Latest / The History of Belgium: A Small Country with a Giant Colonial Legacy — Fexingo History / The Congo's Railroad War: Building Belgium's Iron Spine
Transcript
- Lucas: So, Luna, we've talked a lot about the rubber atrocities and the Force Publique, but there's one piece of colonial infrastructure that really drove the whole system — the Matadi–Kinshasa railway. And the story of how it was built is, in its own way, just as brutal as the red rubber. Luna: I've heard the name, but I don't know much about it. Why was it so important? Lucas: Well, before the railway, getting into the Congo's interior was a nightmare. The Congo River is navigable from the Atlantic up to Matadi, but then there's a series of rapids — the Livingstone Falls — that make it impassable for about 350 kilometers. So to get beyond that, you had to either go overland on foot or use porters. It took weeks, and goods were incredibly expensive. Lucas: Leopold II knew that if he wanted to extract rubber and ivory from the interior, he needed a railway to bypass those rapids. So in 1889, he secured funding from Belgian banks — including the Société Générale — and formed the Compagnie du Chemin de Fer du Congo. The goal: build a line from Matadi to Léopoldville — what's now Kinshasa. Luna: And who actually built it? Local labor? Lucas: That's the key. The railway was built almost entirely by African laborers, many of them conscripted. The French initially had a contract to supply workers from their colonies — Senegalese, Dahomeans, men from the Ivory Coast. But when those sources dried up, the Force Publique simply rounded up Congolese men from villages along the route. They were paid a pittance, if anything, and forced to work under horrific conditions. Lucas: The terrain was brutal. The Crystal Mountains — the Monts de Cristal — are a series of steep ridges covered in dense rainforest. Workers had to clear the jungle, blast through rock, and build bridges over ravines. There was no machinery — everything was done with picks, shovels, and black powder. Luna: What was the death toll? Lucas: It's hard to get precise numbers, but contemporary estimates suggest that between 1889 and 1898, when the line was completed, somewhere between 1,800 and 2,000 African workers died. That's out of a workforce that at its peak was about 10,000. So roughly 20% mortality. Many died from disease — malaria, dysentery, smallpox — but also from malnutrition and exhaustion. The food rations were inadequate, and medical care was almost nonexistent. Luna: That's comparable to the death rates on the rubber plantations. Lucas: Exactly. And there were also accidents: cave-ins, explosions, falls. The railway was built in sections, and each section had its own overseers — usually European engineers and foremen, backed by the Force Publique. If workers tried to escape, they were flogged or shot. It was essentially forced labor under military supervision. Lucas: One of the few Europeans who spoke out was a missionary doctor named Dr. Albert Lemaître. He worked at a hospital in Matadi and kept records. He wrote reports about the high death rate, the poor food, the lack of medicine. But his reports were ignored or suppressed. The company was more concerned with deadlines than with lives. Luna: Were there any acts of resistance? Lucas: Yes, there were. Workers sometimes sabotaged tools, slowed down their work, or simply walked off. In 1892, a group of Dahomean workers staged a strike over pay and conditions. The Force Publique was called in, and several strikers were killed. But resistance was difficult because the workers were from different ethnic and linguistic groups, often couldn't communicate with each other, and were kept isolated from the local population. Lucas: The railway was finally completed in 1898. The first train ran from Matadi to Léopoldville on March 15 of that year. It was a huge event — Leopold II celebrated it as a triumph of Belgian engineering. And in a way it was: the line cut travel time from weeks to two days, and suddenly the Congo's resources could be exported at a fraction of the cost. Luna: So it directly enabled the rubber boom. Lucas: Absolutely. Without the railway, the systematic extraction of rubber from the interior would have been far less profitable. The railway made it possible to ship tons of rubber down to the coast quickly. It also allowed the Force Publique to move troops and supplies more rapidly, which helped them enforce the rubber quotas. So the railway was a key piece of the infrastructure of atrocity. Lucas: And there's a longer legacy too. The railway line is still in use today — it's the backbone of the Democratic Republic of Congo's transport network. But it's also a reminder of the human cost. Many of the workers who died are buried in unmarked graves along the route. There's no monument to them. Luna: That's a sobering thought. All that progress built on forced labor and death. Lucas: It's a pattern repeated across European colonialism. But what I find striking about the Congo railway is how it's often presented as a purely technical achievement — a feat of engineering. And it was. But it was also a feat of exploitation. And the Congolese workers who built it never got credit, never got compensation, and in many cases never got to go home. Luna: Do we know any of their names? Any individual stories? Lucas: Unfortunately, very few. The colonial records rarely recorded the names of African workers. They were just numbers. But there are a few exceptions. One is a man named Mputu, who was a foreman on the line — he's mentioned in a company report. Another is a woman named Ngalula, who worked as a cook for a European engineer. But these are just fragments. The vast majority of the workers are anonymous. Lucas: There's also the story of a group of workers from the Bateke region who were recruited under false pretenses. They were told they'd be paid good wages and sent home after a few months. Instead, they were kept for years, and many died. When a missionary asked one of the survivors what he thought of the railway, he said: 'It is a road of tears.' Luna: A road of tears. That's a powerful image. Lucas: It's a phrase that captures what the railway meant to the people who built it. And it's a phrase that should be remembered alongside the official histories. Because the railway wasn't just a line on a map — it was a scar on the landscape and on the lives of thousands of Congolese. Luna: So what happened after the railway was completed? Did conditions improve? Lucas: Not immediately. The railway company continued to use forced labor for maintenance and expansion. But over time, as more missionaries and journalists visited the Congo, the conditions became more widely known. The rubber atrocities eventually overshadowed the railway's death toll, but the railway itself became a symbol of colonial exploitation. In the 1920s, there were strikes by Congolese railway workers demanding better pay and conditions. And after independence, the railway was nationalized. Lucas: Today, the Matadi–Kinshasa railway is a crumbling relic, badly in need of repair. But it still carries freight and passengers. And every time a train rattles over those tracks, it's a reminder of the people who died to build them. Luna: It's amazing how much history is embedded in infrastructure that we take for granted. Lucas: Absolutely. And that's why it's important to tell stories like this — to remember that behind every colonial railway, every port, every city, there's a human cost that shouldn't be forgotten.