Dowsing

German History Vol. 38, No. 4, pp.
568–593
The Dowsing Debate: Water, Science and

Colonialism in German Southwest Africa*
Martin Kalb
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Wishing-Wand
A song sleeps in all things around
Which dream on and on unheard,
And the world begins to resound
If you hit the magic word.
—Joseph Freiherr von Eichendorff, trans. Natias Neutert
‘Southwest Africa cannot thank its governor enough’, wrote the local newspaper
Windhuker Nachrichten in March 1907.1 The Windhoek-based paper was clearly pleased
with Friedrich von Lindequist for bringing dowser Rafael Perfecto von Uslar to the
German colony. Von Uslar, a district administrator from northern Germany, was be-
lieved to have a unique ability: by employing rhabdomancy, he could find water. Using
a Y-shaped stick or twig or at times a metal wire as a dowsing rod (Wünschelrute, see
Fig. 1), von Uslar now applied the ancient folk tradition of water witching, dowsing or
divination in German Southwest Africa (1884–1915), an arid region which colonialists
hoped to develop into a profitable settler colony. Up until this point, German new-
comers had struggled to access water, an essential resource for extensive cattle farming
and possible agriculture. Although they faced an unfamiliar environment, they regu-
larly dismissed local expertise around locating water. In addition, colonial authorities
in Berlin had initially outsourced colonial development to private entities and there-
fore little was invested in colonial infrastructures—at least until the Herero and Nama
Uprising in 1904. It was in this context that von Uslar arrived in the region in 1906
to help solve the ‘water question’ (Wasserfrage), as contemporaries termed it. According
to the Windhuker Nachrichten, he was remarkably successful, even finding water in the
coastal town of Lüderitzbucht, which had previously relied on water deliveries from
Cape Town or desalination.2 Newspapers directly tied to the colonial state seemed
equally enthusiastic, if not more so. Some even questioned the general aridity of the
region. The newspaper Koloniale Zeitschrift, the organ of the colonial society, asked ‘how
Social Democrats in Germany could state that this is a desert. The ground has to be
worked, but such efforts are worth it. Without persistence, there is no reward.’3 The
official German colonial platform, the Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, agreed when pointing out
‘that there is water everywhere in the protectorate, often very low [in the ground]’.4
* I wish to thank Meredith McKittrick (Georgetown) and Dag Henrichsen (Basel) for their early comments; my
thanks also to the anonymous reviewers and others who have provided feedback. I am very grateful for the help
of librarians and archivists as well as for funding from Bridgewater College and the National Endowment for the
Humanities.
1 ‘Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, Windhuker Nachrichten, 7 Mar. 1907.
2 Ibid. The water proved too salty. ‘Lüderitzbuchter Brief’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 20 Apr. 1907.
3 ‘Südwestafrika’, Koloniale Zeitschrift, 15 Feb. 1907.
4 ‘Dernburgs Studienreise nach Britisch- und Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 26 Sept. 1908.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the German History Society.
All rights reserved. doi:10.1093/gerhis/ghaa084
Water, Science and Colonialism in German Southwest Africa 569

Figure 1: Dowsing, ‘viewed from above’, using a metal wire
Source: Leonhard Weber, Die Wünschelrute (Kiel and Leipzig, 1905), p. 30, accessed at archive.org
Would the water question that had plagued German Southwest Africa, and had pre-
vented lucrative cattle farming and commercial agriculture, finally be solved?
Dowsing has a long and fascinating history, yet it is its resurgence and connec-
tions to the water question in German Southwest Africa that are of particular interest
here. Little is known about the origins of water witching. In Central Europe, refer-
ences to this means of finding water became much more prevalent by at least the fif-
teenth century. For example, the German mineralogist Georgius Agricola described,
and criticized, the use of a forked hazel-wood branch in his classic work De re metallica
(see Fig. 2).5 Historian Udo Krautwurst has proposed that ‘although the emergence
of rhabdomancy is lost in antiquity, what little evidence is available suggests a largely
European genealogy’.6 Dowsers helped locate water as well as resources like iron ore or
gold. The practice increasingly turned into an experimental branch of geophysics, and
mining administrators hired practitioners throughout the eighteenth century.7 Dowsing
lingered as a folk tradition within many European communities thereafter, tied to local
knowledge, identities and economics, before its resurrection at the turn of the twentieth
century in Germany and elsewhere.8
5 ‘Dowsing’, in D. E. Newton (ed.), Encyclopedia of Water (Westport, CT, and London, 2003), p. 89; J. Dillinger,
‘Dowsing from the Late Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century: The Practices, Uses and Interpretations of an
Element of European Magic’, Studies in History, 28, 2 (2012), pp. 1–17, here p. 5.
6 U. Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies and Dowsing Realities: Exporting Models of Non-
Rationality through Colonial and Development Discourses’, PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 21,
2 (1998), pp. 71–82, here p. 71. See also E. Vogt, ‘Water Witching: An Interpretation of a Ritual Pattern in a
Rural American Community’, Scientific Monthly, 75, 3 (1952), pp. 175–86; J. Baum, The Beginner’s Handbook of
Dowsing: The Ancient Art of Divining Underground Water Sources (New York, 1974).
7 W. A. Dym, Divining Science: Treasure Hunting in Early Modern Germany (Leiden and Boston, 2011), pp. 4–5.
8 Dowsing was arguably a transnational movement, with similar debates in other countries. See, for instance,
G. Surbleb, Le Secret des Sourciers (Paris, 1908). See also Carl Graf von Klinckowstroem and Rudolf Freiherr
von Maltzahn, Handbuch der Wünschelrute: Geschichte, Wissenschaft, Anwendung (Munich and Berlin, 1931),
pp. 1–92.
570 Martin Kalb

Figure 2: Dowsing, subtitled ‘A – Twig. B – Trench’
Source: Georgius Agricola, De Re Metallica, trans. H. Hoover and L. Hoover (New York, 1950), p. 40, accessed
at gutenberg.org
The debate surrounding water divination is at the centre of this article. Employed
as a window into German history, it effectively encapsulates the complexities of im-
perial fantasies and the fluidity of epistemologies. First, disputes around dowsing cap-
ture the importance of the water question, for its solution was vital for the future
development of Germany’s first and only settler colony. Without the widespread avail-
ability of water, large-scale agricultural production or pastoral cattle farming, which
was at odds with semi-nomadic livestock cultures, would not materialize. Secondly,
von Uslar’s efforts in German Southwest Africa shed light on the limits of German
colonialism. Though the German Empire originally claimed the area in 1884 and im-
perial imaginations ran rampant, little penetration had taken place by the end of the
nineteenth century. The eventual commitment to colonialism following the defeat and
almost complete extermination of Herero and Nama allowed von Uslar to step into
a virtual vacuum that also existed because of German ethnocentrism and its dismis-
sive colonial gaze. In that sense, the German Empire’s reliance on water divination
accentuates a moment of colonial desperation.9 Finally, the resurgence of dowsing in
Germany and its support by some members of the higher echelon of the administra-
tion challenged established colonial hierarchies. Germans were supposed to enlighten
and civilize local African populations, but instead von Uslar introduced an undocu-
mented folk tradition. His alleged revealing of water contested the imperial mission’s
ostensible grounding in rationality, technology and science. Where did this type of
9 According to Dillinger, ‘we might say that the magic of the divining rod was a symbolic and ritualistic expression
of a pressing concern’, Dillinger, ‘Dowsing’, p. 6.
knowledge fit in light of the dichotomy between objective, peer-reviewed scholarship

and local African folk traditions? The dowsing debate that ensued showcases how dif-
ferent colonial voices negotiated hierarchies of knowledge and how, in the end, dow-
sing as a German folk tradition found its place alongside the sciences, while African
expertise was dismissed and silenced.
These arguments are situated at the intersection of German, colonial and envir-
onmental history, as well as in epistemology, the history of knowledge and science
studies. Historian David Blackbourn has explored how Germans shaped the land-

scape of central Europe; scholarship concentrating on homeland (Heimat), landscape
(Landschaft) and the environment (Umwelt) has further complicated our understanding
of Germany’s relationships with nature.10 Likewise, colonial and environmental his-
tories established avenues of inquiry around conquest and cultivation, conservation,
disease and war, and German Southwest Africa has served as a rich case study.11
Besides, the role of what historian Dirk van Laak has titled ‘imperial infrastructures’,
meant to address the supposed shortcomings of nature, brought some of Blackbourn’s
arguments into the German Empire.12 The conquest of land, not just people, was
key for German settler colonialism (Siedlungskolonialismus) in German Southwest Africa.
Similar to discussions in South Africa, Australia, French colonies in Northern Africa
and the American Southwest, officials in German Southwest Africa also looked to
hydrological technology to wrestle with and possibly overcome aridity. Understandings
and constructions of such landscapes by outsiders as well as fears of desertification
mattered greatly in this context.13 Additionally, German colonial history has long ex-
plored efforts to sustain agriculture and cattle farming in German Southwest Africa,
10 D. Blackbourn, The Conquest of Nature: Water, Landscape, and the Making of Modern Germany (New York,
2006), p. 5; for broader narratives see J. Osterhammel, The Transformation of the World: A Global History of
the Nineteenth Century (Princeton, 2009), p. 779; F. Zelko (ed.), ‘From Heimat to Umwelt: New Perspectives on
German Environmental History’, Bulletin of the German Historical Institute, Supplement 3 (2006); T. Zeller and
T. Lekan (eds), Germany’s Nature: Cultural Landscapes and Environmental History (Camden, 2005).
11 D. Steinbach, ‘Carved out of Nature: Identity and Environment in German Colonial Africa’, in C. F. Ax, N. Brimnes,
N. T. Jensen and K. Oslund (eds), Cultivating the Colonies: Colonial States and their Environmental Legacies
(Athens, OH, 2011), pp. 47–77; C. Botha, ‘People and the Environment in Colonial Namibia’, South African
Historical Journal, 52 (2005), pp. 170–90; B. Gissibl, The Nature of German Imperialism: Conservation and
the Politics of Wildlife in Colonial East Africa (New York, 2016); D. Anderson and R. Grove (eds), Conservation
in Africa: People, Policies and Practice (Cambridge, 1987); G. Miescher, Namibia’s Red Line: The History of a
Veterinary and Settlement Border (New York, 2012); T. Sunseri, ‘Reinterpreting a Colonial Rebellion: Forestry and
Social Control in German East Africa, 1874–1915’, Environmental History, 8, 3 (2003), pp. 430–51; T. Sunseri,
‘The War of the Hunters: Maji Maji and the Decline of the Ivory Trade’, in J. Giblin and J. Monson (eds), Maji
Maji: Lifting the Fog of War (Leiden, 2010), pp. 117–48; P. Lehmann, ‘Between Waterberg and Sandveld: An
Environmental Perspective on the German–Herero War of 1904’, German History, 32, 4 (2014), pp. 533–58.
See also C. Ross, Ecology and Power in the Age of Empire: Europe and the Transformation of the Tropical World
(Oxford, 2017).
12 D. van Laak, Imperiale Infrastruktur: deutsche Planungen für eine Erschliessung Afrikas 1880 bis 1960
(Paderborn, 2004).
13 D. Davis, The Arid Lands: History, Power, Knowledge (Cambridge, MA, 2016). Imperialists tended to blame
local populations for desertification; see ibid., p. 94. For broader discussions see also A. Tal, ‘Desertification’, in
F. Uekötter (ed.), The Turning Points of Environmental History (Pittsburgh, 2010), pp. 146–61. For discussions re-
garding German Southwest Africa see H. O. Siiskonen, ‘The Concept of Climate Improvement: Colonialism and
Environment in German South West Africa’, Environment and History, 21 (2015), pp. 281–302.
572 Martin Kalb
including studies focusing on the importance of water.14 The role of African know-
ledge as well as the transfer of local expertise and transnational findings have also been
part of scholarly discussions.15 This article follows these trends as it emphasizes the
breakdown of a supposed dichotomy between objective imperial knowledge and local
expertise.16 Hierarchies of knowledge, all the more important within the German
Empire, mattered greatly in this context, as German folk traditions easily trumped
existing African expertise.
Scholars have long discussed the roles of water in history, with arid landscapes, the

American Southwest in particular, a particular focus.17 Not much has been written,
however, specifically about the use of dowsing in the search for water in arid land-
scapes, leading Johannes Dillinger to argue that water divination is ‘a seriously
understudied area in historical research’.18 That claim certainly applies to German
Southwest Africa.19 The only scholarly discussion to this day remains historian Udo
Krautwurst’s argument ‘that imperial expansion involved not only the export of ration-
ality, but local European forms of non-rationality—sometimes coded as irrationality—
as well’.20 Krautwurst points to a core issue by emphasizing dowsing’s ‘non-rationalist
14 See, for instance: P. Rohrbach, Deutsch Südwest-Afrika: ein Ansiedlungsgebiet? (Berlin-Schöneberg, 1905);
K. Schwabe, Die Deutschen Kolonien (Berlin, 1909); W. Külz, Deutsch-Südafrika im 25. Jahre Deutscher
Schutzherrschaft: Skizzen und Beiträge zur Geschichte Deutsch-Südafrikas (Berlin, 1909). For more recent
studies see U. Kaulich, Die Geschichte der ehemaligen Kolonie Deutsch-Südwestafrika 1884–1914: eine
Gesamtdarstellung (Frankfurt/Main, 2001); M. Wallace, A History of Namibia: From the Beginning to 1990
(Oxford, 2013).
15 J. Noyes, ‘Nomadic Fantasies: Producing Landscapes of Mobility in German Southwest Africa’, Ecumene, 7,
1 (2000), pp. 47–66; D. Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag im vorkolonialen Zentralnamibia: das Herero- und
Damaraland im 19. Jahrhundert (Basel, 2011). On the transfer of knowledge see R. Habermas and A. Przyrembel
(eds), Von Käfern, Märkten und Menschen: Kolonialismus und Wissen in der Moderne (Göttingen, 2013).
16 F. Driver, ‘Geography’s Empire: Histories of Geographical Knowledge’, Environment and Planning D: Society and
Space, 10 (1992), pp. 23–40; S. Seth, ‘Putting Knowledge in its Place: Science, Colonialism, and the Postcolonial’,
Postcolonial Studies, 12, 4 (2009), pp. 373–88; H. Fischer-Tiné, Pidgin-Knowledge: Wissen und Kolonialismus
(Zurich and Berlin, 2013). Interestingly, the rise of folk traditions like Sebastian Kneipp’s naturophatic medicine
movement complicate understandings of professionalization in the sciences during the nineteenth century.
17 See, for example, A. Mikhail (ed.), Water on Sand: Environmental Histories of the Middle East and North Africa
(Oxford, 2013); S. Solomon, Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization (New York, 2010). For
key studies see D. Worster, Rivers of Empire: Water, Aridity, and the Growth of the American West (Oxford, 1985),
and M. Reiser, Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water (New York, 1986).
18 Dillinger, ‘Dowsing’, p. 3. Material is plentiful, with reputable scientists contributing to debates in England. See,
for instance, R. Lankester, ‘The Divining Rod and Water Finders’, Agricultural Journal of the Cape of Good Hope,
37, 6 (Dec. 1910), pp. 708–11.
19 An extensive 1974 bibliography on water only includes a couple of references to dowsing: H. W. Stengel,
Bibliographie Wasserwirtschaft in Südwestafrika (Basel, 1974). The same applies to a detailed discussion of water
management from 1990: C. Stern and B. Lau, Namibian Water Resources and their Management (Windhoek,
1990), p. 63. Van Laak references dowsing only in a footnote: van Laak, Imperiale Infrastruktur, p. 189. Martin
Schmidt does not discuss dowsing at all; see M. Schmidt, ‘Bewässerungslandwirtschaft in Namibia und ihre
Grundlagen in der Kolonialzeit’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, 1990). Exceptions in-
clude a couple of publications by Namibian farmers and a conference presentation by Meredith McKittrich; see
F. Metzger, Die Wassererschliessung in Namibia (Windhoek, 1998); M. McKittrick, ‘Aquatic Dreams: Invisible and
Imagined Water in Colonial South West Africa’, presentation given at the American Society for Environmental
History, 14–18 Mar. 2018, Riverside, CA.
20 Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 72.
epistemological status in anthropology in the context of past and present imperi-

alism’.21 The following analysis centres on specific players and the dowsing debate in
Germany, not least in order to contribute to deliberations about the role of colonies as
‘laboratories of modernity’.22
Historians have much to work with when delving into these questions. Colonial arch-
ives, full of reports and documentation, capture how a variety of voices within the
administration initially conceptualized and tried to deal with a lack of water. Likewise,
scientific journals, popular newspapers and the publications of numerous professionals

and laymen provide an extensive foundation for any exploration of the dowsing debate.
The incorporation of ‘myths and legends, literary narratives and other texts, landscape
perceptions, as well as colonial and wildlife photography’ offers additional avenues.23
For instance, so-called stories, or folk tales, from within the Southwester community
repeatedly point to the role of dowsing in daily life.24 At the same time, a prevalent ab-
sence of African experts and voices within many of these sources speaks volumes about
German ethnocentrism as well as the creation and flow of knowledge. It also outlines
colonial epistemologies given that scientists, colonial officials and other players felt at
times comfortable with supporting dowsing but never considered directly incorporating
African understandings. This case study utilizes these materials to emphasize the im-
portance of water for German Southwest Africa; it also employs the sources to capture
intricacies around the constitution of imperial knowledge and expertise. All of that will
ultimately help complicate broader understandings of environmental circumstances,
colonial mindsets, the role of experts and the transfer of knowledge within and possibly
beyond this particular German colony.
I. The Water Question in German Southwest Africa
For those believing in water divination, its use in German Southwest Africa, an area of
extreme aridity, seemed logical. Officially claimed by Imperial Germany in 1884, the
area had been inhabited by humans for thousands of years and had also been long fre-
quented by outside whalers, traders, hunters and missionaries. Soon German soldiers,
administrators and settlers arrived in the region. The environments they found con-
sisted of diverse spaces now generally categorized as three main landscape regions: the
Namib Desert, the Kalahari Desert and the Great Escarpment (see Fig. 3).25 With the
fertile areas located in central and northern Namibia, publications largely characterize
the overall territory in light of its aridity.26 Median annual rainfall in the south and
21 Ibid., 71. Historian Lance von Sittert built on Krautwurst’s analysis more recently when focusing on neighbouring
South Africa; see L. van Sittert, ‘The Supernatural State: Water Divining and the Cape Underground Water Rush,
1891–1910’, Journal of Social History, 37, 4 (2004), pp. 915–37.
22 F. Cooper and A. L. Stoler (eds), Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (Berkeley, 1997), p. 5.
23 W. Beinart and J. McGregor, ‘Introduction’, in W. Beinart and J. McGregor (eds), Social History & African
Environments (Athens, OH, 2003), pp. 1–24, here p. 5. See also Botha, ‘People’.
24 E. R. Scherz, Südwester Geschichten am Lagerfeuer erzählt (Basel, 2005). As Stephan Mühr highlights, these
‘stories’ are littered with stereotypes; see S. Mühr, ‘Zur Erzählkultur im deutschsprachigen Namibia’, in ibid,
pp. 101–9, here p. 108.
25 A. Goudie and H. Viles, Landscape and Landforms of Namibia (New York, 2015), p. 3.
26 Ibid., p. 37.
574 Martin Kalb
Figure 3: Illustration of ‘Ground Cover’
Source: H. Schnee (ed.), Deutsches Koloniallexikon (Leipzig, 1920). Image courtesy of the Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg, Frankfurt am Main

west is below 50mm whereas precipitation rates rise towards the north and east, with
a maximum of 550–660mm in the wettest areas, records historian Marion Wallace.27
Not surprisingly, some areas attracted few inhabitants and the lives of local groups like
the Herero, Nama and San were often defined by weather patterns. Their histories and
Namibian history more broadly, to follow Wallace, have ‘been characterised by cycles
of drought, and agriculture has only been possible in the more fertile northern areas’.28
In German Southwest Africa then, unlike in any other German colony, new access to
water would have to be created to support future agricultural settlements.29

For German newcomers these seemingly bleak landscapes were worrisome spaces.
Missionary Johannes Olpp described the surroundings of Angra Pequena (later
Lüderitzbucht) shortly after his arrival in 1865, noting, ‘In vain does one’s eyes search
for a blade of grass.’ He continued, ‘One can barely envision anything less dismal
than this waved steppe land, in which even a three to four-day journey does not un-
earth even the littlest of vegetation.’ He wondered how he could ever become fond
of this land.30 Another German provided his thoughts in Kolonie und Heimat (Colony
and Homeland), the magazine of the Women’s Organization of the German Colonial
Society (Frauenbund der Deutschen Kolonialgesellschaft). He had not found the ‘tropical para-
dise with palm trees and other fruit-bearing foliage’ that he had hoped for. Instead,
German Southwest Africa was ‘dismal and barren’, an inhospitable arid landscape.31
Local populations had long transformed, modified and used these spaces.32 They had
sophisticated set-ups to access water that were mostly invisible to German eyes. Case
studies of specific settlements, like the Khuiseb Delta near modern-day Walvis Bay,
encapsulate such efforts. Archaeologist John Kinahan has explained how patterns of
pastoral settlement and land use were closely adapted to the prevailing environmental
conditions. That meant, he noted, that ‘small, isolated homestead sites, comprising a
few huts and some stock enclosures, were occupied during the long dry season. These
sites were situated within a few kilometres of reliable water supply, usually hand-dug
wells in dry river courses.’33 Sustenance came from the cultivation of the leafless !nara,
a melon-like fruit that grows in arid landscapes, and also from making use of the coastal
environment.34 In central Namibia, the Herero in particular—known as Va-Schimba, or
27 Wallace, History of Namibia, p. 2.

28 Ibid.
29 R. Schmick, ‘Die Wichtigkeit der Bewässerung in Deutsch-Südwestafrika und Deutsch-Ostafrika’, in K. Schneider
(ed.), Jahrbuch über die Deutschen Kolonien IV (Essen, 1911), pp. 144–50, here p. 148. As a result, there are only a
few references to dowsing elsewhere in the German Empire. See, for instance, ‘Die Wünschelrute in Daressalam’,
Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 3 Sept. 1910.
30 J. Olpp, Erlebnisse im Hinterlande von Angra-Pequena (2nd edn, Barmen, 1896), p. 10.
31 Zeitschrift ‘Kolonie und Heimat’ (ed), Eine Reise durch die Deutschen Kolonien, vol. 4: Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika
(Berlin, 1911), p. 2. Many mentioned a lack of vegetation. See E. Freimut, Gedanken am Wege: Reiseplaudereien
aus Deutsch-Südwestafrika (Berlin, 1909), p. 32.
32 Goudie and Viles, Landscape, pp. 48–9. See also Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag.
33 J. Kinahan, ‘From the Beginning: The Archaeological Evidence’, in Wallace, History of Namibia, pp. 34–5. See also
J. Kinahan, Pastoral Nomads of the Central Namib Desert: The People History Forgot (Windhoek, 1991).
34 M. Seely, The Namib: Natural History of an Ancient Desert (3rd edn, Windhoek, 2004), p. 45; M. Silverman,
Between the Atlantic and the Namib: An Environmental History of Walvis Bay (Windhoek, 2004), p. 14. See
also U. Dentlinger, ‘The !Nara Plant in the Topnaar Hottentot Culture of Namibia: Ethnobotanical Clues to an
8,000-year-old Tradition’, Munger Africana Library Notes, 38 (Jan. 1977), pp. 1–39.
576 Martin Kalb
well-diggers—had detailed understandings of underground water routes and, as his-

torian Dag Henrichsen has sketched out, they had established a ‘network of wells’
sustaining their cattle as they wandered over vast stretches of land to escape cycles of
drought.35 This routine meant digging wells in dry river beds; it also resulted in the
construction of ozombu, wells around seven metres deep that collected groundwater, in
the Kalahari Desert.36 Knowledge about where to find water was shared via names for
locations—Otjondjomboimue (only one well) or Oviombo (large well)—or hymns.37 Similar
to the Herero, it seems that the Nama’s use of water resources was ‘extremely successful

and in careful harmony with patterns of natural renewal’, write historians Brigitte Lau
and Christel Stern.38 Arid landscapes and overall weather patterns resulted in the need
to develop flexible migratory habits and required larger stretches of land, both factors
that ran counter to later German plans for empire.39
Future colonists often lacked or dismissed local expertise and routines, or at least
did not find them compatible with their visions of an agricultural settler colony. Much
of this had to do with newly arriving settlers simply not seeing ‘indigenous impacts’ or
signs of ‘non-European occupation’.40 ‘In the minds of settlers’, writes historian Christo
Botha, ‘the precolonial period was a story of small numbers of people occupying and
fighting over the few areas where permanent water was available.’41 The infamous work
Das alte Südwestafrika (South West Africa in Early Times), by German missionary Heinrich
Vedder, for example, paints widespread cattle raids and constant violence as defining
characteristics of nineteenth-century Namibia.42 Whereas such skewed depictions
became convenient justifications for colonial interventions later on, such views also
limited German newcomers from ever envisioning ‘indigenous improvements’ made
to the environment. Vedder himself saw locals on par with migrating animals when
he wrote, ‘Elephants tramp out clearly defined pathways between one water-hole and
another, and roving natives have a way of trekking from water-hole to water-hole.’43
According to another colonial publication, previous efforts by the Herero could at best
35 Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag, pp. 3–7. See also K.-J. Lindholm, ‘Wells of Experience: A Pastoral Land-Use
History of Omaheke, Namibia’ (Uppsala, 2006). Such knowledge did at times reach missionaries. See also Stern
and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, pp. 4–5.
36 H. Vedder, South West Africa in Early Times, trans. C. G. Hall (Oxford, 1960), pp. 47 and 95; Henrichsen, Herrschaft
und Alltag, p. 4.
37 Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag, pp. 4–5. See also H. Vedder, Die Bergdama, part 1 (Hamburg, 1923), p. 195.
For hymns see Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag, pp. 7–13.
38 Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 5. Different views of landscapes speak to the cultural construction
of aridity. Davis, Arid Lands, p. 4.
39 Henrichsen, Herrschaft und Alltag, p. 5.
40 Botha, ‘People’, p. 170.
41 Ibid.
42 Vedder, South West Africa in Early Times. That volume is riddled with myth around ‘early migrations, pastoralism,
violent conflicts, and racial hegemony’, M. Bollig and J.-B. Gewald, ‘People, Cattle and Land—Transformations
of a Pastoral Society’, in M. Bollig and J.-B. Gewald (eds), People, Cattle and Land—Transformations of a Pastoral
Society (Cologne, 2000), pp. 3–52, here p. 8. For a more nuanced discussion see Henrichsen, Herrschaft und
Alltag.
43 Vedder, South West Africa in Early Times, p. 191. Although in some ways a useful overview for the precolonial
period, Vedder’s volume was instrumental in defining misconceptions. Care is required when relying on his work
overall—also because he does not reference his sources. See J. Kinahan, ‘Heinrich Vedder’s Sources for his Account
of the Exploration of the Namib Coast’, Cimbebasia, 11 (1989), pp. 33–9.
serve as the foundation for ‘real’ German development towards large-scale production
and a pastoral farming system.44 Such German ethnocentrism speaks volumes about
German views of how to correctly cultivate nature. Dowsing, as will become apparent,
was perceived as German, whereas existing African expertise and set-ups in regard to
water were invisible. After all, historian Isabel Hull notes, Germany’s assumed super-
iority ‘manifested in material, technological, managerial, and disciplinary preeminence
over non-Europeans’.45
It did not help that African landscapes in no way matched long-cultivated German

cultural landscapes (Kulturlandschaften), the German frame of reference, with its blood
and soil undertones, that so widely dominated settler projects. For newcomers, this
understanding generally meant that Africans had done little to make the area inhab-
itable. According to Lau and Stern, early missionaries at times inadvertently ‘diverted
and destroyed springs by unskilled experimentation with dynamite for the purpose of
establishing agricultural settlements’.46 And Curt von François, commissioner of the
Schutztruppe, the German colonial soldiers in German Southwest Africa, later pointed
out that Africans had simply not done enough to make use of the ‘waterless steppe of
Namaland’.47 In his view, they were just too lazy. A popular German novel by Gustav
Frenssen also captured some of these sentiments: ‘The blacks have deserved death be-
fore God and the people not because they murdered 200 farmers and rose up against
us [Germans in 1904] but because they have not built houses and have not dug wells.’48
At the same time German imperial imaginations and fantasies of turning desert
wastelands into blooming gardens ran wild.49 All kinds of delusions were projected onto
German Southwest Africa.50 As historian Jürgen Zimmerer has written, ‘In Southwest
Africa, all colonial dreams could become reality.’51 Implementation was difficult, how-
ever, owing to logistics, a lack of resources and limited knowledge about the region.
Nonetheless, dreams of an empire were rarely abandoned, a dynamic that in part ex-
plains later efforts to export dowsing.
44 H. O. von Schöllenbach, Die Besiedelung Deutsch-Südwestafrikas bis zum Weltkriege (Berlin, 1926), p. 58.
45 I. Hull, Absolute Destruction: Military Culture and the Practices of War in Imperial Germany (Ithaca, NY, 2005),
p. 34.
46 Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 5.
47 C. von François, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika: Geschichte der Kolonisation bis zum Ausbruch des Krieges mit Witbooi
(Berlin, 1899), p. 112.
48 G. Frenssen, Peter Moors Journey to Southwest: A Narrative of the German Campaign, trans. M. M. Ward (Boston,
1908), p. 200. ‘To be sure, it suited colonial incomers to overlook signs of native alteration; the apparent absence
of indigenous improvements helped justify the removal of indigenes’, D. Lowenthal, ‘Empires and Ecologies:
Reflections on Environmental History’, in T. Griffiths and L. Robins (eds), Ecology and Empire: Environmental
History of Settler Societies (Seattle, 1997), pp. 229–36, here p. 234. See also Botha, ‘People’, p. 170.
49 S. Friedrichsmeyer, S. Lennox and S. Zantop (eds), The Imperialist Imagination: German Colonialism and its Legacy
(Ann Arbor, 1999); B. Kundrus, Moderne Imperialisten: das Kaiserreich im Spiegel seiner Kolonien (Cologne,
2003); B. Kundrus, Phantasiereiche: zur Kulturgeschichte des deutschen Kolonialismus (Frankfurt, 2003). Such
fantasies run deep within German history; see S. Zantop, Colonial Fantasies: Conquest, Family, and Nation in
Precolonial Germany, 1770–1870 (Durham, NC, 1997).
50 J. Zimmerer, Deutsche Herrschaft über Afrikaner: staatlicher Machtanspruch und Wirklichkeit im kolonialen
Namibia (3rd edn, Münster, 2004), p. 16; Kundrus, Moderne Imperialisten, p. 9; S. Friedrichsmeyer, S. Lennox and
S. Zantop, ‘Introduction’, in Friedrichsmeyer, Lennox and Zantop, Imperialist Imagination, p. 23.
51 Zimmerer, Deutsche Herrschaft, p. 16.
578 Martin Kalb
German pains to solve what they soon defined as the water question is a case in
point. Commissioner Curt von François had tried to access water early on, but German
experts arrived in the region during the tenure of Governor Theodor Leutwein.52 In
1892 geographer Dr Karl Dove examined ‘the climatic and hydrological conditions
namely regarding the possibility of intensive soil usage’ for the German Colonial
Society (Deutsche Kolonialgesellschaft).53 He eventually called for a network of stations to
measure precipitation and temperature. In one of his proposals, he also pushed for the
appointment of a hydrology engineer, who would build on his findings.54 In the 1890s,

naval staff physician Dr Ludwig Sander joined several expeditions throughout the re-
gion, and he later lobbied for the further development of the German colony. Such
efforts eventually resulted in the creation of a public-private consortium, the Syndicate
for Irrigation Plants in German Southwest Africa (Syndikat für die Bewässerungsanlagen in
Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika), in 1895.55 A year later, that organization sponsored an exped-
ition by expert hydrologist Theodor Rehbock, who, together with his South African
companion James C. Watermeyer, supported drilling wells and the construction of
small and large dams combined with irrigation systems.56 Subsequent expeditions by
engineer Alexander Kuhn to the area around the Fish River in the south also called for
broader investments and infrastructure.57
Yet support and funding continually fell short. Although inflated visions of an em-
pire remained widespread, little progress was made in surveying irrigation until 1903,
as historian Helmut Bley has noted.58 In German Southwest Africa small-scale efforts
involving drilling crews took shape slowly—with widespread complaints about a con-
tinuing lack of resources.59 In Berlin, debates still circled around the point of having
colonies in the first place. After all, Chancellor Otto von Bismarck had adopted an
indirect approach to colonialism, relying on private entities when it came to the devel-
opment of the protectorate.60 His successor, Leo von Caprivi, ‘was initially even less
sympathetic to the South West African project’, Wallace notes.61 Anti-imperialist rhet-
oric from Social Democrats and other political entities further complicated debates and
often resulted in an absence of direct investment. In the end, the administration of the
protectorate declined both Rehbock’s specific proposals for dams and other irrigation
schemes, thus leaving the water question essentially unsolved.62
52 von François, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika, p. 101.

53 ‘Meteorologische Beobachtungen’, Deutsches Kolonialblatt, 15 July 1893.
54 L. (Ludwig) Sander, Ein Vorschlag zur Erschließung Deutsch-Südwestafrika (Berlin, 1895), p. 5.
55 T. Rehbock, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika: seine wirtschaftliche Erschließung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der
Nutzbarmachung des Wassers (Berlin, 1898), p. ix.
56 Rehbock, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika; T. Rehbock, Deutschlands Pflichten in Deutsch Südwestafrika (Berlin, 1904);
J. C. Watermeyer, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika: seine landwirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse (Berlin, 1898).
57 A. Kuhn, Bericht über die im Jahre 1901 nach Deutsch-Südwestafrika entsendete technische Studien-Expedition
für Bewässerungs-Anlagen (Berlin, 1904); A. Kuhn, Bericht über die von der Deutschen Kolonialgesellschaft dem
Kolonial-Wirtschaftlichen Komitee übertragene Fischfluss-Expedition (Berlin, 1904).
58 H. Bley, South-West Africa under German Rule, 1894–1914 (Evanston, 1971), p. 133. Bley references the period
from 1897 to 1903. See also U. U. Jäschke, ‘Die polyzentrische Infrastruktur Namibias: Entstehung und Entwicklung
in der deutschen Periode 1884 bis 1914/15’ (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Frankfurt am Main, 2000).
59 See, for instance: ‘Aus Swakopmund: Wasserbohrung’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 19 June 1903.
60 Wallace, History of Namibia, p. 116.
61 Ibid., p. 125. The German government long toyed with the possibility of selling the colony to Great Britain.
62 Jäschke, ‘Die polyzentrische Infrastrukur Namibias’, p. 128. The government in Windhoek invested only in the
construction of some model dams. See Kaulich, Die Geschichte, p. 437.
II. Dowsing in German Southwest Africa
The Herero and Nama Uprising in 1904 challenged imperial ambitions and changed
virtually everything. It showcased the limits of German colonial penetration, which
were soon exploited by dowser von Uslar. In January 1904, the Herero had risen up
against discriminatory and exploitative German colonial policies. According to his-
torian Philipp Lehmann, ‘The war that followed was a “colonial conflict over land”
or, even more to the point, a conflict over the water that made the land valuable.’63

For cattle farmers like the Herero, access to land and water mattered, and the uprising
was intimately tied to the water question. Newly arrived German settlers, sustained,
subsidized and supported by German colonial policies, had increasingly taken over
both resources. In 1902 the Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung discussed issues around
property and water rights. Although the middle of rivers was generally used as a prop-
erty line, this approach was a problem in the case of dry river beds—especially since
local African groups like the Herero had long utilized ‘known spots’ within a river bed
to easily access groundwater.64 Seizure of Herero property, and also the removal of
the Herero, repeatedly led to conflict. Similar dynamics unfolded later on. The West
German mini-series Morenga of 1983, largely based on Uwe Timm’s historical fiction
by the same title, showcases how we might envision issues around water turning into
a larger conflict.65 A German farmer employs alcohol and other shady tactics in at-
tempting to acquire a nearby waterhole. Since this takeover would threaten access for
local Herero pastoralists, who can have little or no recourse to law, they rise up. In 1904,
the German colonial government found itself with a full-scale colonial war on its hands,
especially once the Nama rose up as well. In Berlin, a contentious debate around the
budget would later result in the dissolution of the parliament and new elections. The
new parliament passed the budget and additional funds for imperial infrastructures.66
By April 1906, Governor Friedrich von Lindequist had already organized a compre-
hensive plan for the development of water sources that included two drilling crews.67
Dowser von Uslar would arrive in German Southwest Africa in this context.
Back in Germany a massive debate had already brought dowsing back into the lime-
light. It had been launched by an addendum published in the autumn 1902 issue of
the renowned scientific magazine Prometheus. The editors were apparently uncomfort-
able about the inclusion of dowsing in their publication and in what read as a defence,
they pointed to connections between water witching and other natural phenomena. This
avenue might help solve mysteries surrounding dowsing, they noted, especially since
63 Lehmann, ‘Between Waterberg and Sandveld’, p. 545.

64 ‘Aus dem Schutzgebiet: zur Wasserrechtsfrage’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 26 June 1902.
65 Egon Günther, dir., Morenga (Cologne: Westdeutscher Rundfunk, 1983); U. Timm, Morenga, trans. B. Mitchell
(New York, 2003).
66 S. Conrad, German Colonialism: A Short History (Cambridge, 2012), pp. 30–5; J. P. Short, Magic Lantern Empire:
Colonialism and Society in Germany (Ithaca, NY, 2015), p. 132.
67 ‘Organisationsplan für die Wassererschliessung in Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, v. Apr. 1906, Stenographischer Bericht
Reichtstag, 12 LP/ 1, Sess, 1907/08, Nd. 239, Nr. 10. Nach 3, quoted in Kaulich, Die Geschichte, p. 438. See
also von Schöllenbach, Die Besiedelung Deutsch-Südwestafrikas, p. 63; Jäschke, ‘Die polyzentrische Infrastruktur
Namibias’, p. 77. This idea had already been proposed by François in August 1891.
580 Martin Kalb

Figure 4: Rafael Perfecto von Uslar in a photograph from around 1900
Source: Courtesy of Museum Sønderjylland, Institut for Sønderjysk Lokalhistorie
those with knowledge of it ‘often refuse to share any information’.68 Retired District
Administrator Cai von Bülow-Bothkamp, author of the article about water divination in
question, was more than happy to share his thoughts. He proudly described his experi-
ences, skills and success with dowsing. The district administrator from Apenrade Rafael
Perfecto von Uslar had initially introduced him ‘to the secrets of finding water several
months ago, meaning the finding of spring water based on the use of a dowsing rod, so
a fresh tree fork’.69 Now, von Bülow-Bothkamp claimed, he was able to locate water ar-
teries while riding an express train. Any scientific specialist was invited to see for himself,
he added, even if ‘it is only possible to learn how to hold the forked twig—finding water is
based on a certain natural predisposition’.70 Between 1903 and 1910, at least eighty-two
articles contributed to the debate that ensued.71 The ancient art of dowsing had been
resurrected, with District Administrator von Uslar (see Fig. 4) fully engaged from the start.
68 ‘Rundschau’, Prometheus: illustrierte Wochenschrift über die Fortschritte in Gewerbe, Industrie und Wissenschaft,
14, 687 (1902), p. 173.
69 Ibid., p. 174.
70 Ibid.
71 H. Knoblauch, Die Welt der Wünschelrutengänger und Pendler: Erkundungen einer verborgenen Wirklichkeit
(Frankfurt/Main, 1991), pp. 93–4. Knoblauch counts six books between 1905 and 1910 and mentions magazines
like Gartenlaube and Daheim. For books see, for example, G. Rothe, Die Wünschelrute: historisch-theoretische
Studie (Jena, 1910); F. Behme, Die Wünschelrute (Hanover, 1920). Discussions included German Southwest
Africa early on; see ‘Vermischtes: Nochmals die Wünschelruthe’, Deutsch Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 12 Mar.
1903. For a short overview see von Klinckowstroem and von Maltzahn, Handbuch der Wünschelrute, pp. 50–1.
A similar resurrection took place in France, organized in the Association des Amis de la Radiesthésie by 1901; see
Knoblauch, Die Welt, p. 94.
This main protagonist was a colourful and controversial character who has left a sur-
prisingly small footprint in historical discussions. Born to the German consul general
and a Spanish woman in Mexico City in 1853, José Rafael Perfecto Antonio von Uslar
attended university in Braunschweig, studying mathematics, the natural sciences and
economics as well as French and English. When his father died, von Uslar, as the
eldest son, took over the direction of family affairs.72 His acquisition of the estate Gut
Buschmoos in Nordschleswig in 1885 provided him with an avenue to becoming district
administrator of Apenrade.73 Usually remembered for his anti-Danish and anti-Social

Democratic animosities, as well as his hubris, von Uslar was connected to key figures
even before his stint in German Southwest Africa in 1906.74 As Danish scholar Jørgen
Witte has noted, as early as 1897 von Uslar had been in contact with high colonial offi-
cials, apparently seeking to learn more about the colonies, a quest that eventually took
him to Cameroon from 7 August 1897 until 23 March 1898.75 In June 1898 he shared
his views on plantations in the region in the Deutsche Kolonialzeitung.76 An article in the
Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung referenced von Uslar's rhadomancy already in March
1903.77 Such earlier engagement helps explain the government’s subsequent selection
of von Uslar to go to German Southwest Africa.78
The district administrator also had engineer and government building officer Georg
Franzius speak on his behalf. Franzius had taken up District Administrator von Bülow-
Bothkamp’s call in Prometheus to learn about dowsing first hand. Soon converted, he
helped spread the word.79 Since he was widely known as an engineering expert and had
72 J. Witte, ‘Landråd von Uslar—en embedsmand i kamp med “rigsfjenderne”’, in K. Fanø and L. N. Henningsen
(eds), Sønderjyske Årbøger: Udgivet af Historisk Samfund for Sønderjylland (Aabenraa, 1988). pp. 107–58, here
pp. 107–10. See also D. von Uslar, Moment-Aufnahmen: Lebensmomente, Zeitereignisse, Zeitgenossen (Würzburg,
2012), p. 48; K. D. Sievers, ‘Uslar’, pp. 274–5, in O. Klose (ed.), Schleswig-Holsteinisches biographisches Lexikon,
vol. 1 (Neumünster, 1970).
73 Originally acquired in the Second Schleswig War, a 1920 plebiscite made it again part of Denmark (= Aabenraa).
Landesarchiv Schleswig-Holstein, Abt. 320 (Landratsämter und Staatsausschüsse), 1 (Apenrade). At the time
of von Uslar’s tenure, his district had a little over 29,000 residents. H. Oldekop, Topographie des Herzogtums
Schleswig (Kiel, 1906), p. 13. See also M. L. Jespersen, ‘Sønderjyder i de tyske kolonier i Afrika’, in M. L. Petersen
(ed.), Sønderjylland-Schleswig Kolonial: Kolonialismens kulturelle arv i regionen mellem Kongeåen og Ejderen
(Odense, 2018), pp. 215–32, here pp. 221–2.
74 Witte points to his subject’s ‘Selbstüberhebung’, ‘Landråd von Uslar’, p. 153. Complaints about von Uslar’s be-
haviour appear in several letters. See Bundesarchiv Berlin-Lichterfelde (henceforth BArch-B), R 1002/1806 (Bd. 2),
Personalakte Landrat von Uslar, letter of 19 Mar. 1907. For von Uslar’s connections see J. Rust, Aberglaube und
Hexenwahn in Schleswig-Holstein (Garding, 1983), p. 35. Von Uslar died in 1931 in Detmold.
75 Witte, ‘Landråd von Uslar’, p. 151. Admiral von Knorr was his contact. There is little information about what von
Uslar did in Cameroon. See also K. D. Sievers, Die Köllerpolitik und ihr Echo in der deutschen Presse (Neumünster,
1964), pp. 40–1.
76 ‘Plantagenbau am Kamerun-Gebirge’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 21 July 1898.
77 ‘Vermischtes: Nochmals die Wünschelruthe’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 12 Mar. 1903.
78 As historian Krautwurst put it, von Uslar was ‘chosen by the government to go to South West Africa, rather than
a local practitioner, because of his social standing, metropolitan acclaim, and government service’, Krautwurst,
‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 78. At least one other dowser (Berthold Enders) had been men-
tioned to the government. See BArch-B, R 1002/1805 (Bd. 1), Personalakte Landrat von Uslar, letter of 30 Dec. 1905.
79 G. Franzius, Meine Beobachtungen mit der Wünschelrute (Berlin, 1907), p. 7; G. Franzius, Rutengängerversuche
zur Auffindung von Wasserleitungsschäden (Stuttgart, 1913); G. Franzius, Einige Versuche über die Einwirkungen
elektrischer Leitungen auf den Rutengänger (Stuttgart, 1913). See also L. Weber, ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Zentralblatt
der Bauverwaltung, 25, 74 (13 Sept. 1905), pp. 461–2.
582 Martin Kalb
connections to the imperial government—Kaiser Wilhelm had sent him to Tsingtao to

explore options for a harbour in 1897—his voice mattered.80 At one occasion, on 13
October 1905, Kaiser Wilhelm II had supposedly seen dowsing for himself.81 Harper’s
Weekly even claimed the Kaiser ‘attempted to develop as a “sensitive”—and failed’.82
Divination appears to have made an impression on the Kaiser and among some high
governmental officials.
Critics worried but could do little in the end. Geologists had long outlined what
seemed to them to be superstitious and ridiculous claims.83 They had also targeted the

editors of Prometheus for allowing an article about water witching to appear in the first
place.84 Leonhard Weber, professor of physics at the University of Kiel, called dow-
sing ‘an intellectual error’;85 he also claimed von Uslar had covered up any failures.86
A civil engineer was particularly concerned. In a 1906 article he noted that it would
not be an issue ‘if some small village magistrate, yes even a naïve district or regional
administrator [likely von Uslar] openly supports water divination’; that could be dis-
missed rather easily. Trouble lay ahead, however, ‘once a high imperial hydrology offi-
cial [likely Franzius] based on his knowledge and administrative experiences endorses
the dowsing rod and invites others to see for themselves’.87 Initially, such interventions
were able to hinder attempts to send von Uslar to the colony. Herzog Johann Albrecht
von Mecklenburg, president of the German Colonial Society, had made that proposal
back in 1902, ‘but due to the role of a [unnamed] geological specialist (!) and a warning
report there was no deployment’.88 That year directors of the geological regional of-
fices of the German states had stated in a resolution 'that the use of the dowsing rods is
neither of benefit in Germany nor in the colonies’.89
The 1904 uprising, the desperate need to solve the water question and the connec-
tions of both Franzius and von Uslar to high-ranking authorities eventually changed
the situation. According to the colonial records in Berlin-Lichterfelde and Windhoek
at least, the directive to send von Uslar to German Southwest Africa came from
Wilhelm II himself. As is outlined there, the district administrator took a leave of
absence, during which time the Colonial Department, at that point still part of the
80 G. Franzius, Ein Ausflug nach Kiau-Tschou (Berlin, 1898); G. Franzius, ‘Die Entwicklung des Kiatschou-Gebietes’,
Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 21 Nov. 1901. See also G. Franzius et al., eds, Handbuch der Ingenieurwissenschaften
in fünf Teilen (Leipzig, 1898–1912).
81 Franzius, Meine Beobachtungen, p. 21.
82 Anonymous, ‘The Divining-rod in Germany’, Harper’s Weekly, 57 (22 Feb. 1913), p. 22.
83 F. Beyschlag, F. Wahnschaffe, K. Keilhack and A. Leppla, ‘In der Angelegenheit der Wünschelrute’,
Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 2, 27 (1903), pp. 321–2. This publication was the organ of the Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Volkstümliche Naturkunde. See also L. Weber, Die Wünschelrute (Kiel and Leipzig, 1905),
pp. 47–9; ‘Bücherbesprechungen’, Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 17 Apr. 1904.
84 C. Gagel, ‘Der “Nutzen” der Wünschelrute’, Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 2, 19 (1903), pp. 224–5.
85 Weber, Die Wünschelrute, p. 9. Weber saw dowsing as a psychological issue, not a scientific one. See ibid., p. 40.
86 Ibid., p. 18. Geologists like Dr C. Gagel, Prof. H. Haas and Prof. Gustav Karsten also opposed belief in water ar-
teries and dowsing more broadly, ibid., pp. 23–6.
87 ‘Wider die Wünschelrute’, Journal für Gasbeleuchtung und Wasserversorgung, 27 Jan. 1906. See also ‘Die
Wünschelrute’, Die Welt der Technik, 1 Mar. 1906.
88 Behme, Die Wünschelrute, p. 26.
89 Ibid.
Foreign Office, picked up his monthly salary, provided a daily allowance and paid his
travel costs.90 Von Uslar left Germany in early January 1906, on a British steamer, via
Southampton. He travelled first to South Africa and arrived in German Southwest
Africa in late January 1906.91
During his two-and-a-half-year tenure in the colony von Uslar tried to help solve
the water question. According to his own descriptions, colonial authorities sent him
to areas far away from colonial centres where no water had yet been found. These lo-
cations were often 60 to 100 kilometres apart.92 At one point, ‘Captain Franke, three

corporals, three carts, […] six natives’, and four horses accompanied von Uslar.93 The
latter described his endeavours, defined by daily marches of fifty to sixty kilometres,
as ‘the life of a nomad’ to friends back in Germany.94 He indeed travelled extensively,
first in central Namibia before going south by October 1906 and then north again.95
Although he was at one point in a field hospital as a result of concerns around malaria
and dysentery, von Uslar would later point only to ‘heat and thirst’ when explaining
some of the inconsistencies in his findings.96 Von Uslar also seemed keen on challen-
ging officials. In one instance he quarrelled with an engineer leading a local drilling
crew; another colonial official later described a similar situation, noting that von Uslar
threatened to leave if his marker would not be used for drilling.97 At the end of his stay,
he had marked numerous spots to drill for water throughout German Southwest Africa,
often in consultation with local farmers who had been awaiting his arrival and help.98
Unfortunately, assessing these findings remains difficult. Von Uslar’s own documenta-
tion is riddled with colonial narratives and self-promotion.99 Additionally, colonial of-
ficials originally tried to stay out of larger discussions. In early 1909 Colonial Minister
Bernhard Dernburg hoped the media frenzy would blow over. Actually, Dernburg
90 BArch-B, R 1002/1805 (Bd. 1), Personalakte Landrat von Uslar, letters of 22 and 23 Jan. 1906; BArch-B, R
34/926, Abschrift; National Archives Namibia (henceforth NAN), ZBN, 1410 P.IV.B.2, Aufsuchung unterirdischer
Wasseradern durch Wünschelrutengänger. Specialia (1906–07), letters of 22 and 23 Jan. 1906. Former colonial
official Oskar Hintrager also pointed to the Kaiser’s recommendation of von Uslar, see Hintrager, Südwestafrika in
der deutschen Zeit, p. 88.
91 Von Uslar visited South Africa because he feared that a quick transition into a less civilized location and climate
might interfere with his expertise; see Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 73.
92 G. Franzius (ed.), Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage (Stuttgart, 1914), p. 20.
93 ‘Aus unseren Kolonien: Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 18 Aug. 1906. See also
Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, p. 20; ‘Die Erfolge der Wünschelrute in
Deutsch-Südwest’, Zentralblatt für Wasserbau und Wasserwirtschaft, 10 Nov. 1906.
94 ‘Aus unseren Kolonien: Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 18 Aug. 1906.
95 Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat, Die Wasserversorgung in unseren Kolonien, Sonderabdruck aus dem ‘Archiv des
Deutschen Landwirtschaftsrats’, 33 (1909), (Berlin, 1909), pp. 61–3.
96 Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, p. 20. Such treatment took place in spring
1908. See BArch-B, R 1002/1805 (Bd. 1), Personalakte Landrat von Uslar, Auszug aus dem Hauptkrankenbuch
97 For the first incident see BArch-B, R 1002/1806 (Bd. 2), Personalakte Landrat von Uslar, for instance, letter 6 July
1907. See also ‘Aus dem Schutzgebiet: die Wünschelrute in Südwest’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung,
12 Apr. 1912. For the second incident see O. Hintrager, Südwestafrika in der deutschen Zeit (Munich, 1955),
pp. 89–90.
98 Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, p. 23. The colonial records include let-
ters from farmers awaiting von Uslar. NAN, ZBN, 1410 P.IV.B.2, Aufsuchung unterirdischer Wasseradern durch
Wünschelrutengänger. Specialia (1906–07).
99 See, for instance, Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat, Die Wasserversorgung in unseren Kolonien, p. 61.
584 Martin Kalb
seems to have briefly withheld a critical publication by geologist Paul Range for that
reason, although he may also have wanted to avoid irritating one of von Uslar’s fans,
the Kaiser himself.100 Over time, however, as the colonial records in Windhoek show,
the colonial government in German Southwest Africa went to great lengths to assess
von Uslar’s findings. According to that data, the district administrator’s success rate was
around 33.9 per cent—lower than that of geologists.101
Von Uslar evidently relied on observations tied to geography, geology and botany,
probably based on interactions with farmers and their indigenized German knowledge.

We can only speculate as to whether von Uslar took African expertise into account. It
seems unlikely he did so: there was a war going on—today defined as the first geno-
cide of the twentieth century—widespread discriminatory policies were in place and
German ethnocentrism dominated broader discourses. At the same time, African ex-
pertise and experiences must have influenced German farmers in some way. After all,
Herero and Nama worked for settlers and likely shared their knowledge in some in-
stances. According to one colonial official, von Uslar found water ‘where an expert,
and even possibly laymen, could presume water in the ground based on the makeup
of the area, the proximity to rivers, [and] extensive tree-vegetation.’102 German news-
papers noted later that local Africans referred to von Uslar as ‘water thief ’(Wasserklauer),
a claim that is difficult to confirm.103 Although this publication spoke of an overall
‘admiration’ for von Uslar, references of this sort inadvertently stress perceptions of
colonialists stealing knowledge and water.104
III. Media Frenzy
Von Uslar’s endeavours in German Southwest Africa were widely reported. Local pa-
pers in his home district relied on the administrator’s own words—and he was by no
means shy when it came to outlining his triumphs.105 Newspapers such as the Schleswiger
Nachrichten simply published his success rates; the Kieler Zeitung newspaper was a little
more critical, wondering about the output of springs and the money spent in the overall
process.106 The Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, the newspaper platform of the colonial society,
had originally been sceptical and had even issued an urgent warning: ‘The tragic dis-
appointments,’ it claimed, were ‘in large part tied to the stupid belief in dowsing.’107
100 NAN, BKS, 19.5, Schriftwechsel und Einzelheiten über Uslarstellen und Wünschelrutenfrage (1907–14), letter 31
Oct. 1908. For concerns about the Kaiser see in this collection letter Dernburg, 31 Jan. 1908.
101 NAN, BKN, 7, B.3.b, Uslarstellen, Wünschelrutenfrage (1909–14), Verzeichnis Jahre 1906 bis 1911.
102 NAN, BKN, 7, B. 3.b Uslarstellen, Wünschelrutenfrage (1909–14), Hintrager, Bohrungen an Uslarstellen, 7 Sept.
1912. See also Globus: Illustrierte Zeitschrift für Länder- und Völkerkunde, ‘Zur Besiedelung des Hererolandes’, 8
Nov. 1906.
103 Rust, Aberglaube, p. 35. See also H. Kardel, ‘Appenrades Wünschelrutenwunder: Erinnerungen an den Landrat
von Uslar: die Afrikaner nannten ihn Waterklauer’, Der Kreis, Mar. 1960, p. 125, referenced in Krautwurst, ‘Water-
Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 80.
104 Rust, Aberglaube, p. 35.
105 He noted to the government in Kiel that he had been successful in his drilling efforts in twenty-eight of twenty-
nine occasions; see Sievers, Die Köllerpolitik, p. 41.
106 Schleswiger Nachrichten, 20 Aug. 1907, and Kieler Zeitung, 3 Apr. 1907, cited in Sievers, Die Köllerpolitik, p. 41.
107 Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 18 Aug. 1904, as quoted in F. König, Ernstes und Heiteres aus dem Zauberreiche der
Wünschelrute (Leipzig, 1907), p. 75.
This reference highlights the presence of dowsers in German Southwest Africa prior
to von Uslar’s arrival.108 Few in the colony seemed to worry. Some had certainly tried
dowsing before, like a certain Anton Passarge from Klein-Windhoek, who wrote about
his experiences in the Windhuker Nachrichten newspaper.109 Boers migrating into the area
had long used divination as well.110 Governor Friedrich von Lindequist certainly had
few worries. In January 1907 he praised the district administrator’s success in front
of the German parliament, claiming that von Uslar had marked around 150 spots
already; he also defended his support of dowsing by outlining its practicality and the

desperate need for the water question to be solved.111 The local German newspaper
Windhuker Nachrichten certainly appreciated such support.112 The paper soon reported
about all the ‘additional successes of the dowsing rod’, including a 16-metre-deep well
in Kanus: ‘It is indisputable that the dowsing rod has brought a large number of wells
so far, including some very important ones, which would not exist if we would have
merely relied upon scientific development.’113 In any case, and over time, the Deutsche
Kolonialzeitung came around, and throughout August 1906 it at least made reference to
letters from von Uslar in which he described his successes in Karibib.114 In November it
recorded, ‘District Administrator von Uslar has found 120 locations with water. Those
drilling efforts based on his findings have been surprisingly successful.’115 Captivated
by good news from the edges of the empire and possibly influenced by hopes of fu-
ture development, articles throughout 1907 followed similar patterns.116 The Deutsch-
Südwestafrikanische Zeitung started to report on dowsing in the summer of 1906 and
tried to capture the debate being played out in the media.117 In 1907 the newspaper
began calling on the colonial government to assess von Uslar’s findings.118 Overall,
most publications at least mentioned von Uslar’s discoveries, with some acknowledging
contradicting story lines and others directly challenging geologists and other critics of
108
There is little information about such individuals. Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 73.
109 Windhuker Nachrichten, ‘Ein Versuch mit der Wünschelrute’, 6 Dec. 1906.
110 See M. Bayer, Der Krieg in Südwestafrika und seine Bedeutung für die Entwickelung der Kolonie (Leipzig, 1907),
p. 59. See also van Sittert, ‘Supernatural State’.
111
‘Die wirtschaftliche und militärische Lage Deutsch-Südwestafrikas’, Deutsches Kolonialbatt, 1 Jan. 1907.
112 ‘Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, Windhuker Nachrichten, 7 Mar. 1907.
113 ‘Weitere Erfolge der Wünschelrute’, Windhuker Nachrichten, 28 Mar. 1907.
114 ‘Aus unseren Kolonien Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 4 Aug. 1906; ‘Aus
unseren Kolonien: Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 18 Aug. 1906. One bore-
hole was originally called Emperor’s Well (Kaiserbrunnen); it was later marked with a memorial plaque in
honour of von Uslar. Digital Namibian Archive Collection, inventory of historical buildings by Edda Schoedder
with pictures, http://dna.nust.na:8080/greenstone3/library/collection/schoedd/page/about.
115
‘Das südwestafrikanische Programm’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 17 Nov. 1906.
116 ‘Aus unseren Kolonien Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung am Baiweg’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 6 July 1907;
‘Aus unseren Kolonien Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 17 Aug. 1907.
117 See, for instance, ‘Geologie und Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 23 Mar. 1907; ‘Geologie
und Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 4 July 1911; ‘Die Wünschelrutenfrage’, Deutsch-
Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 3 Apr. 1913; ‘Die Wünschelrutenfrage’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 5
Apr. 1913.
118 ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 11 May 1907; ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-
Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 13 July 1907.
586 Martin Kalb
dowsing.119 While the reporting of newspapers must to be taken with a grain of salt—
newspapers in German Southwest Africa often aimed to ‘sell’ the colonial project to
decision-makers in Berlin—von Uslar’s presence in the colony had evidently become a
force to wrestle with.
IV. Clashing Epistemic Traditions
The arguments about von Uslar’s success encapsulate the clash between three epi-

stemic traditions: the European folk tradition, the scientific European tradition and the
indigenous African tradition. For defenders of dowsing, Uslar’s success rate was key. For
example, lawyer and dowsing supporter Friedrich Behme quoted Franzius and noted,
‘It is thus proof regarding the extraordinary talent and experience of Mr v. Uslar that
by 8 October 1906, he had found already 148 springs in Southwest Africa.’120 Behme
was among the strongest defenders of water divination. He was a doctor of jurispru-
dence, but he also cited a background in geology that reached back to his college years;
his connections to the colonial government involved working for the German Foreign
Office and spending several years as a judge in the German colony of Tsingtao (1903–
1906). Otherwise known for his local guidebooks and photographs about the Harz
region, Behme outlined his views on dowsing in the volume Die Wünschelrute.121 It intro-
duced and defended the three main protagonists within what could be described as
a colonial dowsing network: von Uslar, von Bülow-Bothkamp and Franzius.122 In his
view, divination had already played a major part in the solution of the water question
because von Uslar had been able to determine the exact depth of water 80–90 per
cent of the time.123 Von Uslar joined in. Making full use of his new prominence, he
spoke at official venues, often in the presence of high-ranking government officials like
Duke Johann Albrecht von Mecklenburg, Colonial Secretary Bernhard Dernburg, and
Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg and even before Kaiser Wilhelm II.124
Many geologists, geographers and a variety of other voices, outraged since the ap-
pearance of the original article in Prometheus, felt they needed to speak out in defence
of the sciences. Several of them had long tried to push water witching back into the
realms of folk tradition, superstition and magic. In 1906 a cover story in the weekly
science journal Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift featured a professor from a mining col-
lege calling dowsing ‘a deceiving toy’.125 Now, with von Uslar’s efforts in the colony,
119
See W. Anz, Deutschlands Pflichten in Südwestafrika (Stuttgart, 1908), p. 31; R. Hennig, ‘Aufgaben der
Wasserwirtschaft in Südwestafrika’, Die Turbine (1909), pp. 331–3, here p. 333; ‘Aus unseren Kolonien
Südwestafrika: Wassererschließung’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 27 July 1907; ‘Zur Frage der Wünschelrute’,
Windhuker Nachrichten, 23 May 1907. See also the Koloniale Zeitschrift: ‘Südwestafrika’, 14 Mar. 1907;
‘Südwestafrika’, 25 Apr. 1907; ‘Südwestafrika’, 9 May 1907; ‘Südwestafrika’, 23 May 1907; ‘Südwestafrika’, 4
July 1907; ‘Südwestafrika’, 1 Aug. 1907; ‘Südwestafrika’, 15 Aug. 1907.
120
Behme, Die Wünschelrute, p. 26.
121 The private materials of Franzius (1895 to 1941) are located in the Stadtarchiv in Hanover; these documents were
not accessible as of 2018.
122 Behme, Die Wünschelrute, p. 11.
123 Ibid., p. 24.
124 Ibid., p. 28. See also Witte, ‘Landråd von Uslar’, p. 152.
125 ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 23 Sept. 1906. See also ‘Der Nutzen der Wünschelrute’,
Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 8 Feb. 1903; ‘Das Grundwasser (in Bezug auf die Frage der Wünschelrute)’,
Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, 26 Apr. 1903; ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Die Welt der Technik, 1 Mar. 1906.
more chimed in. Engineer and hydrologist Friedrich König, who had long been looking
for a solution to the water question in German Southwest Africa, was among the most
outspoken critics.126 In addition to calling dowsing a ‘pandemic’ and highlighting its
‘deceptive guise’, he worried about financial waste: ‘Over time millions [of marks]
have been sacrificed to the magic of the dowsing rod in numerous countries.’127 König
also noted his concern about allowing von Uslar into German Southwest Africa in
the first place: ‘to promote the civilizing mission of the “people of thinkers” with the
hocus-pocus of the dowsing rod makes Germans feel ashamed’.128 For König, the suc-

cess of Germany’s imperialism relied on ‘sincere, scientifically thinking people’ and
their ability to see that dowsing was a fraud.129
Geologists like mining expert Heinrich Lotz and colonial administrative official Paul
Range battled against the use of dowsing rods as well. Lotz, who would subsequently
play a key role in the German Southwest Africa diamond industry, had quickly re-
sponded from Berlin to von Uslar’s challenge to science and colonial control. In March
1907, he shared his criticisms in the Windhuker Nachrichten. In his view, ‘even if dowsing
is back in fashion given the work of gentlemen like von Uslar, von Bülow, and […]
others’, actual successes had been ‘exaggerated’.130 He projected future failures and
questioned understandings put forward by farmers like Carl Schlettwein. The latter
had argued that von Uslar’s operation would have been ‘impossible to accomplish by
science’.131 In Lotz’s view, these locations had simply not been properly surveyed, a
direct acknowledgment of the limited reach of German colonial control. Range, the
official geologist of German Southwest Africa since 1906 and a key player in the search
for water, held similar views. He noted in 1913 that he would not employ the dowsing
rod because he saw no point in it.132 Range later continued to question the success of
water divination well beyond Germany’s control of German Southwest Africa.133
Some individuals found themselves caught in the middle, unable to pick a side. Most
prominent among this group was colonialist and geographer Paul Rohrbach. Installed
as Settlement Commissioner to German Southwest Africa in 1903, he had criticized
widespread anxieties among colonials and hesitant investment early on. In his view, only
government funds could guarantee a solution to the water question—not dowsing.134
At the same time, as historian Krautwurst has noted, Rohrbach ‘sceptical, though not
126
See, for instance, by F. König, Hauswasserleitungen (Leipzig, 1882); Die Verteilung des Wassers über, auf und in
der Erde (Jena, 1901); Taschenbuch des Hydrotekten für Wasserversorgung und Städte-Entwässerung (Leipzig,
1905); Anlage und Ausführung von Wasserleitungen und Wasserversorgung von Städten, Ortschaften, Anstalten
und Privatgebäuden (Leipzig, 1907).
127 König, Die Wasserversorgung in Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika, p. 50, and König, Ernstes und Heiteres, p. 7.
128 König, Ernstes und Heiteres, p. 76.
129 Ibid., p. 79.
130 ‘Geologie und Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 23 Mar. 1907, and ‘Geologie und
Wünschelrute’, Windhuker Nachrichten, 28 Mar. 1907.
131 Ibid. Range agreed.
132 NAN, ZBN, 1411 P.IV.B.2 (vol. 5), Aufsuchung unterirdischer Wasseradern durch Wünschelrutengänger. Specialia
(1912–14), letter 29 May 1913.
133 See, for instance, P. Range, ‘Die Ergebnisse des Wassersuchens mit der Wünschelrute in Südwest-Afrika und im
Orient’, Die Wünschelrute, 9, nos 10 and 11 (1920); P. Range, ‘Zur Wasserwirtschaft in Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, in
G. Wolff (ed.), Beiträge zur Kolonialforschung, vol. 5 (Berlin, 1943), pp. 133–47.
134 P. Rohrbach, Wie machen wir unsere Kolonien rentabel? Grundzüge eines Wirtschaftsprogramms für Deutschlands
afrikanischen Kolonialbesitz (Halle a. d. S., 1907), p. 123, referenced in van Laak, Imperiale Infrastrukur, p. 189.
588 Martin Kalb
entirely dismissive, leaned toward geological principles, remarking that its success rate
was still marginally higher than that of dowsing’.135 Although in his own writings he
pointed to the history of water witching within the Dutch Boer settler community in the
region, Rohrbach remained unsure about its ultimate value.136 Farmers did not see the
value in picking a side either. In dire need of water, they looked to geographers, geolo-
gists and dowsers. Contemporary colonial publicist Clara Brockmann, for example, re-
corded, ‘There are in the main two, in their way essentially different, means with which
we have worked, namely the divining rod and discovery by scientific manner through

geologists.’137 In her view a simple farmer said it best when he stated that his cattle did
not care who discovered a source of water.138 Farmer Ferdinand Gessert, a frequent
voice in colonial newspapers, noted in 1907 that geologists claimed there would be no
water along the Baiweg. ‘Then von Uslar arrived—let us set the dowsing rod aside—
and found it in many locations. He is just a practitioner.’139 Settlers thus employed
both avenues when looking for water, unlike in neighbouring South Africa where ‘rural
prejudice against foreign scientific experts’ prevailed.140 At times newspapers also chose
the middle ground. The Koloniale Zeitschrift, a platform for societies interested in colonial
development, noted it does not matter ‘whoever discovers it [water], dowsing rod or
geologists. What matters is that it is there and can be utilized.’141 The line between the
sciences as objective disciplines and folk traditions grounded in unverifiable experiences
and intuitions seemed to fade—and that had to be worrisome for any colonial empire
defining itself by its technological superiority and endorsement of objectivity.
This breakdown further manifested itself once investments began pouring into
German Southwest Africa. The arrival of government geologist Lotz in 1904 and his
efforts to access water along major military routes like the Baiweg had only slightly im-
proved the water situation.142 Two years later the situation had gotten a little better. One
scholarly description even speaks of ‘an impressive water documentation infrastructure’
following the creation of drilling crews in 1906.143 Soon geologist Lotz co-ordinated
and supervised two government drilling ‘squads’, one for the north and one for the
south. These squads consisted of ‘six to nine groups under the supervision of a boring
inspector. Each of the groups had a Boring Master, skilled assistants and labourers,
so that by 1914 forty skilled boring personnel worked in the country; the squads also
135
P. Rohrbach, ‘Wassererschliessung in Deutsch-Südwestafrika’, Kolonie und Heimat, 28 Mar. 1909, as referenced
by Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies and Dowsing Realities’, p. 73.
136 Rohrbach, Wie machen wir unsere Kolonien rentabel?, p. 142.
137 C. Brockmann, Briefe eines deutschen Mädchens aus Südwest (Berlin, 1912), p. 30, as quoted in Krautwurst,
‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 73.
138 Brockmann, Briefe eines deutschen Mädchens aus Südwest, p. 33.
139 ‘Wasserwirtschafliches im Ambolande und im deutschen Teile der Kalahari’, Globus: Illustrierte Zeitschrift für
Länder- und Völkerkunde, 4 Apr. 1907.
140 Van Sittert, ‘Supernatural State’, p. 926.
141 ‘Literatur’, Koloniale Zeitschrift, 28 Feb. 1907.
142 P. T. Range, Ergebnisse von Bohrungen in Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika (Berlin, 1915), p. 6. See also von Schöllenbach,
Die Besiedelung Deutsch-Südwestafrikas, p. 62.
143 Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 63. Historian Kaulich refers to a phase of ‘forced infrastructure
development’ due to the uprising and points to Dernburg’s larger investment programme; see Kaulich, Die
Geschichte, p. 466.

Figure 5: Image with the caption ‘Boring for water, place unidentified [191?]’
Source: Photograph courtesy of the National Archives Namibia
included 220 labourers.’144 Two scholars estimated that crews ‘drilled between 50 and
100 boreholes per year and provided the basics of water supply to farmers, towns and
villages’ (see Fig. 5).145 Dowsing played a major role in this shift. According to the
Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, if anything the colony should thank von Uslar for
raising awareness regarding the water question. The Kaiser would have lost interest
and funding for drilling squads might have faltered, the newspaper speculated.146 This
view seems to have some validity given that Berlin’s decision to pour more money into
drilling efforts was taken in a meeting that included discussion of dowsing.147 The dis-
covery of diamonds in 1907 helped as well—although, as one contemporary wrote
later, turning ‘our diamonds into water’ remained a challenge.148
Boring squads soon found themselves in a messy situation. As engineers their tech-
nical expertise did not lie in locating water and many crews therefore depended on
colonial geologists and geographers, who were rare in the colony, especially in remote
areas. As a result, they had to rely on the local knowledge of farmers and the expertise
of von Uslar. According to historians Lau and Stern, experiments continued. ‘For ex-
ample,’ they note, ‘there are large amounts of records comparing the success rate—
including water yields at various depths—of boreholes drilled at the sites located by
144
Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 63.
145 Ibid. These numbers are difficult to confirm but seem to be exaggerated.
146 ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 3 Aug. 1907. See also ‘Herr v. Uslar heimwärts!’,
Deutsch-Südwestafrikanische Zeitung, 5 Sept. 1908.
147 Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat, Die Wasserversorgung.
148 O. Hintrager, Südwestafrika in der deutschen Zeit (Munich, 1955), p. 140.
590 Martin Kalb

Figure 6: ‘The Dowsing Rod’, by Fritz Nansen, followed by a poem
Source: Kolonie und Heimat, 4, 27 (1911). Image courtesy of the Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian
Senckenberg, Frankfurt am Main
conventional geologists, and those drilled at sites located by an officially encouraged

diviner called von Uslar.’149
Water divination also remained in use after von Uslar left. According to the news-
paper Südwest, a certain Mr Behnke dowsed for water in Swakopmund in 1910. After
marking a spot, he dug for about ten metres before finding ‘invaluable’ water for his
distillery.150 A year later, farmer Kubisch noted that von Uslar was ‘a most-respected
person among farmers’ in German Southwest Africa, adding that dowsing was wide-
spread and thanks to von Uslar there had been more access to water.151 In 1911 a
Leipzig-based company ran an advertisement in the newspaper Der Südwestbote soli-
citing orders for dowsing rods farmers could try out for themselves.152 That same year
the Deutsche Kolonialzeitung pointed out, ‘The water supply of the colony requires atten-
tion. Next to dowsing that also includes the scientific geological survey of the whole
country.’153 The magazine Kolonie und Heimat featured a cartoon depicting a settler dow-
sing in the desert as an African follows with a bucket (see Fig. 6). Those in desperate
need of water, such as a farmer near Holoog in the south, requested whatever might
help, in this case geologist Range, drill expert Eyth, and ‘a man with knowledge re-
garding the dowsing rod.’154 By then even some voices within the colonial government
were speaking of using dowsing to supplement geological work.155
149 Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 63.

150 ‘Ein ergiebiger Brunnen im Orte selbst’, Südwest, 17 Feb.1911. See also ‘Bohrung bei der Eingeborenenkirche’,
Der Südwestbote, 24 July 1912; ‘Wasser, Brunnen und Wünschelrute’, Südwest, 10 Jan. 1913.
151 Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, p. 27.
152 ‘Endlich Lösung der Wasserfrage’, Der Südwestbote, 7 June 1911.
153 ‘Unsere afrikanischen Schutzgebiete und ihre Zukunft’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 5 May 1911.
154 NAN, BKS, 4, B.8., Bohrungen für Private (1910–12), Forkel an Bohrkolonne-Süd, 13 May 1911.
155 NAN, ZBN, 1411 P.IV.B.2 (vol. 5) Aufsuchung unterirdischer Wasseradern durch Wünschelrutengänger. Specialia
(1912–14), e.g. letter of 4 June 1912.
The effects of dowsing within the empire also put this folk tradition on an increasingly
equal footing in Germany. Much of that had happened at a meeting of the German
Agricultural Council (Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat) on 17 February 1909, when both sci-
entist Karl Dove and dowser von Uslar had the opportunity to share their insights in
the presence of high government officials, including Wilhelm II himself.156 Von Uslar,
clearly the man of the hour, went to great length when talking about his experiences,
expertise and successes. He quoted from letters of farmers thanking him for his efforts
and even recited a poem in favour of the dowsing rod. His audience was amused. Dove

spoke after him, highlighting the importance of precipitation and the need for me-
teorological data. Von Uslar’s presence thus helped push for the solution of the water
question in German Southwest Africa, with divination gaining traction in that context.
Elsewhere supporters of dowsing continued to aim for the official endorsement of
water divination by the scientific community. After all, opponents still openly attacked
water divination as a hoax.157 Von Uslar himself published an article in the magazine
Kolonie und Heimat calling on the sciences to consider dowsing.158 The verification of
his successes in the colony was intended to help secure the future role of water divin-
ation—soon within the newly formed Committee for the Clarification of the Dowsing
Question (Verband zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage).159 Under the leadership of Georg
Franzius and Friedrich Behme, among others, and eventually with its own publica-
tions, by 1911 this organization was advocating for water divination.160 Its early years
were defined by meetings as well as disagreements with the German colonial admin-
istration around von Uslar’s success rates. One administrative response pointed out
that von Uslar had simply done what geographers and geologists do, for he assessed
landscapes and looked for vegetation and fault lines before dowsing accordingly. Since
geographers and geologists had not surveyed these areas, the colonial administration
found his success not surprising.161 The committee disagreed and ultimately published
its own interpretation.162 In September 1913, conversations around the role of dow-
sing reached a climax with the celebration of the First German Dowsing Day (Erster
156 ‘Koloniale Fragen vor dem Deutschen Landwirtschaftsrat’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 20 Feb. 1909; ‘Deutscher
Landwirtschaftsrat’, Windhuker Nachrichten, 3 Apr. 1909; Deutscher Landwirtschaftsrat, Die Wasserversorgung.
See also ‘Die Kolonial-Kommission des Deutschen Landwirtschaftsrates’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 24 Dec. 1910.
157 ‘The Divining-rod in Germany’, Harper’s Weekly, 22 Feb. 1913.
158 R. von Uslar, ‘Die Methoden der Wassererschliessung in Deutsch-Südwest’, Kolonie und Heimat, 2, 16 (25 Apr.
1909). See also R. K., ‘Koloniale Neuigkeiten. Südwestafrika’, Kolonie und Heimat, 2, 19 (6 June 1909).
159 Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, pp. 4 and 8. See also Schriften des
Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage (ed.), Des Landrats von Uslar Arbeiten mit der Wünschelrute in
Südwestafrika (Stuttgart, 1912). See also Dillinger, ‘Dowsing’, p. 15.
160
The Verband published several volumes around dowsing, the first one focusing on the work of von Uslar.
161 G. Franzius (ed.), Schriften des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage, 7 (Stuttgart, 1916),
pp. 17–18.
162 Ibid., pp. 69–71. The debate tied to this question continued for several years. See, for instance, ‘Die Beratungen
der Budgetkommission’, Deutsche Kolonialzeitung, 21 Mar. 1908; ‘Kolonial-Landwirtschaftliches’, Deutsche
Kolonialzeitung, 8 Mar. 1913. See also Pumpen- und Brunnenbau, the newspapers Berliner Börsen-Zeitung and
the Kölnische Zeitung, as referenced in Knoblauch, Die Welt, p. 95; Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources,
p. 63, n. 163; H. Kardel, ‘Appenrades Wünschelrutenwunder’, Der Kreis, Mar. 1960, p. 125, referenced in
Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 73.
592 Martin Kalb
Deutscher Wünschelrutentag) in Halle an der Saale.163 This event, attended by more than
a hundred people, underscored a general desire to work together with opponents.164
Von Uslar’s endeavours in German Southwest Africa were still prominent, along with
efforts to find a clear verification process, but apart from broad statements there was no
agreement at the end of the meeting.
The beginning of the First World War disrupted efforts to resolve the issue. Von Uslar
had been in Canada but returned to Germany.165 Some evidence suggests that he put
his dowsing abilities to use for the German military.166 By 1915 he was certainly dow-

sing again in northern Germany.167 Meanwhile the debate was on hold. Nonetheless,
von Uslar’s stint in German Southwest Africa had become part of the colonial narra-
tive by 1915. Although he did not comment on success rates, Paul Range recorded in an
official geological report that von Uslar had ‘played a key role regarding the allocation
of drilling equipment’ to the region and credited him with giving important advice.168
Unlike other folk traditions, von Uslar’s contributions had been elevated into the official
history of the colony.
The loss of the colonies separated discussions around water divination. German
Southwest Africa became a mandate of neighbouring South Africa, and, in many ways,
a backwater, which might have been one reason why dowsing remained in use. In 1926
Richard Henning described meeting a young dowser in South West Africa. Although
not a believer at first, Henning had been converted rather quickly—even if he lacked
the needed talent himself.169 A few years later missionary Heinrich Vedder described
how his dowsing rod struck ‘at a spot where there was some green grass’.170 By then
water divination had become a local expertise. More recently, in 1998, farmer Metzger
from Farm Trifels in Okahandja noted, ‘Over the last decades it has become apparent
that we need geologists as well as dowsers in this country. There has been a fruitful
collaboration.’171 For others it could contribute to the generation of ‘new scientific know-
ledge’.172 ‘Stories’ from within the Southwester community include similar references
163
By 1912, the organization had grown to around 300 members—although factions had broken off to join groups in
France and England. Knoblauch, Die Welt, p. 95. See also ‘Erster Deutscher Wünschelrutentag’, Berliner Tageblatt,
20 Sept. 1913.
164 Supporters like Friedrich Behme and von Uslar were present, but so too were opposing voices, including a represen-
tative of the Prussian geological institute. Farmer Kubisch, a supporter of von Uslar from German Southwest Africa
we encountered earlier, also attended. Franzius, Tagung des Verbandes zur Klärung der Wünschelrutenfrage,
p. 27. Georg Franzius spoke of a ‘dowsing movement’, ‘Die Wünschelrutenbewegung in Deutschland’, Glasers
Annalen für Gewerbe und Bauwesen, 15 Mar. 1913. See also ‘Erster Deutscher Wünschelrutentage’, Die Presse,
23 Sept. 1913.
165
Witte, ‘Landråd von Uslar’, p. 155.
166 Knoblauch, Die Welt, p. 94. There are a few references tied to dowsing during the First World War. See, for in-
stance, M. Benedikt, Leitfaden der Rutenlehre (Wünschelrute) (Berlin and Vienna, 1916), p. vii.
167
von Klinckowstroem and von Maltzahn, Handbuch der Wünschelrute, p. 177.
168 Range, Ergebnisse von Bohrungen in Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika, pp. 7, 12. See also von Schöllenbach, Die
Besiedelung Deutsch-Südwestafrikas, p. 66.
169
R. Hennig, Sturm und Sonnenschein in Deutsch-Südwest (Leipzig, 1926), pp. 22–3.
170 H. Vedder, ‘Die Wünschelrute’, Afrikanischer Heimatkalender, 1 (1930), pp. 47–51.
171 Metzger, Die Wassererschliessung in Namibia, p. 8.
172 H. Schröter, ‘Unkonventionelle Wasserfindung, Teil 2’, Namibia Magazin, 1 (1994), pp. 16–17, here p. 17, as ref-
erenced in Krautwurst, ‘Water-Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 76 (italics as in Krautwurst).
to this day.173 In fact, as Krautwurst has noted, on the ground in Namibia today there is
an acknowledgement that ‘each method has advantages and disadvantages, but used in
a complementary manner the expectation is for a higher success rate than either taken
individually’.174 Seen through the lens of environmental history, this tradition encapsu-
lates the scarcity of the landscape, the desperation for water and the pioneering spirit at
the edge of the German Empire. And it became part of a frontier settler and farming
identity that had long dislodged indigenous ways of knowing the land and its resources.

Abstract
The dowsing debate in Imperial Germany and its role in the solution to the ‘water question’ in German
Southwest Africa is a window on the three principal themes of this article: environmental challenges, im-
perial fantasies and the fluidity of epistemologies. First, the water question, as contemporaries termed it,
was a significant concern in German Southwest Africa, and discussions of divination illustrate its centrality
in the development of Germany’s first and only settler colony. Secondly, the main protagonist, district ad-
ministrator and dowser Rafael Perfecto von Uslar, and his role in the search for water sources in German
Southwest Africa capture the limits of German colonial control. Von Uslar stepped into a vacuum created
by German ethnocentrism and its dismissive colonial gaze. Finally, the resurgence of divination, a folk
tradition many believed existed only outside the sciences, blurred the line between objective scientific
knowledge and superstition within the German Empire—all the while silencing local African expertise.
Bridgewater College
mkalb@bridgewater.edu
173 Scherz, Südwester Geschichten, p. 8. See also O. Rohmann, Zur Wünschelrutenfrage (Swakopmund, 1918); R. E.
Hänsel, ‘Auf den Spuren der Wünschelrute’, Nachrichten der Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftliche Entwicklung
Swakopmund, 5, 3/4 (Dec. 1973), pp. 13–14; M. W. Rust, ‘Das Ding mit der Wünschelrute und dem Goldstück’,
Mitteilungen SWA Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft, 27, 1 (1987), 1–4; Library of the Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft
Windhoek, Henno Martin, ‘Geologische Stellungnahme zur Wünschelrute’, REP 550.87 MAR.
174 C. Ndivanga, ‘Ministry to Use Water Divining’, The Namibian, 4 July 1994, as referenced in Krautwurst, ‘Water-
Witching Modernist Epistemologies’, p. 76.

Dowsing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dowsing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

German History Vol. 38, No. 4, pp.

The Dowsing Debate: Water, Science and

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

knowledge fit in light of the dichotomy between objective, peer-reviewed scholarship

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

epistemological status in anthropology in the context of past and present imperi-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

I. The Water Question in German Southwest Africa

Figure 3: Illustration of ‘Ground Cover’

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

27 Wallace, History of Namibia, p. 2.

well-diggers—had detailed understandings of underground water routes and, as his-

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

52 von François, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika, p. 101.

II. Dowsing in German Southwest Africa

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

63 Lehmann, ‘Between Waterberg and Sandveld’, p. 545.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Source: Courtesy of Museum Sønderjylland, Institut for Sønderjysk Lokalhistorie

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

connections to the imperial government—Kaiser Wilhelm had sent him to Tsingtao to

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

IV. Clashing Epistemic Traditions

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Source: Photograph courtesy of the National Archives Namibia

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

conventional geologists, and those drilled at sites located by an officially encouraged

149 Stern and Lau, Namibian Water Resources, p. 63.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gh/article/38/4/568/6065946 by guest on 09 September 2022

You might also like