Commonwealth of Australia - Charles Sturt University...Do not remove this notice. Reading...

Copyright Notice:

Commonwealth of Australia

Copyright Act 1968

Notice for paragraph 135ZXA (a) of the Copyright Act 1968

Warning

This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Charles Sturt University under Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (the Act).

The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act.

Do not remove this notice.

Reading Description:

Egan, R. (2012). 1788-1790 : amity and kindness. In Neither amity nor kindness : government policy towards Aboriginal people of NSW 1788 to 1696 (pp. 5-32). Paddington, NSW. : Richard. Egan.

Readers should be aware that this reading may contain images of deceased persons which can cause sadness and distress to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and offend against strongly held cultural prohibitions.

Reading Description Disclaimer:

(This reference information is provided as a guide only, and may not conform to the required referencing standards for your subject)

CHAPTER 1

1788-1790

AMITY AND KINDNESS

When two cutters and a long boat captained by Arthur Phillip and John Hunter entered Port Jackson on 21 January 1788 in search of a better harbour than the one at Botany Bay, the Cadigal people watching from the southern shores and the Cameragal watching from the north had likely heard of these visitors before . Knowledge of the pale strangers would have reached the Sydney clans some 18 years earlier when James Cook and Joseph Banks arrived at Botany Bay 16 kilometres to the south . At that time, the British were not welcomed by the Botany Bay clans and they had left . But in that January of 1788 the strangers returned. For the Cadigal and the Cameragal and other Sydney clans, there would have been little reason to suspect that their whole way of life that had been in place for many hundreds of generations would be under threat . There would have been no apparent need to fear that their intimate connection with land, their complex kinship and belief systems - that had been the mainstay of their culture - would be challenged. The pale strangers would probably stay for a while and then leave as before .

Aboriginal population in 1788 It is now well established that Aboriginal people have been living in Australia for more than 50,000 years . During the 1950s it was thought (by Europeans) that people occupied Australia about 10,000 years ago during the last Ice Age. By 1965 the earliest known occupation had been pushed out to 20,000 years and by 1973 it had stretched to 40,000 years . 1 The most famous archaeological finds are the two skeletal remains at Lake Mungo in New South Wales: a woman dated to 26,500 years ago and a man dating back to 30,000 years ago. The oldest human remains discovered in Australia have been found at Keilor near Melbourne and have been dated to 45,000 years

5

6 NEITHER AMITY NOR KINDNESS

ago. New dating techniques suggest that it is at least 60,000 years ago since people first came to the Australian mainland, although this is yet to be authenticated.2

While it can be determined how long Aboriginal people have lived on the Australian mainland, calculating the population of the original inhabitants in 1788 is less precise. Nevertheless, it is important to establish some assessment of that population to put into perspective the full impact of the British occupation.

Anthropologists Radcliffe-Brown, A.P. Elkin and Norman Tindale all made assessments of what the Aboriginal population would have been in1788, they concluded: 215,000; 300,000 and 248,500 respectively.3 A more recent determination comes from the economic historian, Noel Butlin, who puts the figure at 750,000 .4 Richard Broome, in his book Aboriginal Australians, offers the following: ' .. there were approximately 300,000 Aborigines living in 1788 when the Europeans arrived, divided into over 500 tribes, each with their own distinct territory, history, dialect and culture ... '5 A comprehensive population study was undertaken by L .R . Smith in a doctoral thesis in 1975; one of his summary findings concludes that in 1788 the numbers were: New South Wales 48,000; Victoria 15,000; Queensland 120,000; South Australia 15,000; Western Australia 62,000; Tasmania 4,500; Northern Territory 50,000; an overall population of 314,500.6

David Day, an Australian historian, suggests: 'The estimates of the Aboriginal population in 1788 vary from 300,000, which was the accepted figure for many years, to the more recent estimates between 750,000 and 1,500,000.'7 Professor John Mulvaney offered the following to describe the population footprint at the time of Arthur Phillip' s arrival:

Somewhere between half a million and a million people were spread unevenly across Australia's 7,682,300 square kilometres in 1788, according to present estimates. They spoke well over 200 hundred mutually distinct languages and they were affiliated loosely into several hundred groupings, termed tribes by Europeans. There were

1788-1790: AMITY AND KINDNESS

occasions when upwards of 500 to 1,000 people assembled for ritual obligations, but usually they lived in bands from 20 to 50 people, depending on local conditions . 8

7

As Mudrooroo, Aboriginal writer and activist writing in recent times about his people, says 'We are many, as many as the trees, as the different types of animals . We are Nyungars, Nangas, Yolngus, Kooris, Murris et al, all different, but all forming the indigenous people of Australia' .9

We will never know exact figures but what is known is the fact that Aboriginal people were here in substantial numbers when the British occupied the country in 1788 and that they had successfully lived in Australia for hundreds of generations.

Visiting Europeans and the indigenous population Europeans had been flirting with the Australian coastline well before the British occupied Port Jackson in 1788. The Portuguese had reached Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and modern day Indonesia in the 1520s . A map drawn up in the French port of Dieppe of an extensive continent named 'Java La Grande' was very similar to Australia, suggesting that the Portuguese had been to the east coast some 250 years before Cook. The Spaniard Luis de Torres had reached the Torres Straits in 1605 1 0 but there is no evidence to suggest he sighted the Australian mainland - his legacy remains with the Strait bearing his name. We are unaware of any written records from the Portuguese or the Spanish of these visits that say anything about the Indigenous people that they may have encountered .

The first written records come from the Dutch. The Duyfken (Little Dove), captained by Willem Jansz (Janszoon) was the first Dutch vessel known to have visited the Australian coastline in November 1606. He sailed for 'two hundred and twenty odd miles of the undiscovered coast of New Guinea till they reached a cape to which they gave the name Cape Keerweer (Turn Around)' .11 Jansz had in fact reached the western side of Cape York. Cape Keerweer remains the oldest place name given by Europeans to any part of Australia. Jansz placed two


other names on his map which are of interest, one was R. met het Bosch (river with the bush) which was the name he gave for Pennefather River just north of Weipa/2 and the other was Moent, placed towards the top of Cape York. The meaning of Moent is unclear but recent research indicates it may be a Dutch transcription of an Indigenous word meaning 'coals, charcoal, cremation ground'; this could be the first Indigenous name placed on a map.13 Tragically for both sides, the ' first fatal encounter between Aboriginal people and Europeans also occurred on this voyage, at Port M us grave' .14 J ansz lost nine of his crew; no mention was made of Indigenous fatalities.

Dirk Hartog, the Dutch captain, who landed on the West Australian coast and hammered in a post and nailed a pewter plate to it with the inscription that he had arrived on 25 October 1616 15made no mention of Aboriginal people. But a later Dutch captain, Jan Carstensz, reported in 1623 of the same coast: ' In our judgement this is the most arid and barren region that can be found anywhere on the earth; the inhabitants too, are the most wretched and poorest creatures that I have ever seen in my age or time.n6

Abel Tasman and his pilot-major (steersman), Franschoys Visscher, left Batavia on 14 August 1642 in search of the great Southland. Travelling east from the Indian Ocean at latitude 44 degrees they sighted land (Tasmania) on 24 November 1642. On board the Heemskerk and the Zeehaen they debated whether or not they had found the Southland. They avoided making a decision on the issue but decided on a name for the land: Anthoony van Diemenslandt, named after the governor general who sent them on their voyage of discoveryY They landed three times but met no-one. Nevertheless Tasman recorded evidence of human habitation: human sounds, music of a trump or small gong, notches in trees made with flint instruments, and fire/8 but made no attempts at contact . Tasman weighed anchor on 5 December 1642 and continued eastwards . It would be another 130 years before another European would visit Van Diemen' s Land: Marion du Fresne landed in almost the same spot in 1 772.

1788-1790: AMITY AND KINDNESS 9

William Dampier published an account of A New Voyage Round the World in 1697. Like Carstensz, he had nothing positive to say about the west coast of Australia and described the local inhabitants as 'the most miserablest People in the World.'19 In 1779 Joseph Banks, the botanist who accompanied James Cook on his voyage to Terra Australis Incognito, reported to a Committee of the House of Commons that Botany Bay 'appeared to be the best adapted' for such purposes as transporting convicts and establishing a colony, and 'that he apprehended little probability of opposition from the natives as those he had seen were naked, treacherous, and armed with lances, but extremely cowardly ... ' 20

It has of course been a sad legacy that the reports of Dam pier, Carstensz and Banks, which are clearly derogatory and dismissive, are found in many Australian histories and have left lasting impressions upon readers.

The British make an assessment of New Holland In 1768, Lt. James Cook was in command of an expedition to observe the transit of Venus at Tahiti and to search for a continent in the South Seas. After charting the coasts of the two islands of New Zealand from October 1769 to March 1770, he turned his attention westwards. In consultation with his officers it was decided to sail to the East Indies by heading westwards until they fell in with the east coast of New Holland then travel north along the coast. Point Hicks (far eastern point of the Victorian coastline) was sighted on 19 A pril 1770 and then on 29 April the Endeavour landed in what was initially called 'Sting- ray's Harbour, then Botanist Harbour, Botanist Bay, before finally choosing Botany Bay'.21 Attempts at some kind of friendship with the local population were unrewarding. They could not communicate despite the enticement of beads and nails, or through the efforts of Tupaia, a Tahitian interpreter whom Cook thought might have been useful in the situation. When Cook ordered the firing of a shot over their heads, not surprisingly, all further engagement was rebuffed.

On 6 May 1770 Cook sailed north and mapped the whole


coastline up to the tip of Cape York. He confirmed for himself that New Guinea was separate from New Holland and was confident that no European had visited the east coast that which he had just traversed. He then hoisted the English colours in the name of King George Ill and 'took possession of the whole eastern coast from the latitude of 38 degrees south to Possession Island by the name of New South Wales, and fired three volleys of small arms . . . '22 From that day the western half of Australia was known as New Holland and the eastern half as New South Wales.

What Cook and Banks wrote about the voyage and observations at Botany Bay was crucial to the British Government's decision to send Arthur Phillip and the First Fleet . Cook was convinced that the Aboriginal population was nomadic, did not cultivate the land or build any permanent structures, was few in number, and, because animal life seemed scarce, he assumed they lived solely on the coast . Cook wrote in his journal:

The Natives do not appear to be numberous nor do they seem to live in large bodies but dispers' d in small parties by the water side . . . we could know but very little of their customs as we never were able to form any connections with them.23

Day suggests that the overall impact of Cook's observations in 1770 seemed to justify a claim of legal proprietorship without seeking approval from the Aboriginal people over the coast he had 'discovered' . Accordingly, he 'caused the English colours to be display' d ashore every day and an inscription to be cut out upon one of the trees near the watering place setting forth the ships name &c'. 24 Day proposes that this inscription was not to advise the Aboriginal people of their dispossession but was to alert subsequent European explorers that they had been preceded by Cook and therefore they could not claim it for themselves . 25


Occupation and the policy of amity and kindness Why the British decided to send a fleet to New Holland in the late eighteenth century has been the subject of much debate . 26 The full answer lies within a number of reasons: a dumping ground for convicts no longer able to be sent to the American colonies following the revolution in 1776; competition from the Dutch and French; commercial ventures including whaling and sealing; and as a source of naval stores of flax and pine trees that could be had on Norfolk Island. What is certain is that when Arthur Phillip and the First Fleet of convicts, marines, and officers arrived into what is now Port Jackson and raised the British Flag on 26 January 1788, they had come to stay. This was a force to secure the land and build a colony.

The British knew that the Aboriginal population would be present, but on the recordings of Cook, they would be few in number . What then, was the policy towards the Aboriginal population? The first policy statement can be found in the instructions from King George Ill to Arthur Phillip:

. . . endeavour by every possible means to open an intercourse with the Natives, and to conciliate their affections, enjoining all Our Subjects to live in amity and kindness with them. And if any of our subjects shall wantonly destroy them, or give them any unnecessary interruption . . . of their several occupations, it is our Will and Pleasure that you do cause such offenders to be brought to punishment according to the degree of the Offence . . . 27

The policy clearly reflected a concern by the British about the possibility of miscarriages of justice against the 'native' population and a desire that the perpetrators should be dealt with harshly. However, there was no apparent policy determination of what should occur if the Aboriginal population resisted the entreaties of the British, or openly defied the occupation . The possibility of resistance may not have been considered (bearing in mind Cook's reports on the numbers they may face) or it was


assumed that any resistance to British intentions would simply be crushed.

The First Fleet of 11 ships set sail from Portsmouth on 13 May 178 7 with little fanfare. The two naval vessels, Sirius and Supply, six merchantmen that had been converted into convict ships, and three store ships, took 252 days to reach Botany Bay. Phillip sailed into Botany Bay on 18 January 1788 with 1,030 people on board, of whom 736 were convicts.28 Considering the distance it was regarded as a successful voyage with the loss of only 48 lives.29

In Botany Bay, Phillip and a small landing party made their way to the beach. A group of Botany Bay people, probably families of the Gweagal and KameygaV0 were waiting near the shore. Phillip was determined that 'nothing less than the most absolute necessity should ever make me fire upon them.'31 This first encounter was a harmonious one. Phillip, according to his own record of events, approached up the beach, alone and unarmed and offered various ornaments to the armed Aboriginal people who had come to meet or confront this pale-faced stranger. Confident of little danger, they laid down their weapons and handled the gifts. Phillip' s ships remained anchored and no dispute took place.32

However, another encounter the following day, recorded by George W organ - surgeon on the Sirius - was more aggressive:

A Party of Us made an Excursion up an Arm in the North part of the Bay, where we had not been long landed before we discovered among the Bushes a Tribe of the Natives .. . these rude, unsociable Fellows, immediately threw a Lance, which fell very near one of the Sailors, and stuck several Inches in the Ground, we returned the Compliment by firing a Musket over their Heads . . . 33

On Monday 21 January, according to the journal of Lieutenant William Bradley of the Sirius, another meeting between the British and the local population was also tense:


An Officer & party of Men were sent from the Sirius to clear away to a run of water on the S.o side of the Bay: The Natives were well pleas' d with our People until they began clearing the Ground at which they were displeased & wanted them to be gone ... 34

13

The interaction at Botany Bay was put on hold as Phillip sought another safe harbour. Despite the glowing reports from Cook's voyage, Phillip found the site at Botany Bay far from favourable. From a European perspective, the land was infertile and more importantly there was no apparent supply of fresh water. With enough supplies for only two years, the need to establish a settlement that could sustain itself was paramount.

Port Jackson which lay to the north had been named by Cook but not investigated. Phillip set sail for Port J ackson and early in the afternoon of 21 January 1788, Captain Arthur Phillip and Captain John Hunter and crew, sailed along the west side

A View in Port Jackson, New South Wales by J. Heath 1791. AusTRALIAN

NATIONAL MARITIME MUSEUM, REPRODUCED COURTESY OF THE MUSEUM


of what is now called Middle Harbour. The party then came ashore at a cove which Phillip called Manly Bay.35

Although the Aboriginal men were armed, there was no conflict. The 'Indians', wrote Watkin Tench, Captain of the Marines, received the landing party with great cordiality. Phillip's party made it ashore and after a short time prepared a meal by boiling some meat in a large pot. Arthur Phillip wrote of the first encounter with the Aboriginal people of Port Jackson in a letter to Lord Sydney on 15 May 1788:

When I first went in the boats to Port Jackson the natives appeared armed near the place at which we landed, and were very vociferous, but, like the others, easily persuaded to accept what was offered to them, and I persuaded one man, who appeared to be the chief or master of the family, to go with me to that part of the beach where the people were boiling their meat ... He then went on to examine what was boiling in the pot, and exprest his admiration in a manner that made me believe he intended to profit from what he saw ... 36

Although it was peaceful encounter, Phillip had deemed it necessary to 'draw a line in the sand' that the Aboriginal people were not allowed to cross - a line that was protected by marines with superior weapons. This line was both 'a physical and symbolic barrier which segregated black and white at their first meeting in Port Jackson.'37 The landing party then rowed to a small beach to the south of the harbour entrance where they pitched tents for the night. The following day they explored the southern shoreline of the harbour for a possible site to make a permanent base for the fleet. They found one - a small cove fed by a fresh water stream.

Late on the same day Phillip returned to Botany Bay where he declared that he had found the ' finest Harbour in the world' . 38 It had a stream that provided fresh water that ran out into a very deep cove where all the cargo from the fleet could be safely unloaded. Botany Bay was discarded and the fleet sailed for the


View of the settlement on Sydney Cove, Port Jacks on by Edward Dawes, 1792. AusTRALIAN NATIONAL MARITIME MusEUM,

REPRODUCED COURTESY OF THE MUSEUM

deep water cove in Port Jackson.

15

When the First Fleet sailed into Port Jackson on 26 January 1788, along the entire coastal cliffs from Botany Bay to Port Jackson, Aboriginal people gathered in groups and lit fires. Robert Brown, captain of the store ship Fishburn, commented, 'The natives on shore hollered Walla Walla Wha or something to that effect, and brandished their spears as if vexed at the approach'. 39 Philip Gidley King, an officer in the First Fleet and later Governor of New South Wales, wrote: ' All the natives which were seen when we first arrived at Port Jackson danced violently, shouting 'woroo woroo, go away'. James Cook, 18 years ago, had received the same warning.40

Those Aboriginal people who brandished their spears at the approach of this large fleet of ships entering their harbour on 26 January 1788 were obviously more apprehensive than those who witnessed the arrival, five days earlier, of the two smaller cutters and long boat in the harbour. This fleet, carrying the


pale-faced people was much larger and potentially more intrusive. Clearly the local population was concerned; it would not be too long before they would realise that the British had come to stay.

Aboriginal people of the Sydney region In 1788 there may have been three Aboriginal language groups living in the Sydney region . North of Port Jackson the people spoke a language referred to as Kuringgai, and this name applied to their group. On the other side of Botany Bay, extending down the coast to Jervis Bay, the Dharawal language was spoken. Between Port Jackson and Botany Bay, and extending into the Blue Mountains, the language was DarugY Within each group there were many clans or bands of Aboriginal people. The clan or band, usually comprised around 50-60 people, had traditional rights over certain areas and owned sites of significance within those areas. In 1788 there were about thirty clans around Sydney (Appendix One) . This picture, however, becomes confused when the British, writing in journals at the time, referred to the ' Botany Bay Tribe', which was probably the Cadigal clan . There is of course further confusion with the spelling of these names. For instance, Darug, a language group in the south west region is also spelled Dharug, Daruk, Dharuk, Dharuck, and Dharruk.

A further point needs to be clarified: the use of the name Eora. In his book Aboriginal Tribes of Australia, Norman Tindale cited many references based on the vocabularies used by David Collins (Judge Advocate) and Governor Hunter from the early 1790s . The term Eora was used for the coastal people between Port Jackson and Botany Bay i .e. clans including Wangal, Gomergal, Wategora, Cadigal, Kameygal, Bediagal, and Murubora. The term is derived from the word for ' country' or 'place', which was 'ora' . 'Eora' might mean 'this place'. The Eora people were identifying the Sydney region as their 'country' . The language they spoke was a dialect of Darug. 42

For the original owners of the Port Jackson district the arrival of the British truly must have been an uncertain time. Had


Colo

DARUG

Tagary

DHARAWA

Murubora

0 !Okm

The Distribution of known clans across and adjoining Darug country.

17

COURTESY OF THE DARUG TRIBAL ABORIGINAL CORPORATION, BLACKTOWN NSW

these people come to stay? It certainly must have looked like it. Richard Broome, surmises:

It was little wonder that they ran to the water's edge, yelling


and lifting their spears with mixed feelings of anger, fear and curiosity ... They watched this large body of strangers, almost as numerous as their own tribe, unload their curious supplies. These invaders behaved like savages in the way they attacked the land ... The gentle rhythms of life around Sydney were pierced by noise, activity, shouts and parades . . Y

The British occupy the land There was clearly unease between the two groups as over the ensuing months contact was sporadic with limited communication. The policy of friendship and kindness was still in place but relations were becoming strained. The Eora would have been concerned about their waterholes being over-used, the indiscriminate clearing of land, damage to sacred sites, the casting of nets into their fishing areas, and the general treatment of the land, all of which was undertaken without permission. It would have been an uneasy peace. There were at least seventeen reported meetings of the two groups over a period of one month after Phillip' s arrival. In thirteen meetings (reported by the British) the original inhabitants 'showed boldness, in two aggression and in two they fled. They came right into the settlement only twice in all that time.'44

Within three months of the British occupation of Sydney Cove the settlement was well established. The Governor's mansion was built on a nine-acre fenced property. By July plans were drawn up for a substantial town that was to become Sydney.45 The land had simply been taken. There was no treaty, there was no discussion with the original inhabitants - there was no recognition from the British that the local inhabitants had any stake in the land at all. The British came under the assumption of terra nullius: 'land belonging to nobody'. The argument of terra nullius was first cited by John Locke in his Second Treatise of Government (1689-90). Many politicians at the time were influenced by his writings. Locke declared that if the land is tilled, planted, improved, cultivated, and the product made use of, then the land becomes one's property.46 Because Aboriginal


people did not appear to have any close ties with the country and there was no agriculture or obvious industry taking place, terra nullius was assumed.

View of the Governor's House at Sydney in Port Jackson New South Wales, by Williarn Bradley, January 1791. IMAGE NUMBER: NLA.PIC.AN3329075-1,

COURTESY OF THE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA

Thus developed this strange paradox of Aboriginal people living on the land but 'land belonging to nobody' under the name of terra nullius. Historically, annexation usually occurred by a violent overthrow by an occupying force, or through some sort of negotiation with the local inhabitants culminating in a treaty. In the initial phase of the occupation at Sydney Cove neither occurred. Michael Bachelard, in a 1997 publication on the Mabo and Wik decisions, states that under a system of terra nullius: ' ... settling a place was relatively easy: sovereignty [ownership] was acquired when such land was occupied. The right of existing inhabitants, in this case Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, counted for nothing because under British law they were officially recognised only as barbarians ... and in need of civilisation.'47


The British were not concerned about the rights of Aboriginal people, for according to the British, they had no rights. However, at the time, this view was challenged: Baudin, the visiting French naval captain, told Governor King that taking Aboriginal land was against 'justice and equity' and the contemporary English writer Richard Price, remarked: 'that if sailing along a coast can give a right to a country, then might the people of Japan become, as soon as they please, the proprietors of Britain?'48 Phillip had no instructions to negotiate or compromise - he would take the land but treat the local population with amity and kindness.

Beginning of the collapse in relations Inevitably, the relationship between the British and the local clans began to deteriorate: petty theft of equipment by the Aboriginal population and the confiscation of Aboriginal weapons by convicts began to occur on a regular basis . As instructed, Arthur Phillip was keen to 'open an intercourse' with the local population. But none appeared to be forthcoming. He was keen for some Aboriginal people to learn English and then to act as intermediaries between the two races. Phillip had always intended to bring the Aboriginal population near to the settlement: ' ... a few of which I shall endeavour to persuade to settle near us, and who I mean to furnish with everything that I can lend to civilize them, and to give them a high opinion of their new guests .'49

However, Phillip must have become increasingly agitated and frustrated due to the reluctance of the Aboriginal people to engage. He decided to change policy; if he could not entice them to enter his community, he would force them. He ordered the capture of some Aboriginal people which resulted in one Aboriginal person from Manly, named Arabanoo, being detained.

Watkin Tench, an extensive chronicler of the early occupation at Port Jackson, described what took place:

. . on the 31st of December [1788] ... The boats proceeded to Manly Cove, where several Indians were seen standing


on the beach, who were enticed by courteous behaviour and a few presents to enter into conversation. A proper opportunity being presented, our people rushed in among them, and seized two men. The rest fled, but the cries of the captives soon brought them back, with every effort on our side, only one of them was secured; the other effected his escape. The boats put off without delay and an attack from the shore instantly commenced. They threw spears, stones, firebrands, and whatever presented itself at our boats ... 50

2 1

It had taken only some eleven months for the policy of amity and kindness to change to one of capture and detainment. Arabanoo, called Manly by his captors, spent some two months in the presence of Phillip. For the vast majority of that time he was tethered to prevent his escape. Tench writes: 'To prevent his escape, a handcuff with a rope attached to it was fastened around his left wrist, which at first highly delighted him. He called it bengadee (an ornament), but his delight changed to rage and hatred when he discovered its use.' 5 1

Arabanoo was initially a curiosity among the British but soon became part of the Sydney landscape. He slept indoors, ate at a table, had his hair shaven and was made to wear European clothes. At one time he was taken out in a boat where he could see his people and they him. When asked from afar by his people why he didn't simply jump in the water and swim home he sadly indicated his tether. He was accompanied by a convict at all times and for much of the time Arabanoo remained dejected and obviously pined to be with his clan. Apart from learning his own name and several others such as Weerong (Sydney Cove), Phillip did not achieve what he had hoped for. The Aboriginal people from his clan did not come to ask for his release and Arabanoo was not forthcoming in acting as a go-between with his people. The stand-off remained. Then in April 1789 an outbreak of pestilence among the Aboriginal population put paid to any attempts at bridging an ever widening gap between the Aboriginal people and the occupiers. Tench observed that


'An extraordinary calamity was now observed among the natives ... in all coves and inlets of the harbour . . . On inspection, it appeared that all the parties had died a natural death. Pustules, similar to those occasioned by smallpox, were thickly spread on the bodies ... '52 When Captain John Hunter returned from the Cape of Good Hope with supplies he expressed the view to the Governor 'that it was truly shocking to go round the coves of this harbour, which were formally frequented so much by the natives; where, in the caves of the rocks, which used to shelter whole families in bad weather, were now to be seen men, women, and children, lying dead.'53

Arabanoo assisted in caring for an old man and young boy back at the settlement of Sydney. He also attended to two further Aboriginal people, a young man and his sister, who were brought in by the Governor's boat. Not surprisingly, Arabanoo himself succumbed to the disease and after languishing for six days he died on 18 May 1789. Tench wrote: 'During his sickness he reposed entire confidence in us. Although a stranger to medicine and nauseating taste of it, he swallowed with patient submission innumerable drugs, which the hope of relief induced us to administer to him. The Governor, who particularly regarded him, caused him to be buried in his own garden and attended the funeral in person'.54

The impact of smallpox The outbreak of smallpox in the Sydney region was catastrophic for Aboriginal people in the area and continuing outbreaks devastated Aboriginal groups who came into contact with the disease.

The appearance of smallpox, at this time, has been the subject of much controversy. It has been suggested, by the historian Noel Butlin, that the smallpox came in a jar of variolous material (small pox scabs) taken from victims and brought out from England to use as a vaccine. Butlin argues that this may have been spread, either deliberately or by accident, with disastrous effect . 55 Alternatively, the medical historian James Watt suggests that it could have been a viral outbreak with skin blisters that


simply looked like smallpox or may have been chicken pox. 56 Judy Camp bell's Invisible Invaders, sheds some light on these

hypotheses. Firstly, she argues that none of the First Fleet letters ever mentioned that the disease was chicken pox and all would have been familiar with the symptoms and outwards signs of smallpox; they all declared it to be smallpox.57 Secondly, she contends, on the basis of very recent studies, that it would have been impossible for a jar of variolous material to have survived the movement through the tropics and in the humid conditions of a summer in Sydney: ' ... even virus protected in scabs retained infectivity for only three weeks at temperatures of 35°C and relative humidity of 65-68 %.'58 Thirdly, by the mid-nineteenth century, British and German settlers in south eastern Australia had observed older Aboriginal people with pockmarks that would have pre-dated the British occupation in 1788. Camp bell's overall conclusion is that smallpox was in the country before the British occupation and most likely was introduced into northern Australia by the Macassan trepangers (from the Indonesian island of Sulawesi) looking for sea slugs which were a delicacy in Asia. They brought the virus with them to the Coburg peninsula (Northern Territory) where the local clans were infected. From there it spread to the eastern seaboard of Queensland or the Darling River country and eventually made its way down to the Sydney region in April of 1789.

As plausible as Camp bell's theory may appear, Craig Mear, refutes her argument on a number of fronts. Firstly, he disputes the contention that the virus can not survive in temperatures of 35°C, he cites Huq (1976) who contends that infectivity falls away rapidly at 35°C but then slows and at4°C a viable virus can still be present after 16 weeks.59 The journal entries of the First Fleet indicate that the temperature never reached those of 35°C, the temperatures varied considerably; Watkin Tench wrote that the ' ... thermometer has never risen beyond 84 ... [29°C].'60 So the variolous virus could have survived. Mear argues:

It is feasible to suggest that a liquid form of virus, kept in a sealed container, with no humidity and out of the sunlight


in the bottom, for instance, of a sea chest, would have been still infective enough to cause an epidemic among a naive [previously untouched ] population such as the Aborigines in Sydney in 1789. 61

It is believed that the British supply of smallpox brought to Sydney was in a liquid form, soaked in cotton wool and dried becoming scabs - this was the traditional European method of storing the matter . Research has acknowledged that variolous virus in scabs is, for a virus, 'very resistant to inactivation, especially at moderate temperatures and out the sunlight' . 62 These scabs, or fomites, may have been on clothes and blankets that carried the disease ashore. Grace Karskens contends that we 'know that even before the official contacts [with] the Eora . . . convicts were socialising with local Aboriginal people and gave them 'presents', probably clothing and blankets . . . '63

Secondly, Mear points out that smallpox was present in the Indonesian archipelago in the sixteenth century, so why did it take so long to arrive in Australia? Thirdly, the South Sulawesi smallpox would have come in the 'wet season' and the Northern Territory Aboriginal people on the peninsula would have been relatively sedentary, in small communities, waiting for the dry season. If smallpox had have been introduced the population would have suffered greatly, perhaps up to 70 per cent . In the 1820s it was reported, by a Surgeon of Raffles Bay (east end of the Coburg peninsula) that no epidemic or contagious disease was evident in the population . 64 Mear further points out that any outbreak in these communities would have rendered far too many dead - leaving too few to care for the sick. The survivors would have fled and would not have been willingly accepted by their neighbours. It was more likely that ' given the timing of the fisherman's arrival, the virus would have swept through those communities in contact with the trepangers and then died out within a few weeks'; it would therefore, not have been able to spread southwards. 65

Finally, Mear refutes Camp bell's claims that the virus travelled from the north to the Sydney region- a journey of some


3,000 kilometres. He contends that this would almost be impossible as nowhere in the world has smallpox travelled such vast distances, moreover, the main Aboriginal trade routes from the north headed west into the Kimberley or down through Cooper's Creek to South Australia- away from the eastern seaboard. Also, with fewer people in the desert areas there would have been less chance of the victims spreading the virus to others; clan members rarely travelled great distances - goods were traded long distances but individuals did not. 'It is difficult to imagine small bands of perhaps twenty people, with up to fourteen or fifteen members increasingly stricken with smallpox being able to travel anywhere to spread the virus .'66

According to Mear it is far more likely that the outbreak occurred in a highly populated region like Sydney and then it was disseminated by fleeing. Smallpox broke out in early April 1789 among the clans living between Sydney Cove and the Heads. Many would have caught it during March and by April bodies were found everywhere. At the end of June, Tench took a party to the west of Rosehill but found no sign of the virus among the Darug, if smallpox 'had been or was in the west one would expect Tench and his companions would have found the sick or dead as they had found in Sydney . . . '67 In the 1830s Charles Sturt and Thomas Mitchell found evidence of the virus all along the Darling and Murray systems and 'it supports the belief of the South Australian Aborigines that the smallpox travelled from the east' . 68

Considering the evidence of Mear it seems highly improbable that the virus travelled all the way to Sydney from northern Australia . We know that the British brought the material with them to Sydney and it would appear, deliberately or not, that it was released and wreaked havoc among the Aboriginal clans of Sydney. Noel Butlin had cause to suggest that the British could have released it on purpose, as they had in fact already done so in North America when blankets- infected with smallpox -were issued to Native Americans .69 There is no evidence that the British deliberately released the virus into the Aboriginal population- but somehow it got out.


It must have been an appalling situation for the local inhabitants to see the members of their groups dying from this dreadful pestilence with pustules forming over their bodies that were slowly wasting away. Kohen suggests that it would have' ... killed literally thousands of people. The death rate around Sydney was so great that traditional burial customs were discontinued, and bodies were found floating in the harbour and lying in rockshelters .'70

It is probable that somewhere between fifty and ninety percent of all Aboriginal people in the Sydney area died of smallpox within the first three years of the British occupation.71

The capture of Aboriginal people continues Phillip remained determined to pursue a policy of capture in order to facilitate further contact with the Aboriginal people. Tench recorded: 'Intercourse with the natives, for the purpose of knowing whether or not the country possessed any resources by which life might be prolonged, as well as on other accounts, becoming every day more desirable, the Governor resolved to make prisoners of two more of them'.72 Under orders from the Governor, Lieutenant Bradley of the Sirius dispatched some boats and set out to capture two more men. Having obtained some fish, Bradley sailed to 'N' cove' (Collins Flat at Manly) where a great number of Aboriginal people had arrived to meet them; when Bradley' s party got near to the shore they held up two large fish and two Aboriginal men were drawn closer to Bradley' s group. They drew nearer, laying down their weapons and eagerly took the fish; four of the boat's crew remained undercover and on the command they jumped from the boat and apprehended the two Aboriginal males. Despite the immediate anger and distress of the Aboriginal people who began to throw their spears, Bradley and crew managed an escape with their two prisoners . Bradley described the capture as ' the most unpleasant task I was ever ordered to execute . . . The noise of the men crying and screaming of the women and children together with the situation of the two miserable wretches in our possession was really a most distressing scene; they were most terrified, one of


them particularly so.'73 One man was called Bennelong and the other Colbee.74

According to Tench's records on the return to Sydney Cove, Nanbaree and Abaroo, a young Aboriginal boy and girl who had come to live in the town since the smallpox outbreak, immediately welcomed the two Aboriginal men calling them Baneelon and Colbee.75 Orders from the Governor required that both men were to be treated well and provided with all their needs by way of food, drink and general comfort; however, like Arabanoo, the two men were restrained. After some seventeen days of captivity, Colbee managed his escape by removing the rope from his shackled leg and Bennelong would have followed had he not been detected moments after the event.

Bennelong remained in captivity but his confinement was, over time, reduced in order to gain his confidence. Phillip had achieved his aim of securing an intermediary, someone to learn from, and provide a connection with the Aboriginal people. However Bennelong proved to be far from compliant and was

'Ben-nil-long', 1760- 1822, by James Neagle, IMAGE NUMBER: NLA.PIC.AN 7566576 (COURTESY OF NATIONAL LIBRARY OF AUSTRALIA)


both a source of satisfaction and frustration for Phillip . Bennelong became very much part of Sydney Cove - he dined with the Governor, drank with the men, told stories of his past, and described his involvement with his female companions. Tench observed that ' . . . His powers of mind were far above mediocrity. He acquired knowledge, both of our manners and language, faster than his predecessor had done. He willingly communicated information; sang, danced and capered; told us all the customs of his country and all the details of his family economy. Love and war seemed his favourite pursuits . . . '76 The previous page bears one of many representations of Bennelong.

Bennelong spent a good deal of time with Governor Phillip and there appears little doubt that a close bond of friendship developed between them.

However, in the time of severe food shortages at Sydney Cove, Bennelong, either because he had no faith in the future of Sydney, or because he could do better for himself, took advantage of an unshackled moment, and simply left on 3 May 1790, little more than five months after his capture.77For Phillip, it must have seemed as though that was the end of the contact with Bennelong. But some four months later there was another meeting; Captain Nepean from the New South Wales Corps, chief surgeon Mr White, and a party of men and young Nanbaree, landed at Manly Cove intending to walk to Broken Bay. Here they encountered about two hundred Aboriginal people broiling the flesh of a beached whale. Nanbaree called for Bennelong and he appeared. Word was sent to Phillip of the discovery and Phillip made immediate plans to meet with the party. What transpired could have derailed what Phillip perceived was a second chance at a dialogue with Bennelong.

When Phillip arrived at the beach all seemed well . Gifts of pork, bread, and other articles were distributed and the promise of hatchets in two days. A bottle of wine was uncorked and Bennelong took a glass and on drinking toasted the King.78 After about thirty minutes a man called Wil-le-ma-ring, in near proximity to Phillip, took up a spear in a threatening manner. Watkin Tench recalled the moment:


. . his excellency . . . cried out to the man, Wee-ree, Wee-ree (bad; you are doing wrong) . . . The words had, however, hardly gone forth, when the Indian, stepping back with one foot, aimed his lance with such force and dexterity that, striking the Governor's right shoulder, just above the collar bone, the point glancing downwards came out at his back, having made a wound of many inches long. Instant confusion on both sides took place; Beneelon . . . disappeared; and several spears were thrown from different quarters, though without effect . . . The Governor . . . attempted to run towards the boat, holding up the spear with both hands to keep it off the ground but owing to its great length the end frequently took the ground and stopped him (it was twelve feet long) . . . 79

29

Once back at Sydney the barbed spear was removed and 1.illip recovered. Bennelong was apologetic and declared that � had beaten Wil-le-ma-ring for the spearing. This incident 1ised the question: Was Bennelong part of a plan to spear PhilJ as pay-back for his capture and confinement? He may well 1ve been as the spear used by Wil-le-ma-ring was an unusual 1.e with a barbed wooden head, the 1 point lacked the jagged ones of the death spears'80 - it was never meant to kill . As a �sult Surgeon White was able to remove it easily and declared tat he would recover . What gives credence to this theory of 1y-back is the fact that, after the incident, relations between Le Eora and British improved. Karskens purports:

. . . some deep resolution had occurred, for a miraculous breakthrough soon followed: friendly relations were established with Bennelong and his people, and the Eora finally I came in' to Sydney. From that time on, Aboriginal people were always among the city's population.81

Phillip did not seek retribution but came to terms with what ld happened and he tried once more to nurture the relationlip with Bennelong .


Back in the fold Bennelong became very much part of the Sydney landscape where he moved between the two worlds that now were part of his land. When Phillip returned to England he took Bennelong and a young boy named Yemmerranwanie with him, arriving on 21 May 1793. Unfortunately Yemmerranwanie died from a pulmonary illness in England, and Bennelong, after living there for two years, meeting King George Ill, and engaging in English society, returned to Sydney in September 1795.

On his return to Sydney Bennelong spent less and less time at Sydney Cove. He returned to his traditional culture of which fighting revenge battles was a part. This would have upset the Governor and other British who would have wished for him to further engage in their society; but he out-wore his welcome from the British in Sydney through his continual ritual fighting. He had been described by the chroniclers at the time as becoming ' ... most insolent and troublesome ... ' and would venture into town armed with spears declaring he would kill the Governor when next they met.82 There was also a commonly held view that he was rejected by his own people, a notion that Keith Vincent Smith denies: Bennelong was I quite at home in his own culture ... [he lived] ... quietly in the Ryde-Parramatta area at the head of about 100 people. The thought that Bennelong was despised by his own people as well as whites is one of the great lies of Australian history.'83

Bennelong was the first Aboriginal person to be fully acquainted with European culture and as a consequence had to deal with the problem of straddling two cultures; his situation was made even more difficult when he was rejected by the women of his traditional culture. Keith Willey, suggests that it is extremely difficult to write from the Aboriginal perspective and of course no one ever thought to record Bennelong' s views I • • • He had been kidnapped, jerked right out of the framework of tribal life, subjected willy-nilly to a variety of unsettling influences, then taken to the other side of the world. He returned to a Sydney changed irrevocably from that which had been in his boyhood, and in which now he had no place.'84

1788-1790: AMITY AND KINDNESS 3 1

Bennelong died at Kissing Point (on the Parramatta River) on 3 January 1813 at an estimated age of 49 years. Unfortunately there is no space here to devote more to Bennelong who was such a significant figure in the early part of the British occupation. His name lives on: Bennelong Point (Sydney Opera House), The Bennelong Institute, restaurants and apartments in the Sydney area with his name, and in the federal electorate of Bennelong.

From amity and kindness to reprisals The Eora were now spending a good deal more time in Sydney. Children played games in the streets and the gardens, the older people came each day to ask for food and had developed a liking for bread and they often called at the hospital to have their wounds attended to.85 The British assumption was that, eventually, the Eora 'would become like the British in thought and action, respecting British laws'.86 This did not happen. Some of the British townsfolk were becoming less comfortable with the constant presence of the Aboriginal people and their demands. For the local Aboriginal population their situation was becoming intolerable: they were witnessing the dispossession of their land and their very livelihood was being threatened; skirmishes increased.

An incident involving the spearing of the governor's gamekeeper, Mclntire, was seized upon by Phillip as a situation that had to be confronted. It was this incident that ushered in another policy switch towards the Aboriginal population .

A sergeant of marines with three convict prisoners, including Mclntire, had gone out on a shooting party for game. After camping overnight they were woken by a group of Eora people. The convicts panicked and went for their weapons and the now famous Eora man, called Pemulwuy, launched a spear at Mclntire which penetrated his body under the left armY Mclntire died some two months later in January 1791 and while he lay dying he admitted to many horrendous crimes that he had perpetrated upon the local Aboriginal people . Regardless of the fact of his previous murders and cruelty, Phillip saw this


incident as time to act. In a moment of haste, misguidedness, or anger, he issued an order to destroy all Eora weapons, bring in two male prisoners, and put to death any ten Eora and to cut off the heads of the dead. After some advice from Watkin Tench, Phillip 'down graded' the orders to read that if six suspects could not be captured then any six were to be killed.88 A decree from the governor read:

Several tribes of the natives still continuing to throw spears at any man they meet unarmed ... the Governor, in order to deter the natives from such practices in the future, has ordered out a party to search for the man who wounded the convict in so dangerous a manner on Friday last ... [and] ... to bring in six of those natives who reside near the head of Botany Bay, or if that should be found impracticable, to put that number to death.89

There must have been some disquiet within the reprisal party as Lieutenant Dawes initially refused to carry out such orders . He wrote a letter to his senior officer indicating that he would not undertake such a duty. We can only speculate as to his reasons (he had an Aboriginal girlfriend) but we can assume that he found the task not in the interests of justice. He did however, under the threat of arrest, reconsider his position and agreed to carry out his orders; although he did inform the Governor that in the future he would not obey a similar order.90

Phillip' s decision, laid down in the General Orders of 13 December 1790, was to remain the constant theme of contact between the two races for the next hundred and fifty years. As a result of this new policy direction, Aboriginal resistance increased in the Sydney region led by Pemulwuy. The British reprisals would become more frequent and widespread: the frontier wars had begun.

§ § §

Commonwealth of Australia - Charles Sturt University...Do not remove this notice. Reading...

Documents

Transcript of Commonwealth of Australia - Charles Sturt University...Do not remove this notice. Reading...