles the missionaries adhered to: did they talk about this? Did these principles even exist?

What was in the curriculum?
The curricula for subsidised missionary education have already been discussed in chapter two. By and large the period in question can be divided as follows, using the applicable curriculum guides: the period from 1929 to 1949, under the first curriculum (the Brochure Jaune), from 1949 to just after half-way through the 1950s, under the second (and third) curriculum and the second half of the 1950s, in which métropolisation was imposed (and, in principle, the Belgian syllabus should have been implemented). Apart from the fact that the transition between the different periods, especially between the second and third, is not very strictly defined, the first curriculum was noticeably enforced for the majority of the colonial period (taking the previously discussed proposal of 1938 into account). It did not seem worthwhile to analyse the changes in lesson content between the curricula of 1929 and 1948 in detail. After all it is almost certain that there is no general and direct concordance between what was required in the curriculum guides and what was actually taught. The curriculum guides only gave minimal norms, general guidelines and guiding principles. Obviously, it did not include the detailed contents of lessons. The third and final reason was that the curriculum was fragmented in the guide of 1948 through the introduction of the distinction between the normal and ‘selected’ second grade. This made an orderly comparison more difficult. The evolution of the two curricula in the area of subject content will only be touched upon very briefly.

However, it did seem worthwhile to make a summary comparison of colonial and Belgian curricula, especially to try to counter a certain representation. Otherwise it might be assumed too easily that the education in Belgian Congo was no more than a kind of occupational therapy. The researcher and the reader are faced here with a very subtle balancing exercise. On the one hand, the intention is to discover the reality, or at least to try: the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of school reality in the past. On the other hand, it is necessary to articulate what almost everyone will be thinking automatically when reading a story of the period: namely that ‘it wasn’t the way it is now’ and that the attitudes of a number of protagonists, namely the missionaries, were fairly ‘old-fashioned’, even ‘primitive’ or ‘backward’.

Of course such an opinion seems suspiciously similar to remarks made by the missionaries themselves about the Congolese (which partly causes them) but this does not mean they should not be mentioned. Nor should they necessarily be attacked with moral judgements but, on the other hand, they should be interpreted. In the first instance it is of course only human to distance oneself in one way or another from events that happened in other places at other times. We must, of course, avoid falling into an a-historical position but the reaction itself is not an historical aberration, in the sense of ‘very wrong at the time’. After all, in the same way the ideas of the missionaries are not to be considered as thoughts that ‘should not really have been thought’ and should have given rise to moral indignation. The foundations of the stance assumed in the colonial context are, after all, to be found in structures, positions and reactions in the home context of the colonisers. This can also be shown clearly in the context of the curricula.

The foundation for the colonial school curriculum must, after all, have come from somewhere. Intuitively, but also considering what was said before, it must be clear that no curriculum was designed ex nihilo and it was certainly not based on African precedents. The seeds were brought from Belgium. A first, even diagonal reading of the Brochure Jaune of 1929 makes this very clear. Considering that the preparation for that curriculum had already started in the first half of the 1920s, it is interesting to make the comparison with the Belgian curriculum guide for primary schools dating from 1922. With this we can also refer to the societal context in which the Belgian curriculum of 1922 was situated. As Depaepe et alii have already remarked, moral and civil education were perceived by the authors of this curriculum guide as the core tasks of a primary school. The quote referred to in this context is particularly relevant and recognisable from the colonial educational situation: “Primary school finds in itself its raison d’être; it is not created with the studies the pupils will do after that or the professions they could take up in mind; its aim is the same for all children entrusted to it: to prepare them as completely as possible for their destinies as man and citizen.”[i]

The colonial translation of this was even more straightforward and stripped of the enlightened ideals that were included in the Belgian version. The remark cited above, made in the curriculum guide for the second grade, made this clear: “Despite the selection which had been used during admission, not all pupils will go to special schools; thus they need to receive a training which is autodidactic and which educates men that are useful for their native environments.” Or, as it would later be worded, in the curriculum of 1948, as one of the three essential goals of primary education: “Provide an education which prepares all natives to live according to their proper genius, either in the ancestral environment or outside this environment.“[ii]

1.1. The Brochure Jaune and the 1922 curriculum guide
Primary school in the Congo comprised of five school years (2+3). A number of subjects were taught from the first to the fifth year. In the first place these were the basic subjects of religious education, reading, native language, arithmetic and geometric systems. Furthermore, hygiene, singing, drawing and gymnastics were taught in every year. For girls’ school, five years of sewing was added to this. French was optional in the first year. And finally there were three rather specific descriptions in the Brochure: the intuition lessons, general causeries/conversations and manual work. Geography was only taught in the second year. The course on theoretical agriculture only started in the third year. Finally, the curriculum of the second grade also prescribed handwriting or calligraphy and in the last year of the second grade girls received a course on childcare.

The explanation of the content of these courses varied in length and detail. The Brochure Jaune contained only the briefest information on religious education as this was left entirely to the religious authorities. But other subjects were also dealt with very summarily, like handicrafts for example. Often a kind of minimum curriculum was stipulated with this for the first year, which was systematically referred to for the following years, with the remark that the curriculum needed further elaboration. Whether or not this caused, in theory at any rate, the basic curriculum to differ fundamentally from that of the Belgian primary school is the question. For example, the Belgian curriculum guide of 1922 also referred to the religious authorities for the concrete elaboration of religion and morality lessons. Language education, on the other hand, was described much more extensively and with more detail and surrounded with conditions. Rather than making a long and elaborate comparison of the two complete curricula, it is perhaps more worthwhile to highlight a few parts: first a main subject, mathematics and then a ‘subsidiary subject’, geography.

1.1.1. Main subjects
There are quite a number of parallels between the Belgian and the Congolese mathematics curricula of 1922 and 1929, respectively. In the Belgian curriculum, the pupils started by learning numbers from one to twenty. In the Belgian Congo, they only did this in the second year but the way in which the material was developed subsequently was similar. Similar systems were also used for teaching units of measurement. The basic principle here, as with mathematics, was apparently that the Congolese needed the first year to get used to the subject matter and would subsequently be able to assimilate more material at the same pace, year after year. Of course this meant that in the Congo education was stopped at the level reached in the fourth year in Belgium. As an illustration, a brief comparison is included of the subject matter as found in the Brochure Jaune and in the Belgian curriculum guide of 1922. It is clear that the Congolese mathematics curriculum was less extensive than the Western one, understanding that the limitation was largely due to a shorter period of primary education in general.

Is mathematics a measure for the other subjects? It seems logical to assert that mathematics has a somewhat more objective basis for comparison than other subjects. With this I mean that as far as mathematics is concerned there was not likely to be any pupil’s foreknowledge that differed from what was to be taught (which was the case for a language course, for example), though it must be noted that education experts in the 1950s had objections to this. For example, it was remarked in 1955 in the Revue Pédagogique Congolaise that young Congolese found it harder than the Belgians to grasp geometric forms.[iii] They grew up in a very different environment, after all, and in their early years they had only been confronted with flowing lines, while the straight lines of geometric figures were totally alien to them. This is in contrast to the Belgian child that grew up in an environment full of straight-lined figures and abstract concepts.[iv] “So, the European child is introduced at all times to the mathematical and geometric universe of the West. He hears people talking about numbers, hours, minutes, right and left. About countless objects with various shapes which have a set place in him.” According to the authors, the result of these things (including other areas and subjects) was a discontinuity between the natural first experiences and the subject matter taught at school.

The solution, however, lay in the systematic implementation of the Western education system through the further development of nursery education. On the opposite side we have the testimonial of Vertenten, who was already writing about the mathematical ability of his students in 1928: “If they come to the higher course they need to be good at mathematics and writing and for mathematics they need to know the four main operations well with whole numbers. That is the basis. From that I have, in a fairly short time, been able to teach them the following:

Can the same mechanisms be found in the other subjects? The other main subject, native language, is harder to study in a comparative perspective. The Congolese curriculum guide itself stipulated explicitly that the education should not be too literary, especially not in rural schools (the first grade of the curriculum). One result of this was that the curriculum stayed on the sober side on this point. After a somewhat more extensive explanation for the first year, in the division lecture the text was largely limited to the designation “lecture courante“, from the fourth year “lecture expressive“. Handwriting was only taught in the second grade, as mentioned above. A comparison with the Belgian curriculum guide is impossible here because the native language took a very central role and was the most extensively covered of all subjects. It was divided in various subdivisions like grammar, composition, pronunciation, etc.

1.1.2. Other subjects  
However, the cited mechanisms did apply to other (subsidiary) subjects. Geography was only taught in the second grade according to the Brochure Jaune, whereas in Belgium it was provided for in the curriculum guide from the first year onwards. In the first grade however, it only consisted of an initiation into geographic observation. This comprised very simple lessons about the most important geographical information, taught very concretely and without definitions. The curriculum guide further stipulated that this material would, in the first year, be part of the exercises in rhetoric during the native language lessons (about which no further details can be found in the paragraphs concerned). Of course, in the Congolese curriculum nothing was mentioned about this because geography was not taught in the first grade.

In the causeries, for example, in the second year the accidents géographiques de la region had to be discussed as well as natural phenomena like night and day, wind, rain, thunder and lightning. In practice it also happened that geographical concepts were discussed in the reading lessons.[vi] The subject matter for the second year was more parallel in the curriculum. As in the Congo, the emphasis in Belgium was also placed on simple concepts, starting from the pupil’s concrete living environment. One would leave the classroom and go and explore the world outside in increasingly larger ‘circles’: the school, the village, the town, the region, etc. As appears from the example reproduced here (figure 1), this was also put into practice by the MSC. The world opened up for the boys through their own classroom, the school building, the football field and… the church.

The worldview that the young Congolese retained from their geography lessons finally did remain more limited than that of their Belgian counterparts. While in Belgium the borders were crossed to neighbouring countries in the second year, for the Congolese the world outside the Congo was limited to Belgium.[vii] Of course this was not to be considered a foreign country. Some parallels between both curricula can be taken fairly literally. In the fourth year in the Congo, for example “A few big trips on the sphere” were studied. This was also to be found literally in the Belgian curriculum guide for the second year. However, there it was specified which voyages of discovery were meant exactly, something for which there was no place in the Congolese curriculum. ‘Belgium’ was covered but only in the second year. The history of the occupation of Congo was on the curriculum in the fourth year. Further geographical concepts concerning the ‘motherland’ were only covered in the last year but it was a very selective approach: “Situation, some cities, rivers, railways (length), some information about the richness and the activities of the Belgian population, the Belgian royal family.“[viii] In other subjects the issue of ‘Belgium’ was not covered a priori.

1.1.3. Causeries
The Congolese curriculum further contained the subject causeries. These were lessons during which the teacher had to tell educational or edifying stories. It was more or less an extension of what was called “Moral and citizen formation” in Belgium. However, the formulation of the content of the causeries in the 1929 brochure is revealing in itself and contains in itself a colonial curriculum. In the five years of primary school the following were to be covered in succession:

Attitude in the classroom, in church, in the street, in the village, relationship with fellow students, school rules, people, things and scenes from their own environment; first notions of politeness.

1. Politeness: respect towards civil and ecclesiastical authority; aiding elders or the weak; tenderness towards animals; geographic layout of the region and natural phenomena.
2. Role of Europeans in the country; habits and practices of the country; politeness.
3. Habits and practices of the country: superstition, bad influence of magicians; natural phenomena: lightning, hail, earthquakes, eclipses, the dangers of alcohol consumption, the use of hemp and other narcotic plants.
4. The most important stipulations from the decree on the chefferies;[ix] obligations of the population concerning censuses, taxes, militia; most important legal stipulations concerning firearms, hunting, alcohol, hemp and gambling.

In comparison: the Belgian curriculum guide of 1922 summed up in a number of points the various ‘obligations’ that the students had to be taught. In the first and second years this mainly related to individual and generally altruistic virtues, such as cleanliness, caution, order, regularity, moderation, dignity (individual) and respect, goodness, servitude, friendliness (altruistic). In the third and fourth years so-called “national” education was taught, as well as professional obligations: “The work considered in the company; the solidarity of workers. Requires conscientious work. The employment contract: obligations of employers and workers. Mutual support in the professions.” The principles and values touched upon in both curricula were thus not very different, often they even corresponded remarkably well. Yet there was a difference: in the case of the Congolese it seems as though fewer words have been wasted, the tone is slightly firmer and the content was more geared to the acceptance of authority. Finally, the inclusion of a number of issues like “superstition” and “hemp use” were certainly dictated by local circumstances.

1.2. The position of girls
Finally the explanation about moral and civil formation in the Belgian brochure of 1922 also contained a number of extra paragraphs with considerations about girls and women, under the heading “Observations“. The moral education in girls’ schools should be aimed at aspects of home and family life. This concerned the role of young women in their family and the relationship with other family members (parents-in-law); how to become a good housewife; the qualities of the young woman in the household: politeness, foresight, charm, simplicity, equanimity, goodness and devotion. And the most important fault to be avoided: nosiness! Further, marriage had to be considered, its preparation and, of course, the manner in which a woman should function in a marriage. Finally, children also had to be considered, as well as everything involved therewith.

There was not really a specific section devoted to girls’ education in the Brochure Jaune. Girls’ schools would only be treated separately from the first year onwards in the 1938 curriculum. The brochure did however devote some attention to the domestic science school and in that context female concerns or subject matter were of course specifically covered. In the 1929 curriculum, the domestic science school was still a rural economics school, which in itself is revealing as to the social position of woman in the eyes of the colonisers. This education would last three years. The only classes of general education during the time were French (optional) and Arithmetic and Metric systems, in which subject matter from primary school was mainly repeated and how to keep small household accounts was taught. The course Hygiene also consisted of material already covered, with additional classes in childcare. Besides this, agriculture, housekeeping and conversation were provided as subjects. The last two received considerably more attention than the other subjects in the brochure. Of course, a wide variety of practical activities and abilities were covered in housekeeping. In the Causeries the following topics were to be treated: “The role of the woman in the family; to insist on financial matters and the foresight she will have to show; thoroughly combating the blacks’ tendency to excessive eating and drinking when abundantly available, of having big parties in order to display their resources; to combat the customs, the harmful practice of religion, customs and practices to which, in general, women are more attached than men; to be responsible for caring for and educating children.”[x] To this it was only added that these lessons should be played out as much as possible in the field, on the farm, in the kitchen and in the workshop. The teaching method suggested in the curriculum was that the pupils would afterwards return to the classroom and, under guidance from the teacher, write down what they had just learned.

One conclusion is evident: women were clearly treated differently, both in Belgium and in the colony. In both cases they had to fulfil a specific role and needed preparing for it. In both cases they had to fulfil extensive domestic tasks. Apparently, their roles had to be described far better and more precisely than those of men. Typically this was worded with far less circumlocution in the colonial context. In Belgium, an extensive description was used to express that other things were expected from women, although there was no underlying image of equality. In the Brochure Jaune, on the other hand, it was asserted without too much ado that women were more ‘susceptible’ to certain deficiencies or faults. More generally it can be posited – whether concerning boys’ or girls’ schools – that from the outset the curriculum of the colonial primary school corresponded to the image of a small lapdog being dragged on a lead by its owner: it follows in the same direction but can never keep up, let alone catch up with its owner.

1.3. The 1948 curriculum
The reform implemented in the 1948 curriculum has already been discussed in the first chapter. One consequence of the increasing contribution of the administration in the organisation of the education was, among others, that organisation and subject content were discussed in separate brochures from then on. Despite this, subject content was left relatively undisturbed, even though twenty years had passed since the implementation of the previous curriculum. This was certainly the case for the first grade and the ordinary second grade. There were not really any new subjects. The curriculum guide did now include an “observation exercises ” section but this simply seems to have been a new name for what was previously called “intuition lessons”. The French lessons were described in more detail but it was emphasised that it should be “very simple teaching”.

In the ‘selected’ second grade, the subject content was further elaborated and other priorities were imposed. French lessons were given a prominent place, immediately after religion and the native language. Fairly detailed guidelines were given, more than for any other subject, while it remained a subject as any other in the normal second grade. The theoretical agriculture lessons underwent the opposite fate: they were completely central in the normal second grade and were abandoned in the selected second grade. A section on “manual work” was kept but formulated very concisely. The same trend extended into the second and third year. A “professional” subject, with a practical impact, existed for the normal second grade. The biggest difference, of course, was in the fact that the selected second grade was a year longer than the normal one. In the last year, as was the custom, a great deal was repeated but a large portion of new material was also added.

The curriculum in practice
How much of the curriculum was actually implemented in the classroom? There are two ways of finding out more about the content of the lessons. Both ways give a kind of ‘side-view’ and must for that reason be used in a complementary way. On the one hand there are the inspection reports, which have already been dealt with extensively. On the other hand there are the colonial schoolbooks. The colonial schoolbooks offer insight into the selection made by the teachers. The schoolbook, like the curricula, does not of course represent reality. They both mainly say how things should be. Even so, we can employ these types of sources here because the books are also the product of a specific context. Thus they can present parts of the atmosphere and intellectual reality. To that I wish to attach the educational convictions of the missionaries, inasmuch as they existed and were expressed.

2.1. Inspections
In the earliest inspection reports only scarce information is to be found on the subject matter. Of course, this is linked to the absence of binding rules concerning subject matter, curriculum and inspection. The earliest official documents I found date from 1927. In addition, there cannot have been any inspections much earlier because the missionaries were only there from 1925. The first curriculum proposal also dates from then. But reports from before the implementation of the curriculum of 1929 do exist. In a report from 1927 about the girls’ school in Coquilhatville, it was pointed out that the school was only in its first year. The girls had never previously received any school education. The Sister herself remarked rather optimistically: “Over the 1 year the school has been open, we have already noted real progress.” What exactly was happening at this time was not so important but it is certain that sewing was done and the garden was worked in. Besides this no real intellectual activity can be detected. It was reported that the children had not yet been able to sit exams and further that “In order to obtain discipline we first applied exercises of order and discipline, while marching to rhythmic songs.”[xi] The Daughters of Charity insisted on discipline. They considered that the morality of their girls had deteriorated under the influence of their environment and they attached by far the greatest importance to discipline and zest for work. The following school year they also reported, after listing all the problems, that: “Meanwhile, despite the problems, we noted great progress amongst the children as far as discipline is concerned as well as work.“[xii] Oddly enough the report does refer to an official curriculum that was supposedly being followed. Jardon, the travelling inspector, also frequently referred to an official curriculum.

In the reports about the mission activity in this period, it is clear that the education was not yet bound to a structured curriculum. On Sunday afternoon, the Sisters ‘welcomed’ all the children: “We welcomed all the children, both the young and older ones, that came to us. We used our time for different exercises: prayers, songs, games.” A few years later this already produced some results because the report of 1930 informs us that a choir had developed from the Sunday meetings and that learning new songs was much easier, since most of the children could now read. As well as the actual school activity, which was only discussed very briefly, a ”tailoring school” was also referred to. This meant that four out of five days, the pupils were occupied with sewing for two hours. They covered needlework, crocheting, knitting and making clothes. The clothes they made themselves were given back to them at the prize draw. The children at the nursery school made plaits with raffia.[xiii]

In the report about the schools at the various mission posts which Vertenten provided for the state inspector in 1929, he only deals with a number of subjects briefly. Mostly he mentioned handiwork, sewing, mathematics and religion. Nothing was said about the content of these subjects; indeed, there was not enough space on the pre-printed forms for this.[xiv] In a report about the second grade of the boys’ school in Bamanya, from 1929 or 1930, he referred to the Brochure Jaune for the first time. The lessons had been ‘inspired’ by the curriculum brochure. It appears that here the official instructions were not experienced as particularly obligatory either. It is not too clear what guidelines were used exactly. Probably they were from the organisational project of 1925, even though this was not an official, legally binding text. The project fitted into the framework of agreements made between the mission congregations and the government from 1925-1926. Via this detour, the text was probably seen to be a legal guideline anyway.

Hulstaert also referred to a curriculum in September 1928. He said that the primary school in Flandria had organised three school years. In the first year, reading and writing were taught. In the two following years mainly mathematics was taught, at various levels. The implementation of the provided curriculum had not worked yet. This would only be possible step by step, according to Hulstaert. The provincial inspector, Jardon, also referred to “the curriculum” in two reports from June 1929. In Bokuma, this curriculum was followed meticulously for all subjects. In the report on Wafanya, Jardon gave slightly more information: “For religious education, reading, writing and the local language, the students have the right level. As far as arithmetic is concerned I notice a rather considerable progress but the fundamental notions are insufficiently known.“[xv] Moreover, the missionaries did not have enough control over the moniteurs and the main result of this was that the subsidiary subjects were neglected. Presumably, the curriculum of the Brochure Jaune was already being referred to here. The definitive text supposedly dates from 1928, though it was only published in 1929. However, the indications in the reports are not really decisive on this point.

In his inspection report of 1930 about the Sisters’ school in Coquilhatville, Vertenten concluded that it was not surprising that the pupils stayed below the level of the curriculum. The school, as is clear from the report, was only in the first stage (the first year) and had to struggle with the low level of the staff and the poor language ability of the Sisters, as well as the material problems mentioned earlier. Vertenten only referred explicitly to language, mathematics and religion and made a very brief reference to geography in the fourth year. The children were learning to read and write French, though this was not the intention. The mathematics lessons also took place in French. The Sisters who taught in the second grade had no command of the local language but even the moniteurs who taught in the first grade – under the supervision of the Sisters – taught mathematics in French. The situation was probably of such a nature that the inspector, who praised the Sisters extensively, was already happy that there was a school that functioned on a regular basis at all.[xvi] In the rural schools, in any case, there was also no mention of complete teaching activities. In the report to the education inspection in 1932 this was worded rather more optimistically: “One should not lose sight of the fact that in numerous villages Christian education existed where thousands of children received religious education and learned to read, write and do mathematics at the same time.“[xvii]

In a report about the girls’ school in Bamanya, Sister Auxilia gave a detailed overview of what exactly the curriculum represented at the school. At that time there were 96 girls. A moniteur taught the three first years, the two higher years were taught by a Sister. Sister Auxilia (who was headmistress of the school) gave a whole list of subjects in her report. For each, she indicated what material was taught in which year. It shows clearly where the emphasis lay:
Religious education was taught every day in every class, the Sister wrote: “1^st 2^nd 3^rd year, the minor catechism, 4^th and 5^th, the major catechism.” A division was made depending on the nature of the lessons: Father Jans explained, the moniteur taught “teaching and explanation” and Sister Auxilia herself taught baptism preparation classes and provided Holy Communion after morning mass. She referred to the catechism pictures as her teaching tool: “ Next year a new series of pictures (for each child separately) will be used. Catechism in pictures with the catechism of HG Cardinal Gasparri.” And finally: “In the 3rd, 4th and 5th years, children practice writing questions without mistakes.” There was also a separate subject “Biblical history”. Here pictures were also used but it was taught completely by moniteurs: “A great emphasis is placed on the lively but unaffected transmission of lessons. 4th and 5th also take notes on the classes, aided by questions.”

Writing took place according to the method of the Brothers of the Christian Schools. In order of class the following was on the curriculum: “1st: letters with small connections of consonants and vowels (pencil), 2nd: all letters and small words (calligraphy in ink), 3rd: capitals, 4th and 5th: capitals and exercises for fluent and regular writing.” Apparently there had been dissatisfaction with the results of these lessons in the past (from Hulstaert) and so the Sister pointed to the fact that special attention had been paid to this, with good results.

For reading, Hulstaert’s reading method was used. The Sister spoke of “the first and second book”, which refers to the Buku ea njekola I and II, the reading books published by Hulstaert in 1933. It is striking that every year was started with the first book. The higher the class, the further one got. In the fifth year the pupils worked through the first book and a part of the second, “as well as other literature“. Later, Alma Hosten also described a similar system.[xviii] However, also in the lower classes “the 1st and 2nd books by the English were used alternately. From the 3rd year onwards attention is paid to reading tone and the natural rendering of the subject matter in their own indigenous manner.” So English books from Protestant congregations were also used, which Vinck later confirmed.[xix]

The sister was quite brief concerning mathematics: “1^st and 2^nd year: according to the curriculum. 3^rd idem except for the decimal system. 4^th and 5th: all calculations up to and including 1000. 5^th went over 1000 but no particular value was attached to this.” (…) “A great emphasis is placed on sums of the metric system, particularly calculations with francs, of which especially also the way of writing was studied.”

In language education a distinction was made between various parts. It certainly related to Lomongo.
– grammar lessons: “typed courses by P. Hulstaert.” (…) “The higher classes are behind because we have only had the books 1.5 years – and because the material was so unfamiliar both to us and the moniteurs.”
– dictation: “for all classes in proportion to their knowledge.”
– style: “writing out by heart a song learned, with points of departure for discussing objects, customs, situations, etc.”
– “style and conversation lessons or general development classes converge here. Here the children are given the opportunity to explain their own songs, dances or games and so when it comes to learning plays, the children can express their opinion freely and frankly instead of slavishly accepting what we tell them when they don’t agree with us in their hearts.”

About gymnastics: “The same principles are used for gymnastics and dancing. The European way had to yield to the typically indigenous way. The rhythmic movements connected to Congolese conceptions and understandings are the material for beautiful expressive movements. The blacks find their own dances beautiful, really beautiful, but performed as one coherent whole and in order. In this way, with her own singing, her beloved ngomo, gymnastics keeps its appeal for the children and they still receive all the movements of head, hands, feet and torso. Next year we hope to stimulate the children to take part in games, such as rounders, handball, korfball – also for passing the time on Sunday afternoons.”

Then a few shorter statements follow. French was barely mentioned: “for the three highest classes, spoken French – very little or nothing is written.” About singing only this was noted: “melodies by Ghesquiere and Hullebroeck are taught.” Drawing was also only briefly mentioned: “The children made sketches, without the use of a ruler or compass.” The geography lessons were taught in the two highest classes and were limited to very general concepts: “General concepts, continents, oceans. The provinces of Congo and their capitals – further the physical division; the Congo river and its side rivers, the lakes, etc. From Tsjyapa, division with prominent places.”

The last item was sewing and this was also treated most elaborately. It was taught in all classes, two afternoons from three to five. Seen relatively, this was rather a lot but the attention devoted to it by the Sister in the report does seem out of proportion. While a total of three pages were devoted to all the other subjects, this subject took up about one whole page, in which a detailed description was given for every year and every object the pupils had sewed, crocheted and knitted.

So sewing was the dominant element on the curriculum. Oddly enough, not a word was said about agriculture in this report. From an inspection report of 1938, five years later, it appears that the same school devoted seven and a half hours a week to “practical agriculture lessons”, namely every day from seven until eight in the morning and one afternoon from three thirty until five in the afternoon. Other practical activities became more important depending on how the girls progressed with their studies. Sewing lessons were taught for two hours in the first year but in the last (fifth) year, it already occupied four and a half hours. “Homework” (housekeeping) went from half an hour to an hour and a half.

According to a document from 1939, the causeries in the first and second year had to cover the following issues: “Hunting and, in connection with this, the most notable animals and their way of life. Fishing and, in connection with this, the seasons. Swimming, the healthy but also the damaging things for the body. Dancing, the good and bad dances, pointing to the dangers of the latter, the stimulation of folk dances and games. The dead, mourning, the dance, the burial. Drinking, moderate drinking, drunkenness as a scandal, damages the health. Smoking and chewing tobacco, unfitting for girls, damaging to the health, bad for the teeth. Encouraging love for the monarchy through photos, stories, the flags of Belgium, Congo and the Papal flag, the benefit of becoming acquainted with the state in its various workings and institutions. Politeness in general, why we should be polite, politeness in church and at religious ceremonies, courtesy in oneself through order and neatness of dress, taking heed of one’s expressions wherever one goes, in all one’s doings, while eating, towards parents and elders, etc.”

Father Cobbaut, who inspected the school in 1946, only made a short report and only mentioned in it that, in all classes, all subjects were regularly taught and that they were all generally well known. So there is not too much information to be gained from this. At the domestic science school (which was on a higher level than the primary school) the curriculum was, at that moment, neatly divided into two: in the morning the pupils in groups of two or three carried out all possible sorts of housework in turn. The afternoon was reserved for theoretical instruction. Based on the timetable used in all schools, this of course meant that only a minimal amount of time was devoted to the theoretical education.[xx]

Sister Auxilia again in 1947: “The morning periods are devoted to housework like mending sheets, tights, socks, sewing and patching children’s, women’s and boys’ clothes, washing, ironing, starching, folding, native and European cuisine, domestic chores, further sewing, tooling tree bark, raffia. This year a new kind of embroidery with raffia was undertaken, namely filet in raffia, very beautiful, if the children become skilled at it. In the theory classes, apart from the revision of the ordinary school subjects and religious studies, the main subjects taught are: hygiene, agriculture and cattle breeding, home economics, childcare, etiquette classes and other development classes, French lessons and drawing paper patterns. 1 x a week the girls worked in their gardens with great diligence.” Further, every morning the land was worked (probably outside the framework of the lessons). The government inspection thought this was far too little. The inspector actually only had remarks concerned with the time spent on agricultural activity. At the primary school this was better than elsewhere, given that there at least the ordinary portion of morning labour was on the curriculum. Meanwhile, the pupils of the last year of the second grade worked in the kitchen, “and as a result they did not devote themselves to any rural work.” The domestic science school was a complete disaster: “Meanwhile at the rural economics school, the timetable is not well balanced and does not leave enough time for agricultural work“[xxi] Also in a report Hulstaert wrote in 1944, the smallest part of theoretical subjects appeared in the timetable of the domestic science school. According to him only two afternoons a week were filled with other than practical subjects. In this short time religion, mathematics, reading, writing and theoretical revision of the practical work were taught.[xxii]

Hulstaert also inspected the boys’ school in Bamanya in 1944. In the light of what will be said later about the conflicts between Hulstaert and the Brothers of the Christian Schools, who ran this school, it is not surprising that he added the necessary measure of criticism to this. The official curriculum was followed and not that of the Brochure Jaune. The extent of the difference in how the timetable was filled is clear from the reproduced summary given by Hulstaert in his report for the first grade. The timetable for the second grade was presented less clearly and could not be reconstructed completely. From the timetable of the first grade it is clear that the emphasis was on French, not on Lonkundo, which troubled Hulstaert a great deal, of course. The other subjects (hygiene, geography) were taught for a great part in French and so he wrote in the report: “The courses are almost entirely devoted to French and mathematics.” The Causeries also served primarily for practicing French.

There were a few other deviations from the normal curriculum, which Hulstaert had used systematically as his norm, even though the Brothers had in this case chosen to use a different curriculum. “It is noticeable here that from the first year the curriculum (with respect to mathematics, JB) of the state schools is used, not that of the Catholic schools (however that has not even been changed in the new plan of 1938 in the sense of the official programme). Whatever the reason may be for accepting the state curriculum, I believe that the curriculum is made to be followed and must not be changed on one’s own authority.” For example, no intuition classes were taught here, even though according to Hulstaert this was “one of the most important educational subjects on the curriculum“. This school also made time available for agricultural activity, but not very much: only an hour and a half or an hour and forty-five minutes a week. Sometimes midday “studies” were devoted to gathering small pieces of firewood or leaves. The pupils needed these to prepare their food. All in all this came down to a “considerable deviation from the subject and hour divisions proposed by the government brochures“.[xxiii]

The fact that the guidelines given in the curricula or by the government were not strictly applied is very clearly proved by information in an inspection report written by Gaston Moentjens from the school year 1952, about the primary school and teachers’ training college in Bamanya. The extensive report (twelve pages of text) was supplemented with a number of tables in which, for all years, the norm given by the government was compared to the timetables implemented by the missionaries (in Bamanya these were the Brothers). The impression given by these tables is not really surprising. In the first grade, religion was systematically taught more than recommended (4.5 to 5 hours instead of 3). Native language was divided into three subthemes: reading-writing, copying-dictation and recitations. Far less time than recommended was spent on the first two and far more on the third, just as the component elocution. Less time was also spent on mathematics than was actually requested, as was gymnastics. However, drawing, singing and certainly agriculture and traditional activities were taught far more extensively. So much the more remarkable because, in contrast to the prescribed number of hours, five and a half hours more were taught. This difference was almost entirely caused by religion, agriculture and sewing lessons. Especially in the first grade there were sometimes notable differences. In the normal and selected second grade, the prescribed timetable was followed much more closely. Only singing (much more) and mathematics (much less) retained times that were clearly deviating.[xxiv]

Both the missionary inspector Moentjens and the state inspector Eloye were at that time fairly critical towards the differences between the prescribed and applied time allotment. Moentjens pointed an accusing finger at the moniteurs: “The curricula imposed by the school regulations are, in general, quite well implemented. Moniteurs are well informed to follow the curriculum guide they are given but I don’t think that the moniteurs are able to resist their tendency to teach things outside the guide. In any event a more effective control is imposed.”[xxv] In his conclusions, though, he did move the responsibility more to the missionaries themselves: “Regarding didactic organisation I cannot recommend the headmaster enough to exercise his position as headmaster fully by organising practical and theoretical methods at schools better. This includes drafting good timetables, well defined distribution of subject matter from the different program guides and of all the prescriptions from the educational organisation.”

2.2. The subject matter in the schoolbooks
Of course the schoolbooks offer a second possibility to become acquainted in more detail with the subject matter the pupils could receive at school. Honoré Vinck has already done a comprehensive study of a number of the schoolbooks that were published and used by the MSC.[xxvi] In a series of studies he discussed aspects of form and content of primarily MSC reading books. From this it appears all the more that Hulstaert was very active and very influential in this area. Even so, this picture must be looked at with caution. Hulstaert had, as was often the case, his specialisation and his hobbyhorses.

In the first years after their arrival (in 1926) the MSC had to appeal to existing publications due to the absence of their own publications. Thus, they also asked the Brothers of the Christian Schools to bring as many of their own books as possible.[xxvii] A number of publications from the Trappists were also used. Sister Auxilia again, in 1933: “For arithmetic method the mathematics books of the Brothers of the Christian Schools are followed. These fulfil all the requirements of the curriculum. 1st and 2nd year worked through everything, in the 3rd year we allowed the 10-part fractions, while 4th and 5th year did all the basic operations. For reading method we used the books by the English until August, in September all classes adopted the reading method (3 parts) of Fr. Hulstaert, as well as the 4 parts of his grammar. 4th and 5th studied 1st part in the past months, 2nd and 3rd have also started but have not yet finished the first book.” Use was made of anything to hand, it could even be Protestant. The writing method of the Brothers of the Christian Schools was also applied, the Sister added in her report.

In due course, however, more and more of their books were written in the regional language. Vinck stated: “The range of books in Lomongo for linguistic and religious education is quasi complete. The whole curriculum of primary school and even secondary school has been covered in the local language, Lomongo. This library has been established within a few years, mainly by one man only and according to his rather pedagogic, linguistic and ideological choice in particular.” In the publications by Hulstaert himself and also later in the studies made about him, attention was paid primarily to books on language and reading lessons. For other subjects, for a long time different books were often used, whether or not they were translated into Lomongo: “The scientific books (often in a provisional state) would come some ten years later. It was a conscious and chosen strategy. Hulstaert has underlined it a lot in contemporary articles.“[xxviii] Vinck, however, did not indicate in which texts this was.

In any case, it also appears from his study that for a great number of years existing books were used for some subjects. It appears however from the first part of this chapter that the weight of a number of subjects was often less important in the curriculum. Also for mathematics, for example, material from the Brothers of the Christian Schools or the Marist Brothers was used for a long time. A number of these books were translated into Lomongo but others were written in Lingala or in French and were also used like that. For geography, publications were only provided in the 1950s, primarily by Frans Maes. Further, a whole series of fairly practically oriented schoolbooks was published in the framework of so-called observation lessons.[xxix] These ‘books’ (often only a bundle of copied pages) contained a number of texts on the most diverse subjects: descriptions of traditional objects and their use, interactive skills (politeness), hygiene, animals. There was an amalgam of subjects, which were sometimes also taken from the schoolbooks made for other courses. Furthermore, specific books existed for the fields of hygiene, botany and zoology, interactive skills and drawing.

2.2.1. History: Ngoi and the whites
From the early 1940s, Hulstaert himself worked on a history textbook, “un cours d’histoire mongo“. It was based on a number of reading lessons from one of the reading books he had written in the 1930s, Buku Ea Mbaanda. The history textbook itself, Bosako wa Mongo (History of the Mongo), only appeared in 1957 but several of the texts used in it had previously been published in the periodicals of the MSC, which also appeared in the regional language. They had probably already been used in this way. The logical consequence for the history lessons must have been that only the teacher disposed of textual material.[xxx] A fairly unique text written by Paul Ngoi was included in the publication of this history book. Ngoi was a pupil of the MSC who was rather close to Boelaert and Hulstaert and was involved as an assistant in editing a number of MSC publications in Lomongo, Le Coq Chante and Etsiko.[xxxi] In 1939 Ngoi, who can probably be considered an évolué avant la lettre, wrote the text Iso la bendele (“Us and the Whites”). The text was intended to be an entry for a literary competition, organised by the periodical Africa, published in London.

Ngoi’s text is a surprising account of traditional customs. The concept certainly does not fit in the Western tradition of historiography, as it was used in the schoolbooks. It is not a chronological summary of political events, forms of state and cultural characteristics of particular periods. Instead, Ngoi treated a number of social problems (sloth, lying, theft) and mechanisms (marriage, death, family, jurisprudence, authority) of the traditional Nkundo society. The difference, for example, from history books as used in secondary education by the Brothers of the Christian Schools is considerable. The texts appear very much to be accounts of contemporary events, but they weren’t. They testify to a way of narration, probably typical of cultures that relate their history through the spoken word, which is very close to the way people from those areas still tell stories of their (or ‘the’) past.[xxxii]

Indeed, Ngoi points out at the beginning of his article that there is a great lack of respect for the local population on the part of the whites: “Because, even at present, most of the Whites believe that our ancestors were wild beasts, without any morals and only with mistakes, without any virtue.”[xxxiii] The article was almost completely taken up in the schoolbook, which was compiled by Frans Maes. Ngoi’s descriptions seem objective though. There are no real judgements or criticisms, at least not at first sight. A number of statements are surprising on first reading, such as in the chapter on laziness, which starts with the following phrase: “Here the laziness is innate and gets confirmed with growth.” Which, however, does not mean that later in the text the author actually claimed that the Mongo were naturally lazy people. On the contrary, after a series of examples, he concluded the chapter with: “This is the least we can say about laziness here. It is different from the concept the Whites have.” The chapter “Lust“, about experiences of sexuality “aux temps des ancêtres“, was also objective-descriptive. The antropophagie (“people-eating”) was also treated here in a short paragraph.

As mentioned above, the chapter in question contained a complaint about the bad conditions caused by the arrival of the whites. Armed combat, rubber exploitation, the damage to villages, destruction of local authority, destruction of the family structure, spread of disease and depopulation of the area were examined successively. Further, there were paragraphs on the suppression and loss of local culture and language and on the temptations caused by wealth, luxury and sexual excesses. Each and every charge was levelled against the influence of Western society. In the midst of all this misery, faith was the only ray of hope: “We don’t complain in the same way as we do about the other importations of the Whites.” On the contrary, gratitude was appropriate here: “We greatly thank the Whites for that.”[xxxiv]

A number of considerations have to be made here. Vinck continually questioned the extent of the originality of this text and whether there was any far-reaching influence from the missionaries when it was written. The fact that Paul Ngoi was, for a very long time, an assistant of Hulstaert, supposedly played a role in this. From the perspective of this chapter, however, the exact answer to this question is irrelevant. After all, the text was used in a schoolbook by the MSC. The missionaries must thus, in any case, have been in agreement with the statements made therein. The schoolbook seems, at first glance, to be an example of how the subject matter, in this case history, became more Africanised, or was at least moved away from a European perspective. A few marginal notes need to be added here. Firstly, the use of this text is situated fairly late in the colonial period and thus its possible influence coincided with decolonisation. Secondly, Vinck remarked that there are a number of internal contradictions in the text. The matters covered in the first descriptive part of the text (and thus of the book) were not necessarily positively qualified. Vinck also posited that Ngoi himself often criticised the practices he described. But in the last chapter, where the intervention of the whites was covered, the tone changed dramatically.

This text was an example of the often ambiguous stance of the MSC towards the local culture. This, in its turn, was a result of the position they took regarding a number of social issues, both at home and in the colonial context. Its meaning for the content of the lessons and thus for the pupils is in itself just as ambiguous. The tone of the last chapter was very radical and very negative. The question is how this one example should be evaluated in the totality of the subject matter. Firstly, we can assume that the tone of most schoolbooks and subject matter contrasted somewhat with this critical stance. In other history lessons (often parts of schoolbooks for other subjects, such as geography or religion), a very different tone was employed. An example of this is Bosako w’oyengwa (Histoire Sainte) from 1935, in which the arrival of the whites is also described. The text of the lesson in question, reproduced here, takes a far more ‘traditional’ stance. Secondly, the impact of this book can be questioned, given that it was only used in the sixth and seventh year.

The Whites in the Congo
The kings of Europe had learned the news of the Congo. They found out it was a big country with a big population. But its people are cruel and sin is very distinct in them. They go to war between themselves, they put each other in prison and they shoot lots of people. The Arabs came to the Congo from the East at Tanganika and through the rivers Tsingitini and Lualaba. They defeated the natives; they captured lots of slaves and took them to their own region to sell them there.
The kings of Europe were greatly upset by this news. They gave the Belgian King Léopold II authorisation to keep Congo in order to slow down the wars, to chase away the Arabs in order to free the men from slavery and to teach them the intelligence of the Whites and to raise their wealth through trade.
Léopold had sent his men to Congo. But the natives did not appreciate the arrival of the Whites and their teaching; they defeated them and plundered their possessions. Then, the Whites campaigned against the natives. They spread throughout all regions of the Congo and they defeated the natives and dominated them. There were a lot of battles amongst the Arabs and certain men, because they were very cruel. But the Whites had weakened their strength. When the wars ended, they freed the slaves and started to embellish the country. [xxxv]

Extract 3 – Reading lesson on the arrival of the whites in the Congo, from Bosako w’oyengwa III.

2.2.2. The reading books written by Hulstaert
The reading book, as a specific form of schoolbook, is an interesting object of study in this matter, for several reasons: of all the material, it probably had the greatest distribution; it was used from the first year; the MSC and also Hulstaert in particular, attach quite some importance to it, relatively speaking; this type of book contains a great number of reading lessons, which cover a wide variety of subjects. In this way, they present a good overview of the themes covered during the lessons and of the most important messages the missionaries imparted or wanted to impart to the Congolese youth. In a few recent studies, analyses of reading books published by the MSC were already discussed.[xxxvi] The conclusions of these studies concern didactic, educational and broader ideological aspects of the reading books and their use in the classroom. These aspects are treated separately here, but it is clear that they are correlated.

Technically
The method Hulstaert used to teach the children to learn to read was specifically concerned with writing and forming words and sentences and learning letters. Whether this was all thoroughly thought-out is another matter. Vinck calls Hulstaert’s spelling method “anti-langue-africaine” but immediately adds that he probably deviated from international standards in this regard because it was too difficult to apply them for learning the language at school.[xxxvii] Further, he did take the characteristics of Lomongo into account, such as grouping certain consonants and vowels and the fact that this language contained seven different vowels. Hulstaert, of course, had written out the majority of Lomongo himself and could thus also determine arrangement and style himself. We can assume that he was very gifted and well grounded in this area and worked with a great deal of insight.

This does not mean that his method of working was didactically well thought-out, let alone innovative. The didactic guidelines he gave in the reading books Buku ea Mbaanda are about the clearest statements he made in this area. Hulstaert wanted to teach the phonetic sounds and subsequently teach the pupils to write the accompanying written letters. In this way, various letters were learned and subsequently placed together, first in meaningless wholes, later in meaningful words. Van Caeyseele calls this an example of a bottom-up method. Keeping more with the spirit of the time, I would sooner call it an analytic method. This by way of analogy with the analytic-synthetic method as was generally used in the first decades of the 20th century. This method assumed that the letters had to be learned by separating them in a series of ‘known’ words. The ‘new’ pedagogy would distance itself more and more from this method to elaborate the ‘synthetic’ elements within it (more visual, more global, working with meaningful sentences and texts instead of just words, which were not necessarily related).[xxxviii] Hulstaert situated himself even further on the other side. It was typical of his method to treat the letters one by one when learning them. The letters themselves had to be ‘deconstructed’. He even wanted to show how letters were actually composed of other letters. A ‘u’, for example, was an addition of two ‘i’s. It was also presented in the instructions to the moniteur in this way.[xxxix] In part II of the same book there were further instructions for teaching capitals.[xl]

Educational-didactical
The Hulstaert method was a system he had designed quite intuitively, without taking account of (other) educational principles. There is no reference here to a global reading method using the context in which words and letters are found, although this method was known at the time. Vinck and Van Caeyseele refer to Alma Hosten, alias Sister Magda[xli] on this point. Vinck said: “It seems to me that she had an influence on Hulstaert but it was impossible for me to perceive the exact outline of it.“[xlii] Van Caeyseele goes even further in her study: “She was informed of the insights into the new school movement and from these criticised Hulstaert’s gradually surpassed method.“[xliii] It is probably exaggerated to speak of real ‘criticism’ in this context. Indeed, Hulstaert himself published a contribution by Hosten in Aequatoria, in which she mentioned reading books.

In this she clearly referred to Hulstaert’s method: “Every reading method for beginners should be illustrated. Illustration captivates! The separation of words into syllables is an unhappy business. It is unmethodical, literally distracts instead of concentrates. I have taken the following test: let a particular group read syllable by syllable, connect those syllables into words and finally achieve fluent reading. Have another group take no account of the divisions between syllables. Group 1 had significantly more trouble than Group 2. It will probably be said: the pupils should not read in separate syllables or parts! But: why place these sections in front of the students and weaken the strength of the reading image then? That is to disturb the literary understanding; when there could be a beautiful harmony between image and speech.” (…) “Small lessons are far more interesting than separate sentences without a connected content. Those lessons also prepare a suitable base for the style practice. They can also be a great help for a global reading method.”[xliv]

From the correspondence between Hulstaert and Hosten it seems that they got on well with each other and that there was some agreement on Hosten’s educational approach. In a letter from April 1942 Hulstaert wrote to Hosten: “You know that I agree with you completely concerning the purpose and principle methods of teaching.”[xlv] For her part, Hosten complained to Hulstaert about a colleague in Boende, Sister Martha, who she did not feel was cooperating in the implementation of modern teaching methods. For those who read between the lines some envy between the Sisters cannot be discounted.[xlvi] At any rate, Sister Magda boasted that she had qualifications and professionalism as opposed to her colleague.

Instructions for the teacher

The method for teaching reading and writing.

• Repeat the previous lesson but don’t take too much time over it.
• Then the new sounds. Pronounce a few words in which these sounds are used. Show the pupils some objects which are meaningful through these words (by fact or by drawing).
• The pronunciation of the sound. A few pupils pronounce the sound individually and then all together.
• Homework. The pupils think about words which start with the new sound. Then they try to find words in which the sound is located in the middle or at the end of the word. They pronounce it without haste in order to learn how to control the sound in a very clear way. If they don’t understand something, or if they hesitate, help them by asking questions.
• Writing. Write the letter neatly on the blackboard. Explain the pupils the different parts of the letter. Then teach them the block capitals.
• Reading exercise. The pupils read the written letters first and then the letters in block capitals.
• Writing exercise. They write the letters on the drawing board with care. After that they correct the mistakes. Then some people write the letters on the blackboard. After that you make them remove what they have written.
• Put the new letters up onto the blackboard next to the old ones; (parts of words, the words themselves, then phrases). One by one they read them out loud and then all together.
• They read the lesson in the book.
• They write the words that are on the blackboard, after that the words that are in the book.

The method for writing a capital letter:

• Teach the shape of the letter in italics at the blackboard.
• Write your letter in different parts and unite the parts in order to create an entire letter.
• Show the pupils the comparison between this letter and some previous letters, or they look themselves.[xlvii]
• Some pupils try to write the letter at the blackboard and their friends should look for mistakes and differences between the letter written by the pupil and the one by the teacher.
• The pupils copy the letter either onto the drawing board or into their notebooks. After that they correct it.
• They imitate the language which is used in the book.
• Don’t fail to check the force with which the pupils try and the way they hold their pens and the way the notebooks spread out in order to get all things straight.

Extract 4 – Instructions to the teachers, from the MSC reading book Buku ea njekola eandola la ekotelo

Ideologically
Although it is said that Hulstaert pays less attention to the religious in his reading lessons than is traditional, that influence was present nevertheless.[xlviii] From recent research it appeared that this did not follow from the chosen themes so much as from the way in which they were addressed.[xlix] From the analysis of the contents of a few reading lessons, in MSC reading books and those of other congregations, it is apparent that an explicitly religious motif (as the theme of the reading lesson) was not always as clearly present. Where Kita stated in the case of the Pères Blancs that 28% of the reading lessons (from reading books published in the 1910s) analysed by him had an explicitly religious theme, Vinck and myself came to only 12% in the case of the MSC’s Mbuku ea Mbaanda (first published in 1933) studied by us. In a comparable reading book from the 1950s by the Dominicans (working in Uele, North-East Congo) that portion was even lower. Without drawing general conclusions from a rough comparison of three different congregations, I think that the period of publication can explain this difference to some extent.This should be nuanced by stating firstly that the religious theme was part of a broader moralising motif and these were both completely intertwined. When the facts are seen in this light then Pierre Kita’s remarks in his study of the reading books of the Pères Blancs must be agreed with: “Religion very clearly occupies a predominant place: not only the themes that are completely dedicated to it, representing around 28% of the total, but also the biggest parts of the texts which are related to social life and even to studies are influenced by religious morals.”[l] In the study of the MSC and Dominican books the same characteristic came up: “Regarding this topic you should take note that the two types of handbooks contain many references to God and to his glorification, in all kinds of lesson.”[li] Secondly, most reading books, whatever the date of publication, had a long life and were often used for several decades. Kita expresses this in the case of the books by the White Fathers. This was the same for the MSC, as is apparent from correspondence. This is especially informative as to the moralising element remaining imposingly present in the schoolbooks until the end of the colonial period.Educational ideas: a measure of nothing?

3.1. Influences and allies
In the second year of Aequatoria (1939) an article appeared signed with the initials Z.M., standing for ‘Zuster Magda’ [Sister Magda].[lii] This article was unique, for two reasons. As far as known she was the only woman ever to publish a contribution in the original Aequatoria series. Apart from this the content was also unusual for the periodical: Hosten wrote a report on the manner in which she had worked with the school curriculum. The subtitle of the article was literally: “Application of the primary school curriculum”. She treated each subject that was taught in turn and referred to the curriculum brochure. The general conclusion that can be drawn from the article is that the sister certainly did not feel herself bound to the curriculum to the letter. This started with the first subject, native language: “The education in letters received an ample share, due to its undeniably great educational worth.” Yet the curriculum made different emphasises. In the causeries she said quite determined: “The useful and formative subjects of the curriculum were covered, the remaining were omitted.” In the lessons on medicine: ”Apart from the curriculum, special attention was given to illnesses of local importance.” From the article it was apparent that much attention was given to the development of the language and mathematics lessons. The descriptions of the performances in the lesson ‘native language’ were very extensive. The sister mentioned the kinds of exercises that were done and which topics the students had mastered. In the case of mathematics it seems special attention was given to fractions. She also described the methods used.

May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be loved everywhere

Boende, 16.7.42

Very reverend Father Superior,
I thank you most warmly for your last letter. I often thought that I had become uninterested in class matters. The judgement of others (…) But when I read your letter, I felt clearly that I was not at all indifferent to your approval or disapproval. And I saw clearly – never before so well – how you are a light and support to me. It is most human I know but I confess it to you most simply.

Dearest Father Superior, allow me to speak my heart. As far as Sister Martha is concerned… I think it has been enough. I have nothing against her personally and I do not believe that she has anything against me personally. [It is a] very different case than that of Sister Beatrijs. But she is not the person to be left in education any longer. You remember the fate of earlier moniteurs … and now hers have had enough. They are good and simple boys… they are exemplary, they are our teachers and have a simple good and loving spirit… it is all I ask.
Not long ago 3 of Sister Martha’s moniteurs went to Father Henri and said plainly that they could not take it any more with Sister Martha, that they had had enough of it. 1000 proofs, facts, … Far too many to list. Father Henri told them to continue in their duty, not to criticise anyone and to wait.

You can see, good Father Superior, all things allowed, that intervention is needed. Her adjustments to new methods are extremely weak… a continuous stumbling block for me, a brake that slows the system. Lately during a visit to the class with Father Paul I saw that she had dropped the mathematics method, without having asked my good advice or permission, and was ploughing on in her own way. The reading method? As long as it is examined in that way… I cannot bring about anything definite… I could continue to write for a long time in this way.
Finally it is the spirit of Boende that she will never be willing or able to accept, for she has never loved the blacks in her heart. She says it is singing that wrenches here and everything would be solved if she could teach singing again… Talk. Her spirit has never been different… The singing has made the mood less sweet and finally unbearable… And if she would only see that she is not the person to teach singing, just because she is not an educator.
If only she was just harmful to the teachers like this… I could easily tolerate this for another 20 years… but she is damaging to education and that is as precious to me as the apple of my eye. It is a great pity for education that such people busy themselves with it, even if they finally achieve something. Education must work inwards… and such people have never looked into the child’s soul. I do not judge people in any way by saying this… for I have my faults as she does.

Dearest Father Superior, it is starting to be hard for me… besides, I do not believe she feels much for education… success – eventhough it is imagined success, the downsides were far greater than the success – kept her up and so still tolerable in some way. I do realise, very reverend Father Superior that it is hard now to find a solution.

Extract 5 – Letter from Sister Magda to Gustaaf Hulstaert. Aequatoria Archive.

Hosten was a professionally trained secondary school teacher and this clearly showed from the language she used. She referred several times to “the occasional method” or the “purpose occasional education”. She was apparently very interested in these methods and tried to encourage the moniteurs to join her in this. That was not a simple assignment she said: “This is still a plague to those who naturally adhere to the ‘système des tiroirs’ and who don’t dare or know how to make bridges between the parts of a subject or between the separate subjects.” From the report it also appears that repetition was a very important element. In the subject ‘mathematics’ each year started from the beginning and then went further according to the ‘excentric method’: “In which the learning material is treated 1) every year and 2) always more extensively.” She further clarified that she was not using this excentric method exclusively but intermittently with the concentric method. This meant that the subject matter was always studied in more depth. She did mention that the system was not fully completed yet: “Yet to teach a subject in this way demands a purposeful division of the subject matter. But we have not been able to do this yet for most subjects, due to lack of time. Because this takes a lot of personal preparation.”

The meaning of this text should not be underestimated. In the inspection reports that can be found on the schools in this period, educational concepts and ideas were almost never being referred to. The emphasis was far more heavily on facts and material data. Especially the fact that Hulstaert put this section in his periodical has its importance. After all, he published the article because he felt that it described a situation as it should be. Aequatoria was not a mission periodical; the propaganda element certainly did not play a part. The article had a more normative function. In other words, it can be supposed that in most other schools things were far less progressive and modern. From the last statement it can be deduced that the lessons given by the moniteurs were in many cases not so structured.[liii] This puts the direct importance of this specific text for the image that the contemporary reader forms of the colonial class into perspective. Sister Magda was not representative. More than that, she was an exception. Likely she was even an exception in her own environment, which is also apparent from the letter she wrote to Hulstaert about her colleague, Sister Martha. At that moment she was also a young, ‘fresh’ power. Someone who, for the sake of an educational ideal, worked actively, cared heart and soul for her work, and with a desire to put her accumulated knowledge into practice.

Hulstaert had an interest in the ideas tested by Hosten and certainly was not opposed to them. His correspondence with her was in a fairly friendly tone; he did not criticise her article. From other articles it is only too clear that he would speak his opinion about other’s articles without hesitation if he found it necessary. A good example of this was the publication of the article “Pédagogie Civilisée et Education Primitive“. The article was written by Vernon Brelsford, a British district commissioner in Nigeria. It was originally published in English in Oversea Education. Hulstaert summarised it and translated it into French and published it in 1945 in Aequatoria. He added: “No doubt that this remarkable study will interest our readers. We took the liberty, counting on the well-known British open-mindedness, to add a few considerations as notes.”[liv] In his article the British functionary strongly emphasised the differences between the two types of education. The comparison between the two was consistently to the advantage of Western education. Hulstaert did not hesitate to add some strong doubts on this opinion in the footnotes of the article. In this he presented himself as critical both of the opinions that the author expressed and of European society. He also put into perspective all the differences that Brelsford had emphasised. In opposition to the Brit he saw no incompatibility between the education systems in Africa and Europe and no supremacy of the European system. He did not see parallels between the new trends in education and African education. That conclusion would show too much interpretation. He did enumerate some characteristics of the African system that were essential to him and stood up for the Africans.[lv]

Hulstaert profiled himself very much as an indigenist and by this he expressly meant to oppose himself to the established authority and to be critical.[lvi] His views were fully revealed in the conflicts with the Brothers of the Christian Schools about the way in which they worked in the schools in Bamanya and Coquilhatville.[lvii] Namely, the use of French as the language of education was a constant bone of contention for Hulstaert. In 1945 he wrote an article for the periodical Aequatoria in which he gave a ‘seven-point plan’ of educational principles. Supposedly the reason for writing this article was to be found in the conflicts he had experienced over the past years with the Brothers of the Christian Schools. In the article he argued for a ‘general’ education as a counterbalance for the so-called ‘modern’ education: “Primary school teaching, as teaching in general, needs resolutely to engage in the path of adaptation.” (…) “This conclusion is a result of certain given facts; the social nature of man, the existence of natural societies which have the right to be respected, just like everything that is good in nature; the principles laid down as a basis for the colonisation by the Government of the Belgian Congo, whose aim is to civilise the natives, to refine them in a harmonious manner in all fields while respecting the native organisation and the traditions.”

It does appear a little contradictory that he so loyally refers to what was almost a kind of official ideology: the civilising mission of the Belgians in the Congo as a justification of their presence. Yet the content of certain schoolbooks corresponded to this. The whole results in a rather schizophrenic image. In a letter to Sister Magda, which we have already quoted, he made it very clear what “adaptation” meant to him. The students needed an education that would prepare them to continue living in their hometown: “You are quite right to say that success in Bamanya and Bokuma is not the main goal of our education; education should not even take any account of it, whatever may come of boys who continue studies later. But I do have a certain reservation in the case of Bokuma and this because the education there is in the same spirit as with you. An adaptation has to take place eventually.”[lviii] Bamanya and Bokuma were the only places at that time where some form of further education could be found. It was to this that Hulstaert alluded. He also emphasised this strongly in his seven-point plan, which he published in Aequatoria. At least three of the seven points indicated it. The training that prepared the Congolese to be aides in the service of the Europeans could only be taught in the écoles spéciales. Even in the écoles spéciales that provided a specific, applied training, the personal nurturing of the student could not be neglected. So it was also clear to Hulstaert which conclusion was right concerning primary education: “It is absolutely necessary to avoid transforming primary school education into a preparatory course to a technical instruction (in the largest sense of the word). On the contrary, this preparatory course should be based on the primary school education.”[lix]

In December 1941 he wrote a letter to the head of the missions in Bamanya in which he expressed his anxiety about the state of affairs at the teacher’s training college. In the past there had been a decision from the vicariate that there should be a limit on the amount of pupils allowed. Now that there was a new primary school in Coquilhatville that restriction was removed again so that, in principle, entrance to the teacher’s training college was not limited, at least for the pupils in Bamanya. Hulstaert did not like this idea. It posed a number of fundamental concerns for him. The teacher’s training college had to “remain a real teacher’s college”. By this he meant that the training should not take account of other societal needs and that they should exclusively aim at the training of teachers headed for the rural MSC schools in the interior: “Instead of changing or adapting ourselves to schools in places of exception we will continue to insist on more adjustment of the teacher’s college to the needs of the schools in the interior.” He also clarified what the implications of this would be for the curriculum: “Considering conditions inland the following are the most pressing topics: general formation classes, language (Lonkundo) and grammar, mathematics. Our teachers inland do not need so much knowledge, but rather a general overview, insight, and development of the intellect and everything that can help with this. Courses like French, however useful for other purposes, are of lesser importance for our teachers.”[lx]

The fact that Hulstaert was occasionally on the same wavelength as the followers of Education nouvelle seemed to be mainly a result of his indigenism. This ensured that he wanted attention paid to the concrete living environment of the Congolese. But there were other motives beside the purely educational behind this. In reality his religious conservatism as well as his distrust of the modern world remained alive, including in his writings for school. Vinck already wrote that he never progressed beyond an “éclectisme limité” in theoretical educational knowledge. That knowledge was based on the possession (and likely also the reading) of certain conservative Catholic-inspired handbooks: Didaktik by Otto Willman and the overviews of Frans De Hovre and Victor D’Espallier (Nieuwe Banen). It should be no surprise that he consulted these books in the light of what was said earlier about the influences the MSC candidates experienced. [lxi]

3.2. Clashing visions
3.2.1. With the Brothers
The views of the MSC corresponded to a great extent with those of Hulstaert, that much is clear. Yet it would be wrong only to mention Hulstaert here. Though he was a prolific writer and a very active and enthusiastic missionary who left the most traces of all the MSC in the colonial period, there were also ‘lesser gods’. From the number of confrontations that Hulstaert and the MSC had with other parties in connection with the teaching material, it can be inferred that although there was often a united view, this was certainly not always the case. The best-documented examples of this are without a doubt the continuing arguments the MSC had with the Brothers of the Christian Schools, although they were brought to their vicariate by the MSC themselves in the 1920s. In this conflict Hulstaert took the lead. Sometimes he dragged other MSC with him in this, whilst others were much more sceptical about his discord with the Brothers.

That his article of 1945 on general training was also directed to the Brothers of the Christian Schools became visible in his standpoint on the language of education, amongst others: “We cannot continue along the line of polyglotism within primary school education. The already-mentioned programme of reorganisation provides, in certain circumstances, up to three languages at 2nd level. Primary school education, which in nature is meant to be for the mass population, will not know what to do with the whole linguistic requirement, which overloads the programme and confuses the pupils’ minds.” The struggle against French as the language of education would finally be lost but the fight against the Brothers was more than a language struggle.[lxii] It was also a power struggle. From 1939 there was an aim to apply the same curriculum guide across the entire MSC vicariate. It is clear that the MSC had at least partial authority in the local education network. All other congregations working in the region were contractually bound to them. At that point the Brothers of the Christian Schools were an exception. In Bamanya they were working for the MSC but not in Coquilhatville, as they worked in an official school there. The inspection authority in the region was allocated to the ‘head congregation’ in the area and thus to the MSC. Paul Jans, who was the head missionary at the time, wrote to Hulstaert that he had argued to “make an independent whole of the primary schools with curricula that are as identical as possible. In all our posts, including Bamanya, among others, I emphasised that much more needs to be done for Nkundo and less for French. After the fifth year a certificate could then be given of completed primary education. Boys who do further studies to be a moniteur, in Bamanya as well as other posts of the mission, are then united in a 6th year, taught by an indigenous Brother, that must be followed as 1^st year vocational training and where there is plenty of French besides a revision of the primary curriculum.”[lxiii]

In general Jans did not seem to follow in the same line as Hulstaert on the subject of holding back the inland children, he thought that they were certainly welcome at the Brothers’ school in Coquilhatville. He even explicitly accused Hulstaert of sowing seeds of hatred and of unconsciously contributing to an aggressive feeling towards the Brothers among a number of his fellows.[lxiv] He wrote the following about Hulstaert’s educational ideas: “I find your theory about Forcing and Leading very nice but wishing systematically to refuse entrance to Coq where we cannot convince our people inland seems very much like ‘volontariat forcé’.” Such statements clearly show that even Hulstaert’s contemporaries found his way of dealing with the Congolese to be quite patronising. Apparently Hulstaert wished to have a united curriculum not just for the entire region but especially for all congregations. Jans clearly had problems with his method: “What I propose for the unification of the primary school curriculum for all mission posts that function normally are thoughts that are at least four years old and for which I already had some unpleasantness in ’35. But practically, the cooperation of everyone, also the Brothers, is required for the creation of this curriculum. I do not believe in a monopoly on truth or correct thought or correct insight. With nobody.”

Hulstaert kept pushing and would lock horns with the Brothers on more occasions. He wrote to the higher orders when it appeared that the Brothers were planning to follow the official curriculum in their subsidised school in Coquilhatville, instead of the subsidised missionary education curriculum. The curriculum was mainly based on the Belgian curriculum and therefore much ‘harder’ than what was taught in most Congolese schools. Reisdorff, the government inspector, answered him in the name of the governor general: “It goes without saying that the Reverend Brothers of the Christian Schools are allowed to follow curricula of official schools, the pupils subsidised being usually destined to continue their studies at the official school of Coquilhatville.“[lxv] Hulstaert retaliated, saying that the use of the official curriculum would lead to a surplus of graduates all of whom would not be able to find work. This would inevitably lead to abuses, a society of ‘unclassed’. However, the governor general did not follow him in his reasoning. In a friendly but decided manner Reisdorff refused Hulstaert’s suggestions.[lxvi] He suggested that subsidised schools function under the missionary school curriculum completely independently of the official school system. There would then be a selection of the best students to have finished the first grade who would have the opportunity to go to the official school and eventually to middle school. In his reply Hulstaert agreed to this solution but took the opportunity to describe his ideal once again: the complete separation of primary and secondary school, so that primary school could focus purely on general education, “without referring to further studies.” To make the step to middle school an extra “preparatory year” could be provided after the fifth year.

Language use was also discussed. As late as 1943 Hulstaert wrote to the Brother Director in Coquilhatville: “You know that it is absolutely important to us that Lonkundo is the working language. The moniteurs educated in this language will have no problem here. For the foreign pupils, who don’t know the working language, the moniteurs should provide an adaptation system, which to me seems easy to elaborate.”[lxvii] The fact that his confidence in the Congolese moniteurs was noticeably higher than at other times is striking. Brother Director, who had been confronted with the same demand ad nauseam, answered Hulstaert in a rather cynical tone: “According to your desire, once more expressed, the working language called ‘Congolese’ or regional language is, as you say, Lonkundo. Others will say Lingala, some others Lonkundo-lingala for Coq. However, the language the young people will almost exclusively use in the working environment later is French, wouldn’t it be good to give these elements as soon as possible?“[lxviii]

But Hulstaert did not let up and answered bluntly that decisions on the organisation of education in the vicariate were up to the vicariate itself, according to canon law. From this he drew the equally definite conclusion: the spoken language at school was Lomongo. The study of French as a subject could only begin in the second grade. Only the students at the official schools would need to speak professional French later, those of the free schools would not. It would not be fair to ‘sacrifice’ the whole population for the sake of a minority elite. The main body had to remain native.[lxix] On the subject of the official school Hulstaert took an equally clear position, which he often offered directly: “At the moment the greatest danger for our school is the official school of Coq and if no intervention is made then all those learned, degenerate blacks, the most immoral, the drinkers, the animals as we know them here, bring it to the point when you will again be obliged to place the Brothers in the central schools inland as teaching personnel.[lxx] His resistance was to make no difference. In his inspection report of 1943 he had to establish that the Brothers continued to steer their own course (which was in accordance with the guidelines and ideas of the government): “It was painful to have to note that the directives I gave through a letter no 1965 of March 2 of this year, regarding the curriculum to be followed, the working language and the teaching of French, had not been executed.”[lxxi]

There was no agreement among the various MSC about Hulstaert’s stance towards the Brothers. We have already pointed to Jans’ remarks on the subject. Not everyone had such radical opinions, as is abundantly clear from a letter by the rector of the missionary post in Bamanya, Van der Beken. He was reacting to a letter of Hulstaert’s, in which he seems to have been particularly shocked by the attitude of the Brothers. Apparently he did occasionally pictured them as real bad guys who would destroy the Congolese youth. Van der Beken was more positive about the Brothers: “Most honourable and dear Father Superior, I received your letter of May 1. I believe what you write and yet the Brothers do not neglect their religious education, every morning they must prepare this in particular. Brother Director also gives them special lessons on their responsibility as teachers. They are actually Brothers of the Christian schools, how would they bring down our holy faith? I accept that their teaching is not adjusted to the mentality of the blacks as they do not know that mentality.” So it seemed at first sight that he wished to protect the Brothers and wished to deny Hulstaert’s accusations. But that was not the case for the moniteurs: “And yet the Christian life is not felt, not experienced, the teachers feel no responsibility for the community, they are not Catholic as they are not universal in their actions, they are egoistic and that only to the bad because their egoism goes to complete independence. They feel themselves to be lord and master and to be subordinate to none.” There appeared to be a very negative vision of the evolution and the possibilities of the Congolese behind this. The efforts that the missionaries went to did not really make a difference since even the Congolese who were raised by missionaries inland got big ideas: “With their little learning and their cockiness they are just shameful.”

It appears that Van der Beken felt rather powerless, not equal to the ‘great’ civilising task that was traditionally attributed to the missionaries: “Of course I don’t claim that school is a necessary evil but I do think that the concept of school may be wrongly understood by many of us. What improvements have not been introduced in Europe and daily more improvements and adjustments to the students are sought. Dear Father Superior, our vicariate is quite new and many of our priests including myself are not well enough grounded or developed for a revolution. I am just a very normal everyday priest, one may say ‘made in Japan’, I should be more aware of current conditions, should apply myself more to serious literature on the missions, be able to understand better the depth of the Negro soul.”[lxxii] This quote clearly shows, in my estimation, that the world of the average missionary at work was not so straightforward, simple and self-assured, although that impression was often made in missionary and other propaganda literature.

3.2.2. With the government
There were not only troubles with the Brothers of the Christian Schools. A number of MSC fell foul of the government. There was often an ideological factor connected to this, which sometimes makes it difficult to interpret the content of certain discussions. A conflict broke out in 1951 concerning the inspection by government inspector Eloye. That year, during his inspection round of the MSC, he found a number of things that he did not feel corresponding to the intentions of the education curriculum. He gave an extensive description of this in his inspection reports, which did not earn him many thanks among the missionaries. Complaints were made to the provincial governor Bruels de Tiecken. The case reached the governor general, who tried to reach a compromise and make peace between the brawlers. He decided to send Jean Ney, chief inspector of colonial education, to check Eloye’s inspections and to search for a solution in consultation with the provincial governor and the vicar.

It was in Boende, where father Van Linden was responsible for the school at that time that Eloye had been overcome by criticism. Van Linden had told him that he only considered the inspection reports and other official guidelines to be advice, to which he did not feel bound in any way in cases where they did not correspond to his own vision. He accepted no addendum to the curriculum and would not respond to anything communicated to him in French, out of Flemish-nationalistic convictions. In Ney’s version the remarks were already put into perspective: “The Reverend Father has generalised his opinion on the official communications, confirming that if he were the boss, he would not ask for the subsidy because he doesn’t like the official and that in this way he would be the boss in his own school.” Ney acknowledged that Van Linden was very active and devoted to the school but he also had to admit that he had a number of old-fashioned ideas, which did not tally with the image that one should have of a school. He did not communicate what these ideas were exactly but he did report that Van Linden had told him literally: “The schools do more harm than good.“[lxxiii] Which convictions or considerations could have been at the basis of this statement was not clear to me in the conversation I had with Van Linden.

On his part, Breuls de Tiecken complained to the governor general about the fact that the missionaries positioned themselves so aggressively. He then also proposed to reconsider subsidies again in cases such as Van Linden’s. “Also, the continuous pressure from the people being inspected by the inspectors, either because of themselves, or because of powerful intermediary people or organisations, would succeed in paralysing the control up to a point where it would become ineffective.” He believed that the treasury should not subsidise a person who openly contradicted generally accepted educational and hygienic principles, who often flatly refused to read official correspondence addressed to him and who considered inspection reports and other guidelines to be nothing but simple advice when they did not tally with his vision.

Mgr. Vermeiren then defended his missionaries to Breuls de Tiecken. He referred to a number of other complaints the inspector had expressed. He maintained that he had done everything possible to sketch as gloomy an image as possible of the mission of the MSC. According to the inspector, the handwork in many rural schools consisted almost entirely of laying roofs in ndele or in harvesting palm nuts destined to be sold for the benefit of the missions. Vermeiren said this should be checked. According to him, the fact that catechists were in many cases appointed moniteurs was a distortion of reality. Actually, the moniteurs had to function as catechists as well. The thorniest question, however, was still that of the language of education. Vermeiren seemed to become rather enraged about this: “A handful of foreigners, instead of integrating into the environment where they are leading a prosperous life, uses its privileged situation as a European to impose the teaching of a foreign language (Lingala, JB) on millions of natives because all in all they are but Negro and (…) because it is easier for the others.”

On this subject, the MSC clearly closed ranks but they were fairly isolated. The province governor thought the missionaries should teach in Lingala because the majority of the population of the province did not know Lonkundo and everyone tried to speak Lingala. The Brothers of the Christian Schools had sensed this and had adapted themselves in their school in Coquilhatville. “Judicieusement“, Breuls de Tiecken thought. To the great surprise and probably also dissatisfaction of the MSC, Father Moentjens found the same in Bamanya: “To my great surprise I noticed that between moniteurs and pupils Lingala is well spoken and even during the lessons certain moniteurs introduce words and expressions from Lingala into their language. I drew this to the headmaster’s attention and asked him kindly to put the entire weight of his power to good use to effectively combat this abuse which does not constitute an imaginary or illusionary danger.”[lxxiv]

3.2.3. With the Congolese
Conflicts also occasionally erupted with the Congolese. These were even less visible to the outside world because the balance of power was to the advantage of the missionaries and the Congolese were never really given the opportunity to make their problems and demands explicitly known. On some occasions there was nevertheless evidence of serious problems between the missionaries and Congolese students. One striking event, which is still mentioned today in conversation with missionaries and which is to be situated in line with the conflicts mentioned, was the ‘uprising’ of the seminarians in Bokuma.[lxxv] From 1926 the MSC had tried to start a classics degree in Bokuma, relating to the priestly training. Originally Boelaert, together with Petrus Vertenten, was one of the driving forces behind this project. From 1932, when the area of the MSC was raised to the status of ‘real’ vicariate, things began to move: the training became more professional and became truly a training in its own right, more than just a result of the primary school. It has to be noted that even in this type of school there was an emphasis on handiwork and its educational value. The curriculum seemed to develop prosperously. In any event, Boelaert himself expressed his satisfaction in a letter at the end of 1934: “When I arrived here four years ago, I found only six students, and now we are closing the year with six well-formed classes, with regular attendance and the best prospects.” The emphasis was on the study of Latin and the native language.

In 1936, the first seminarian dissatisfaction was observed. According to the Fathers, there were people who wanted to leave to study elsewhere or there were people who were discontented because they had been away from home for a few years. It was not so surprising, at least according to commentaries given by the missionaries themselves about the lives of the seminarians: “The life at a boarding school and abstaining from contact with family members and people of the opposite sex, the regular enforcement of the regulations, the relatively heavy studies, the constant guarding they are exposed to and the constant effort that is required are all obligations that are far harder for them than we can easily imagine.”

Sanders wrote the following for 1937: “Expressions of obstinacy and pride. Amongst other things, they will refuse in class to write down a text because it is in Lonkundo: they must have French!“[lxxvi] A year later a whole class left the préparatoire (the preparatory department of the classics degree): “Bikoro is leaving, but largely because of Lonkundo.” What this means exactly is unclear. However, it may be assumed that the pupils from the nearby region of Bikoro were being referred to. The seminary of Bokuma had, after all, received the status of ‘regional’ seminary some years before. Concretely, this meant that students from other vicariates in the Equator province also went to the seminary there. The level of the training was rated very highly by the missionaries. They assumed that only very few candidates were eligible for it.

In any case, problems concerning the language had clearly developed. Something similar also happened in Bamanya after the Second World War. If possible, information about this is even scarcer. Cobbaut did speak about it in his inspection report of 1946: “Since the beginning of the school year Brother headmaster has had to deal with a number of serious difficulties, probably caused by the bad atmosphere that must have been prevalent from before amongst the moniteurs and the students. Three moniteurs have dropped out because either they left their work illegally or they had to be sent away because of very bad behaviour. All the students of the third normal year have, in a spirit of revolt, left the school, with two exceptions, who filled the vacant positions of the moniteurs in the primary school.” We don’t find out in his text what the exact problem was. One of the former students of the teacher training college in Bamanya, Jean Boimbo, reported a similar fact: “One day, if I can remember well, the Brothers nearly went on strike because they didn’t agree with the vision of the MSC. Then they said: ‘if it is for those problems, you can come and teach yourself. But we, we have to teach ourselves, that’s not it. Well then the children shouldn’t waste their time.’ That’s when they gave up. Yes.” (…) “And we followed the strike, if we were not taught following the curricula of the teacher training such as … (sic)” However, he situated his studies at the teacher training college after 1949. This indicates that the Congolese also noticed the problems between the MSC and the Brothers and that they slowly became aware that they were in a position to make certain demands. We will examine this in more depth in the following chapters.

Conclusion
The subject matter taught to Congolese pupils at primary school shows clear differences from what was taught in Belgium. However, it must be posited that these differences were not in the essence or content of the subject matter as such. At first sight, the list of the material taught looks largely parallel. Above all, Religious Education was taught. Besides this, the same basic subjects were taught as in Western schools: arithmetic, writing, reading. Though it seems there were many parallels, there was one important exception. The language of teaching, and the learning of French in particular, was always the stumbling block of colonial education. The discussions on this topic dragged on until the end of the colonial period. The stance of the MSC, with Hulstaert as its most outspoken representative, is probably one of the most illustrative examples of this. Their choice for the native language later appeared to be a strategic mistake and primarily caused a great deal of conflict with the local population and from the 1950s on also with certain government officials.

The rest of the education curriculum, which, however, was not put into practice to the same degree always and everywhere, showed a far-reaching takeover of Belgian habits and subjects. The strong emphasis placed on – at least to the Congolese – strange and exotic geography and history of the motherland and the West on the one hand and the forceful emphasis on handwork and practical skills on the other hand always had clearly ‘metropolitan’ roots, though they were not necessarily included in the curriculum for the same reasons. More fundamental, however, is the position that the share of ‘new’, ‘adapted’ or ‘African’ subject contents was as good as non-existent. In this regard the MSC could actually be considered as exceptions, given their relatively broad concern for the conservation of local language and traditions. Whether this was out of emancipatory convictions can however be doubted, if only because of the fact that language and tradition were offered to the students in a ‘Catholic’ package.

At a level of didactic technique, the conclusion seems clear and uniform: even Hulstaert, who was responsible for the production of the majority of new reading books at the MSC, was not an education expert. A remarkable link between his ideological views and education is formed by the fact that he wanted to maintain the individuality of the local culture. Through this he unwittingly placed himself in the same line as the ideas of educational reformers from the first half of the twentieth century. At first sight, his indigenistic principles were linked to the upbringing “vom Kinde aus” and the “Nouvelle Education” in general and this led to his designation as a ‘didactic progressive’. He considered himself like this: “What is the best method? Difficult to say, but mine is based on the language and thus adapted, it also improves the functioning of writing and reading instructions.”[lxxvii] This was no empty statement. Hulstaert had indeed done his best to take the specificity of the local language into account when writing the reading books.

It must finally be noted that, certainly in this area, it is easy to overestimate the influence of Hulstaert in the historical perspective. After all, he was a person who published a lot and also played a very active role for a long time within his congregation and the mission territory. Put another way: so many other missionaries who were active in the field and who were undoubtedly also influential remained far less visible. However, it can be shown that these opinions were certainly neither shared nor accepted by everyone: Hulstaert had to deal with opposition and conflicts from the missionaries, in his own or other congregations, as well as from the government and from the Congolese themselves. Despite this, it appears that in the field there were not many revolutionary or progressive ideas concerning education and that classroom practice was more a result of traditional conservative Catholic views on the one hand and the more or less automatic application of known basic principles on the other. The foundation of this image is formed by the scarce testimonies about more innovative ideas or initiatives together with the positions and statements expressed in contemporary conversations and correspondence between missionaries.

NOTES

[i] I base this on the following publication from 1923: Programme Type des écoles primaires communales, Bruxelles: Ministère des Sciences et des Arts. p. 116.
[ii] [Original quotation in French]Organisation de l’enseignement libre subsidié pour indigènes en collaboration avec les sociétés de Missions Chrétiennes, 1948, p. 8.
[iii] The Revue Pédagogique Congolaise was a joint initiative from the recently founded university of Lovanium and the Centre d’Etudes des problèmes sociaux indigènes (CEPSI) in Elizabethville. It was published from 1955 as an appendix to the Bulletin du CEPSI.
[iv] Verhaegen, P. & Leblanc, M. (1955). Quelques considérations au sujet de l’éducation préprimaire de l’enfant noir. In Revue Pédagogique Congolaise, n° 2. p. XVII-XXXII.
[v] “Uit brieven van Z.E.P. Vertenten aan de studenten der apostolische school te Assche”. In Annalen, 1928, 10, p. 219.
[vi] See Briffaerts, J. (2003). Etude comparative de manuels scolaires au Congo Belge: Cas des Pères Dominicains et des Missionnaires du Sacré Coeur. In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H., Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge, Studia Paedagogica 33, Leuven: University Press. p. 167-196.
[vii] Inversely, the study of Belgian Congo was on the Belgian curriculum in the third and fourth years.
[viii]  Organisation de l’enseignement libre subsidié pour indigènes en collaboration avec les sociétés de Missions Nationales, 1929. p. 19. [Original quotation in French]
[ix]  The chefferies (translated from the lesser used term “hoofdijen”) were the first territorial units in the governing system implemented locally by the colonial administration. In the interior (i.e. not in the cities), the population was divided into chefferies that were subsequently grouped in sectors. In the first instance, the colonial administrative authority was active per sector. According to the law, common law remained applicable to a certain degree (within the boundaries stipulated in law). Hence the designation of city areas by the name “centres extra-coutumiers” or “outside common law areas”, at least for the Congolese districts in those cities.
[x] Organisation … 1929, p. 42. [Original text in French]
[xi]  Africa Archive Brussels, Missions Collection, no. 647, “inspection scolaire 6”. “Ecole de Filles des Grands Centres. Coquilhatville. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école dirigée par les Filles de la Charité. Année 1927”. Soeur Borsu, Coquilhatville, 1928. [Original quotation in French]
[xii]  Africa Archive Brussels, Missions Collection, no. 647, “inspection scolaire 6”. “Ecole de Filles des Grands Centres. Coquilhatville. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école dirigée par les Filles de la Charité. 1928-1929”. s.n., s.l., s.d. [Original quotation in French]
[xiii]  Lazarist Archive Leuven. “Rapport sur les oeuvres des Filles de la Charité de St-Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville. Exercice 1930”. s.n., Coquilhatville, January 1931.
[xiv]  Africa Archive Brussels, Missions Collection, no. 647, “inspection scolaire 6”. “Rapport sur le fonctionnement des écoles primaires du premier degré, mission de Coquilhatville, année 1928”. P. Vertenten, Bamanya, 27 March 1929.
[xv]  Africa Archive Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 16.484, documents nr. 36 (Wafanya) and 38 (Bokuma). “Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire du premier degré dirigée par les RR. PP. Missionnaires du Sacré Coeur”. G. Jardon, s.l., June 1929. [Original quotation in French]
[xvi] Lazarist Archive Leuven. “Rapport sur l’enseignement des écoles des Révérendes Soeurs de Saint Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville”, P. Vertenten, Coquilhatville, February 1930.
[xvii] Africa Archive Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.490, “schoolinspectieverslagen 1932”.
[xviii] Alma Hosten (1909-1985). Mission sister, Daughter of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart. She was originally from Leffinge and from 1934 worked in the boys’ school in Boende. Hosten had an education degree for primary schools and was a teacher of sciences (obtained at the H. Hart Institute in Heverlee). With this, she was by far the best-educated person employed there. See Van Caeyseele, L. (2004). Gustaaf Hulstaert: katholiek en/of indigenist? Unpublished Master’s thesis, Leuven; Vinck, H. (2002). A l’école au Congo Belge. Les livres de lecture de G. Hulstaert. 1933-1935. In Annales Aequatoria, XXIII, p. 53-54; Venard, M. (1992). De geschiedenis van de belgische provincie der Dochters van Onze Lieve Vrouw van het Heilig Hart. Brussel: Dochters van Onze Lieve Vrouw van het Heilig Hart; Corman, A. (1935). Annuaire des missions au Congo Belge.
[xix]  Vinck, H. (2003). Les livres scolaires des MSC. In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H. Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge. Leuven: Presses universitaires. p. 133-166.
[xx]  AAFE 12.5.1. Inspectie van de meisjesschool te Bamanya, 1946. F. Cobbaut, Bamanya, 28 September 1946.
[xxi] AAFE 11.3.3-7. Rapport d’inspection de l’établissement des Soeurs Missionnaires du Précieux Sang à Bamanya (école primaire mixte pour indigènes et école ménagère). M. Vanmeerbeeck, inspecteur-adjoint au service provincial de l’enseignement, Coquilhatville, 8 May 1947. [Original quotation in French]
[xxii] AAFE 12.5.6. Report on the inspection in the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 17 November 1944.
[xxiii] AAFE 12.5.3-5. Report on the inspection in the primary and teacher schools in Bamanya. 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 4 November 1944. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxiv] AAFE 9.4.2-6. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya. 1952. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 31 September 1952.
[xxv] Ibidem. [Original quotation in French]
[xxvi] The following paragraphs are also partially based on sources unlocked by him and the studies he made of them. I rely here on the contribution of Vinck, H. (2003). Les manuels scolaires des MSC. In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, M. & Vinck, H., Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge. Leuven: Universitaire Pers. p. 133-165; Briffaerts, J. (2003). Etude comparative de manuels scolaires au Congo Belge. In Ibidem. p. 167-196 and Van Caeyseele, L. (2004). Gustaaf Hulstaert, katholiek en/of indigenist? Unpublished Master’s thesis, Leuven.
[xxvii]  AAFE 5.2.6-8. Letter from P. Jans to Frère Visiteur. Bamanya, 8 January 1929.
[xxviii] Vinck, H. (2003) Les manuels scolaires des MSC, p. 158. [Original quotation in French]
[xxix]  Vinck situates this in an evolution of educational methods but observation, or “intuition”, was a part of the syllabus from the beginning, as was already apparent from the curriculum discussions of 1929.
[xxx]  Moreover, Vinck says, there were only 50 copies printed of this book. See Vinck, H. o.c., p. 152.
[xxxi]  Le Coq Chante was a biweekly MSC publication (1936-1948) that originally dealt with mainly religious and literary themes, mainly in Lomongo, partly in French. After 1940 there was a greater variety of topics. “In serial stories and sometimes in dialogue form whole courses were published: on biology, on geography of the Equator province, on medicine, on childcare”. Etsiko (literally “the palaver tree”, from 1949 to 1954) and Lokole (“signalling drum”) Lokiso (1955-1962) were successors to Le Coq. With this latter edition the intention was to put the editing and edition fully into the hands of the Mongo, at least according to the MSC themselves. The chief editing was done by Paul Ngoi and Augustin Elenga. Elenga (1920-1986) was a student of the MSC. After studying at the école pour moniteurs in Bamanya, he taught at the primary school in Boteka. From 1950 he became the personal secretary of Hulstaert. Paul Ngoi (1914-1997) received primary education with the Trappists in Bokuma in the first half of the 1920s. Later he followed the Latin humanities section at the small seminary of the MSC. He taught there himself in the preparatory department from 1931 to 1937. Subsequently he worked as a clerk at the mission printing press of the MSC. See De Rop, A. (1975) In dienst van de autenticiteit. In Vereecken, J. (ed.) Missionarissen van het Heilig Hart. 50 jaar in Zaïre. Extra-edition of the MSC-circle. Borgerhout: MSC. p. 26-30, and further http://www.aequatoria.be/ under “Bio-bibliographie de personnes” and http://www.aequatoria.be/archives_project/ under “Edition & analyse”.
[xxxii]  In the first instance this caused serious problems on the level of the interpretation of the story of one of the Congolese former pupils of the MSC, namely Stephane Boale. About this problem see also chapter 9.
[xxxiii] Vinck, H. (2001). “Nous et les Blancs” (Iso la Bendele). Considérations (1938) de Paul Ngoi sur la vie traditionelle des mongo et leur confrontation avec la colonisation belge. Unpublished text. This is a French translation of Ngoi’s text, made in 1999 by Charles Lonkama, secretary of the Aequatoria research centre in Mbandaka. The text is destined for publication in the Annales Aequatoria. [Original quotation in French]
[xxxiv] Vinck, H. (2001). “Nous et les Blancs”. [Original text in French]
[xxxv] Bosako w’oyengwa III, edition 1955, p. 225-245, translated in the framework of a translation project led by Bogumil Jewsiewicki, at the University of Laval, Quebec (code J-34). This text is actually taken from a schoolbook of the Marist Brothers from 1928, Buku Ya Nzambe, though Hulstaert claims its authorship for himself. The text of this lesson is also reproduced in the anthology by Vinck, H. (1998). Manuels scolaires coloniaux: un florilège. In Annales Aequatoria, 19. p. 3-166 also published on the Internet www.abbol.com [Original text in French]
[xxxvi] Here I specifically mean Vinck, H. (2002). A l’école au Congo Belge. Les livres de lecture de G. Hulstaert 1933-1935. Introduction et textes. In Annales Aequatoria, XXIII, p. 21-196, and the two already cited articles by Vinck and myself in Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge.
[xxxvii] Vinck, H. (2003), Les manuels scolaires des MSC, p. 51.
[xxxviii] Van Gorp, A. (2004). Gedragswetenschap in de steigers. Het psycho-pedagogisch vertoog van Ovide Decroly ontmythologiseerd? (1871-1932). Leuven: unpublished doctoral thesis. p. 111-114. An extensive series about the analytic-synthetic method was published in the educational periodical “Zuid en Noord”, the forerunner of “L’école moderne”.
[xxxix] Missionnaires du Sacré Coeur (1933). Buku ea njekola eandelo la ekotelo I, Coquilhatville: MSC.
[xl] Ibidem.
[xli] Sister Magda was Alma Hosten’s name in the convent.
[xlii] Vinck, H. (2003). Les manuels scolaires des MSC, p. 54. [Original quotation in French]
[xliii] Van Caeyseele, L. (2004). Gustaaf Hulstaert. Katholiek en/of indigenist? [original quotation in Dutch]
[xliv] Z.M. [Alma Hosten] (1940). Notes on reading books. In Aequatoria, III, 3, p. 61-62. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xlv] AA, Fonds Correspondance Hulstaert, 161, Letter from Gustaaf Hulstaert to Sister Magda, 16 April 1942. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xlvi] See p. 293. Source: Aequatoria Archive, Fonds Correspondance Hulstaert (microfiche 162).
[xlvii] The translator means “or let them look for it themselves”.
[xlviii] See Van Caeyseele, L. (2004). Gustaaf Hulstaert.
[xlix] As published in Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H. (2003). Manuels et chansons scolaires.
[l]  [Original quotation in French] Kita, P. (2003). Les livrets de lecture des Pères Blancs du Kivu (1910-1950). In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H. Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge. p. 83.
[li] [Original quotation in French] Briffaerts, J. (2003). Etude comparative de manuels scolaires au Congo Belge: Cas des Pères Dominicains et des Missionnaires du Sacré Coeur. In Depaepe, M., Briffaerts, J., Kita Kyankenge Masandi, P. & Vinck, H. Manuels et chansons scolaires au Congo Belge. p. 182.
[lii] Z.M. (1939). From a school report. In Aequatoria, 1939, II, p. 55-58.
[liii] This is developed in more detail in the next chapter.
[liv] Brelsford, V. [translated and commentated by G. Hulstaert] (1944). Pédagogie Civilisée et Pédagogie Primitive. In Aequatoria, VII, p.24-27. [Original quotation in French]
[lv]  Briffaerts, J. & Vancaeyseele, L. (2004). Le discours de la nouvelle éducation dans le contexte colonial: le grand malentendu. Paper presented at the 26th International Standing Conference for the History of Education at Geneva, July 2004.
[lvi]  Honoré Vinck also expressed himself in this way in various conversations I had with him, among other things about Hulstaert. He described him as someone who knew how to draw attention to his work and his person, this being one of the reasons that his work has remained far more known than that of Boelaert.
[lvii]  Vinck, H. (2004). Assimilatie of inculturatie. Conflicten tussen de Broeders van de Christelijke Scholen en de Diocesane Onderwijsinspectie in Coquilhatstad.1930-1945. Lecture for the Belgisch Nederlandse Vereniging voor de Geschiedenis van Opvoeding en Onderwijs (BNVGOO) [Belgian Dutch Association for the History of Education], Amsterdam, 19 March 2004, unpublished.
[lviii]  AA, Hulstaert Correspondence Collection, fiche no. 161. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Sister Alma, 16 April 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lix]  Hulstaert, G. (1945). Formation générale et école primaire. In Aequatoria, VIII, 3, p. 87-91. [Original quotation in French]
[lx] AAFE 1.5.3-4. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Louis Van der Beken, head of Bamanya mission. Coquilhatville, 10 December 1941.
[lxi]  See chapter 2, [p. 91 and following].
[lxii] Hulstaert, Boelaert and many others did not have any qualms about speaking French and using it in their daily work.
[lxiii] AAFE 30.1.7. Letter from P. Jans to G. Hulstaert. Coquilhatville, 14 January 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxiv] AAFE 30.1.8-9. Letter from P. Jans to G. Hulstaert. Coquilhatville, 24 January 1939.
[lxv]  AAFE 30.1.10. Letter from the government inspector Reisdorff to G. Hulstaert. Leopoldville, 6 December 1941. [Original quotation in French]
[lxvi] AAFE 30.1.13-14. Letter from Reisdorff to G. Hulstaert. Coquilhatville, 19 January 1942.
[lxvii]AAFE 30.4.2. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Brother Director of the school of the Brothers in Coquilhatville. Coquilhatville, 6 February 1943. [Original quotation in French]
[lxviii] AAFE 30.4.3. Letter from Brother Director to G. Hulstaert. Coquilhatville, 10 February 1943. [Original quotation in French]
[lxix] AAFE 30.4.9-10. Letter from G. Hulstaert to Brother Director. Coquilhatville, 2 March 1943.
[lxx] AAFE 30.5.10. Typed memo from G. Hulstaert, unknown addressee, 14 May 1943. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxi] AAFE 31.1.9. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école libre subsidiée dirigée par les Révérends Frères des Ecoles Chrétiennes à Coquilhatville. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 27 November 1943. [Original quotation in French]
[lxxii] AAFE 1.1.10-12. Letter from L. Van der Beken to Hulstaert. Bamanya, 11 May 1942. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxiii] Africa Archive Brussels, electronic inventory, no. 12.452, Inspection V.A. Coquilhatville 1949-1953. “Contrôle des inspections faites pendant l’année 1951. Province de l’Equateur.”, Jean Ney, Inspecteur en chef de l’enseignement, Leopoldville, 11 December 1951. [original quotation in French]
[lxxiv] AAFE 9.4.2-6. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 31 December 1952. [Original quotation in French]
[lxxv]  This information about Bokuma comes from one single source, a report written during the 1960s by one of the MSC, Remi Sanders, entitled “Historiek van het klein seminarie van Bokuma”. This is an unpublished, typed text of 36 pages kept in the archive of the MSC in Borgerhout. This study is based on archive pieces originally kept in Bokuma itself. Honoré Vinck himself saw this archive piece in the Congo. According to him it was never transferred to Belgium. Where the archive pieces in question are situated now is uncertain, only the text of Sanders was recorded on microfile.
[lxxvi] Sanders, R., Historiek van het klein seminarie van Bokuma, p. 10.
[lxxvii] Gustaaf Hulstaert in a letter to Paul Jans, 26 June 1929, quoted by Vinck (2002). A l’école au Congo Belge, p. 49. [Original quotation in French]

In this chapter the focus shifts slightly to didactic and educational practices, insofar as these can be known. This is used in the meaning of every day interaction between missionaries, moniteurs (teaching assistants) and pupils. The inspection reports give some insight here into what really happened, although in most cases from a distance. Although the reports and letters from inspectors may be said to be perfect examples of the normative, this does not mean that they make it possible to see clearly what practices were criticised and for which practices alternatives were offered. Two contrasts that were discussed earlier appear again and ‘mark’ distinctions between them. The first is the distinction between the centre and periphery, which, in this context coincides with the dichotomy mission school – rural school. In the previous chapters it was obvious that the material situation was very different depending on whether a school was situated at the central mission post school or a bush school. The second contrast between the two types of teachers, missionaries or moniteurs corresponds largely with the mission school – rural school situation. These distinctions are, in fact, situated almost entirely within the context of the central mission school, considering that, almost by definition, no missionaries taught in rural schools.

However, they do not correspond completely. Ideally, it should be possible to identify three different situations within the context of (Catholic) missionary education: A first situation in which pupils received education without any, or only sporadic, intervention from missionaries. This is what was found in rural schools; a second situation, in which a moniteur gave lessons in a central mission post, near to missionaries but not in their permanent presence; and a third situation in which the missionaries exercised permanent control over what happened in the class or gave lessons themselves. This third situation was, as should already be clear, quite unusual (except in the initial phase of a mission post). In a number of cases one subject was given systematically by missionaries. Usually that was religious education. In other cases one class, and usually the highest one, was entrusted to the care of a missionary. This occurred mostly from necessity because no native teacher could be found who was suitable for the job. In girls education there were, relatively speaking, more female religious who actually taught themselves. This must be explained by the fact that female education was way less developed because of the social context in which Congolese girls functioned and because of the position of the female religious workers themselves.

The organisation of this chapter is not, in fact, along these lines. The available sources were, after all, almost exclusively produced by the missionaries themselves. It also seems to me to be difficult to deal in an even-handed manner with situations in which the missionary staff were absent and to give them, quantitatively speaking, just as much space as the others. For this reason another approach was chosen. It starts from general observations or questions (“topics”). This is probably less structured but at the same time also ‘more honest’ towards the reality studied in the sense that it has been decided beforehand to start from one particular aspect, to collect information about this and to discuss it, but without causing the reality to ‘stop’ at a particular moment. In any event this approach is easier to grasp because in this way we avoid telling a too compartmentalised story, whereby for each of the three proposed hypotheses the same topics would need to be dealt with again and again.

Discipline
1.1. The school rules: theory…
In principle every school had to have school rules: “In every class there hangs a set of rules for the Colony: there is a lot on it, 20 numbers composed by the Father Director of the Colony himself. Get up … attend Holy mass… Work… school… eat… go to sleep… and so forth…“[i] The scope of the rules probably differed strongly according to the place and the congregation that was active there. A very interesting example for the study of classroom reality is the rather comprehensive rulebook of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, created for the Groupe Scolaire in Coquilhatville.[ii] In theory, the Brothers had been given responsibility for the pupils during school time but in practice their reach went further. The rulebook contained a mixture of instructions that was directed at the moniteurs and the pupils. It constitutes a very normative source, to the extent that we can expect it to effectively reflect reality for a large part. The book begins with a list of provisions that applied to the teaching staff. It applied to their behaviour and also to their tasks with respect to the pupils. Among these, a lot of attention is paid to religiously inspired themes. After a few indications for the maître chrétien himself (enough prayer, be punctual, make sure that the timetable is respected), there follows the first chapter “éducation chrétienne“. Reciting the correct number of prayers a day, the use of a rosary, going to mass and confession at set times: it was the task of the teaching staff to make sure that the pupils certainly did these. “Enseignement” was only mentioned in the second section. Here, a number of items were discussed in connection with the teaching method, from which not very much can be deduced about the reality. The teacher must follow the curriculum and make an effort to pass perfect knowledge on to the pupils: “He shall carefully prepare his lessons and give methodical and graduated education. He shall apply himself to cultivating the intelligence of his pupils as well as their memory and language.”

The importance of good manners, external behaviour and appearance were underlined again in this section: “He teaches a course on etiquette and takes any opportunity to teach the pupils politeness.” An aspect that was comprehensively covered after this, in the second section, was the “règlement disciplinaire“. Further, a number of formal, administrative duties were set down, such as keeping lists of attendance and the checking of absentees. In one of the rules it was also expressly determined what the moniteur was not allowed to do:

The teacher must refrain:

1. from hitting, mistreating the pupils, from giving them unjust marks;
2. from keeping the pupils after the regulatory school hours, from removing a pupil from the class and sending him home without the approval of the headmaster;
3. from writing any discourteous note or expression on the pupils books;
4. from preventing a pupil from taking part in examinations;
5. from sending the pupil on errands outside the school, even for things related to the class;
6. from smoking in the schoolrooms in the presence of pupils;
7. from reading newspapers in the playground and especially in the classroom;
8. from writing his classroom diary or preparing lessons during school hours.

Extract 1 – Restrictions laid on the teacher. From the school rules of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in Coquilhatville. Source: Aequatoria Archive.

The first section ends with the list of prayers that must be used in the classroom and with a few quotations about “la récompense du maître chrétien“. These quotations were undoubtedly intended to be motivating. The motivation was not supposed to come from the pay but from the moral satisfaction that flowed from the work of a teacher. Finally there followed the text of the morning prayer for the teacher, which must be prayed before the beginning of every school day (“To nourish his faith, fan the flames of his zeal and in order to receive the light of heaven he needs to guide the children, the teacher will fervently recite the ‘teacher’s prayer’ before school each morning“). In the second section purely disciplinary measures are mentioned. Not that there was nothing said about order and discipline in the first part, but here the behavioural rules for the pupils were set down, while the first part was presented more from the teacher’s perspective. In a number of paragraphs the different aspects of the required behaviour were revealed: entering and leaving, diligence and work, behaviour in class, “classe et classique” (meaning class equipment, JB), order and discipline, playground and recreation, behaviour on the road, cleanliness and politeness, behaviour at church, apologetic and polite expressions.

Order, discipline and self-control were the leading principles in the text. The pupils must always show self-control, they had to fulfil the pattern set down for them both with regard to movement and language. What had to be said, what the pupil had to do and how he had to do it were set down for all forms of communication with adults. If a visitor came into the classroom, the pupils knew what they were supposed to do. They had to stand up and, preferably in chorus, pronounce the appropriate greeting: ‘Some visitors occasionally said: Good day children’ or ‘Praise to J.C.’. The pupils responded: ‘Good day sir…’ or ‘Amen’.” They had to stand up in a particular way: they must look at the visitor modestly and show by a “smiling physiognomy” that they were happy to receive a visit. It is not at all clear what that implied in practice and if it was always done effectively as it was set down. After they had seated themselves again, they must pay attention to the visitor if he had come to say something: “Having sat down appropriately with their arms in the resting position, all eyes and ears were turned to the words of the visitor, who would address them.”

The rules also included prescriptions for behaviour during lessons. The pupils must sit calmly at their desks and should not bother their neighbours. To ask something or to give an answer they must raise their right hand, without snapping their fingers or making other noises. When being asked questions the pupil should stand up next to his desk, “a straight back, head turned towards the teacher, a smiling face“, and answer with a loud and clear voice. Apart from this the rule prescribed silence, order and neatness. It was also prescribed what the pupil was allowed to do outside. That was not much: on the stairs or in the gangways there must be no running and no talking, shouting or whistling. On the playground the same applied: the rule determined that the pupils must play. It even suggested quite strongly what should be played: “The games to be used are ball or Foot-ball (sic).” Also, during play pupils should avoid lying on the ground, pulling each other or fighting. The same rule continued: “Fisticuffs are not to be tolerated.” The pupils must also not hang around near the toilets.

Even outside the school the pupils had to follow a comprehensive code of behaviour: in church but also in the street. A chapter “Behaviour at church” explained how the pupils had to behave at church, how they should come in and how they must sit: “At their place they will worship and avoid making any noise, they will bear themselves appropriately while kneeling or sitting and shall look towards the altar without turning their head from one side to the other.” Again, a strengthened form of discipline applied in the immediate neighbourhood of the church. Playing was not allowed around the church, even before the start of the church service. On the way to school or home the pupils must retain their dignity above all. A number of things were bad, such as “Shouting, racing around; throwing projectiles or giving way to all other misplaced fantasies.” They must greet all those who held positions of superiority with the appropriate respect (and those were particularly priests, religious workers, teachers, all Europeans and the parents of other children). They must above all be helpful. They must show the way for strangers, though without walking with them. Finally, to streamline contact with the outside world even further, this publication listed a number of summed up formulae for politeness, which the pupils were to use in all kinds of circumstances when speaking to adults.

1.2. …and practice?
It looks very much as if people wanted to control what happened in the classroom and even the behaviour of the children outside the classroom as much as possible by fixing it in formulas and procedures. It remains difficult to judge whether this corresponded effectively to reality, or if it remained a wild dream. The guidelines and rules are recognisable in so far as they were also applied in Europe. Just as in nineteenth-century Belgium corporal punishment still existed in spite of all the fuss and the objections that were made about it, also in Congo corporal punishment was still used, even though it was usually against the rules. Jos Moeyens reported such a case in 1934. Somebody called Bolawa, a moniteur in one of the rural schools, in the area of Bamanya, went further than he was allowed to. Paul Jans had him put on the spot for this. According to the report by Moeyens the person concerned had afterwards pulled himself together: “According to the chief moniteur, Louis Nkemba, this moniteur is more ready to take orders and has paid attention to the remarks that were made by the Father P.Jans, rector of Bamanya, and so has delivered evidence of his goodwill. He beats the boys less and when he is teaching explains the lessons better.”[iii] The fact that people here speak of ‘less’ shows that the missionaries had nothing much against a slap being delivered now and again. Only in extreme cases such as this did they have to intervene. In Flandria there were similar but less heavy complaints from the director Frans Maes: “Moniteur Ngola, who is very enthusiastic and competent, has to learn to moderate his expressions and not to react too heavily, for example with Lingala sentences and expressions, as if he was a policeman! I had already mentioned this to him.“[iv]

Again in the number of other cases it is not as clear whether corporal punishment is being referred to or less severe forms of punishment. For example, in an article in the Annals about the school of Mondombe: “‘Petelo’, asked the Father, ‘why haven’t you been to Mass today?’ Without fear but still somewhat abashed he replied ‘Fafa, I was sleepy and too lazy. Was that not a frank answer? Then was heard, severe and earnest: ‘come to my office after school’… The office of the Fafa! .. Very many father-like admonitions were given there. It is sometimes more effective and far-reaching with just two people. In any case, it was certainly good for Petelo. Still, the children know the Father not just as the ‘Man of discipline’.” What is to be understood by this last expression is not completely clear. The Fathers were certainly against the teachers giving the pupils physical punishments. The Pierre Bolowa mentioned was reprimanded and threatened with dismissal. Another moniteur from a rural school in the area was also tackled by the missionaries because of complaints about hitting pupils: “The moniteur: gives a relatively good impression, is clean and tidy. In the presence of the Father and the head he is rather timid in the classroom. It is said that he teaches regularly and well but at the beginning he hit which had caused a few of the Batswa children to run away. The Father reprimanded him on this subject in the presence of the head and the head catechist, reminding him that the school management formally prohibits hitting pupils. If punishment is required, he can send him to the Chief.“[v]

1.2.1. Order and punishment
Order and punishment often went together, for example when working on the field or on a plantation. Jos Cortebeeck writes in one of his articles about the coffee harvest. The Sister on duty kept her eyes open and checked the delivered work of the schoolboys systematically: “At 11 o’clock the coffee gong was beaten and you saw the boys, baskets on their heads, coming from all sides of the coffee plantation, singing and laughing to their mama, by the drying boxes. The Sister busy with the coffee takes the register very carefully, and anyone who has not enough gets a mark and for every mark bakotas (10 cent pieces) are taken away from the week’s or month’s money.”[vi] In the mission of Mondombe the boys had to work in the mornings in the fields, for example in the peanut harvest. This activity was also carefully checked. Rightly, according to the writer of the article: “The Father whistles, it is a signal for the end of the work. Those from the nuts must first be checked. ‘Arms up! …” at this command everyone stretches their arms up and more than one peanut falls to the ground. After that is checked behind the ears. There our head finds more than one unpeeled peanut. Embarrassed they leave.“[vii] The pupils often had to provide their own food, either completely or a great part of it. It was therefore not so surprising that they used all the possibilities of doing this. They used the pauses between the lessons but sometimes they had to go about it in the evenings too, although to do this they had to disobey the rules about curfew.[viii] At the start of the 1930s the state inspector observed that in Flandria the pupils often stayed away for a few days so as to gather rations.[ix]

Taking food belonging to the missionaries without permission was certainly punished. Another quotation about the mission of Flandria shows how this happened: “Fafa Octaaf has dark but sharp eyes and quick hands. Once he caught two schoolboys who were eating from the ‘botanikken’ of the Sisters. He caught them by the scruff of the neck (collar we would say) and put them on their knees in the courtyard in the view of everyone. In front of them were spread the few remaining fruits. ‘Yes you terrible naughty boys, I will send you to Ingende; this afternoon the administrator will come and throw you in the pen! You can wait here on your knees.’ After an hour or so Father Octaaf came to see …[x] The ‘botanikken’ referred to the Sisters’ garden and the fruits that grew on the trees there. The pupils were not allowed there. This was also complained about in other places: “We were not allowed to climb up to search for palm nuts because it belonged to the mission, if not we would be sent from school or punished. We had to go behind the priests’ territory. We collected all the nuts that fell. That was behind their territory. Even the fruits that fell, good grace, you had to be sure that you weren’t seen collecting them!“[xi]

The Fathers were obviously persons that you had to look out for, at least in the view of their Congolese pupils. In the articles that appeared on this in the Annals, that was never said explicitly. In certain passages there was so much emphasis placed on the disciplinary character of the school experience that this almost automatically raises questions about the way in which order and discipline were imposed: “And this school of 400 boys, you don’t hear them, not even in their quarters of stone houses, one house per village, you don’t hear them, you see them in the church but you don’t hear them: there is discipline there, they are drilled, there is a power under it, the secret of the two Sisters, who never hit, never shout, now and again one just moves her head.”[xii] It certainly shows that in a number of cases the disciplinary rules, just as in the example of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, were also applied effectively. That is also apparent from the story already told about Sister Imelda: “Remember that for our new boys it needs a lot of effort to live according to the rules day-in day-out without falling short. The Father likes order and discipline. That is necessary with this gang of rogues. The Father takes care of lighting the fires of diligence under them. Now and then he comes in the school and it is not always to congratulate but also sometimes to ‘reprimand’.“[xiii]

From the point of view of the Fathers that was really just one side of the coin. They also saw themselves as rewarders. The following quotation about this comes from the same article and shows that there were indeed other methods used to bring the young people to the right path. Giving the expectation in the future of particular material benefits to be awarded not only constituted a permitted method to get the boys to do what they wanted them to. The point system referred to here clearly illustrates that the control by the missionaries was applied over a very broad area: black marks could be received in the church, at school and at work. Frans Maes reported somewhere that he had developed a specific point system to ensure better discipline. Obviously, black marks were given out for disobeying the rules, but these could be cancelled by the pupils and there was the possibility in any case of ‘earning’ good points. In this manner, the community also benefited from it: “DISCIPLINE: left something to be desired at the beginning of the school year. This explains the large number of pupils being sent home, at least amongst the older boys. By applying the system of buying back the bad points by voluntary work, I have obtained a good result and at the same time the levelling of the football field was finished faster than planned.”[xiv]

On a certain day Father comes into school and says: “it is already fourteen days since the school has begun… everybody knows the rules and I am going to reward those who keep strictly to them.” And in every class he showed a pair of beautiful trousers, in a khaki colour with a pocket on the side; and with it a leather ‘nkamba’ (belt). beautiful… really beautiful… Everybody wants them and in their imagination they are already at the distribution ceremony of these beautiful trousers at new year. Still so much time to wait and to never be naughty. Oh, that is something else! That is not for everybody. The older ones have understood quickly. (…) They are so excited they are unable to make any noise, and they look at their neighbours as if to say: “shall we really all get such nice trousers with a belt and a pocket in it?” One of the worst dares to ask the Father just that. The answer is: “The ones who do not get a single black mark will get them at the next holiday.” They are disappointed and their heads are full of questions: “Fafa, is there among the 250 boys only one who will be the lucky owner of the trousers with the nkamba?” The Father has read the quandary from their faces and reassures them, with the assurance that there are many of these nice trousers. And then the diligence is awakened. Now to work. (…)   
The first month has passed. The Father comes to the school with his register and very carefully this time the black marks are counted up, those from the prayers, those from the school and those from the work. Those that only have one bad mark are forgiven but the others get a big disappointment: their nice trousers are gone and lost forever.[xv]

Extract 2 – Sister Imelda about the motivational techniques of the Fathers (1937). Source: Aequatoria Archive.

1.2.2. Nature of the punishments
Punishments frequently had a utilitarian character, which can be seen from a number of testimonies from former pupils: “We had to go and look for wood or sticks as punishment if we had to be punished for something.”[xvi] And: “There was a punishment, you had to cut so many square metres of grass. Ten metres or twenty or fifty in length and four metres wide. It had to be cut, eh, and this wasn’t like the lawns we have, it was grass that was taller than us. Or, during break we had to cut fifty pieces of firewood, these were called ‘fascines’.“[xvii] And the missionaries also confirmed this. Fernand Van Linden, who was headmaster in Flandria:[xviii]

Was there much punishment?
FVL: Yes, there was punishment. Gathering wood or getting the food ready. Getting the manioc ready for the women. Or weaving baskets.
Was that really punishment for them?
FVL: Yes, Yes, some days they really wanted to go fishing or hunting but then they had to gather wood.
And if they did not want to do it, would they object?
FVL: Then they could go home.
And they wanted to avoid that?
FVL: Hey, yes![xix]

These types of punishment were also used with the girls: “I was given punishment: for one week I had to cut the grass. I was not allowed to go to class.“[xx] Although this sort of punishment was used conspicuously, the nature of the deserved punishment differed from mission post to mission post and probably depended on the amount of inspiration of the local Fathers. When asked whether there were tasks and chores set as punishment, Stéphane Boale, a former pupil of the school in Bokote, said in the affirmative, at first: “Yes, yes, (very affirmative). Clearly. Work with the coupe-coupe. Tidying the terrain. Yes, or sweeping, things like that.” When asked about possible other types of punishment he said: “That is to say, they all had numerous ways of punishing people. A disruptive person would be expelled if it were serious. If a person did something else, for example with regard to the lessons, if they had not done their homework they were told: “you must write one hundred lines of this or that during your free time.”[xxi]

Nothing was ever published in the MSC publications about real corporal punishment in the sense of beatings. A number of people said that the chicotte was still used in other regions until after the Second World War. At the Sisters in Leopoldville: “They beat you with the chicotte (cane) in front of your parents so that you would not start again.”[xxii] In Stanleyville: “And during our time, I must emphasise to you: the educational theory of corporal punishment was in force. If you were lucky, when you arrived late or when you were caught talking you would only be shouted at but generally it was the cane, you see. You see that shows something of the relationship we had with the teacher.”[xxiii] That was obviously never done in the area of the MSC. No traces can be found of the cane either with the Fathers or the Brothers. In any case, it was expressly stated in the rules of the Brothers that physical punishment was forbidden; only work was provided as a disciplinary measure.

This is not to say, however, that this always corresponded to reality. The moniteurs made the children kneel down as a punishment, or sent them out of the class (in which case they also risked punishment by the missionaries, if they were in the neighbourhood): “Did the moniteurs give a lot of punishment or penalties? Yes! To correct a person they had to be punished. And what were these punishments? For a disruptive pupil? They were made to kneel.”[xxiv] And some teachers did, in fact, hit the children: “Being hit did happen, as it always had an effect on everyone. But usually it was prohibited.”[xxv]

Even the missionaries used different sorts of punishments. Suspension: “If you arrived slightly late, even by five minutes, you would be excluded. So, for example, in the boarding school of the Moniteurs, you were not allowed to talk during the night. The Father supervised there. If you talked and that was found out, it was over. You would be expelled, even during the night.”[xxvi] More physical punishments were also used by the MSC. We have referred previously to statements in the letters from Father Vermeiren, from which it seemed that pupils were hit from time to time. Jean Indenge told of Father Pattheeuws, who came to work at the mission of Wafanya in 1951. His presence was experienced as a welcome relief by the pupils because he, much more than the others, concerned himself with hygiene and feeding the pupils. There was one problem: he kicked the children and punished them: “Every Sunday after Mass, he would inspect the pupils to see those who were not clean. And he would kick those who were dirty. And then the punishment.”[xxvii] These things often happened with the best intentions, from the (biblical) principle “that the rod should not be spared”.

That is also apparent from the anecdote that Rik Vanderslaghmolen told about the school in Bokuma. The primary school there was under the leadership of Father Gaston Heireman. When he built new sanitary installations for his pupils, the following happened: “Gaston came to me one day and said: “Come and look at my new WCs. They’ve all wiped their bottoms on the corners!’ That was really dirty! I said: ‘Gaston: don’t worry about it, it will get better!’ And I had some mortar standing, for I was busy with building. And I took this mortar to the WC, and mixed up quite a lot of pili-pili with it. And I spread this mortar rather thickly on the corners. And the next day we heard the boys running from the WC to the river, yelping. Oh dear, Gaston was really sorry about that. And I was really sorry for what I had done, because he was sorry. That his little boys had so much pain on their bottoms.“[xxviii]

1.3. ‘Trouble in paradise’
It is perhaps not obvious at first sight that the interaction between missionaries and Congolese should not be interpreted one-sidedly as one of patient leaders and obedient or at least docile pupils. Still, a number of indications can be seen. In the previous chapter reference has already been made to a number of conflicts in which the MSC, or some people under them, were involved during their missionary work. There are a number of references to conflicts between missionaries and teachers. We refer here to another conflict, of which many fewer traces are to be found. The events occurred in 1943. In a letter to Mgr. Van Goethem, Father Wauters mentioned a ‘revolt’ by the pupils. A number of the bigger boys who were at boarding school in Bamanya became rebellious and had broken curfew by making extra noise after the second sounding of the gong instead of keeping silent. In spite of reprimands by the missionaries during evening mass they repeated that behaviour on other days. Wauters revealed the case in detail. The way in which he reported the facts gives a completely different view of the relationship of power between Fathers and pupils.

After the second “lokole” (gong) they began, just as on the previous evenings, to make still more noise and to throw stones on the tiles of the colony house. I went there myself and P. René came behind. When the boys saw us coming in the moonlight a group of them ran away behind the side of the colony building (the married people’s side) and began to throw stones at us. We fled up to the veranda and the boys who were on the inside square of the colony were quiet when they saw me. Throwing stones on the roof lasted a few more minutes. The big boys, who were there with me, said that it was the children of the married people. I sent them after the stone throwers but they claimed not to have been able to catch any. Then I called the chiefs of the boys and the third class of training college to my room. They insisted that the stone throwers were boys from Bamanya, those of the married couples or those that were lodging with the married people. But the next day they went and told Brother Director that they had not accused the children of the married couples but that I had done so. (Br. Director naturally believed the boys but not the Father.) So with this opinion and going by what the boys of the third year teacher training had told me, the next day before the Mass I called the boys of the married people out of the desks and made them all kneel down in the choir. After the Holy Mass I told them that I was putting them all out of the class. After school the parents came to palaver. They swore up and down that their children were innocent, that it was the boys of the colony themselves who were guilty. Their children went to sleep in good time, they said, and they did not allow them to run around after dark. I began to doubt the guilt of these boys and then I told the two catechists and the five moniteurs to investigate and come and tell me the results. The outcome was that the children of the married people were innocent and that the incitement was from the biggest boys of the colony. (…) When the case was finished, I made the boys who sleep in the colony work all day as punishment. When, in the afternoon after work, they had been to the river and were coming back, on the way they did nothing other than curse the married people with the foulest “bitoli”. When Father René that same evening went to serve a dying man in the village, he was catcalled by a group of boys from the colony as he went by. Then the boys ran away. Then I forbad the boys from the colony from taking the sacrament. The next evening the boys were quiet but when Father René went to his room he found the keyhole of his door blocked up with pieces of wood, so he had to work for a long time until he could get it open. The next day he found his door had been written on with chalk. It made fun of his baldness.[xxix]

Extract 3 – From the letter of Father Wauters about the ‘revolt’ of the students (1943). Source: Aequatoria Archive.

In spite of this it appears from other witnesses that the curfew was strongly applied. Jean Indenge says the following about a curfew in Wafanya and the punishments connected to it: “A 8 p.m. the bell went, to go to sleep. And then the principal moniteur would call an assembly. If he missed a person – and it did happen that he missed people – older boys who had slipped away for two reasons, one of two reasons. Either they had gone fishing at night – but nobody would tell them that. Or the head moniteur thought perhaps they had gone to the city to look for women. We were 12, 13 years old so that wasn’t our problem. But there were some who were 18 and then they had to be supervised! An absence like that, obviously, that meant being suspended. Not having spent the night inside.“[xxx]

This story is situated in the 1940s, and it happened in a more isolated mission post, whilst in the incident reported above it was older pupils who were involved, in the neighbourhood of the ‘big’ town. At that moment the pupils had the courage to act against the Fathers, although not enough to do it openly. The authority of the missionaries over their daily affairs was still strong enough to keep them disciplined. In this a number of intermediaries such as moniteurs and catechists were also called in, these were close to the missionaries and had themselves a certain measure of authority. According to the testimony of former students this situation also evolved. There are however absolutely no traces to be found of cooperation between moniteurs and pupils in the missionary sources we consulted. Jean Boimbo declared though, that private lessons in French were given by the teachers to the pupils outside school hours.[xxxi]

The missionaries must have been somewhat alarmed, however. In inspection reports complaints were sometimes found that there were deviations away from spoken language. Hulstaert and Moentjens sometimes referred to the use of French during and outside the lessons or also to the wrongful use of French by the Brothers but had never talked about the systematic teaching of French by moniteurs. The reprimands for such situations certainly did not occur only with the MSC. Also in other regions the language that had been chosen for education was strongly adhered to, made as obligatory as possible and, indeed, there were frequently punishments.[xxxii]

Rhythm
2.1. The rhythmic passing of the school day
2.1.1. The pupils’ drill
One of the first accounts of the course of a school day may be found in the Annals of Our Lady of the Sacred Heart from 1927. Marcel Es described his work at the mission school in Boende and began with the morning gymnastics of the pupils: “Then the morning exercises are especially useful to bring in some liveliness: the teacher ensures they warm-up. It goes with ‘apparase de repos! En posisson! Un, deux, twa, quat! En ava! en arrière’.” (…) “But once they are at work together they forget all their small miseries. Then everyone dances forward to the rhythm of their singing: and then they feel no hunger, no thirst, no tiredness or pain, until mouths and arms fall still.” (…) “Then it is time that the fafa whistles them together to go to the class in ranks. A and o, and e, and i, and u, that goes well; 2+ 2 = 4 and 3 – 1 = 2, that goes well too. But when it gets more difficult or if the class lasts too long for their taste – and that is quickly the case – then their heads get so tired! Some I have to wake up from a soft, pleasant nap.“[xxxiii]

If anything can be deduced from this report, then it is the importance attached to drill in the school. In the mornings there was an assembly with physical exercises, in groups. After this came the work and here, too, the rhythm and disciplined character of the activities was very important. It is an element that is always present in the stories and reports. For example, in the account by Sister Godfrieda published in 1934 in the Annals: “Every two hours… lokole! Each person jumps up praying and then goes his own way. Then back to school… The road to the village is black with boys! Quickly the small bell tolls that calls them to the line; they saunter to their places amid great chattering. The main bell!.. they fall silent. Sr. Ghislena is standing on the veranda and orders: ‘fiks!’ and seven hundred and fifty pairs of arms go down… ‘Bum’bakata!’ They fold their hands… ‘A fina!’ They pray a Hail Mary, and then they all go into their own classroom.“[xxxiv] The lokole or gong played an important role in de school day, for the most important dividing moments were marked by it, as the school bell did elsewhere.

The former Trappist Brokerhoff also began his description of the working day at the mission post of Wafanya with physical exercises: “After completion of the daily exercises, which last about half an hour, the morning tasks of the missionary are interrupted by a half-hour rest.” (…) “It is in this break that one really enjoys the Congo.” The break was probably for the pupils to go to mass, or to wash themselves. “Just at half past six or a few moments before a small bell rings in the refectory. It is time for breakfast. In the meantime the tasks of the day are prepared and discussed and after a quarter of an hour this first operation is finished. A pipe is filled or a cigarette is lit and one is ready for the show to begin. Now you hear the word Ngaga! (the bell) and the big bell in the hallway sounds. Twelve good strokes and the person who has sounded them, one of the table boys, rushes like the wind to the tam-tam and, helped by one or two of his friends beats with all his might to tell everyone that work – manual work for the older ones and school work for the small and middle-sized – is starting.”[xxxv] In the teacher training college in Bamanya there was a similar routine in the early 1950s, as related by Jean Boimbo: “But I was a domestic, a server for the Brothers. What I had to do, preparing food (…) When we left Mass, we had a kind of cupboard, chests, there were three of us, working for the Brothers, serving the Brothers. The chests always stayed there. The Sisters prepared omelettes, the lunch. (JB: That had to be carried?) They were given to us. The Brothers ate and once they had finished eating we cleared everything up. At eight the bell went and we had to go to class.“[xxxvi]

Next, pupils were assembled. This was also done in a quasi-military way: “Approximately 20 minutes after the beating of the tam-tam they are pretty much all there. In the boys’ quarters the scholars and the big boys stand, separately, in two straight lines. The two teachers for the first, and the capita (headman) for the second, stand to one side or behind them. They hardly see us coming before a command rings out and everyone stands in ranks with the little finger lined up with the seam of their trousers. I go to the middle, just in front of the picture of the Sacred Heart, look around to see if everything is in order and say loudly: ‘A Jina’, at which everybody makes the sign of the cross. Then in the Lonkundo language ‘Do you believe in Christ (Fomemi a Jesu Kristo) and all answer aloud ‘Bideko l’Adeko’.” (…) “Now it is the turn of the schoolboys. Assembly is held in the same way for them. Then when all the names have been called off there is the command ‘fiks’ and they stand there looking at the ‘fafa’ and now a half-hour of exercises can start.“[xxxvii]

That quasi-military character is not a gratuitous interpretation. The missionaries, after all, frequently called on soldiers to take care of the physical condition of the pupils. That was certainly the case in the early years of missionary activity. The Daughters of Charity called on the services of an army sergeant during the first school years in Coquilhatville to take care of the physical education.[xxxviii] A military man was also hired in Mondombe: “Albert Bomanga, a former corporal, gave gymnastics each day at quarter to seven.”[xxxix] It was also common practice later, in which, according to a circular from Hulstaert from 1939, the administration also cooperated: “The administration has announced that the cooperation of soldiers is available, especially with the idea of teaching moniteurs gymnastics, so that they can stand on their own feet later. It would be best if the local school management asked the army command concerned (or the A.T.), at least in places where there are soldiers. In the case of important garrisons, instruction can be given by officers and NCOs, so long as it is necessary to train the native moniteurs. The lessons should take place at most twice a week, preferably from 4 to 5 pm.“[xl]

Frequently, the missionaries considered these exercises to be a separate part of the day, not part of the education, although from 1929 it was included in the curriculum. In 1930 Petrus Vertenten wrote explicitly in his inspection report about Mondombe: “The time given for gymnastics and the experimental garden cannot be taken during lesson time.”[xli] This same thought also comes through in the introduction of the following quotation from Brokerhoff: “When the gymnastic lesson is finished, school begins. Divided into three classes our little curly heads sit on the school desks to sharpen up their understanding with all sorts of subjects connected with education. Reading, writing, arithmetic, song, geography, introduction to weights and measures, drawing, French, there you see the daily programme.” In the letter from Hulstaert that was just quoted it seems from the arrangements in connection with the time of the gymnastics lessons that he also does not consider it a part of the school day.

Discipline was often by far the most important element of the programme, although it was not listed as such. The Annals relatively often refer to the orderly and disciplined character of the pupils: “The clarion calls for the second time; in front of every classroom a double line of eager-to-learn youths forms. Here or there a chatterer dares say a word; but the chin of Sister Bernardine goes up threateningly and forces a reverent silence. Now the rows slowly push into the class.”[xlii] In inspection reports, too, order and discipline were invariably considered as important elements and it was emphasised how this was brought into class life in practice: “The attitude of the pupils: entering and leaving in silence and in a line without any disorder. In class they keep quite, straight, hand on the desk.“[xliii]

In articles in the mission periodical, the authors liked, probably unconsciously, to play on the difference between the natural disorder of the children and the order that resulted from the intervention of the missionaries. That can be seen, for example, from the same article by Brokerhoff: “When the first lesson, which lasts until 9 o’clock, has finished and the school bell has rung, they all storm outside to enjoy themselves with a ball or some other game or maybe to take a snack. A half hour break is always over too quickly for their taste; for when, a couple of minutes after half past nine, the bell calls them back into school, patience is needed until the last pupil is present.”[xliv] Another example, from Father Caudron, again in de Annals of the Sacred Heart: “You were standing chattering and cackling, calling and shouting: the last stroke of the bell sounded and in an instant all the noise stopped and you stood like drilled soldiers stock-still in the ranks. That was discipline!“[xlv]

2.1.2. The (school) timetable
As present in the sources as the element of discipline is the use of time, the division of the school day into blocks. The lesson times were regularly interrupted to relax, to go to mass or to eat but the actual lesson time was six hours: two times one and a half hours in the morning, and three hours in the afternoon. The ‘rhythm’ of the school day, the division into relatively short lesson units, was typical because it was assumed that the restricted attention span of the Congolese children had to be taken into account. This opinion was very widespread, so much so that even at the start of the 1950s the colonial educational administration distributed a note to all school directors, Recommendation for the establishment of daily timetables, in which rules were given for splitting up the school day.

It is recommended to take the following into account insofar as possible for school management:

1. Plan lessons that require more concentration in the morning and insofar as possible at the beginning of the day or after a break. Courses that require an intense intellectual effort from the pupils certainly differ according to the type of school; in any event it may be said that subjects relating to mathematics, writing, explained reading, grammar and systematic exercises in observation and speaking certainly belong to this category.
2. Avoid excessively long lessons (partly ineffective insofar as they exceed the attention span of the pupils) and lessons that are too short (for example in some subjects, like arithmetic, in which Congolese pupils are relatively slow).
3. If a subject only has two lessons available per week, avoid putting them on two consecutive days.
4. If studying a subject requires more than six lessons a week and if it is consequently necessary to put two courses of the same subject on the timetable on the same day, separate these two lessons with one or more subjects relating to a different subject area than that of the two lessons concerned.
5. If it is necessary to arrange more than two lessons consecutively that require considerable attention from the recipient, have the pupils take some short physical exercise to relax between the lessons (a few minutes of easy gymnastics or rhythmic or free walking, or singing or simply a free break).
6. Each time the morning lends itself to it, include practical work during the lesson itself.[xlvi]

Excerpt 4 – From the circular on drawing up timetables, Aequatoria Archive.

This circular raised the disgust of Frans Maes. He noted a number of remarks in the margin of the article that reflect his irritation well. Concerning the attention span: “Who will determine that?” About recreation: “As though distraction could suddenly stop!” And on the slowness of the Congolese children in arithmetic: “Not just them, South African blacks too.” His indignation was partly based on research that he had carried out himself into the speed of the African children in arithmetic exercises. As a result of this note he carried out a supplementary test with children at the HCB school in Flandria. In the different classes he did a Bourdon test with letters.[xlvii] From this he concluded that even half an hour of concentration was not too long for the children: “The best performance was even reached towards the end of the ½ hour; so tiredness could not be observed! (naturally, if the effort is not demanded too often per day: e.g. 2x as a maximum for such efforts, which are in fact never demanded in ordinary lessons, even in arithmetic!).“[xlviii]

He repeated these remarks in a letter that he wrote to Moentjens.[xlix] Maes again rather strongly criticised the education officials who had composed the memo: “These worthy advisors are very mild with their advice but applying it in practice mostly causes problems that they don’t seem to concern themselves with. They just transplant Belgian rules here, without any previous study. And just what sort of rules, too… they stink of old parchment and school grind, of the irresponsible system of ‘sticking together like oat ears and chaff’. They seem to be quite some specialists giving you advice such as ‘place … the lessons that need the most attention after a break.’ Just as if these boys could go in a minute from relaxation to effort just through willpower.” However, Maes was an exception, probably under the influence of his university training (he had studied education for two years before leaving for the Congo).

Other missionaries seemed to have accepted the popular prejudices about the Africans’ capacity for understanding. On this we can refer to the pronouncements quoted in chapter 4. Especially in girls’ education and for the Batswas these sorts of difficulties were mentioned. Vertenten wrote about the girls in Bamanya: “The education is very intuitive. The R. Sister explains herself well in Lonkundo, she lives for her class. That is the secret of her success, which is considerable, when we know how difficult it is to keep the attention of young native girls.”[l] However, according to him that applied just as much to the boys: “One has to make their classes interesting in all sorts of ways, treating the dry material briefly and clearly, one can ask a short period of attention from them. Sometimes five minutes is already too much; if some begin to stare into space, that is the moment to change the subject before their eyelids close.”[li] Later these sort of remarks disappeared for the most part from the discourse and references to the characteristics of the Congolese became more vague, at least in the context of the sources on school life.[lii] Hulstaert wrote somewhat more carefully about the Batswa in 1939: “The school curriculum is regularly followed so far as the subjects are concerned, still the pupils cannot follow the prepared division of the material. But this is not so important. We have to adapt ourselves to the lower state of development of the boys. Certainly, the desire for a free life and the memory of it play a certain role in the difficulties of bringing the Batswa to the level of the prescribed curriculum.”[liii]

Still, the timetable used continued to show the same characteristics throughout the colonial period, fitting in clearly with the old-fashioned rules. Only in the initial period a much less structured curriculum was used in a number of places. In the initial phase the school in Flandria only provided three classes, where a complete subject was taught first before the next one was begun. The children first learned reading and writing, then they learned arithmetic. In the first instance Hulstaert (who was then the head of school) blamed that on the poor material circumstances: “The lower course is mainly concerned with reading and writing, the two others mainly apply themselves to arithmetic, at differing degrees, you understand. We have not yet been able to introduce the regular application of the planned curriculum. The circumstances simply do not allow it.”[liv] Hardly half a year later, however, he remarked: “I will content myself simply by saying that the situation is generally the same as during the previous term. The only facts to be noted are that the lower class has started studying arithmetic after having perfected writing and reading written texts.”[lv] Apart from this, school days passed according to fixed and rhythmical changes of subjects. Later, too, such systems remained in vogue in many schools of the vicariate. The examples that are reported here show timetables respectively from the boys’ primary school in Wafanya (1930),[lvi] the rural primary school of Mpenjele near Bamanya (1941),[lvii] and the boys’ primary school in Bamanya (1954).[lviii]

In Wafanya in 1930, the school day only lasted for half a day, all together three hours and a half per day. The school day was divided into two blocks, one of an hour and a half and one of an hour and three-quarters. They were divided by a break of one quarter of an hour. The first block was divided into three periods, one of a quarter, one of three quarters and one of half an hour, which did contain different subjects, however. Only the first period of a quarter of an hour was always the same: religion (and religious history, but that was of course a very homogeneous package). The second block after the break had only two periods but was all in all much more fragmented. The first period was no less than an hour and a quarter long but in that the most diverse subjects were taught, sometimes three successively. The second period was then only half an hour long and contained one or two subjects.

In the rural school of Mpenjele the curriculum guide of 1941 provided four blocks of a maximum of 60 to 75 minutes. The central point was the morning, with two and a quarter hours of lessons. In the afternoon there was only teaching for an hour and forty minutes. Of this the last twenty minutes were spent singing. Most time was spent on the subjects religion (40 minutes every day) and reading (45 minutes every day). Sometimes a whole hour was spent on dictation, but not every day. The other subjects took up barely twenty minutes each. The agricultural activity before starting the real lessons lasted, in fact, the longest: an hour every day.

The timetable from Bamanya for the 1950s was much more complete, which shouldn’t be surprising considering the year and the place. Still, here too, a number of guiding principles can be observed that correspond in part with the principles used by the administration. The largest part of the ‘theoretical’ teaching material came first, in the morning. As always, this was headed by the most important part, religion. All together, this lasted less than two hours. Subsequently, there was a second ‘cluster’, in which no religious work was expected: gym, recreation and handicrafts. The afternoon consisted of two hours of lessons: a first, more theoretical hour, but here again the second half was devoted to ‘lighter’ material (singing and causeries). The second hour was again filled with physical work.

Wafanya 1930: boys’ primary school (original in French).

	8.00-8.15	8.15-9.00	9.00-9.30	9.45-11.00	11.00-11.30
Monday	religionreligious history	readingdictation	monetary and metric system	writingdrawing ornamentation French 1/4h.°	arithmetic
Tuesday	religionreligious history	writingcalligraphy	arithmetic	monetary metric system	readingdictation
Wednesday	religionreligious history	calligraphydictation French°	arithmetic	hygieneintuition the time wall charts	readingdictation
Thursday	religionreligious history	readingdictation	monetary metric system	writingcalligraphy	intuitiondrawing
Friday	religionreligious history	readingdictation	writingdrawing ornamentation	arithmeticFrench 1/4h.°	clock readingmonetary and metric system geography*

°1/4 of an hour French for the first year of the second grade.

*1/4 of an hour geography for the first year of the second grade.

—

Mpenjele 1941: primary school (original in Dutch).

08.00-09.00: agricultural work: manioc, peanuts, palm trees, etc.

09.00-09.40: religion

09.40-10.00: writing

10.00-10.15: playtime

10.15-11.00: reading

11.00-11.30: language, speaking

11.30-14.30: noon break

14.30-15.00: dictation

15.00-15.30: dictation or drawing

15.30-15.50: playtime

15.50-16.10: causerie – about plants, trees, objects, etc.

16.10-16.30: singing

—-

Bamanya 1954: first year primary school (original in French).

	Monday	Tuesday	Thursday	Friday		Wednesday	Saturday
8.00-8.30	religion	religion	religion	religion	8.00-8.30	religion	religion
8.30-9.00	reading	reading	reading	reading	8.30-9.10	reading	reading
9.00-9.20	cop. dict.	obs. eloc.	obs. eloc.	cop. dict.	9.10-9.40	obs. eloc.	recitation
9.20-9.50	arithmetic	arithmetic	metr. syst.	arithmetic	9.40-10.00	gymnastics	gymnastics
9.50-10.10	gymnastics	gymnastics	gymnastics	gymnastics	10.00-10.25	recreation	recreation
10.10-10.25	recreation	recreation	recreation	recreation	10.25-11.00	metr. syst.	arithmetic
10.25-11.30	agr. work.	man. work	agr. work	man. work	11.00-12.00	agr. work	drawing
					agr. work = agricultural work
14.00-14.30	reading	arithmetic	arithmetic	reading	man. work = manual work
14.30-15.00	singing	hygiene	singing	causerie	cop. dict. = copying & dictation?
15.00-16.00	man. work	agr. work	man work.	agr. work	obs. eloc.= observation & elocution?

Extract 5 – School timetables applicable at three different places and times. From Aequatoria Archive.
2.2. The rhythm of the lessons: reprise

The emphasis on rhythm and regularity is strongly evident in the lessons themselves. References to repetition, and to repetitive patterns, are legion. In 1939, Henri Adriaensen wrote: “Next door in the school the boys drone out their reading lesson together.” (…) “How quiet the mission is now. In the distance I hear boys singing songs in the school. Every afternoon they do that for the last quarter of an hour.”[lix] De Rop in 1947, about the mission of Imbonga: “14.00 h.: after the midday break: just go to check whether everybody’s at his place and if the school boys are back in the class. Yes, they are there, I can already hear the droning of the lessons.”[lx] Here in 1957 again, about the school in Bamanya: “The roof of the teacher training college shines in the sun. In one class the lesson is being repeated aloud. A moniteur taps his pointer on the board or on his lectern.”[lxi]

In the classroom itself, and in the context of the teaching activity, repetition was not only a means to discipline, but also an educational principle. There was a lot of repetition, both by the missionaries themselves and by the teachers. Many courses were partially repeated during the school year but this principle was also used when learning new subjects: “Repetition must really never be neglected, especially in subjects of general education, such as arithmetic, language, science. Not only should one repeat from time to time some part of the material to be taught but also in the meantime (in new subjects too) one should make use of favourable opportunity – just for a few moments – to come back to some point or another.”[lxii] This repetition, Hulstaert thought, was necessary to bring the pupils to a good understanding of the material to be learned. If it were to go too fast, they would not be able to keep up. This was, in fact, one of the more pedagogically directed points of criticism that he formulated with reference to the education by the Brothers of the Christian Schools in Bamanya: “We must make a few general remarks concerning the curriculum. We have been following what is common at the school in Tumba. However, this institution has 6 years of primary school. Consequently they are obliged to force the execution of the curriculum, especially for arithmetic. This situation is not beneficial to a good understanding of the subject matter and prevent it from entering into the pupils’ minds properly.“[lxiii] The school in Bamanya only had 5 school years and therefore work had to be done more quickly and there could be less repetition.

In his report about the Batswa school in Flandria, a few years later, he emphasised repetition once again: “Repetition of what has been seen earlier must be done regularly; otherwise the connection would be lost. The more often this is done the better. This is especially important in arithmetic and language. The metric system should be reviewed carefully in all classes because the foundations are lacking. The subjects of the 4 principal calculation operations also need to be revised, since they form the key to further arithmetic education and without this knowledge and those concepts one is left hanging. The boys will not, then, be able to enjoy arithmetic. The same thing applies, mutatis mutandis, for language teaching.”[lxiv] A few years later he came back to this again in his discussion of the girls’ school in Bamanya: “In general a lot needs to be repeated and improved if one wants to bring the highest class up to a certain level.”[lxv] He did, however, make a clear distinction between repeating material and the slavish repetition of things that had been learned. In an inspection report from 1944 he observed: “Right down to the lowest classes it is a joy to hear the children explaining Bible stories, for example, in a way that shows they understand what they are saying: it is something quite different from the slavish repetition which one sometimes hears in other schools.“[lxvi]

That slavish repetition was, however, very present in education, which is apparent from several remarks. Vertenten wrote in 1930: “For arithmetic the results still leave much to be desired. The children do not understand the problems they solve without fault but automatically and without having properly understood them.”[lxvii] Hulstaert himself remarked on it repeatedly. In a report about the girls’ school in Bamanya, in 1936, he wrote: “It is undoubtedly a model school. The Reverend Sister is completely dedicated to her children and is a sound teacher. The curriculum is completely adapted to the mentality and the level of development of the pupils. No bluff, no stuffing memories but a constant striving to make the lessons as practical as possible, to weave them into the thought processes and the emotional life of the children, in a word to stretch them to a real development of spirit and heart.“[lxviii] Too much memorising was also one of the things he accused the Brothers of. In 1944 he stated in his report about the boys’ primary school in Bamanya that in all subjects, there was far too much call on the memory, which was not good for conceptual understanding.[lxix] In the 1950s it was also regularly remarked, particularly in the little bush schools, that too much was memorised and that there was too much automatism in the manner of teaching. In the writing lessons too much was copied and in the reading lessons too much was automatically droned out.[lxx] Moentjens gave the following advice in a report from 1951 to one of the teachers in Flandria: “With the 2nd year the moniteur must also avoid reading-by-heart, especially by getting the weaker elements to spell the syllables and even the letters.”[lxxi] The same defect was also later commented on, both in well-established as well as in newly founded schools.[lxxii]

If the lessons were too repetitive in a number of cases there were undoubtedly various reasons for this. Sometimes the material circumstances of education favoured memory work and repetition. It was remarked in this regard in 1956 that writing was difficult in the rural school of Beambo. The pupils had no school desks and they had to hold their notebooks on their knees. In another case, the entire Lonkundo lesson was copied on the board. The teacher himself had no textbook, he had to go and borrow one from a colleague. The pupils themselves had no book. Other missionaries remarked that it was characteristic of the Congolese that they could work well with their memory and following that insight ‘repetitive methods’ were therefore often used. Sister Auxilia, who was greatly appreciated by Hulstaert, also used repetition methods in Bamanya. To her own account, she tried to get more out of that. In the biblical history lessons she started with using the wall pictures but: “Great importance is given to lively, though unaffected retelling of the lessons. 4th and 5th also reproduce the lessons in written form, with the help of questions.” Further, songs were also learned by heart. The pupils had to write down the text by heart, whereby starting points for causeries were identified, according to the Sister.[lxxiii]

Transmitting the teaching material
3.1. Teaching by observation
In several inspection reports the emphasis was strongly laid on the necessity of a more demonstrative education. Particularly Hulstaert used the term rather often: “Another remark should be made about arithmetic: this subject should be made more demonstrative, especially in the lower classes, and with more variety (abacus alone for example is not sufficient). In different classes this defect is noticeable, especially in insufficient understanding of division, of fractions, and of the metric system. It is therefore to be recommended that these points should be covered properly, preferably from the beginning, and more graphically.”[lxxiv] There was not a lot of theory behind this. People especially wanted to use a more concrete method because observation was considered better for stimulating the understanding of the pupils than a purely theoretical form of education. From the tone of the inspection reports it can be inferred that an observation based method was not prevalent always and everywhere: “The school runs quite regularly. The courses are given carefully and following a method. Nevertheless, it is often necessary to monitor the native moniteurs closely. These, in fact, easily forget to use the method during their lessons which was taught to them and of which they are continually reminded by the Brother Headmaster.“[lxxv] Hulstaert also noted that elsewhere. In Bamanya the principle was, according to him, used correctly in the teaching of agriculture. For example, the use of native fertiliser could be demonstrated well in the experimental gardens: “However, it would really be useful if the boys could try some real tests in the direction of improving cultivation. It must also be ensured that the boys learn to save seed for the next planting season; that is a point of educational value.[lxxvi]

He also thought that giving concrete examples in other subjects should be taken up. Practical applicability was used strongly as a criterion: “For the lessons in hygiene, the same method could be further developed, so the value would be increased. Br. Florent, for example, would certainly like to do that. In lessons about mosquitoes, for example, useful tests could be done; you could add: tracking down breeding grounds, pest control and so forth. In Bamanya this will also be useful from a practical point of view.”[lxxvii] He repeatedly hammered the point home of the necessity of more ‘illustration’: “It is further to be expected that especially the boys in the lower classes should get more graphical education in arithmetic. There should in fact be no calculation at all done without everybody doing it using their fingers or having objects before their eyes. The same goes for the metric system.”[lxxviii] Later he broadened his argument to all the teaching material: “For all subjects the illustrative method could in fact be used more. The pupils could be interested in this. And with a people that are strongly under the influence of superstition that is doubly useful.”[lxxix]

In 1941 he further defined what he meant exactly by that. The director of the school in Flandria had said the level of lower classes was too low because of the lack of preparation by the teachers. Hulstaert agreed with that and advocated better preparation in general. He also saw another means for improving performance: “If it does not improve in spite of that, then other causes must be sought and it must be considered whether the initial education needs to be better adapted. I think that, in this sense, particularly your school needs to work on modern methods used in Europe: globality, concreteness, better adaptation to the intuitive nature of your pupils, and so on. Sister Imberta should know about these work methods and it would be good if she could look in that direction.”[lxxx] A couple of years earlier he said something similar about the school in Flandria: “They give a lot of time to singing, games handicrafts, etc. that are attractive to the children yet still educational.”[lxxxi] These pronouncements seem at first sight to contradict the attitude of Hulstaert as it was described earlier. What he called ‘modern methods’ were the elements of the New School movement (the global reading method, for example) that could fit into his indigenistic point of view. It is probably not a coincidence that he used these terms in a letter that, according to Vinck, was written at the time that he became aware of certain educational studies. Apart from this it also shows that Hulstaert in his function of inspector thought that methods used in class were not concrete enough.

In the kindergartens of the vicariate the Sisters already worked regularly according to ‘modern’ principles. According to Hulstaert they used the Fröbel method in Flandria, but it is difficult to discover what that consisted of exactly: “A lot of attention, sense, observation exercises, etc. were done. A little in primary education, too. This last is kept to a strict minimum and is used only insofar as it helps the Fröbel education method.” In the same report Hulstaert also made a number of suggestions, which implies that these things had not been done previously. In âprticular, he quite strongly emphasised the use of native games, songs and verses.[lxxxii] Elsewhere there was talk of a Montessori school: it was mentioned incidentally in an article about the mission post of Mondombe. Again, here it was a Sister, Imelda, who was leading the educational project. The only other thing that was said about the school was that the children did a dance in good order and discipline for the Father who was visiting the village.

3.2. Visual material
The administration also stimulated schools to use visual material. In 1940 a competition was set up for designing wall posters, in the context of the lessons on hygiene. The purpose was to develop two series of wall posters on the basis of which lessons could be given, with the cooperation of the teaching staff everywhere in the colony. The first series should illustrate ‘cleanliness’ in its differing facets (propreté du corps, propreté de la maison, propreté du linge, le repas familial, le village bien entretenu, …)[lxxxiii], the second series must contain information on the tsetse fly, first aid in the case of cuts and wounds and on alcoholism and abstinence.[lxxxiv] That principle was also applied again later, in the context of agriculture, which experienced a revival in the early 1950s. In the context of the policy of paysannats there was an attempt to combat the exodus from the land and agriculture was promoted again, more than ever, to the Congolese population.[lxxxv] Education played its role in this; the mission inspectors were mobilised. Moentjens recommended the propaganda material from the administration in a circular to the mission superiors. It would be useful as an educational aid in the theoretical agriculture lessons: “I have the honour of sending you, in a separate package, 6 posters intended as agricultural propaganda. These posters are published for promoting the appreciation of agriculture among the population, especially among young people currently in school, who are all too inclined to turn away from agriculture. They offer the best instructional material when discussing causeries on that subject.”[lxxxvi]

Other types of wall posters were also very sought after. Especially in the context of religious education this was a regularly used teaching tool. The Sisters in Bamanya used wall posters from Speybroeck – Bonne Presse in the 1930s for the lessons in biblical history.[lxxxvii] Hulstaert also noted it in 1939 in the inspection report of the Batswa school in Flandria: “In the same sense more use could be made of the posters in religious education. The Spanish text of the existing posters could be translated into Lonkundo.“[lxxxviii] The precise manner in which the posters were used is not apparent from the pieces in the archives.

In some inspection reports from the early 1950s there is an allusion to their use: “In addition the lesson is illustrated with a picture representing J.C. attached to the scourging post. The moniteur should have used it more and his lesson would have been even more interesting.“[lxxxix] And: “Third year: catechism lesson on the readministering of baptism. The text is well written on the board. The lesson started with an explanation of a picture representing the baptism of Jesus where the pupils had to try to recognise the various people. Afterwards we continued learning the text and its explanation.”[xc] Stéphane Boale, who was at school in the same period in Bokote, spoke in similar terms about the use of the wall pictures: “There were images for all the subjects. For example, imagine you were giving a lesson on Adam and Eve. Do not think they did not have illustrations to accompany this lesson! For everything, no matter what subject, if you were talking about anatomy, hygiene, religion. First of all, there was an intuitive lesson. Firstly one asked what could be seen and then the pupils would talk about everything they could see and the explanation of the illustrations would only follow afterwards.“[xci]

Sometimes the use of more ‘visual’ methods came from material necessity. In this way the mission inspector advised the reading lessons to be written on the board in extenso in the girls’ school in Flandria because there were not enough reading books to let everyone follow at the same time.[xcii] That this in its turn would give rise to memory work had been mentioned earlier. However, it could be done differently. In the same school, inspector Moentjens praised the reading methods of the teacher a few years later: “1^st year Lonkundo reading lesson: this is written on the board and always is explained well first, that is to say, the teacher asks the pupils for the meaning, explains it further and shows the application of every word in one or several sentences. This seems to me to be a very good method of education. Finally the reading on the board is taken up.”[xciii]

In a number of cases teachers went a step further in this illustrative aspect. At the boys’ school in Bamanya bible scenes were played out during religion lessons from 1937 onwards. Probably they were a sort of tableaux vivants, in which the moniteur played a role as well. Hulstaert thought that a very positive development: “They not only go down very well with the pupils; but make it possible to get more into the studied subject better and improve their way of expressing their feelings (sic), which we try hard to make more dignified while preserving their character of natural native. These attempts are done in all classes but they are the most advanced in the lower class under the direction of the moniteur BOMPOSO Antoine.”[xciv] In a number of schools this was in fact carried out outside the actual hours of lessons. In time they began to put on real plays. These performances almost always had a religious content and were frequently commentated on in the publications of the MSC. After all, they were excellent proof of what could be achieved with young Congolese. At the same time the missionaries wanted to show in this way that they had respect for the local culture.

Contents of the lessons
4.1. Examples
Finding an example of concrete lesson content is not straightforward. The inspection reports do describe the performance and attitude of the teachers and sometimes also the names of the topics dealt with but the way in which the teaching material was put across was seldom put on paper. Highly exceptional, in that context, are a few example lessons, which can be found in the Aequatoria Archive. These are only two short notes written in 1936 by Petrus Vertenten. They were almost certainly used by the moniteurs, probably for a few years. Hulstaert succeeded Vertenten as inspector and he referred to the use of the term “décimes” for a tenth of a Franc in a report. This term was, in the context of units of currency, rather unusual but Vertenten did use it in the example lesson shown here. Therefore, it is probable that this example lesson was actually used in the class. Whether the rigorous work methods, which Vertenten described, were applied to the same extent is more difficult to discover. Hulstaert made no comments on Vertenten’s methods. That is unsurprising, for these example lessons started from a concrete situation and it was a school example of learning by repetition.[xcv] Starting with a concrete question (“how much is seven times five centimes?”), an explanation was given of how the franc was divided up (the concepts “centime” – one-hundredth of a franc – and “décime” – one tenth of a franc), which differed from the division the Congolese used. The notation was explained in detail. The operations ‘division’ and ‘multiplication’ were illustrated, coupled to each other, and this in both directions.

Vertenten also gave practical tips for the religion lesson but in this case there was no detailed example lesson as for the subject ‘arithmetic’. More general rules were given to the moniteurs. Again here the principle of repetition was present: as much as could be done, certain points had to be raised again and again. It had elements of project learning, with the understanding that these projects were essentially religious or moral in nature. The example lesson itself was no more than a summing up of religious rules. Vertenten only gave a few pedagogical rules in a nutshell at the beginning of the lesson. It was very clear from these to what degree the religious element was a decisive element within education and how in practice this pushed the educational element sensu stricto into the background.

—
Arithmetic lesson: End first year second grade.

Write or make them write on the board the value of 7 coins of 5 centimes.
Show the 7 coins
Test the pupils
Praise the one that succeeds in writing down this value
1 lièke: 5 centimes are a 20^th of a franc. 1/20 of a fr. equals 5 centimes.
What’s a centime?
It’s a hundredth of a franc.
Show ONE CENTIME 1/100 of a fr. 1: 100 = 1/100
Expressed in francs one centime is ZERO francs 0,
One centime is not a tenth of a franc either, which is called decimal = ten centimes or one LIKOTA.
Show a centimes coin, show the inscription.
So one lièke or 5 centimes is not one franc:    fl: 0.

”                                                          a tenth:            fl: 0.0

You write the units, the tens, hundreds, thousands without the decimal point and before the decimal point.
After the decimal point you write the tenths and hundredths (décimes and centimes)
in our DECIMAL system you NEVER write
either the HALVES/DEMIS (menya)
or the FIFTHS
or the TWENTIETHS but we express the value in tenths or hundredths.
In the monetary system we express the DEMIS or MENYA, the FIFTHS and the TWENTIETHS in décimes or in centimes.

So:       ONE centime or one hundredth part of the franc is written as follows:
falanga 0, décime 0, centime 1 :           fl. 0.01
One lièke or 5 centimes is written      :           fl. 0.05
One lièke is a twentieth of a franc. Five centimes is a twentieth of 100 centimes (1 fr.) 1/20 of a franc (bya falanga).
We can thus divide one franc among 20 people and each will have a twentieth of a franc or FIVE CENTIMES.
Let’s try the division:
1 : 20   impossible to give everyone 1 fr.
so        1 : 20 = 0,
we will change the franc in BAKOTA or DECIMES: tenths:
10 décimes: 20. Impossible to give everyone one LIKOTA
10 décimes: 20 = 0.0 (fl. zero, décime 0.)
we exchange the décimes into centimes
100 centimes divided by 20 equals: 5 centimes
20 times 5 centimes equals 100 centimes
santime 5 bekola 20 wete SANTIMES 100

But the above problem requires writing the value of SEVEN bayèkè, of SEVEN coins of 5
centimes.
When you have 7 coins of 5 centimes you have 7 times 5 centimes
In Lonkundo this is said as follows: (5 centimes SEVEN times)
SANTIME ITANO bekola 7: santimes 35
this value equals: falanga 0, décimes 3 = fl. 0.3 or 30 centimes
falanga 0.30 and 5 centimes = fl. 0.35
3 décimes = 6 coins of 5 centimes or 6 x 5 = 30 centimes
in LONKUNDO 5 x 6 = santime 30
the value of 7 coins of 5 centimes is written as follows: fl. 0.35
fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05 + fl. 0.05
= fl. 0.35
35 centimes divided by 7 (between 7 comrades) = 5 centimes
fl. 0.35 : 7 = fl. 0.05
——————
How many coins of 5 centimes do you add in order to obtain the value of ONE FRANC?
To get ONE FRANC you need 20 coins of 5 centimes
we already have 7. So we still need 20 – 7 = 13
centimes itano bekola jum l’esato wete centimes 65
35 centimes plus 65 centimes = 100 centimes = 1 franc
fl. 0.35 + fl. 0.65 = fl. 1.00
etc. etc.
always request the complete deduction
——————–
argue/explain the tables of multiplication:
in Lonkundo: 9 x 7 = 7 x 9 = (7×10) – 7 = 63
———————
always argue/explain the problem,
do not allow steps to be left out,
make them think.
—
Daily conversation/chat (a few minutes only)
about charity
Every day we will give one of its points,
we will come back to it later during the day,
especially if a practical application has to be done.
We can get back to it when doing a dictation.
We will question one child on the point mentioned earlier.
Sometimes we will write on the blackboard or make him write.
We are not at all limited to these texts,
the best model lesson cannot replace the initiative.
—
But the pedagogy teaches us that you should teach children to respect by respecting the others,
politeness is the flower of charity.
More than anything this little chat should be usual practice

Excerpt 6 – Example lessons by Petrus Vertenten (1936). from Aequatoria Archive.

4.2. The moniteurs in action 
Most information on the progress of the lesson was therefore contained in a number of descriptions, which were given by the mission inspectors in their inspection reports. The contents of these reports certainly evolved over time. The reports of such travelling Fathers as Jans and Moeyens were more summary and did not give much more than an evaluation. Those of Petrus Vertenten, although somewhat more detailed, also do not contain much concrete information on the lesson content. From time to time Hulstaert (from 1937 to 1946), and certainly Moentjens (from 1950 to 1959), actually went more deeply into a number of concrete problems. Hulstaert was a technician and clearly ‘short-sighted’ because of that. What I mean to say by this is that he paid great attention to well-defined problems, such as spoken language, and as a result these problems occurred more frequently and were considered in more depth. He seldom focussed in detail on the teaching method or the content of a lesson. Whenever he did, it remained in general terms and rather synthetic. In contrast a number of reports survive from Gaston Moentjens which consider a number of lessons in more depth. These are reports he made in the early 1950s about the primary school and teacher training college in Bamanya. That also entails that it doesn’t just give an insight into the primary school but also into training teachers who would themselves be standing in front of the class in future years.

Beside the inspections by the mission inspectors there were naturally also those of the state inspectors. In fact very few of the reports on the Catholic schools in their vicariate have survived. The following paragraphs are therefore grouped around periods in which Hulstaert and Moentjens were active as inspectors. The reports of the state inspectors were also quoted, insofar as useful information could be found in them. In any case, this information was mostly restricted to the teachers and very seldom concerned the pupils themselves. They do contain some evidence of a number of teaching practices. That is why they are so important. The descriptions of these practices were, however, strongly coloured by the ‘evaluating’ eye of the inspectors, in general with a rather ambiguous attitude towards the abilities of the Congolese teachers. Some people, including Vertenten, said, for example, that initiative from the moniteurs was welcome, but in reality the missionaries often reacted in a very aloof and equivocal manner to the contribution of the Congolese teachers.

4.2.1. Under Hulstaert’s supervision
Hulstaert’s reactions also seem to show some ambivalence: “With the current moniteurs there has been a great improvement in order in the class, in less wasted time, in improved preparation. In some subjects there is still a lack, yet that is due to the insufficient training of the teachers.”[xcvi] A few lines earlier he had remarked that the greatest change for that year was that every class now had a qualified teacher. It certainly indicates that the level of the training of teaching assistants, even in the view of those directly involved, was not rated very highly. “Arithmetic and language are poor; there is too little thought put into them. The same must be said of the explanation of the catechism and biblical history, which could also be better. The text is, in fact, well-known except for a few small errors (including the definition of the divine virtues, where attention was not paid to the subjunctive form, instead the normal form was used).”[xcvii]

Another remark by Hulstaert was more important: “The general problem of the moniteur paying too much attention to particular boys and neglecting the others somewhat is also present here and people work continually to improve this.”[xcviii] In older reports (from the end of the 1920s) this remark was also made but this quotation shows that ten years later it was still a frequently occurring phenomenon. In any case, there were large differences from one class to another. It seems almost impossible to bring everything together in one general picture. In the school of Mondombe, a somewhat smaller and more isolated mission post, there were different classes. The impressions that the inspector wrote down in his report on these classes vary from somewhat approving to very concerned. He wrote about a number of classes: “Application is good; there is a lot of absenteeism.” About other classes he remarked: “Order and discipline leave a lot to be desired, there are not many absentees and it should be remedied energetically.“[xcix] In the rural school of Mpenjele there were also great contrasts between the teachers.

In fact, the missionaries did not trust the teachers completely. The attitude they had towards Africans in general was just as much present in the class. The moniteurs had to be checked and that is apparent from many remarks made in the inspection reports: “Good, without supervision there is a risk, that he talks too much himself in the explanation of the lessons and neglects letting the children work themselves by using questions.“[c] “The girls’ school is under the leadership of Sister Auxilia. She is helped by 4 monitrices who are very satisfactory. More important or more difficult subjects are given by the Reverend Sister herself.”[ci] Until the 1950s, remarks of this sort were made: “Undoubtedly the results achieved can still be improved noticeably, e.g. by getting the teachers who otherwise are very diligent and dedicated, to give more careful preparation, with the guidance and assistance of the Rev. Fr Headmaster. For the moment the moniteurs seem to be left rather too much to their own fate and initiative.”[cii] The fact that it was thought that the teachers were too much left to their own devices naturally says more about the trust that was put in them than about their own qualities. It especially shows that the missionaries themselves were mostly not closely involved de facto with the pupils and the actual education.

According to the provincial inspector Vanmeerbeeck the general level of girls’ education was pitiful. That was due to the total lack of expert female teachers. He remarked on that in 1947, on the occasion of the inspection of the school in Bamanya. However, it was, he thought, a general phenomenon: “As in all the schools for native girls inspected or visited until now, the inability and ephemeral character of the native teaching assistants seems to be an almost insoluble problem. From the 1st to the 4th primary years, the same inadequacy is mentioned in knowledge of the subject to be taught, the same lack of life, of teaching talent, the same mechanical nature of the lessons, the same constant appeal solely to memory.”[ciii] In the concrete case of Bamanya, Vanmeerbeeck’s report resulted in Father Wauters, who was responsible for the school, replacing the teachers by more qualified ones.[civ]

The contrast between Vanmeerbeeck’s words and the commentary of the mission inspector on the same school, a year earlier, was striking. Cobbaut had said in his report: “What is especially noticeable here is the teaching method: it is not mechanical repetition or learning by heart but a lively, practical, instructive education. One immediately feels the masterly hand of the Reverend Sister Auxilia, who does not have as much time as she would in reality like to give to the school.”[cv] However, the difference between both inspection reports was considerable. Vanmeerbeeck wrote a rather detailed report of five pages, in which he went further into different details. Cobbaut on the other hand found a single page sufficient and wrote no more than the remarks quoted here concerning the primary school. Hulstaert had also been more positive in his inspection report from 1944, though not without exception. He did write that the lessons were given well, but attributed the good progress much more to the headmistress, Sister Auxilia, than to the monitrices. Firstly, he noted the large turnover of female teachers (see chapter 5). Secondly, he ended his report with the remark: “Especially with our monitrices it is indispensable that both preparation and control are carefully done if one wants to achieve anything. And for more in-depth education one relies completely on the Sister.”[cvi]

There was really very little information given on the concrete behaviour of the pupils, apart from the disciplinary aspect. A number of remarks can be found on the manner in which they learnt to write. In the boys’ school in Bamanya pupils made too many mistakes, Hulstaert stated in a report from 1942: “A lot of mistakes are still being made when writing in the mother tongue and the moniteurs themselves are not always competent enough to avoid this or correct them. F. Ipoma and A. Bongeli should pay particular attention to that. We must really demand that the teachers should write in their own language without faults.”[cvii] In the girls’ school, too, he had already pointed out: “The monitrices must still pay attention to the attitudes of the children, particularly during writing. They should also learn the sensible and handy use of blotting paper and to turn over the pages of their books carefully.”[cviii] Also, in the school of the Brothers he asked that attention be paid to the attitude of the pupils: “A comment to be made: the pupils’ attitude leaves much to be desired in some classes, particularly during writing. I must add that the poorly adapted desks are the cause for the faulty attitude of many. Also, the moniteurs must continually correct their pupils, which is very difficult for the native, who gets tired easily if the effect is not immediate.”[cix]

4.2.2. The reports of the 1950s
On primary education
In a first report from 1950, on the boys’ primary school, Moentjens especially mentioned a number of aspects of the curriculum. He paid particular attention to the teachers and the way in which they taught their lessons. There is very little about the pupils and what they had to do in these reports. Still, this report shows a number of interesting elements that reflect the way the class operated .

In the first year the inspector followed a religion lesson, in which a student from the teacher training college gave a lesson to the pupils on remission of sins. Using an example from daily life it was described how this concept was connected, in the Catholic religion, with the life of Jesus Christ. Illustrative material was used in the form of a picture of “Our Lord on the cross”, being scourged. Obviously, the illustration was not really used to the full; the missionary thought in any event that the lesson would have been improved if that had been the case. He made a similar remark again in the next year on the religion lesson in the third year: “The moniteur did not explain the religious picture which should have served to illustrate his lesson and he did not talk enough about the Holy Mass.”[cx] Positive points, according to the inspector, were that the teacher in spe asked the pupils a lot of questions and in this way was ‘stimulating’. In the arithmetic lesson use was again made of lemons, with which the pupils in the front of the class had to illustrate their exercises. Although order and discipline (here again expressly mentioned) were good, Moentjens noticed that the teacher only concerned himself with the pupils at the desks at the front of the class.

Considerably less information was given about the higher years, with the exception of the fifth year. The inspector went into great detail about the religion lesson, so there was not much space left over for other subjects: “The religion lesson which he gave on the fourth Commandment of God was truly well taught. He considered God’s authority, parents and all other persons invested with authority and considered more or less in depth the reasons for the authority enjoyed by the parents and other superiors. Also considering the fifth Commandment he gave the pupils a glimpse of the fundamental principle on which brotherly love is based and as he progressed he based his lesson on examples from the Old and New Testament which he illustrated using pictures from the holy book. His drawing lesson was less successful. After spending too long considering the structure and function of the leaf he proceeded to the drawing itself without having properly explained how to proceed.” In the sixth year the lesson was given by a Brother. The performance of the pupils was positively evaluated by the inspector but the teacher was given some advice: not so fast and do not talk so monotonously.[cxi]

In his evaluation Moentjens gave a general impression of education in the school. This was good but he expressly referred to the supervision and efforts of the Brothers, who made sure that the teachers functioned well in their class. “Bamanya has without doubt good moniteurs but on the other hand it is thanks to the constant surveillance and stimulation of the Fr. Headmaster that they accomplish their tasks so well and that they teach so carefully. It is known elsewhere that at Bamanya moniteurs and pupils are very ‘responsible’.”[cxii] Moentjens undoubtedly meant that a relatively strong authority was exercised over both groups. That the authority of the missionaries was not at that time as unaffected as it would appear from his words has already been clearly shown by the references to the sometimes rebellious behaviour of the pupils.

The fact that, according to the mission inspector, the missionaries (even if in this case they were Brothers) had the greatest share in the success of the education is very significant. It shows the point of view from which education was discussed. If possible that is made even clearer when these remarks are compared to those Moentjens made in the same year about the teacher training college. He formulated a number of considerations ‘of an educational nature’. Obviously the state inspector, Verhelst, had drawn the attention of the Brothers to the fact that more attention should be paid to educational subjects in the teacher training college. Verhelst had based this on a circular from the vice-governor general. Moentjens put this matter into perspective in the conclusion of his report: “According to the terms of the letter from the Vice-Governor General, the instructions given in it in this regard are only given as an ‘indication’; in the text it says ‘he had advised’ which contrasts with the imperative tone that Mr Verhelst seems to want to give it. Moreover, in my opinion the part the Vice-Governor General wanted to see reserved for educational theory in the 3^rd year of teacher training college is exaggerated. Where would there be time left for the other sections of the curriculum if the educational theory course on its own has to be given 2 hours a day? Consequently, I consider 6 to 7 hours a week should be more than sufficient for this subject, at least if one does not want to sacrifice a good part of the general education.” This attitude is strongly reminiscent of the conflict between Van Linden and Eloye, reported in the previous chapter. Van Linden was “accused” of regarding the rules of the administration as incidental.

Still, Moentjens had to observe that the results of education were not completely satisfactory. This could not really be blamed on the Brothers, for they showed ‘boundless’ dedication. On the contrary, perhaps they even went too far in this and grossly over-estimated the abilities of the Congolese. Particularly education in French was reaching too high. “It is said that once entered into the realm of higher education (very relatively higher) the intelligence of the blacks is inclined to close up and their capacity for intellectual assimilation goes numb. Perhaps it is because the teaching is given in French. For this reason I would like to advise the Rev. Frs. Masters to take this into account and insofar as possible to use simple and clear language and to give their lessons rather slowly and without precipitation as I saw another time. I would like to add that at this time and according to the extent of their abilities they should also remind the pupils of the notions and terms in Lonkundo for the things they are learning, as it is in this language, their native language, that they will have to teach later.”[cxiii]

In the light of the things that were going on at that time between teachers and pupils, this statement sounds somewhat strange. It probably shows that there were a number of things the missionaries knew nothing about at that time. The French lessons referred to by Jean Boimbo show that reality was really seen in a radically different way by the missionaries and the Congolese. The following example of the practical educational lesson, on keeping school registers and calculating average attendance, should be considered from the same point of view: “The Rev. Brother gives a short explanation of the number of school days per month, then he gives the rule as it is established (sic) by the department of education and according to which the total number of school days in the month and the average attendance in the month and over many months together should be calculated. At the same time he illustrates the rule well using a concrete example. Afterwards he explains how one should proceed to find the average attendance for two, three, four months in total and so on. The pupils have to do numerous practical exercises in order to become accustomed to the system.” In his conclusions Moentjens returned to this in considerable detail. He thought it was a scandal that in a school such as in Bamanya hardly any moniteurs were able to do this. The cause, he thought, was in the excessively theoretical character of educational training. What precisely that ‘too theoretical’ educational training may have been cannot be seen clearly from the documents available in the archives.

At the teacher training college
The lessons of the teacher training college that Moentjens reproduced in his report seem rather practical. As, for example, the writing lesson in which the Brother first demonstrated what had to be done. The lesson developed in several stages: a general explanation on the organisation of the letters of the alphabet, then the educational principle to be applied (in this case: the easiest group of letters should be taught first). Then the writing rules for the specific group were explained and the letters were written on the board. After the explanation from the Brother it was the students’ turn. In groups of six they had to come and give the same lesson on the board. Moentjens also reported a so-called ‘didactic lesson’. This was a reading lesson, in which one of the students had to act as the teacher and his fellow students had to play the pupils. Apart from any critical considerations on the teaching method, the typical course of such a lesson can be seen from the text. First the teacher briefly reviewed the previous lesson. Then he read out the entire new piece of text aloud. The best pupils then each had to read out a sentence. Finally, the whole class read the whole text collectively.

In the lessons given in the highest year, rhythm and observation/demonstration (working on the board) also return as primary elements: “The application is realised without effective control and even without the possibility of proper control because no rhythm is given to the application.” And: “A lesson in Lonkundo grammar in the 4^th year by the pupil moniteur Mboyo Antoine. Faults: writing on the board could have been better i.e. tidier; the moniteur only gave one example on the board while 2 or 3 would have been better; the examples asked from the pupils were only given orally, while it would have been preferable and more beneficial to have the pupils come to the board and write the examples they thought they had found. For the rest it was a good lesson.” Moentjens seemed to be much more concerned about deviations from the prescribed rules. The teacher who dared to do that was really going off the rails, as can be seen from this following passage: “Capital fault: The moniteur deviates from the kilogram which should have been the subject of the lesson, as well in his written preparation, and the teacher or the Very Rev. Fr. Headmaster should have seen and corrected this in advance, as during his lesson itself; thus he deviates from that which should be taught!“[cxiv]

Naturally, it is not illogical to think that a lesson given in the presence of the inspector did not follow the pattern of other lessons completely. It may be supposed that both the teachers and students tried to do better than usual. In the light of this it is probably interesting to look for certain remarks of the inspector, which at least allow us to formulate a number of hypotheses about the normal course of events. At the first reading by the teacher, Moentjens remarked: “He reads the model piece for today, without always having the correct tone, not raising his eyes at any point to see whether the pupils were following.” During group reading the moniteur made a remark that was very much appreciated by the inspector: “In the middle of the first paragraph, which was however not so long, he had the entire class repeat what had just been read. Here he made the very correct remark concerning avoiding chanted reading.” It indicates that this all happened too frequently for Moentjens liking. Immediately afterwards a somewhat contradictory consideration followed on the subject of the rhythm of the reading lesson: “Afterwards he had the entire piece read simultaneously, which did not succeed very well because it did not have sufficient rhythm.” From a number of considerations it could be inferred that the moniteurs did not teach in a very structured way under unsupervised circumstances: “Here he explained what the section contained, which he should have done first or after his model reading as he should have made the reading more comprehensible and more attractive in this way. The moniteur did not correct poor pronunciation at any time, poor connection or a jerky reading although his fellow students gave him many opportunities to do so.”

The same can also be inferred from some descriptions of more practical lessons, such as traditional work or working on the land. In the first case the inspector seemed to have surprised the students: “The lesson had started without the assistance of the Ref. Fr. Master or the Very Rev. Fr. Headmaster. On my arrival with the Rev. Fr. Master the explanation has finished and the pupils are busy with the tasks the elected pupil-moniteur has given to a small group of pupils, then he turns to the others who he is checking and to whom he gives useful instructions. A few other pupil-moniteurs assist him in this task of supervision and guidance, but two others are seated and are looking rather disinterestedly while the moniteur in charge is standing with a group of pupils and another pupil-moniteur is helping them carry out their work, making a type of earthenware carafe. All of them, including the head moniteur and the other pupil-moniteurs present would do useful work if they would lend a hand to their colleagues in such lessons.” Also in the work in the fields things did not seem to proceed in a very structured way, despite the presence of the inspector: “Two other pupil-moniteurs, with a few of their fellow students, went to the school fields instead of teaching a lesson on crafts. Their work consisted of fixing the beanpoles at the side of the plots ready to be sown with beans. Almost all the pupil moniteurs with the head moniteurs helped out with the pupils. But… each pupil only had two poles to be fixed in the soil!!! Moreover, it was clear that they had difficulty passing, not to say killing, the time available – an entire hour – and the organisation of the work did not seem very good.”

The lack of interest or enthusiasm was a thorn in the flesh of the inspector. He not only made some short remarks on this in the discussion of some subjects, he noticed it in the self-assessment that the students of the teacher training college had to make after the lessons. From what he said it seems clear that a considerable number of the pupils participated little or not at all: “The pupils are called to make a criticism of the lessons given by their fellow students in which they participated during the day. The Rev. Brother corrected and completed these critiques with his own remarks for the lessons in which he also assisted. The critiques of the pupils have some good elements but the majority relate to remarks of a secondary order and often relate too exclusively to laudatory judgements, which should surely not be neglected if merited; but they pass too lightly over the faults and omissions or possibilities the pupil moniteur should have been able to use beneficially in his lesson. During the practical lessons I had the impression that some pupils were not given a task to complete and that they remained passive as though completely uninterested in the lesson.“[cxv]

That the inspector held the opinion that various matters were indeed the fault of the Congolese and not so much of the missionaries is apparent from the remark he made in his report for 1951 on the primary school: “On the other hand it is difficult to be aware, especially in an application school, of the differences that exist between the timetables that should be displayed in the classroom and those written in the class diaries. Moreover, there were the deplorable breaches of school discipline that I ascertained with the moniteurs and the Rev. Brothers, while the Very Rev. Headmaster spent a whole hour each morning on inspecting the classroom diaries and preparing the lessons of the moniteurs. On numerous occasions during the lessons I was forced to conclude an incomprehensible toing and froing of pupils who came to find one or other object the moniteur needed for his lesson or that was required for manual work after the lesson in progress.”[cxvi] In any case, this contrasts strongly with the Brothers’ rules, which stipulated that the teachers all had to be prepared before the lessons started in the morning.

Other testimonies
Moreover, dissatisfied noises could also be heard from other corners. In the girls’ school in Coquilhatville education was led by the Sisters of Charity. As in the previous period, explicit mention of particular educational techniques was made here in the 1950s. The state inspector Eloye showed that he was rather satisfied with the use of the global method in the first school year and the centres d’intérêt in the following years. Still, the same practices were present here. In his comments on the monitrice in the first year, Eloye stated: “The reading lesson according to the global method: the materials she has available made the task easier. She had the group read too quickly from the board, from the book she must avoid reading by heart.”[cxvii] Here too, education was characterised by a high degree of improvisation. In the second grade the girls were in the same classroom. The two monitrices tried to solve this by adapting their timetables. “The monitrice teaches one year while the other works on their exercises.” Above all, they did not always seem to be well prepared: “The dictation lessons given by the Rev. Sr. Headmistress and the monitrice should have been prepared before the lesson itself, not as the dictation progressed, and corrected without losing time.” The same monitrice was also criticised because of her poor teaching, particularly in the arithmetic lesson: “She exceeded the curriculum with calculations that she had solved wrongly on the board: 32-18 = 24, 44-27 = 23.” The moniteur who taught the third year (that was really exceptional and shows there was a lack of capable monitrices) worked according to the method of project learning: the reading lesson fitted into the ‘Stanley’ topic. However, his teaching method did not satisfy the inspector, for the moniteur was much too nervous and repeated his explanation to the point of boredom. Another surprising report finally came from the HCB-school in Flandria, where Nand van Linden confined his report on the study results for the school year 1958-1959 to the following remark: “According to the curriculum prescribed for mission schools, the results usually demanded of pupils were not achieved, although the lesson hours have been increased and the subject matter to be taught has been reinforced with new textbooks. The cause is partly due to the pupils’ lack of discipline and application to their studies and mainly to the moniteurs who are not qualified and unable to teach according to the required standards.[cxviii]

Summary
The sources that provide us with information on the practical approaches to giving lessons in the mission schools create a picture that is somewhat similar to that of the school in the motherland in certain respects. Particularly the attention to obedience and discipline, to order and virtue, is not really surprising within the context of an educational concept dominated by Catholicism. Considering that most of the missionaries had not had any significant educational training, it should not be surprising that the principles they applied were precisely those they brought with them. These in return corresponded to their own school education. Respect, obedience, respect for authority were very strongly emphasised.

Order and discipline were undoubtedly the leading principles for the missionaries or were supposed to be so. The use of quasi-military drill techniques to deal with Congolese children, to keep them quiet and to be able to teach them, was probably present even more strongly than in the homeland. The fact that no exaggerated attention is paid to it in the sources does not detract from the fact that it was clearly a supporting factor in school life. These physical methods of keeping order (standing in lines, standing up at the same time, moving in groups, answering together and so on) were really the extension of a broad administrative framework surrounding the pupils that was just as much geared to the creation of an orderly, organised and controllable Congolese “mass”.

It is noticeable that the use of punishments was very often connected to utilitarian aims. This connection is not illogical, considering that these aims were perhaps even more present in education as a whole. The practical and utilitarian aspect was very expressly present in the curriculum and in practice. Work was done for the greatest part of the day, both within and outside the context of the official curriculum. This emphasis on handicrafts, on practical tasks, was certainly not exclusive to primary school, it was also continued at higher levels. It was supported by a double and ambiguous legitimisation: the necessity to contribute on the one hand to the material maintenance of the missions, on the other hand to the essential development of skills that would make the pupils able to work in rural surroundings later on.

The lessons were mainly given by Congolese teachers. Considering the sources available to the researcher are predominately written from the point of view of the missionaries and do not originate from the Congolese, it remains dangerous to make generalisations about the way that happened. In many cases there was certainly a rather comprehensive control over what the moniteurs and monitrices did in class. However, what was noted in inspection reports concerning classroom practice or the education of the teachers is very frequently mainly directed at the things that are not going well or, according to the inspecting authorities, should be done differently. From these reports it can certainly be deduced that a self-disciplined approach was often expected from the teachers, which in theory had to be supported by an enthusiastic and lively approach to the material but which before anything should remain within the prescribed rules and the point of view of the missionaries.

The majority of missionaries in the MSC area had no expertise in the field of education. There were a few who concerned themselves with theoretical principles and with fundamental questions of education and even amongst them it was frequently hard to find a drive for renewal. It is appropriate to make an exception for the Brothers of the Christian Schools, a teaching order that in fact had a somewhat restricted field of work in the region. Despite their better technical training or even their more theoretically oriented (and thus experienced by the Congolese as more progressive) education, it does not look as though they coloured noticeably outside the lines of colonial attitudes. Certainly insofar as the lesson content is concerned it is mostly the MSC who seemed to offer more of an alternative choice to their pupils due to their attention to local facts and traditions.

In conclusion, an important consideration must be repeated: the sources are ‘short-sighted’, not only because they are mainly written by missionaries but also because, for the most part, they leave a large part of the Congolese schools out of the picture. Practice in the small rural schools which formed a large if not the largest part of the famous education of the masses by the Belgians in the Congo is much more difficult to uncover than what occurred in the well-populated mission schools. The picture uncovered from the elements that are visible is anything but rich. Due to a lack of buildings, material, knowledge and staff, education in such schools mostly had to be reduced to the most elementary fundamentals, frequently dependent on the goodwill and efforts of a few, and consequently markedly precarious.

NOTES
[i] Imelda, Sr. (1937). Something about our schoolboys in Mondombe. In Annals, 3, p. 54. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ii] AAFE 38.5.2-39.1.6. Groupe Scolaire Coquilhatville. Prescriptions réglementaires et Principales obligations du maître. s.n., s.d.
[iii] AAFE 25.3.10. Inspection of the rural school Mpenzele. J. Moeyens, 8 September 1934. My underlining. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[iv] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Report on the inspection of the boys’ school near Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[v] AAFE 25.4.9. Bamanya Mission. Rural school of Boyela (Injolo) inspection for the month of May 1934 by R.P. Moyens. Signed P. Jans. [Original quotation in French]
[vi] Cortebeeck, J. (1932). “De houtskool-teekenaar” (vervolg). In Annals, 7, p. 152. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[vii] Imelda, Sr. (1937). Iets over onze schooljongens van Mondombe. In Annals, 3, p. 54. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[viii] Interview with Jean Indenge, Brussels, 14 July 2003.
[ix] AAFE 93.4.12. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école des Huileries du Congo Belge établie à Flandria (district de l’Equateur), 1933. Report by the provincial inspector (name not given).
[x] Maes, F. (1950). Straf. In Annals, June, p. 88. The Father referred to is Octaaf Everaert. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xi] Quotation from interview with Jean Indenge. [Original quotation in French]
[xii] Cortebeeck, J. (1941). Boende. In Annals, January, p. 7. [Original quotation in Dutch]
[xiii] Imelda, Sr. (1937). Something about our schoolboys in Mondombe. In Annals, 3, p. 54. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xiv] AAFE 96.2.6-7. Rapport annuel 1953. Ecole H.C.B. – District Flandria. Ecole primaire centrale à Flandria. F. Maes, Flandria, 3 January 1954. Maes remembered also during my interview with him: “There was an assembly every week; then they all stood in front of you, on Saturday morning they had to do their punishment. They had to fetch soil, or make the ground even behind the school to make a football pitch.” [original quotation in French]
[xv] Ibidem.
[xvi] Interview with Jean Indenge, Brussels, 14 July 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xvii] Interview with Jean Boimbo, Ukkel, 25 September 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xviii] Fernand Van Linden (°1912) was ordained as a priest in 1937 and left a year later for the Congo. He originally worked as a travelling Father. After 1945 he became head of the school in Flandria, in the course of the 1950s he went to work in the same job in Boende.
[xix] Interview with Fernand Van Linden, Ternat, 11 June 2002.
[xx] Interview by Césarine Bolia with Julienne Aboli, Kinshasa, 29 September 2003. [original in French]
[xxi] Interview with Stéphane Boale, St-Joost-ten-Noode, September 2003. “Coupe-coupe” refers to a machete. [original quotation in French]
[xxii] Interview Césarine Bolia with Joséphine Bongondo, Kinshasa, 29 September 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xxiii] Interview byCésarine Bolia with Bernard Kasusula, Binza, 29 September 2003.
[xxiv] Interview with Stéphane Boale, St-Joost-ten-Noode, September 2003. [Original quotation in French]
[xxv] Ibidem. [original quotation in French]
[xxvi] Interview by Césarine Bolia with Bukasa Mbanvu Sebanjili, Kinshasa, September 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xxvii] Interview with Jean Indenge, Brussels, 14 July 2003.
[xxviii] Interview with Rik Vanderslaghmolen, Borgerhout, 18 August 2004. Vanderslaghmolen worked from 1946 to 1951 in Coquilhatville as an economist. After an interruption in Belgium because of health problems, he worked for a year as head of the school in Mondombe and from 1956 he taught (Latin) at the junior seminary in Bokuma. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxix] AAFE 30.5.7-9. Letter from Father Wauters to Mgr. Van Goethem. Bamanya, 1 May 1943. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxx] Interview with Jean Indenge, Brussels, 14 July 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xxxi] Interview with Jean Boimbo, Ukkel, 25 September 2003.
[xxxii] Also found in the interviews that Filip Deboeck and Césarine Bolia made with a number of inhabitants of Kinshasa in the context of an investigation into memories of the colonial school time (September 2003). One of the interviewees told of his time at school with the Marists in Stanleyville: “There was a system applied: a frank was given to people who spoke Swahili for example. So when you went to class, the teacher asked: “Who has the coin? Oh, it’s me!”. Then you were punished. You had to avoid talking Swahili.” Interview with Donat Salehe Kimbulu, Makala, 16 September 2003.
[xxxiii] Es, M. (1927). Mijn kleine schoolkolonie. In Annals, 11, p. 246. My emphasis. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxiv] Maria Godfrieda, Sr. (1934). What sort of things they have to do. In Annals, 5, p. 108. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxv] Brokerhoff, P. (1930). A normal day on a Congo-mission post. In Annals, 11, p. 248. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xxxvi] Interview with Jean Boimbo in Ukkel, 25 September 2003. [original quotation in French]
[xxxvii] Brokerhoff, P. (1930). l.c.
[xxxviii] Archive Lazarists Leuven. “Rapport sur les oeuvres des Filles de la Charité de St-Vincent de Paul à Coquilhatville. Exercice 1930.” s.n., January 1931.
[xxxix] AAFE 15.3.4-8. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Mondombe, 1930. P. Vertenten, Mondombe, 24 December 1930. [original quotation in French]
[xl] AAFE 101.4.12. Circular to the managers of the missions. G. Hulstaert, 1 February 1939. A.T. stands for “Autorité Territoriale”. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xli] AAFE 15.3.4-8. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Mondombe, 1930. P. Vertenten, Mondombe, 24 December 1930. [original quotation in French]
[xlii] Segers, F. (1947). De zingende knapen van Mondombe. In Annalen, March, p. 44. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xliii] AAFE 25.4.9. Bamanya Mission. Ecole rurale de Boyela (Injolo) inspection du mois de mai 1934 par le R.P. Moyens. Signed Paul Jans. [original quotation in French]
[xliv] Brokerhoff, P. (1930). Een normale dag op een Congo-missiepost. In Annalen, 11, p. 248. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xlv] Caudron, J. (1935). Ik denk aan mijn jongens in Bokote. In Annalen, 12, p. 269. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xlvi] AAFE 99.5.14. Memo “Recommendations pour l’établissement des horaires journaliers.”, s.n., s.l., s.d. [original quotation in French]
[xlvii] The Bourdon test is a psychological test that measures the capacity for concentration on the basis of the speed of recognition of figures or letters in a set of meaningless texts or figures or symbols. Named after the developer, the French psychologist Benjamin Bourdon (1860-1943). See Nicolas, S. (1996). Benjamin Bourdon, le fondateur du laboratoire. In CRPCC, un laboratoire centenaire. On http://www.uhb.fr/sc_humaines/psycho_expe/labos/expe/
[xlviii] AAFE 99.5.14. Note “Recommandations pour l’établissement des horaires journaliers.”, s.n., s.l., s.d.
[xlix] AAFE 99.5.3-5. Letter from Frans Maes to Gaston Moentjens. Flandria, 26 March 1951.
[l] AAFE 15.4.7-11. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire des Rev. Soeurs du précieux Sang à Bamania (école de Filles). P. Vertenten, Bamanya, 8 November 1930. [original quotation in French]
[li] “Uit brieven van Z.E.P. Vertenten aan de studenten der apostolische school te Assche”. In Annalen, 1928, 10, p. 219. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lii] For example, even in 1950 Father Pattheeuws wrote: “Veel negers zijn voor een eerste stap maar ze zijn te rap moet.” In Annalen, 1950, October, p. 140.
[liii] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Report on the inspection in the boys’ school for Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[liv] AAFE 35.4.7. Rapport sur l’école professionnelle H.C.B. Flandria. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 28 September 1928. [original quotation in French]
[lv] AAFE 34.4.10. Ecole Professionnelle H.C.B. Rapport trimestriel sur l’école, mars 1929. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 6 April 1929. [original quotation in French]
[lvi] AAFE 15.5.11. Horaire des classes. Ecole primaire (garçons). P. Vertenten, Wafanya, 17 June 1930.
[lvii] AAFE 1.5.1-2. Report about the rural school of Mpenjele, 1941. s.n.
[lviii] AAFE 75.3.5. Horaire de la première année primaire. J. Jacobs, Bamanya, 24 February 1954.
[lix] Rieks, A. (1939). Een doodgewone namiddag. In Annals, 3, p. 56. This article was written under a pseudonym. The author, Henri Adriaensen, had been in the Congo from 1934 to 1937, first as head of the mission printing press in Coquilhatville and afterwards as director of the boarding school in Bamanya. The article, which was published after his return to Belgium, is more than probably about Bamanya. See De Rop, A. & Vlamynck, J. (1971). Bibliografie van de Missionarissen van het H. Hart. Belgische Provincie. 1921-1971. Borgerhout: Missionarissen van het Heilig Hart, p. 1-2; Vereecken, J. (1985). Wij gedenken. Tweede reeks biografische schetsen van M.S.C. van de Belgische Provincie. Borgerhout: Missionarissen van het Heilig Hart, p. 31.
[lx] De Rop, A. (1947). Een dagje in Imbonga. In Annals, May, p. 67.
[lxi] Annalen, March 1957, p. 37. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxii] AAFE 4.1.12 – 2.1. Report from the school inspectors, girls’ school Bamanya, 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 21 June 1937. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxiii] AAFE 4.4.5-9. Inspection report on the boys’ primary school Bamanya, 1936. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 23 October 1936. [original quotation in French]
[lxiv] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Report on the inspection of the boys’ school for Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 3 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxv] AAFE 1.1.4. Report on the inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 12 November 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxvi] AAFE 12.5.6. Report on the inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 17 November 1944. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxvii] AAFE 15.5.8-10. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Wafania. P. Vertenten, Wafania, 1 June 1930. [original quotation in French]
[lxviii] AAFE 4.4.14-5.3. Inspection of the girls’ school, Bamanya, 1936. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 20 October 1936. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxix] AAFE 12.5.3-5. Report about the inspection of the primary school and teacher training college in Bamanya, 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 4 November 1944.
[lxx] AAFE 75.3.15-4.3. Inspection report of the subsidiary schools, 1954. 8 schools were mentioned, all set up between 1952 and 1954.
[lxxi] AAFE 99.4.7-10. Inspection report of the boy’s school in Flandria, 21-23 June 1951. G. Moentjens, Bokote, 28 October 1951. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxii] AAFE 75.3.10-13. Inspection report of the subsidiary school of Beambo, 1954. G. Moentjens, Flandria, 28 August 1954.
[lxxiii] AAFE 15.1.3-7. Bamanya. Report about the girls’ school. School year 1934, Primary school. Sister Auxilia.
[lxxiv] AAFE 4.1.12-2.1. Report of the school inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 21 June 1937. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxv] AAFE 4.4.5-9. Report of the inspection of the boys’ primary school in Bamanya, 1936. G. Hulstaert, Coquilhatville, 23 October 1936. [original quotation in French]
[lxxvi] AAFE 1.5.6. Report of the inspection of the boys’ primary school in Bamanya, October 1941. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 7 October 1941. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxvii] AAFE 1.1.2-3. Report of the inspection of the boys’ school in Bamanya, 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 11 November 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxviii] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Report on the inspection of the boys’ school for Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 3 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxix] AAFE 1.1.2-3. Report of the inspection of the boys’ school in Bamanya, 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 11 November 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxx] AAFE 101.4.1. Letter from Hulstaert to the school management in Flandria. Bamanya, 5 January 1941. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxi] AAFE 101.4.9. Report on the inspection in the girls’ school in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxii] AAFE 1.1.4. Verslag over de inspectie in de meisjesschool te Bamanya, 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 12 November 1942.
[lxxxiii] [cleanliness of the body, cleanliness of the house, cleanliness of the linen, the family meal, a well cared for village, …]
[lxxxiv] AAFE 3.5.10-12, Letter by J. Daxhelet, chef du territoire ad interim, to the MSC in Bamanya, with circulaire from the Gouvernement Général, fixant les conditions d’un concours ouvert par le Gouvernement de la colonie à la fois en Afrique et en Europe pour appeler, en vue de faciliter l’enseignement des pratiques d’hygiène élémentaire, à l’aide de tableaux didactiques destinés aux écoles pour indigènes du Congo Belge, les oeuvres les meilleurs et les plus éloquents. 2 p. Coquilhatville, 3 January 1940.
[lxxxv] The paysannats were large enclosed agricultural areas, which were divided among Congolese inhabitants. Led by agronomists the farmers on these lots were taught agricultural methods that combated erosion and increased yields. Through the foundation of cooperatives farmers could buy tools and sell their products together. See Cleys, B. (2003). Andries Dequae. De zelfgenoegzaamheid van een koloniaal bestuur (1950-1954).
[lxxxvi] AAFE 99.3.1. Letter from G. Moentjes to the school directors. Coquilhatville, 9 January 1952. [original quotation in Dutch]
[lxxxvii] AAFE 15.1.3-7. Bamanya. report about the girls’ school. School year 1934, primary school. Sister Auxilia.
[lxxxviii] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Verslag over de inspectie in de jongensschool voor Batswa te Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 3 October 1939.
[lxxxix] AAFE 10.3.8-13. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire pour garçons indigènes à Bamanya. 7, 9, 10 November 1950. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 3 December 1950. [original quotation in French]
[xc] AAFE 9.3.4-4.6. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 31 September 1952. [original quotation in French]
[xci] Interview with Stéphane Boale, in Sint-Joost-ten-Noode, 22 September 2003.
[xcii] AAFE 101.4.9. Report on the inspection of the girls’ school in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [original quotation in French]
[xciii] AAFE 100.1.9. Inspection report of the boys’ school (Batswa) in Flandria, 1950. G. Moentjens, Tshuapa, 11 October 1950. [original quotation in French]
[xciv] AAFE 4.3.12-4.1. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école primaire de Bamanya, 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 18 June 1937. [original quotation in French]
[xcv] AAFE 101.5.7-8. Leçon de calcul. P. Vertenten, à bord du Theresita, 6 April 1936; AAFE 101.5.9-10. Petite causerie de chaque jour (quelques minutes seulement) sur la charité. P. Vertenten, Jeudi Saint 1936.
[xcvi] AAFE 101.4.10-11. Report about the inspection of the boys’ school for Batswa in Flandria, 1939. G. Hulstaert, Flandria, 2 October 1939. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xcvii] Ibidem. [original quotation in Dutch]
xcviii] Ibidem. [original quotation in Dutch]
[xcix] AAFE 15.3.4-8. Rapport sur le fonctionnement de l’école primaire à Mondombe, 1930. P. Vertenten, Mondombe, 24 December 1930. (original quotation in French)
[c] AAFE 3.5.13-14. Girls’ primary school, Bamanya, 1938. Sister Auxilia, Bamanya, 31 December 1938. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ci] AAFE 4.1.12-2.1. Report on the school inspection, girls’ school in Bamanya. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 21 June 1937. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cii] AAFE 100.1.11-14. Inspection report of the boys’ school (Batswa) of Flandria, 1950. G. Moentjens, op de Tshuapa, 11 October 1950. [original quotation in Dutch]
[ciii] AAFE 11.3.3-7. Rapport d’inspection de l’établissement des Soeurs Missionnaires du Précieux Sang à Bamanya, 1947. M. Vanmeerbeeck, inspecteur-adjoint au service provincial de l’enseignement, Coquilhatville, 8 May 1947. [original quotation in French]
[civ] AAFE 12.1.1-3. Letter from G. Wauters to Pater vicarius delegatus. Bamanya, 23 September 1947.
[cv]AAFE 12.5.1. Inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1946. F. Cobbaut, Bamanya, 28 September 1946. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cvi] AAFE 12.5.6. Report of the inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya, 1944. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 17 November 1944. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cvii] AAFE 1.1.2-3. Report on the inspection of the boys’ school in Bamanya 1942. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 11 November 1942. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cviii] AAFE 4.1.12-2.1. Report on the school inspection of the girls’ school in Bamanya 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 21 June 1937. [original quotation in Dutch]
[cix] AAFE 4.3.11-4.1. Rapport sur l’inspection de l’école primaire de Bamanya, 1937. G. Hulstaert, Bamanya, 18 June 1937. [original quotation in French]
[cx] AAFE 9.4.7-12. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, September 1951.(original quotation in French)
[cxi] AAFE 10.3.8-13. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire pour garçons indigènes à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 3 December 1950. [original quotation in French]
[cxii] Ibidem. [original quotation in French]
[cxiii] AAFE 10.3.5-7. Rapport d’inspection de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 7 December 1950. [original quotation in French]
[cxiv] AAFE 9.4.7-12. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs de Bamanya, 1951. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 10 September 1951. [original quotation in French]
[cxv] AAFE 9.3.4-4.1. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs à Bamanya, 1952. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 11 September 1952. [original quotation in French]
[cxvi] AAFE 9.4.7-12. Rapport d’inspection de l’école primaire et de l’école de moniteurs de Bamanya, 1951. G. Moentjens, Coquilhatville, 10 September 1951. [original quotation in French]
[cxvii] Africa Archive Brussels, electronic inventories, no. 12452. Rapport d’inspection n° 57. Ecole primaire centrale urbaine pour filles indigènes à Coquilhatville, 29-30 August et 1-2 September 1950. Eloye, provincial inspector. [original quotation in French]
[cxviii] AAFE 95.3.12-13. Huileries du Congo Belge, s.c.r.l. – District de Flandria. Ecole primaire centrale. Rapport scolaire annuel 1958-1959. F. Van Linden, Flandria, 20 July 1959. [original quotation in French]