Memoirs of the Queensland Museum Cultural Heritage Series
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VOLUME 4 PART 2 MEMOIRS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM CULTURAL HERITAGE SERIES 17 OCTOBER 2008 © The State of Queensland (Queensland Museum) 2008 PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia Phone 06 7 3840 7555 Fax 06 7 3846 1226 Email [email protected] Website www.qm.qld.gov.au National Library of Australia card number ISSN 1440-4788 NOTE Papers published in this volume and in all previous volumes of the Memoirs of the Queensland Museum may be reproduced for scientific research, individual study or other educational purposes. Properly acknowledged quotations may be made but queries regarding the republication of any papers should be addressed to the Editor in Chief. Copies of the journal can be purchased from the Queensland Museum Shop. A Guide to Authors is displayed at the Queensland Museum web site A Queensland Government Project Typeset at the Queensland Museum CHAPTER 3 THE LAST BATTLE OF MUA: ELEVEN TEXTS ANNA SHNUKAL Shnukal, A. 2008 10 17: The last battle of Mua: eleven texts. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, Cultural Heritage Series 4(2): 35-59. Brisbane. ISSN 1440-4788. Of all the battles fought by the people of Mua (Banks Island), the most significant was the ‘last battle of Mua.’ Said to have taken place shortly before the placement of Christian missionaries on Mua in 1872, it marked the end of the era of revenge killings and the beginning of a new, peaceful, ‘civilised’ era. The battle also provides a confirmation, context and explanation for some of the earliest recorded observations of Mua: its reduced population, fear of strangers and abandonment of coastal villages. This chapter reproduces 11 texts of the battle, collected between 1898 and 2002, and provides evidence that the battle took place not in 1863, as usually claimed, but in 1870. Italgal, Mualgal, Torres Strait history, Mua (Banks Island). Anna Shnukal, 75 Stanley Terrace, Taringa, Queensland 4068, Australia; received 24 July 2006. Of the numerous battles fought by the people of The importance of the final battle has ensured Mua, the most significant was the final ‘massacre that it continues to be recounted by the people of the Muans’, the culmination of generations of of Mua, Mabuyag and Badu, each retelling enmity among the peoples of Mua, Mabuyag and providing a unique perspective and context. Badu. This battle, which took place not long before The eleven versions provided here were collected the arrival of Christianity, marked the end of the between 1898 and 2002 and offer a range of cycle of revenge killings which characterised life different viewpoints and a wealth of narrative in pre-contact Torres Strait and the Islanders’ and incidental detail. A collection of such ver- acceptance of Christianity and ‘civilisation.’ sions serves two purposes: it provides access to documentary sources which otherwise may The battle is also historically important in that it be difficult to access; and it allows the researcher provides a confirmation, context and explanation to date certain pre-contact events in Torres for some of the earliest recorded observations Strait history more accurately, using internal of Mua. European visitors in the 1840s reported narrative evidence, relevant fragments of external that Mua had a large population; those who documentary evidence and local knowledge. began to arrive in greater numbers from the early Evidence will be adduced that the battle did not 1870s, noted the abandonment of Mua’s coastal occur in 1863, as has generally been assumed, villages, the smaller than expected population for but probably in August 1870. such a large island and the fear of outsiders. It is generally argued that the depopulation of the A FACTUAL EVENT? islands (on Mua as elsewhere) was caused by the depredations of the shellers and the spread Despite there being no contemporary first- of disease, chiefly the measles epidemic of 1875. hand accounts of the battle, the available hearsay While not downplaying the abuses perpetrated evidence convinced many researchers of the by the new arrivals, who raided island gardens, historical basis for the events first set down about seized women and men for the bêche-de-mer a generation after their occurrence, beginning boats, given the protection afforded by the size with Wilkin and Haddon from the Cambridge of Mua, its scattered population and its wooded Anthropological Expedition to Torres Straits. I and hilly interior, it is unarguable that endemic shall refer to these as ‘stories’ (accounts of recent retaliatory warfare also played a significant role important events), following Lawrence’s (1994: in the Muans’ psychological fragility, their move 290) distinction between stories and legends into the interior and their eventual willingness to (non-historical stories handed down through the accept the protection of Christian missionaries generations but popularly recognised as having from late 1872. some historical character).1 The third category, 36 MEMOIRS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM not relevant here, is myth (imaginative, symbolic quarter, no more than 40 or 50 (Douglas, 1900: stories not to be taken literally but revelatory 34). Such a devastating loss indicates either of a culture’s deepest values). Thus, technically one or a series of devastating causal events – speaking, the historian Singe (1989: 169) is in Torres Strait these were generally massacre, correct in pointing out that we have no proof illness or drought. Yet, despite a series of deadly that the massacre occurred; nevertheless, there illnesses brought by outsiders from the 1860s, is sufficient convergence in the accounts from the isolation of the villages militated against Mua, Mabuyag and Badu for us to accept the their spread to areas outside more crowded factual core of the events narrated, even when pearling or bêche-de-mer centres. Pearling some of the accreted details may be questioned. began in Mua Pass from the early 1870s but Of the ‘tales of the war-path’ recorded by there is no suggestion that illness or drought Wilkin on Mabuyag in 1898, which include this caused Muan depopulation, as on some other final battle, Wilkin (1904: 308) writes that ‘we islands. Rather, the reason given by the Muans may regard them as being as accurate as most themselves was invariably the depredations historical records which are narrated by the of Mabuyag and Badu. The local Government conquering side.’ Resident wrote that ‘a warlike tribe famous The pre-contact cycle of peibaik (retaliatory) in the old times fought the Moa people, and killings is well attested. Wilkin (1904: 298) cut them up to such an extent that they never defines blood feuds or reprisal wars as those recovered’ (Douglas, 1900: 34). ‘in which no quarter would be granted, and VERSIONS AND VERACITY the stronger party would crush the weaker and probably either capture the women or kill them Countless oral versions of the massacre have and the children.’ Numerous raids on each other been told but we cannot access them except by Mua, Mabuyag (Mabuiag), Naghir (Nagi) by proxy and without their performative and and Badu, sometimes in alliance, left the people instructional aspects. The 11 which appear in exhausted and demoralised until the boys grew to this chapter were all written down in English by manhood and could reactivate the cycle (see Fig. Europeans either directly from stories narrated 1 and the Figures in Manas et al. (‘Introduction by elderly Islanders with rights to tell the story to Gelam’s Homeland’ chapter, this volume) for or inspired by them: Namai from Mua and locations of the places mentioned in this paper). his mother were said to be the only survivors; The numbers of warriors who could be mobilised 2 Kokoa from Badu was a participant in the on the above islands waxed and waned. Thus, battle; Algida (Alligator) from Badu was, like we have glimpses of Mua as a strong nation, too Namai, a child at the time; Peter from Mabuyag strong to be challenged by the Kaurareg in the was the grandson of Bainu, a participant in an 1840s, yet, a generation later, depleted and fearful earlier fight. Despite the largely hearsay nature (Chester, 1871). At each encounter, the small of the accounts, younger narrators would have bands regularly lost at least half a dozen members, heard the story many times from the actual clubbed to death and beheaded by their enemies. participants as they were growing up. A Mabuyag man told Wilkin (1904: 318), perhaps exaggeratedly, that head-hunting expeditions to The versions reproduced here were written Mua were ‘like breakfast,’ i.e. part of the daily down between 1898 and 2002 and range in routine. length from a paragraph to several pages. Read in sequence, they offer increasingly Mua is one of the largest islands of the strait less ethnographic information. The first, most and was protected from marauders by its hills, elaborate version was recorded by Wilkin from swamps and rough terrain, its elaborate system of Peter of Mabuyag, grandson of a participant, lookouts and guards who warned of intruders by Bainu, a generation after the events it narrates. sounding the bu-shell, and its rocky overhangs, It is told from a Mabuyag perspective and hidden from outside view, into which the women provides a wealth of incidental detail found only and children fled for safety. Its people lived in small in Version IV, which appears to be a somewhat extended family groups in many semi-permanent sanitised and shortened version. The versions coastal and inland camps and any attack was in date order with their narrator (where known) a warning to others to flee. Nonetheless, by and recorder are: the turn of the twentieth century, its former population, said once to have been the equal of Version I: Peter of Mabuyag 1898 (Wilkin, 1904) its nearest neighbours, had dwindled to about a Version II: Algida of Badu 1915 (Burnett, 1962) GELAM’S HOMELAND 37 Maydh MABUYAG ISLAND Mui Goemu Dugu Ngur Sarbi Argan Totalai Murarath Damu Pad Womel Wakaid Dabu Ith Pad Meth Poid Wag (St Paul’s Ilapnab community) Tabungnazi Kubin Arkai FIG.