Notes Rec.

doi:10.1098/rsnr.2020.0047
Published online

THE ITINERARY OF ALFRED RUSSEL WALLACE’S AMAZONIAN JOURNEY

(1848–1852): A SOURCE FOR RESEARCHERS AND READERS

by
VICTOR RAFAEL LIMEIRA-DASILVA*

Faculty of Education, Federal University of Bahia—UFBA,

40110-100, Ave. Miguel Calmon, Salvador-BA, Brazil

This research report offers the most complete itinerary of Alfred Russel Wallace’s scientific
explorations of the Brazilian Amazon between 1848 and 1852. As a source for historians
of science and natural scientists, it may become a reference to track the zoological and
botanical species collected alongside the described landscapes and people in Wallace’s
complex road map of explorations. Evidencing many relations and interests intertwined
with the construction of Wallace’s itinerary, this report makes room for the elaboration of a
more accurate picture of his expedition. Tracking the development of Wallace’s insights
along his journey, this itinerary also allows us to ascertain which species, regions, and
phenomena fostered the conceptual roots of his later theory of evolution by natural selection.

Keywords: itinerary; Wallace; Amazon

This research report presents the most complete itinerary to my knowledge of Alfred Russel
Wallace’s natural history explorations of the Brazilian Amazon between 1848 and 1852 (see
table 1 at the end of the main text). Based on a thoroughly researched reconstruction of
Wallace’s collecting, surveying and ethnographic trajectory, it also shows how the study of
his itinerary can add to the specialized literature on his scientific biography, and the broad
historiography of the nineteenth-century foreign scientific explorations of the Amazon.
Moreover, it makes room for future investigations on the role of Wallace’s first
field experience in the tropics in the development of his later biogeographical and
evolutionary theories.
This reconstruction of Wallace’s itinerary is localized within a diversified set of historical
and cultural studies on the relations between imperialism, transnational contacts, field
sciences, travel and collecting.1 The following remarks discuss the making of Wallace’s

*e-mail: v.limeiradasilva@gmail.com; victor.limeira@ufba.br

1 As a tremendously large literature exists, it is only possible to mention the following sample here. See, for example, Nathan
Reingold and Marc Rothenberg (eds), Scientific colonialism: a cross-cultural comparison (Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,
DC, 1987); Henrika Kuklick, The savage within: the social history of British anthropology, 1885–1945 (Cambridge University Press,
1991); Emily S. Rosenberg, Gilbert M. Joseph, Catherine LeGrand and Ricardo D. Salvatore (eds), Close encounters of empire:
writing the cultural history of U.S.–Latin American relations (Duke University Press, Durham, 1998); Alda Heizer and Antonio
A. Videira (eds), Ciência, civilização e império nos trópicos (Access Editora, Rio de Janeiro, 2001); Leoncio López-Ocón and Sara

1 © 2021 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society.

2 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

itinerary as a tool to understand how the abovementioned relations took place in the
execution of his expedition. By showing scientific knowledge being obtained in the field, it
does not ignore the circulation of knowledge back to Europe. In fact, it looks especially to
the management of local contacts and itineraries as vitally determinant to claim scientific
recognition back home. Wallace’s Amazonian journey has received more attention from
historians of science and other researchers in the last decades; however, it has not been
fully analysed yet.2 One of the central reasons for this limitation is the loss of a great part
of Wallace’s material in a fire on the way home. Historians of science and biographers
used to imply that Wallace’s observations and insights were lost with his burnt collections.
On the contrary, as some historians have been arguing, this was exactly not the case.3
Regardless of Wallace’s losses, there are diverse aspects of his first field training in the
tropics that can help us to better understand his pathway towards later scientific
achievements. To find the early foundation of his scientific ideas it is necessary to follow
the step-by-step construction of his exploratory itinerary. This is so because, unlike for his
expedition to the Malay Archipelago (1854–1862), there is no daily journal or notebook of
Wallace’s insights and findings on the Amazon. Therefore, to know which early field
observations he connected with his later reflections, it is vital to match the surviving data
with the precise locations of collecting and observation in the Amazon.
Exploring how Wallace’s itinerary was built, including which relations and interests were
intertwined with this process, allows us to create a more accurate picture of his expedition. In
the absence of a complete personal collection as testimony of his achievements, Wallace’s

Badía, ‘Overcoming obstacles: the triple mobilization of the Comisión Científica del Pacífico’, Sci. Context 16, 1 (2003); James
A. Secord, ‘Knowledge in transit’, Isis 95, 654–672 (2004). Mary L. Pratt, Imperial eyes: travel writing and transculturation
(Routledge, London, 2007; first published 1995); Kapil Raj, Relocating modern science: circulation and the construction of
knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650–1900 (Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2007); Neil Safier, ‘Global knowledge on the
move: itineraries, Amerindian narratives, and deep histories of science’, Isis 101, 133–145 (2010); Camilo Quintero, ‘Trading in birds:
imperial power, national pride, and the place of nature in U.S.–Colombia relations’, Isis 102, 421–445 (2011); Daniela Bleichmar,
Visible empire: botanical expeditions and visual culture in the Hispanic Enlightenment (University of Chicago Press, 2012);
N. Jardine, J. A. Secord and E. C. Spary (eds), Cultures of natural history (Cambridge University Press, 1996); Innes M. Keighren,
Charles W. J. Withers and Bill Bell, Travels into print: exploration, writing, and publishing with John Murray, 1773–1859 (University
of Chicago Press, 2015); Neil Safier, La medición del Nuevo Mundo. La ciencia de la ilustración y América del Sur (Fundación Jorge
Juan y Marcial Pons Historia, Madrid, 2016); Ernesto Bassi, An aqueous territory: sailor geographies and New Granada’s
transimperial greater Caribbean world (Duke University Press, Durham, 2016).
2 Barbara G. Beddal, Wallace and Bates in the tropics: an introduction to the theory of natural selection (Collier–Macmillan,
London, 1969); Michael J. Balick, ‘Wallace, Spruce and palm trees of the Amazon: an historical perspective’, Bot. Mus. Leaflets 28,
263–269 (1980); Ricardo Ferreira, Bates, Darwin, Wallace e a teoria da evolução (Editora UnB, Brasília, 1990); Sandra Knapp,
Footsteps in the forest: Alfred Russel Wallace in the Amazon (Natural History Museum, London, 1999); Sandra Knapp, Lynn Sanders
and William Bakers, ‘Alfred Russel Wallace and the palms of the Amazon’, Palms 46, 3 (2002); Alfredo B. Hernández and Jorge
L. Bousquets, ‘La obra biogeográfica de Alfred Russel Wallace. Parte I: Su viaje a la Amazonia y sus primeras ideas sobre
distribución’, in Una perspectiva Latinoamericana de la biogeografía (ed. Juan J. Morrone and Jorge L. Bousquets), pp. 29–38 (Las
Prensas de Ciencias, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Cidade do México, 2003); John Hemming,
Naturalists in paradise: Wallace, Bates and Spruce in the Amazon (Thames & Hudson, London, 2015); Marcio R. Horta, ‘A primeira
teoria evolucionista de Wallace’, Sci. Stud. 1, 519–530 (2003); Ildeu C. Moreira, ‘Darwin, Wallace, a seleção natural e o Brasil’,
Revista Princípios 101 (2009); José J. A. Alves, ‘A natureza e a cultura no compasso de um naturalista do século XIX: Wallace e a
Amazônia’, His. Ciênc. Saúde-Manguinhos 18, 775–788 (2011); Frank N. Egerton, ‘History of ecological sciences, Part 41: Victorian
naturalists in Amazonia—Wallace, Bates, Spruce’, Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 93, 35–59 (2012); J. Van Wyhe, ‘A delicate adjustment:
Wallace and Bates on the Amazon and ‘The problem of the origin of species’’, J. Hist. Biol. 47, 627–659 (2014); Victor R. Limeira-
DaSilva, ‘History of the human sciences and Wallace’s scientific voyage in the Amazon: notes on historiographical absences’, Rev.
Estud. Hist. 32, 529–563 (2019).
3 Victor R. Limeira-DaSilva and Juan M. Sánchez Arteaga, ‘Alfred Russel Wallace and the models of Amazonian Indians
displayed at the Crystal Palace’s Ethnological Exhibition’, Nuncius J. Hist. Sci. (forthcoming); V. R. Limeira-DaSilva, ‘A naturalist
amongst the Uaupés: A. R. Wallace’s Amazonian ethnography in the emerging British sciences of man’, PhD thesis, Federal
University of Bahia (forthcoming).
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 3

extensive and self-proclaimed pioneering itinerary served as his primary portfolio to justify
his entrance into the scientific community. In addition, following Wallace’s footsteps
across the Amazon is an opportunity to find where he actually met his collaborators and
guides and how they helped him to shape the map of his explorations. Undertaking an
independent collecting journey, Wallace had to rely on a big chain of contacts to advance
into the Amazonian interior. This network of acquaintances connected him with a wide
range of local and foreign people. In addition, it was mediated by his natural history agent,
Samuel Stevens (1817–1899), and other supporters, such as entomologist William
H. Edwards (1822–1909) and botanist William J. Hooker (1785–1865).4
The study of this itinerary also raises questions about the logistics of independent nineteenth-
century scientific explorations undertaken concerning the interplay between trade, science, and
transimperial relations. As mid-century British naturalists and geographers had explored the
Brazilian Amazon to a limited extent, every location visited was an invaluable addition to
Wallace’s itinerary. His agent’s commercial lists of desiderata also played a key role in
defining the destinations of his collecting trips. However, his itinerary indicates internal trade
and foreign capitalist ventures as the main routes through which he explored the Amazonian
interior lands and rivers. So far, the works by Peter Raby and Jane Camerini have provided
reconstructions of the Amazon map highlighting Wallace’s trajectory.5 Nevertheless, they are
limited to the main localities named in Wallace’s travel book. More recently, Carla Lima and
Victor Limeira-DaSilva indicated more accurately several other locations where Wallace
collected specimens and visited Indigenous communities, but they also focused on locations
important to their respective monographs.6
Because of his lost data and diverse changes in the political geography of the Brazilian
Amazon, Wallace’s records have inaccurate place names and dates. A general reader of A
narrative of travels on the Amazon and Rio Negro 7 may face innumerable gaps when
trying to precisely locate Wallace’s findings and accounts on present-day maps. Among
specialists, the case is not so different. For instance, historians interested in the
ethnographic dimension of the journey cannot identify the Indigenous groups met by
Wallace following only his narrative. For historians of the natural sciences and
taxonomists, determining the specific locations where Wallace collected a given plant,
insect, bird or mammal is not an easy task. Also, for historians of the geosciences,
geographers and geologists interested in Wallace’s surveying, it can be very difficult to
ascertain the locations where he took notes or sketches of landscapes, geological
formations and stretches of rivers.
Resulting from a detailed scan of A narrative in contrast with Henry Walter Bates’ (1825–
1892) and Richard Spruce’s (1817–1893) respective journals, along with Brazilian sources

4 Alfred Russel Wallace, My life: a record of events and opinions, 2 vols (Dodd, Mead & Co., New York, 1905), vol. 1, p. 265.
5 Peter Raby, Alfred Russel Wallace: a life (Chatto & Windus, London, 2001), p. 32. Jane R. Camerini, The Alfred Russel
Wallace reader: a selection of writings from the field (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 2002), p. 63.
6 In addition, John van Wyhe produced an itinerary of Wallace’s and his assistant Charles Allen’s travels across the Malay
Archipelago. Combining and comparing that itinerary with this one may create opportunities to better visualize and understand
Wallace’s twelve years exploring the tropics; Carla Lima, A experiência de campo de Alfred Russel Wallace na Amazônia oitocentista:
viagem, ciência e interações (Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, 2014); V. R. Limeira-DaSilva, Alfred
Russel Wallace e os mundos amazônicos: o natural e o humano no contexto das ciências naturais oitocentistas (Universidade Federal
de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, 2015); Alfred Russel Wallace, The annotated Malay archipelago by Alfred Russel Wallace
(ed. John van Wyhe), pp. 39–43 (NUS Press, Singapore, 2015).
7 Alfred R. Wallace, A narrative of travels on the Amazon and Rio Negro, with an account of the native tribes, and observations
on the climate, geology, and natural history of the Amazon valley (Reeve & Co., London, 1853).
4 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Figure 1. Map of the River Amazon and the northern part of South America, from A narrative of travels on the
Amazon and Rio Negro (1853) by Alfred R. Wallace. Adapted to highlight Wallace’s itinerary. All rights over the
original are held by Mary Evans/Mary Evans Picture Library and the Natural History Museum. (Online version
in colour.)

and Wallace’s correspondence, this itinerary intends to offer a source to help researchers and
readers overcome some of the abovementioned issues, as well as to enrich new investigations
dealing with any topic related to his journey.8 As a means of illustrating the discussion and
supporting the study of the itinerary, figure 1 shows the map of northern South America
printed in A narrative, with Wallace’s complete journey highlighted.9 From May to
September 1848 Wallace travelled alongside Bates. They explored the Northeast Province
of Pará and the Tocantins River as far as its first falls. Afterwards, without Bates, Wallace
paid a trip to the Marajó Archipelago and to the Guamá River basin. From August 1849 to
mid-May 1850, he travelled along the lower Amazon River accompanied by his recently
arrived brother, Herbert Edward Wallace (1829–1851), as far as the lower Negro River.
After some excursions around Barra do Rio Negro (Manaus), Wallace, without Herbert,

8 Henry W. Bates, The naturalist on the river Amazons: a record of adventures, habits of animals, sketches of Brazilian and
Indian life, and aspects of nature under the Equator, during eleven years of travel, 2 vols (John Murray, London, 1863); Richard
Spruce, Notes of a botanist on the Amazon & Andes, being records of travel on the Amazon and its tributaries, the Trombetas, Rio
Negro, Uaupâes, Casiquiari, Pacimoni, Huallaga and Pastasa, as also to the cataracts of the Orinoco, along the eastern side of the
Andes of Peru and Ecuador, and the shores of the Pacific, during the years 1849–1864 (ed. Alfred R. Wallace), 2 vols (Macmillan,
London, 1908), vol. 1.
9 The itinerary chart includes: the final destination of the excursions, places visited, arrival and departure date (when possible),
and remarks on species, insights, observations, and people associated with the given localities. In case of places with change of name,
the current denominations appear in parentheses. It also includes, in brackets, the present-day municipalities of Pará and Amazonia
States that encompass the localities visited. Some of the place names refer to private estates and farms, which can be found only in
nineteenth-century maps; however, the nearest localities are indicated in these cases. Wallace visibly relied on informants who still
used eighteenth-century denominations for some places; therefore, more recent names are indicated in these cases. Misspellings and
loose phonetic spellings have also been corrected and adapted to more usual forms.
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 5

went on a long excursion to the upper Negro River, reaching Venezuela. Finally, he made two
excursions to the Uaupés River, tributary of the Negro River, reaching Colombia during the
second. He explored the Negro River basin from August 1850 to May 1852.
Although the making of the itinerary itself is an important source for picturing Wallace’s travel
in specific areas or as a whole, it also allows us to trace his evolution as a fieldworker. For instance,
it can reveal details about the diplomatic, commercial, scientific and Indigenous dimensions
intertwined with his field achievements. Scientific diplomacy played an important role in
making Wallace’s trajectory possible. When obtaining his ship tickets, he became aware of the
need for scientific recommendations and diplomatic mediation to advance into the Amazonian
interior, owing to the protectionist policies of the Brazilian Empire.10 For example, ready to
begin exploring the District of Pará, Wallace was informed that the provincial customs houses
required more documentation before officials could issue permits to navigate, as well as allow
him to obtain the scarce workforce to assist with his endeavour.11 Because of this Wallace
genuinely feared having to return home after an expedition limited to Pará.12
The execution of his itinerary depended on a strategic articulation of a wide network of
contacts, involving foreign and local merchants, diplomatic personnel, Brazilian authorities,
middle local traders, and dominant Indigenous groups. For instance, from Pará to the
Tocantins River, and back to the Paraense Islands, Wallace’s itinerary was not primarily
directed by his own collection plans. He followed the steps of North American and
European traders and other foreign businessmen, who were in search of Amazonian
economic potentialities, with a view to fostering international commercial navigation.13
Scientifically, Wallace’s itinerary also can be understood beyond the search for completing
lists of species for sale. Indeed, it was completely integrated with his personal search for
scientific recognition. In addition to the accomplishment of the journey from the first to the
last Brazilian domains over the Amazon, Wallace had three primary objectives for finally
surveying the Negro River basin. First, he wanted to reach the farthest point visited by
Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859), who had been banned from entering Brazil.
Visiting Yavita, on the Temi River, Venezuela, Wallace wanted to check, and if necessary
correct, Humboldt’s data about altitude, climate and geological structure of the Negro–
Orinoco riverine complex.14 Second, he wanted to explore deeply the ‘barely known’—at
least to the British—Uaupés River, with the goal of determining its precise coordinates and
extent within Brazil. Third, navigating this river as far as its first villages in Colombia,
Wallace wanted to produce a detailed report of its ‘little known’—at least to the British
ethnologists—Indigenous groups.15
Taxonomists can better explore Wallace’s specimen records having this itinerary as a
reference. As the common logics of space in the Amazon were based on the riverine
topography instead of on territorial divisions, in most cases, Wallace just mentioned the
broad area where he saw, captured or bought specimens. Knowing the actual locations of his

10 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Samuel Stevens, 25 May 1849, WCP661.L7711, ff. 1r–2v, Wallace Correspondence Project,
Essex.
11 Including a letter of recommendation from the British Foreign Office; Samuel Stevens, Letter to Lord Palmerston, 4 August
1849, WCP6633.L7681, f. 2v, Wallace Correspondence Project, Essex; John Bidwell, Letter to Her Majesty’s Consuls in Brazil,
21 August 1849, WCP5492.L6224, f. 1r–2v, Wallace Correspondence Project, Essex.
12 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 51.
13 Ibid., pp. 45–47. Bates, op. cit. (note 8), p. 84.
14 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 245–250.
15 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Thomas Sims, 20 January 1851, WCP390.L390, f. 1r, Wallace Correspondence Project, Essex.
6 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

occurrence records can enrich the treatment of his findings in bibliographical reviews, as well as
in analysis of biogeographical distribution. For example, the classification of Wallace’s
hundreds of drawings of fish species according to modern ichthyological taxa is still
incomplete. Monica Toledo-Piza Ragazo’s edited volume on the fishes of the Negro River
collected by Wallace has already taken the important step of reuniting all of his illustrations
and few surviving notes.16 Starting from the data she catalogued, it is possible to match both
the drawings and Wallace’s comments with the places and remarks on this itinerary. This
would be very helpful in order to locate the actual stretches of the Negro River and tributaries
where Wallace collected and preserved the fishes as well as produced the drawings.
In a recent paper, Hélio Beltrão, Jansen Zuanon and Efrem Ferreira pointed out that the
loss of Wallace’s preserved fish specimens is the biggest barrier to understanding the actual
richness of his findings.17 Checking this itinerary for the precise locations of Wallace’s
occurrence records, it is possible to compare the distribution of species by river type (i.e.
black water, white water) in that period with modern research data. Also, these locations
are relevant to investigations that may need to explore the natural history and migrations of
specific fish species recorded by Wallace in the 1850s. Furthermore, Wallace had at least
six main insights into geographical distribution, population diversity, and adaptation of
Amazonian species. First, he raised questions about the relations between very similar bird
species found in different habitats within the Amazon, i.e. downland and upperland species
or Guianese and Negro River species.18 Second, he hypothesized that the distribution of
Coleoptera and Lepidoptera in the Amazon was connected with the forest thickness, which
influenced the amount of sunlight and consequently the offer of flowers.19 Third, he
realized that there were patterns in the variations of size and number of birds and
mammals according to confinement or ample space.20 Fourth, he raised the hypothesis that
large rivers have containment power over populations of animals, including birds and
monkeys.21 Fifth, he reflected about the adaptation of species of birds to the availability of
food and territory.22 Sixth, he suggested that water type influenced the richness and
distribution of fish species in the Amazonian rivers.23

16 In 1905, ichthyologist Charles Tate Regan, FRS (1878–1943), keeper of zoology and future Director of the British Museum
(Natural History), identified 115 species among Wallace’s illustrations; Charles Tate Regan, ‘On drawings of fishes of the Rio Negro’,
Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1, 189–190 (1905). Some of the species of Regan’s list overlap with Ragazo's identification of 180 species out
of the 212 illustrations; Alfred Russel Wallace, Fishes of the Rio Negro/Peixes do Rio Negro (ed. Monica Toledo-Piza Ragazo),
(Natural History Museum, London/EDUSP, São Paulo, 2002). In 2015, Kullander and Varella described another fish species among
Wallace’s lost collections; however, they relied more on specimens collected and preserved by Swedish explorers between 1923 and
1925 than on Wallace’s records; Sven O. Kullander and Henrique R. Varella, ‘Pike cichlid gets a name after 160 years: a new species
of cichlid fish (Teleostei: Cichlidae) from the Upper Rio Negro in Brazil’, Copeia 103, 3 (2015).
17 Hélio Beltrão, Jansen Zuanon and Efrem Ferreira, ‘Checklist of the ichthyofauna of the Rio Negro basin in the Brazilian
Amazon’, Zookeys 881, 53–89 (2019).
18 Alfred R. Wallace, ‘On the umbrella bird (Cephalopterus ornatus), ‘Ueramimbé,’ L. G.,’ Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 18 (1850),
p. 207.
19 Ibid., pp. 170–171.
20 Ibid., p. 103.
21 Alfred R. Wallace, ‘On the monkeys of the Amazon’, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 20 (1852), at pp. 108–110. Wallace, op. cit.
(note 7), pp. 471–475.
22 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 83–85.
23 This hypothesis has been comprehensively studied. See, for example, Gabriel Stefanelli-Silva, ‘Reconsiderando a tipologia das
águas de Wallace: escolha de água de igarapé e maior sucesso de desova em um peixe amazônico’, MA Dissertation, Instituto
Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia, 2018; Gabriel Stefanelli-Silva, Jansen Zuanon and Tiago Pires, ‘Revisiting Amazonian water
types: experimental evidence highlights the importance of forest stream hydrochemistry in shaping adaptation in a fish species’,
Hydrobiologia 830, 151–160 (2019); Juan David Bogotá-Gregory et al., ‘Biogeochemical water type influences community
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 7

For natural scientists dealing with any of the species in question, this itinerary is a reliable
source to check Wallace’s mapped occurrences in contrast with modern lists of taxa or
biogeographical distribution graphics. In fact, the same comparative methodology can be
applied to any knowledge area covered by Wallace’s collections and observations, whether
ornithological, entomological, etc. As Janet Owen has argued with regard to Wallace’s
collecting in New Guinea in the late 1850s, diverse aspects of natural history collections
allow us to ‘understand better the collecting experience itself’. Notions such as ‘deep
mapping’, ‘objects biography’ and ‘multi-sensorial collecting’ open up interpretations of how
travelling naturalists used all sorts of material and mental techniques to observe and transport
information back home. Owen also suggested that this methodology needs supplementation
by means of textual analysis of journals and notebooks.24 As Wallace’s Amazonian journal
did not survive, this itinerary may be a useful tool in future studies of this sort, in which
multiple dimensions of Wallace’s collecting experience need to be taken into consideration.
For historians of biology, the itinerary is rich material with which to explore the conceptual
roots of Wallace’s later theory of evolution by natural selection. Tracing the development of
Wallace’s insights along his itinerary makes it possible to know which species, habitats and
natural phenomena fostered his speculations that evolved into a theory. For instance,
Wallace’s reflections on adaptation of species, food availability, and variations in size and
populations of animals are the first sources for the ideas outlined in his 1858 Ternate
Essay.25 Also, Wallace’s speculations on the distribution of Amazonian fauna and flora, as
well as the role of riverine barriers, were the forerunners of his later theoretical dividing
line between the Asian and Australian biogeographical provinces.26
Executing the itinerary and accomplishing scientific objectives were not enough in the
struggle for recognition in the competitive nineteenth-century scientific arena.27 The
accomplishment of an extensive itinerary was based on the idea of reaching inaccessible
areas, which were vital for defending the novelty of the data presented in travel narratives
and reports. For example, Wallace believed that reaching ‘the ‘ultima Thule’ of most of the
traders’ on the ‘barely known’ Uaupés River could make him better acquainted with the
natural history of the Amazon valley ‘than any other European traveller’.28 Nevertheless,
Wallace’s claim that his itinerary pioneered the exploration of the western Negro River
basin was more discursive than effective. With the discovery of the Casiquiare Canal
(1750s), which connects the Orinoco and Negro rivers, it became very easy to access the
upper tributaries of the latter, coming down from Venezuela or the Guyanas. Also, at least

composition, species richness, and biomass in megadiverse Amazonian fish assemblages’, Scient. Rep. 10, 15349 (2020)(http://dx.doi.
org/10.1038/s41598-020-72349-0).
24 Janet Owen, ‘Towards a methodology for analysing nineteenth-century collecting journeys of science and empire, with Charles
Darwin’s activities in Tierra Del Fuego as a case study’, Notes Rec. R. Soc. 73 (2019), at pp. 400–403. Janet Owen, ‘Alfred Russel
Wallace’s collecting journey in Dorey, New Guinea’, J. Hist. Collect. 32 (2018), at p. 3.
25 Wallace’s ‘On the tendency of varieties to depart indefinitely from the original type’ appeared in Charles Darwin and
A. R. Wallace, ‘On the tendency of species to form varieties; and on the perpetuation of varieties and species by natural means of
selection’, J. Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond. 3, 45–62 (1858).
26 For Wallace’s biogeographical lines, see Jane R. Camerini, ‘Evolution, biogeography, and maps: an early history of Wallace’s
line’, Isis 84, 700–727 (1993), and Fenneke Sysling, ‘The human Wallace line: racial science and political afterlife’, Med. Hist. 63,
314–329 (2019).
27 Innes M. Keighren et al., ‘Undertaking travel and exploration: motives and practicalities’ in Travels into print: exploration,
writing, and publishing with John Murray, 1773–1859 (ed. Innes M. Keighren, Charles W. J. Withers and Bill Bell), pp. 34–67
(University of Chicago Press, 2015).
28 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 306; Wallace, op. cit. (note 15).
8 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

three major Luso-Brazilian explorations of the Uaupés River—the first governmental, the
second naturalistic, and the third missionary—had been undertaken since the 1790s.29
In the same sense, Wallace claimed that he was the ‘first European’ to contact ‘uncontaminated’
Indians of the upper Uaupés River. He indeed added new and relevant ethnographic accounts to the
emergent British ethnology of South America. However, the idea that his itinerary reached
Indigenous groups ‘out of the ordinary track of the white man’ is quite unrealistic according to
the details revealed in his road map.30 Not only had the Luso-Brazilian naturalist Alexandre
Rodrigues Ferreira (1756–1815) reached almost the same localities as Wallace on the Uaupés
River in 1792, but also since 1775 ‘Uaupés Indians’ had been reported living in the villages by
the main course of the Negro River.31 Therefore, Wallace’s assertion that those Indigenous
groups were ‘isolated’ was another discursive support to his claim of field authority.
As is quite evident, market competitiveness between collectors was also extremely influential
in planning and executing itineraries. Wallace and Bates’ choice of destination was based on
consultations with naturalists and agents regarding the number of collectors exploring the
region at that moment. Though aware of the acute competition, some advice from Edward
Doubleday (1810–1849) convinced them that the Amazon was one of the most profitable
destinations.32 Considering only the best-known cases, during the period of Wallace and
Bates’ journeys at least five other British explorers were collecting in the region. They also
mentioned several other collectors of different nationalities competing for the same field.
Indeed, Wallace and Bates’ itineraries were partially determined by matters of competition
between them. While in Pará in September 1848, they split up in different directions most
likely in order to avoid competing in the same locations and to reach less-frequented areas.33
Accordingly, the extension and pioneering nature of any exploratory itinerary was also
determined by the quest for recognition and profits. Instead of distinctions between scientific and
commercial interests, Wallace’s itinerary reveals that these goals were completely integrated. In
the hierarchical Victorian scientific community, to dedicate yourself to researching and publishing
without financial worries was the privilege of very few. The speciality of Wallace’s life trajectory,
from a humble field collector to a prominent naturalist, depended upon finding income through
the sale of specimens in the species market while using findings to support hypotheses and theories.
Other dimensions that can be explored in Wallace’s itinerary are the Indigenous knowledge,
agency, and power relations. First, all excursions during Wallace’s journey followed Indigenous
tracks and geographical notions. In fact, he was a visible example of a follower of the
Humboldtian natural history, which highly valued Indigenous topographic references and
general knowledge.34 In addition, for Wallace, the graphic representations and written

29 Stephen Hugh-Jones, ‘Historia del Vaupes’, Maguaré 1, 29–51 (1981), at pp. 31–33. Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira, ‘Diário da
Viagem Philosophica pela Capitania de S. José do Rio Negro’, Rev. Inst. Hist. Geogr. Brasil. 48, 5–234 (1867).
30 It is important to point out that most regatões followed non-official routes. This was one of the reasons for the prohibition of
this type of trade in the Province of Pará in 1850, in addition to the contact with non-Christianized Indians, which was condemned by
some authorities. However, as for the Uaupés River, Wallace undoubtedly exaggerated the ‘novelty’ of the Indigenous villages
covered by his journey; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 467. Márcio C. Henrique, Sem Vieira nem Pombal: índios na Amazônia no século
XIX (EDUERJ, Rio de Janeiro, 2018), pp. 181–182.
31 José Monteiro de Noronha, Roteiro da Viagem da Cidade do Pará, até as últimas colonias do Sertao da Provincia, Escripto na
Villa de Barcelos pelo Vigario Geral do Rio Negro o Padre Dr. José Monteiro de Noronha no anno de 1768 (Typographia
de Santos & Irmaos, Pará, 1862), p. 68.
32 Wallace, op. cit. (note 4), pp. 264–267.
33 Raby, op. cit. (note 5), pp. 44–45.
34 Michael Bravo, ‘Ethnological encounters’, in Cultures of natural history (ed. N. Jardine, J. A. Secord and E. C. Spary),
at pp. 347, 349 (Cambridge University Press, 1996).
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 9

topographical descriptions of the Amazon were supplemented with indications for periods of better
weather and profitable localities for future collectors. Most of this information was based on the long
experience of local informants.35
Second, the Uaupés River had been explored only to a limited extent because of its dangerous
course, which is full of deadly falls and whirlpools. Additionally, it was not easy to get the
required Indigenous workforce to overcome the rough riverine flow. Most of the Indians
avoided doing business with traders and travellers beyond the exchange of objects and animals
because of their fear of being kidnapped into forced labour situations.36 Wallace took
advantage of the contacts arranged by his local supporters with the dominant Indigenous
groups of the western Negro River basin. The itinerary of his ethnographic report/collection
was determined by the involvement of key individuals of the huge Tukano and Arawak
groups. Wallace had his headquarters in the Malocas (ancestral long houses) of the noblest
strata of these peoples, whose support determined the richness of places he visited.
Third, in addition to providing infrastructure, Indigenous people literally shaped Wallace’s
itinerary. For instance, one of the species that he desired most was a heretofore uncollected
white umbrella-bird (Cephalopterus ornatus).37 He heard about this albino variety from an
Indian on the lower Negro River and subsequently tried to discover some way to find it.38 It is
known that Indians often fooled travellers with tales of imaginary animals, plants, rivers and
humans in order to just get rid of their inquiries.39 Even with this knowledge, illness, limited
provisions, and low expectation for profit based upon the results from previous trips, Wallace
risked a second expedition up to the Uaupés River as far as Colombia, by trusting Indigenous
guidance. It is also important to point out that Wallace’s first plan, based on Bates’ suggestion,
was to extend his expedition to Mato Grosso or to the Peruvian Andes, a change of itinerary
that was influenced by Indigenous information regarding the Uaupés River as the breeding
ground of the upland species of the umbrella-bird.40
Not only Indians but also other local people guided Wallace and shaped his itinerary.
Analysis of Wallace and Bates’ trajectory between Pará and the Tocatins River shows that
enslaved and free black people also advised on destinations and guided them through
ancient routes by land and river. One of their companions, the elderly former enslaved
Isidoro, literally lectured Wallace and Bates on the Paraense flora and on the ways to find
and extract the most desired species.41 Committed to sending a consignment of plants to
William J. Hooker at Kew, but far less trained in botany than in zoology, Wallace
depended completely on Isidoro to choose the best routes to the targeted species in the
shortest time possible.42

35 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 265–266, 306–307.

36 Ibid., at p. 279. German Zuluaga, La historia del Vaupes desde este orilla (Editorial Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, 2009),
p. 30.
37 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 306.
38 Ibid., p. 319.
39 For a broad study of Indigenous strategies in cross-cultural encounters in America, see Héctor H. Bruit, Bartolomé de Las
Casas e a Simulação dos Vencidos (Editora Unicamp, Iluminuras, Campinas, São Paulo, 1995). For the Indigenous agency and
ingenuity during ethnographies in the Negro River basin, see Curt Nimuendajú, ‘Reconhecimento dos Rios Içana, Ayarí e Uaupés:
Relatório Apresentado ao Serviço de Proteção aos Indios do Amazonas e Acre em 1927’, J. Soc. Am. 39, 125–182 (1950).
40 Wallace, op. cit. (note 15). Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Charles Algernon Wilson, October 1852, WCP5417.P6136, f. 1r,
Wallace Correspondence Project, Essex.
41 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 31–32. Bates, op cit. (note 8), p. 11.
42 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 31.
10 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Also important are Wallace’s appropriations of the Indigenous spatial and territorial
conceptions in the narrative and graphic presentations of his itinerary and maps. To construct
his later published ethno-biogeographic map of the Negro River basin Wallace used ‘a
prismatic compass, a watch, and a sextant’. However, both the descriptions of the river
courses and the map itself followed strictly the Indigenous topographic sense of the basin and
landscapes. On the main Negro River, instead of locating the variations of river width
according to coordinates only, Wallace used the territorial position of the Indigenous villages
as his primary reference marks. As for the measurements of the Uaupés River, his reliance on
the Indigenous groups is even more evident—they calculated the length of the river according
to the succession of falls and rapids, each receiving a specific name in their cosmogonies.43
Wallace surveyed the Uaupés River based on the landmarks of the Indigenous practical life
and mindset. For instance, he remarked that to determine his positions he had no instrument,
trusting only ‘the time occupied in the passage to the various stations’.44 Making use of
almost four years of daily practical lessons provided by the Indians, Wallace wrote that he had
‘gained experience as to the rate of travelling in canoes under different circumstances, which I
have had to depend upon in determining my distances on the Uaupés.’45
Furthermore, while travelling across the Negro River basin Wallace had as his supporter the
Luso-Brazilian trader Antônio de Lima, acquainted with the river, its tributaries, and the
Indians for a long time. In the first expedition, Wallace strictly followed Lima’s commercial
circuit of Indigenous partners and customers. In addition to being a regatão—as small traders
were called in the Amazon—Lima was a trafficker of so-called Índios bravos (resistant
Indians) for merchants and authorities. These routes of human trafficking were maintained for
a long time with the help of powerful Indigenous groups that subjugated others. As
mentioned, Wallace’s hosts on the Uaupés River were the influential Tuxauás (family leaders)
of well-established groups, such as the Daxseá (Tukano), Kótirya (Wanano) and Talyásari
(Tariana). They provided him with accommodation, transport, specimens and objects, in
addition to the notions of displacement, time and distance in order to accurately map the
Uaupés River.46 Without Lima’s knowledge during the first trip and the acquaintance with the
Indigenous groups in the second, a promising part of Wallace’s itinerary would certainly be
less rich in data and reduced to the well-visited low courses of the rivers.
Engaging with the following itinerary does not mean simply to look at a table with place
names, dates, people and species. The detailed correction of each itinerary gap in Wallace’s
published journey is not the only object of this report, which may also open opportunities for
renewed research on Wallace’s first and still overlooked field experience in the tropics. The
disconnected and unbalanced way in which the historiography of science still deals with
Wallace’s two tropical journeys is the primary issue targeted here. To produce global
approaches that consider both of Wallace’s journeys as parts of a single scientific formative
process, it is necessary to reach a level of knowledge of the first expedition we already
have of the second. By presenting the construction of a scientific itinerary with multiple
contributions and interests involved, this report allows us to take a step towards an
improved comprehension of Wallace’s achievements in the Amazon.

43 Alfred R. Wallace, ‘On the Rio Negro’, J. R. Geogr. Soc. 23, 212–217 (1853), at p. 217; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7),
pp. 341–368.
44 Wallace, ‘On the Rio Negro’, op. cit. (note 43), p. 217.
45 Ibid.
46 Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 366–367.
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 11

Table 1 Itinerary chart.

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

1848 Liverpool (England) 26 April

on board the
Mischief
Salinas (Pará) 26 May
City of Pará [Belém] 28 May 23 June Met Isidoro, former slave,
(PA) collaborator on botanical
collections. Settled in the
village of Nazaré. Met Vicente,
probably enslaved, a
collaborator on insect
collections. First captures of
Papilio, Morpho, Mantodea,
Epicalia and Mygalomorphae.
First collections of Mauritia
flexuosa, Bromeliaceae and
arums.
Two excursions Maguari [Ananindeua] 23 June 24 June First collections of Orchideae.
to Maguari (PA) First capture of Cithaerias
andromeda. Capture of
Morpho.
Belém (PA) 24 June July (?) First sight of Jacanidae, Pitangus
sulphuratus and Ramphastidae.
First sight of Socratea
exorrhiza. First sight of
Bothrops jararaca.
Maguari/Laranjeiras July (?) July (?) Stay of 10 days. Search for river
[Ananindeua] (PA) shells. First sight of monkeys.
Belém (PA) August (?) 26 August First sight of Boa constrictor and
Folivora. Dispatch of the first
consignment of collections to
Samuel Stevens and plants to
William Hooker in England.
Excursion to Cametá/Vista Alegre 30 August 2 September Second sight of Mauritia flexuosa.
the Sugar Mill (PA) First capture of Ophisthocomus
Tocantins hoazin. First sight of
River Heliconia. First capture of
Cicadoidea.
Baião/Jambuaçú 3 September 7 September Shot terns and gulls, Galbulidae,
Cocoa Farm (PA) Amazona and pigeons. Capture
of many new species of
Lepidoptera.
Jutaí Island [Ilha 9 September 10 September Search for river shells.
Grande, Baião]
(PA)
Nazaré dos Patos 10 September 13 September47 First sight of Anodorhynchus
[Breu Branco] (PA) hyacinthinus. First collection of
river shells.
Trocará [Tucuruí] 13 September 14 September First capture of Caprimulgidae.
(PA)
(Continued.)

47 Wallace stated that they stayed in Patos for two days, whereas Bates indicated three days. Despite appearing to be in
disagreement, later on Wallace recalled that they had waited one more day for the pilot and two men to proceed; Wallace, op. cit.
(note 7), pp. 65–66; Bates, op. cit. (note 8), p. 132.
12 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Panajá [Tucuruí] (PA) 14 September 14 September First alligator hunt. Second sight
of Anodorhynchus
hyacinthinus.
Jucaipuá [Tucuruí] 14 September 15 September Sight of the old Portuguese
(PA) settlement of Alcobaça.
Islands of Saints and 15 September 16 September Geological observations.
of Pacas
[Goianésia do
Pará]
Arroios/Tapaiunacuára 16 September 17 September Observations of volcanic rocks.
and Guaribas Falls
[Itupiranga] (PA)48
Panajá (PA) 18 September 19 September Quick visit to Jucaipuá. First sight
of Polygonum. Search for land-
shells. Search for yellow oriole.
Nazaré dos Patos (PA) 19 September 19 September Shot an Accipiter superciliosus
and captured Papilio and
Riodinidae on the way to
Baião.
Baião/Jambuaçú 22 September 23 September First sight of Attalea phalerata.
Cocoa Farm (PA)
Islands near Cametá 24 September 27 September First capture of Pelecanus
(PA) occidentalis. Observations of
habits and geographical
distribution of birds.
Belém (PA) 30 September October (?) Split up with Bates. Moved to
another house in Nazaré.
Dispatch of the second
consignment of collections to
England.
Estate of the Swiss October (?) 3 November Observations of diverse bird
Consul [Belém] species. First insight into
(PA) geographical distribution of
species related to some
‘regulating principle’. First
collections of Hesperiidae.
1849
Excursion to Island of Mexiana 7 November February 1849 Partially accompanied by Mr
the islands (PA) 1848 Yates, orchid collector. First
of Mexiana acquaintance with extensive
and Marajó slavery. First sight of
Campylopterus, Ramphastos
toco, Sturnella militaris,
Icterus croconotus and
Mycteria americana. First sight
of Arapaima gigas. First duck
hunt. Second alligator hunt.
Observations of habits of many
species of mammals.
Observations of geological
formations.

(Continued.)

48 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Samuel Stevens, 23 October 1848, WCP3744.P3651, f. 1r, Wallace Correspondence Project,
Essex.
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 13

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Island of Marajó/ February (?)49 March (?) Stay of 1 week. Took notes of
Juncal Cattle Farm unoccupied nests of Platalea
(PA) and Threskiornithinae and
observations of habits of other
birds.
Island of Flechas (PA) March (?) March (?) Stay of 1 day. Accompanied
Indians in search for raw
material for arrows. Botanical
observations.
Belém (PA) April (?) April (?) Moved to another house in
Nazaré. Met Luiz, former
enslaved assistant to zoologist
Johann Natterer (1787–1843)
in his expeditions across Brazil.
Excursion to São Domingos da Boa May (?) May (?) Stay of 1 week. Some birds
the Guamá Vista/do Capim captured by Luiz.
and Capim (PA)
rivers
Santana do Capim/São May (?) June (?) First observation of the riverine
José Farm50 (PA) phenomena of waves called
Pororoca. First collection of
fish species. Search for species
of Tinamus and for the
Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus.
Capture of Psophia viridis and
varied monkeys. Insight into
‘battle of life’ applied to man’s
mental/moral development.
Belém (PA) June/July (1st Herbert Edward, Wallace’s
week) youngest brother, arrived in
Pará, together with botanist
Richard Spruce (1817–1893)
and his assistant Robert King.
Trip towards Belém (PA) August (1st First sight of the main course of
Barra do Rio week) the Amazon River.
Negro Observations of habits of
[Manaus] aquatic birds.
Santarém (PA) September September (after 28 days of journey from Belém.
(1st week)51 14 Sep)52 First sight of the Tapajós
River.
(Continued.)

49 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to the members of the Neath Mechanics’ Institution, February 1849, WCP829.L1001, f. 1r, Wallace
Correspondence Project, Essex.
50 Lucia M. Furtado, Visões da terra (Clube de Autores, Joinville, 2011), pp. 63–64. Cláudio Ximenes and Alan W. Coelho,
‘A descrição histórica, geográfica e etnográfica do rio Capim feita por João Barbosa Rodrigues’, Bol. Mus. Paraense Emílio Goeldi
Ciênc. Hum. 12, 535–554 (2017), at p. 543.
51 Herbert Edward Wallace, Letter to Frances Sims Wallace, September 1849, WCP393.L393, f. 1r, Wallace Correspondence
Project, Essex. Alfred Wallace, Letter to Samuel Stevens, 15 November 1849, WCP4268.P4384, f. 1r, Wallace Correspondence
Project, Essex.
52 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Samuel Stevens, 12 September 1849, WCP4267.P4383, f. 2v, Wallace Correspondence Project,
Essex.
14 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Monte Alegre (PA) September (?) October (?) Met Spruce on his way to Óbidos.
Capture of Biblis hyperia. First
drawings of prehistoric rock-
paintings. First sight of Victoria
amazonica. Short trip to the
Serras. Capture of Asterope
leprieuri, Oreas sapphira and
new species of Catagramma.
Observations of geological
formations and geographical
distribution of insects. Acquired
first set of decorated Indigenous
calabashes.
Santarém (PA) October (?) November (?) Dispatch of third consignment of
collections to England.
Óbidos (PA) November (?) December (?)53 Stay of 4 days. Met Spruce.
Vila Nova da Rainha December (?) December (?) Journey of 4 days from Óbidos.
[Parintins] (AM) Stay of 1 week. Met Father
Torquato, travelling companion
of Prince Adalbert during his
journey up the Xingu River,
narrated in Travels.54
Serpa [Itacoatiara] ca December December (after
(AM) 25 Dec)
1850 Barra [Manaus] (AM) 31 December, January 1850
1849
Excursion up Castanheiro [Iranduba] January (?) February (?) First insight into the abundance of
the Negro (AM) insects according to the forest
River thickness. First search for the
umbrella-bird (Cephalopterus
ornatus) and observations of
many other bird species.
Barra (AM) February (?) Met Bates. Dispatch of fourth
consignment of collections to
England.
Excursion to Manaquiri (AM) Mid-March (?) Mid-May (?)55 About 8 days of journey from
Manaquiri/ Barra. First acquaintance with
Solimões Purupurú (Paumari) and Mura
River Indians. First sight of
Oncidiums. Capture of
Pteroglossus beauharnaesii.
Insight into vultures’ vision
capacity. First sight of a
manatee (Trichechus).
(Continued.)
53 Alfred R. Wallace, Letter to Samuel Stevens, 20 March 1850, WCP4269.P4385, f. 1r, Wallace Correspondence Project, Essex.
54 Adalbert (Prinz von Preussen), Travels of His Royal Highness Prince Adalbert of Prussia, in the South of Europe and in Brazil: with
a voyage up the Amazon and the Xingú (trans. Sir Robert H. Schomburgk and John E. Taylor), 2 vols (D. Bogue, London, 1849).
55 This is the largest gap in Wallace’s itinerary. Owing either to editorial errors or to failures in his record, the month of April is
completely omitted. Considering that Wallace stated that he spent ‘nearly two months’ in Manaquiri, ‘mid-March’ to ‘mid-May’ would be
the most likely time-lapse of this trip. Later on, he stated that after arriving in Barra, the canoe planned to go up the Negro River was delayed
and then ‘many weeks passed wearily away’ (these may have been the remaining weeks of May and the whole month of June). After a short
trip to the Solimões River, Wallace affirmed that again ‘several weeks more passed wearily, till at length we had news of the long-expected
canoe’ (these may have been the weeks of July and August). Thus, ‘mid-March’ and ‘mid-May’ are not in disagreement with the narrative
and are still more reasonable, since it is unlikely that Wallace spent more than three or even four months in Barra, as might be the case if the
return from Manaquiri were April, the month omitted; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), pp. 18, 189, 190–192.
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 15

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Barra (AM) May (?) First mail from England,

California, and Australia since
leaving Pará. Short fishing
excursion to the Solimões
River. First drawings of fishes
of the Negro River.
First great Barra (AM) 31 August Split up with Herbert. Met
excursion up Antônio de Lima, Portuguese
the Negro trader, supporter until the
River return to England.
Airão (AM) ca 7 September ca 7 September Took geological notes.
Pedreira (Moura) ca 8 September ca 9 September Drawings of prehistoric rock-
[Barcelos] (AM) paintings opposite the mouth
of the Branco River.
Carvoeiro [Barcelos] ca 9 September ca 10 September
(AM)
Barcelos (AM) ca 15 ca 15 September Beginning of frequent appearance
September of Mauritia palms.
Moreira (Caboquena) ca 16 ca 18 September Beginning of frequent appearance
[Barcelos] (AM) September of granitic formations.
Uajanari Estate 3 October 5 October
[Barcelos]56 (AM)
Santa Isabel do Rio 6 October ca 6 October
Negro (AM)
Castanheiro [Santa 8 October 9 October Drawings of prehistoric rock-
Isabel do Rio paintings.
Negro] (AM)
Auanauacá Estate 11 October 11 October
[São Gabriel da
Cachoeira] (AM)
Village of São José ca 12 ca 15 October Capture of diverse rare species of
[S. G. da October57 Lepidoptera.
Cachoeira] (AM)
Village of São Pedro ca 18 October 19 October First sight of the Serra do
[S. G. da Curicuriari (AM) and the
Cachoeira] (AM) homonymous river.
São Gabriel da 21 October 22 October First sight of the mouth of the
Cachoeira (AM) Uaupés River and acquaintance
with the Negro River main
falls.
(Continued.)

56 Antônio Gonçalves Dias, Gonçalves Dias na Amazônia: relatórios e diário da viagem ao Rio Negro (ed. Josué Montello),
(Academia Brasileira de Letras, Rio de Janeiro, 2002), p. 142.
57 Dates 12–18 October were deduced from information about 19 October. Wallace specified 19 October as the day when he
‘reached the celebrated Falls of the Rio Negro’, the ‘same day’ that he left the Village of São Pedro. Considering that he spent ‘an
evening’ in São Pedro, then he arrived there on the afternoon of 18 October, leaving during the night of the same day. He stated that
they arrived in São Pedro ‘In two days more’ in relation to the departure from the previous village, São José. Therefore, they would
have left São José during the morning or afternoon of 15 October. In São José, they would have stayed on 14, 13 and 12 October
because Wallace stated that they ‘reached Wanawaca’ on 11 October and that ‘the next day (12th) we staid at another village, Sao
Joze’. Later on, he stated that because of the change of vessel, he stayed ‘two days’ (13 and 14 October) ‘unloading and loading’;
Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 205.
16 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Nossa Senhora da 24 October Met J. Natterer’s Indian daughter.

Guia [S. G. da Indian companions shot some
Cachoeira] (AM) Cotinga cayana and other bird
species. Drawings of fish
species. First acquaintance with
Electrophorus electricus.
Excursion to Village of the Baniwa November (?) December (?) Stay of 9 days. First search for the
the Serras Indians/Serra do ‘cocks-of-the-rock’ (Rupicola
near the Cubate (AM) rupicola). Shot a
Cubate Gymnocephalus calvus, and
River made observations of its
distribution. First acquaintance
with the Indigenous
classification and uses of
Iriartella setigera, Oenocarpus
bataua and Ceiba pentandra.
Geological notes.
1851 Nossa Senhora da January (?) 27 January First encounter with Friar José dos
Guia (AM) Santos Inocentes (?–1852),
famous figure in the history of
contacts with Amazonian
Indians.
São João Batista de 28 January Found a new species of
Mabé [S. G. da Chaetodon. More drawings of
Cachoeira] (AM) fish species.
Mouth of the Xié 29 January Sight of the Serras do Cababuri
River (AM) and Tapirapecó.
Marabitanas [S. G. da January 31 31 January
Cachoeira] (AM)
Serra do Cucuí 1 February 2 February Geological observations.
(Brazil–Venezuela
border)58
San Carlos de Río 4 February
Negro (AM–VE)59
Solano (AM–VE) 5 February 5 February First sight of the Casiquiare River.
San Carlos de Río 5 February Met Baré Indians.
Negro (AM–VE)
Tomo (AM–VE) 10 February 13 February Met a subdivision of the
Walimanai Indians.
Maroa (AM–VE) 13 February 13 February Met another subdivision of the
Walimanai Indians.
Isthmus of Pimichin 14 February 20 February Reached the farthest point visited
(AM–VE) by Humboldt. First sight of a
Panthera onca on the road to
Yavita. Several occurrences of
Mauritia palms and Attalea
maripa. Insight into the
geographical distribution of
palm trees. Geomorphological
and climatic observations.
Rectification of some of
Humboldt’s data. First sight
and classification of
Leopoldinia piassaba.
(Continued.)
58 Nowadays, the mountain is only part of the Venezuelan territory and called Monumento Natural Piedra del Cocuy.
59 From here until 1 April, ‘AM’ refers to the Venezuelan Department of Amazonas, not the current Brazilian State.
 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 17

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Yavita (AM–VE) 20 February 31 March Met the Walimanai and Warekena

Indians. Preparation of the skin
of a Caiman latirostris. More
drawings of fish species.
Second insight into the
distribution of Coleoptera and
Lepidoptera according to the
forest thickness.
Isthmus of Pimichin 31 March 31 March
(AM–VE)
Maroa (AM–VE) 31 March 1 April Acquired a set of Indigenous
objects. First capture of a
species of Gymnotus.
Tomo (AM–VE) 1 April Acquired Indigenous objects.
Marabitanas April (?) April (?) 3 days after leaving Tomo. Stay of
(AM–BR) 1 week.
Nossa Senhora da April (last 3 June Recorded having drawn 160
Guia (AM) week) fishes.
First excursion São Joaquim [S. G. da 3 June 3 June First acquaintance with a Eunectes
up to Cachoeira] (AM) murinus.
Uaupés
River
Maloca 60 Açaí- 7 June 8 June Acquired Indigenous objects.
Paraná: Waí-Khana
Indians61 [S. G. da
Cachoeira] (AM)
Maloca Naná- 9 June 10 June Observations of the Indigenous
rapecuma: Daxseá uses of the Atta cephalotes.
Indians62 [S. G. da Acquired Indigenous objects.
Cachoeira] (AM)
Maloca Mandii- 10 June 11 June Acquired Indigenous objects.
Paraná: Talyásari
Indians63 [S. G. da
Cachoeira] (AM)
São Jerônimo 12 June 13 June More drawings of fish species.
(Ipanoré) [S. G. da
Cachoeira] (AM)
Juquira-Pecôma: 15 June 16 June
Daxseá Indians64
[S. G. da
Cachoeira] (AM)
(Continued.)

60 A great abode built by the Indigenous groups of the Uaupés River basin for centuries, in which several families live together. In
the process of restructuring religious missions in the 1850s, many Malocas began to be used by missionaries as the basis for settling
Indigenous peoples from several different groups; Pelo Rio Mar: Relatório Compilado pela Prelazia Salesiana do Alto Rio Negro, sob
a coordenação de Dom Pedro Massa (ed. S. D’Azevedo), (C. Mendes, Rio de Janeiro, 1933).
61 Alcionilio Brüze da Silva, A Civilização Indígena do Uaupés: observações antropológicas, etnográficas e sociológicas
(Las Roma, Roma, 1977), pp. 49, 95.
62 Ibid., pp. 49, 72.
63 Nimuendajú, op. cit. (note 39), p. 163.
64 Brüze da Silva, op. cit. (note 61), p. 49.
18 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Iauaretê (Brazil– 17 June ca 24 June Stay of 1 week. First sight of the

Colombia border) Guilielma speciosa and
[S. G. da Iriartea ventricosa. Shot a
Cachoeira] Gymnoderus foetidus. Capture
of two species of Papilio and
one of Acraea. Observations of
habits of varied bird species.
Observations of insects and
Lumbricina being used for
food by the Indians.
Juquira-Pecôma (AM) ca 24 June ca 29 June Capture of a new species of
Papilio.
Maloca Urubucuara: ca 30 June ca 1 July
Kumãdene
Indians65 (AM)
São Jerônimo 1 July ca 16 July Capture of two new species of
[Ipanoré] (AM) Satyrinae. Acquired nine living
Pionites melanocephalus.
Collected several wild
Orchidaceae. More drawings of
fish species. Increased the
collection of preserved fishes.
Nossa Senhora da 24 July ca 15 August
Guia (AM)
Return to Barra São Joaquim (AM) ca 15 August 1 September
do Rio
Negro
São Gabriel da 1 September 2 September
Cachoeira (AM)
Village of São José Stay of 1 day.
(AM)
Uajanari Estate (AM) 6 September 6 September
Barra do Rio Negro 15 September Received news of Herbert being
(AM) very ill of yellow fever in Pará.
Met Spruce. Prepared the fifth
consignment of collections, not
dispatched until 1852 because
of accusations of contraband.
Second Pedreira (AM) Stay of 1 day. Second encounter
excursion up with Friar José dos Santos
the Uaupés Inocentes.
River
Carvoeiro (AM) Stay of 1 day.
Uajanari Estate (AM) 29 October ca 5 November Preparation of the skeleton of a
Trichechus and of a Clielys
matamata.
Estate of Mr Chagas 12 November 12 November Local information regarding a
(near Castanheiro) white variety of Cephalopterus
[Iranduba, AM] ornatus.
Auanauacá Estate 13 November 13 November
(AM)

(Continued.)

65 Ibid., pp. 49, 99.

 Alfred Russel Wallace’s Amazonian journey 19

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

São Bernardo do ca 15 ca 15 November

Camanaú [S. G. da November
Cachoeira] (AM)
São Gabriel da ca 16 ca 16 November First sight of a Lachesis muta.
Cachoeira (AM) November
São Joaquim (AM) 23 November More than two months laid ill.
1852 São Joaquim (AM) 16 February Visit of 1 day to São Gabriel. Met
Spruce.
São Jerônimo (AM) 21 February 24 February
Iauaretê (AM) 28 February 28 February Search for the white umbrella-bird
(Cephalopterus ornatus), never
found.
Maloca Iapuna66 28 February 1 March Passed by the Maloca Uacará.
(AM)
Maloca Caruru- 2 March ca 7 March Acquired Indigenous objects.
cachoeira: Kótirya
Indians67 (AM)
Maloca Diápoepawí’i, 11 March 11 March Acquired Indigenous objects.
Aracapuri68
(Vaupés–Colômbia)
Micura [VP–CO] 12 March 25 March Capture of a Lagotlirix
humholdtii, a Trochilus Pyra
and a new species of Asterope.
More drawings of fishes.
Reviewed measurements and
coordinates of the Uaupés
River. Acquired Indigenous
objects.
Maloca Caruru- 1 April ca 5 April
cachoeira
Iauaretê (AM) April (?) April (?) Stay of 1 day. Acquired
Indigenous objects.
Return to Barra
do Rio
Negro
São Jerônimo (AM) April (?) 23 April
São Joaquim (AM) 26 April 27 April
São Gabriel da 28 April 29April Met Spruce.
Cachoeira (AM)
Estate of Mr Chagas 2 May 2 May
(AM)
Castanheiro (AM) 2 May 3 May
Uajanari Estate (AM) 4 May
Barcelos (AM) 8 May
Pedreira (AM) 11 May
Airão (AM) 12 May
(Continued.)

66 Wallace misspelt as ‘Japóna’. He meant ‘Iapuna’, which means ‘oven’, the precise name of that fall; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7),
p. 344; Ermano Stradelli, ‘Vocabulário Neéngatu-Portuguez’, Rev. Inst. Hist. Geogr. Brasil. 104, 58 (1928), at p. 457.
67 Wallace affirmed that this village was inhabited by the ‘Ananás Indians’, being an incorrect spelling of ‘Wanana’ (Kótirya);
Brüze da Silva, op. cit. (note 61), pp. 84–85; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 348.
68 Wallace named ‘Uarucapuri’, which does not appear in any other record consulted. It seems certain that this is the village of
‘Aracapuri’, in Colombia, where several Indigenous Malocas exist, including the mythical Diápoepawí’i; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7),
p. 354; Feliciano Lana and Luiz Gomes Lana, Antes o mundo não existia: mitologia dos antigos Desana-Kehíripõrã (Unirt, Foirn,
São João Batista do Rio Tiquié, São Gabriel da Cachoeira, 1995), p. 43.
20 V. R. Limeira-DaSilva

Table 1. (Continued.)

Year/excursion Place Arrival Departure Remarks

Aiparuça69 (AM) 15 May

Barra do Rio Negro 17 May 10 June Heard that Herbert Edward died of
(AM) yellow fever in Pará on 8 June
1851.
Return to Vila Nova da Rainha 13 June
Belém (AM)
Óbidos (PA) 14 June
Santarém (PA) 15 June
Gurupá (PA) 18 June
Breves (PA) 22 June
Belém (PA) 2 July
Return to Belém (PA) July 12
England
Latitude 30° 30' N, 6 August Fire on board and shipwreck.
longitude 52° W
on board the ship
Helen
On lifeboat 7 August August 15
On board the ship 15 August
Jordeson
English Channel 29 August
Deal, Kent (England) 1 October

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks to George Beccaloni for the very first draft of Wallace’s itinerary and for
encouraging me to publish it. Special thanks to the Wallace Correspondence Project.
Thanks to the Mary Evans Picture Library for kind support. Thanks to the referees of this
paper for their insightful comments. The research of which this itinerary is one of the
results was supported by FAPESB (grant number 2354/2017) and CAPES (grant number
88887.194805/2018-00) and developed during a PhD Fellowship in the Dana Research
Centre of the Science Museum, London.

69 Wallace wrote ‘Ai purusá’ in a loose phonetic spelling. He meant ‘Apairuçá’, a locality currently part of the municipality of
Iranduba (AM), Greater Manaus, right after Airão. The editors of the first Brazilian translation of A narrative corrected the
misspelling; Wallace, op. cit. (note 7), p. 372; Alfred R. Wallace, Viagens pelos Rios Amazonas e Negro (trans. Eugênio Amado),
p. 231 (Itatiaia, São Paulo, 1979).