China and the Beginning of Australian History

Author Ganter, Regina

Published 2003

Journal Title The Great Circle - Journal of the Australian Association for Maritime History

Copyright Statement © 2003 Australian Association for Maritime History. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.

Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/5783

Link to published version http://aamh.asn.au/great-circle/

Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au TheGreat Circle Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

CHINA AND THE BEGINNING OF AUSTRALIAN HISTORY

The founding of a Britishconvict colony at BotanyBay is generallyconsidered to be the point where Australianrecorded history begins and its pre-historyends. It is certainly an importantand incisive symbolic moment, and has been the locus of intense historical interest, and considerable debate. The 'master narrative'of founding,which has become a convenientand familiarshorthand interpretationof events,is thatthe Britishstruck out intoBotany Bay in orderto rid themselves of the problem of over-crowdedprisons, as far away fromhome as possible. I argue here for a differentversion of early Australian history,one in which China plays an importantrole. Trading connections between the -Pacific region and China were importantfor the British deliberations over the establishment of Botany Bay, affectingboth its timing and nature.In addition, the trade between Indigenous northernAustralia and Makassar to supply China with trepang, known in China as hai-sen, made it seem both desirable and feasible to establishBritish hegemony over the entirecontinent.

A BIG DEBATE

The traditional story that the colony was foundedto receive surplus British convicts sounds entirely feasible, supported by the fact that the prison populations were, indeed, a problem at the time and that a convict colony was founded in 1788. Britain's prison population was the subject of a number of commissions of inquiry after the American colonies refused to accept any furtherconvicts following the American war of independence in 1776. The Hulks Act, passed in hurriedresponse, was a temporarymeasure allowing for the detention on ships of those convicted for transportationbut, given the capacity of such vessels was necessarily limited,it could not be a permanent solution.1

This picture is, however, complicatedby a host of discussions thatwere held in the lead-up to the sending of a firstfleet of convictsin 1788, suggestingthat a range of other motives was at play. Australian historians have been fairly divided on the question of whether Botany Bay was indeed the result of a criminaljustice problem (Gonner,O'Brien, Roe, Clark,Atkinson),2 or whetherit was motivated by military/strategicconsiderations (Blainey, Frost),3or inspired by the trading opportunitiesit offered(Dallas, Fry, Martin).4These are the 3 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

'camps of opinion' identifiedby Ged Martinin a 1978 review of the debate, with a few more historiansweighing in by raisingobjections to each.5

I would argue thatthe distinctionbetween strategicand tradingconsiderations is of littlevalue in understandingan essentiallymercantilist apparatus, and thatthe prospect of trade with China has generally been vastly under-valued in this historiography. Dallas, however, did suggest a broad canvas of strategic interests,including the China trade,the South American trade,the furtrade, and whaling and sealing. 'It was the mercantilistage', he argued, and the First Fleet convicts were 'the servantsof mercantilistinterests'.6 Both H. T. Fry and Ged Martin also emphasised the China connection.

Even historianswho are consideredto be in the 'convict colony' camp of opinion have not, on the whole, been entirelycontent with that narrowview. E. C. K. Gonner concluded in 1888 that'those who sent [the expeditionin 1788] aimed at something more important than the mere foundation of a new criminal establishment'.7Michael Roe consideredthe sweep of clues hintingat the importance of trading and strategic considerations, but felt compelled to conclude only what the available documentary record allows - and the documentary record is geared towards the planning and execution of the project.8Alan Atkinsonwarns of takingthe intentions- and records- of government as indicative of the motor of British history when 'the moving forces were those of privateenterprise'. He cautions that in 'the City of London, the centre of Britain's world-wide trading interests, the party had no real authorityat all' and that partyideas 'generallydid not prevail at all in such vital places as the coffee houses and counting houses of the city,places intimately linked withBritain's overseas empire'.9

The debate over the foundingof Australia was most lively in the 1970s, but books are still being published and theses are still being writtenon the topic. The debate is far from over, despite an emerging weight of opinion that it derives its salience from a rather mono-cultural and Euro-centric view of Australian historyand eclipses the prior and continued occupancy of Australia by indigenous people. The debate is also taintedby the charge thatit continues the older historiographicaltradition of casting Australian historyas a branch of the British historyof empire. My view is that an examination of the British arrival in Australia can avoid all these pitfallsand make a useful contributionto seeing Australian history as part of a global dynamic with important antecedents,shifting the trade relations of indigenous peoples with the outside world long before 1788 intothe prominentplace which theydeserve.

4 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

CONVICT TRANSPORTATION

The British penal system was essentially mercantilist.Merchants to whom convicts were indentured met all expenses for their transportation,feeding, housing and medical care, and over 500 privateholding goals in Britainhoused them from conviction to transportation. Between the passing of the TransportationAct, 1718 and the AmericanWar of Independencein 1776, some 50,000 convicts were shipped to the Americancolonies. The numberof offences punishable by death (and convertible into transportationsentences) increased from around 50 to almost 200 in the period from 1688 to 1801. A harsh penal systemthat subjected minor offencesto extremepunishment went hand in glove with a useful and profitabledeployment of the cheap labourpool so created.

Not surprisingly,when the Bunbury-led House of Commons committee on transportation in 1779 recommended that one or more colonies might be established 'in distant parts of the globe' as a remedyto the problem with the hulks, it added that this 'may prove advantageousto navigationand commerce'.10 The committeesuggested Gambia (West Africa) or BotanyBay. The committee had the benefit of favourable advice from Sir who had accompanied, and helped to finance,'s firstPacific voyage in 1770. Banks' firstimpression of had been unfavourable.His journal recorded: 'A soil so barren, and at the same time entirelyvoid of the help derived fromcultivation, could not be supposed to yield muchto the supportof man.'11But by 1779 he had changed his mind: 'It was notto be doubted,that a large tract of land such as New Holland, which was largerthan the whole of Europe, would furnish matter of advantageous return.'12This is among the earliest positive assessments made by European eyewitnessesof Australia, a trulyremarkable change of heart.

There were many 'armchair strategists'who chose to ignorethe discouraging first-handevidence of travellers and speculated that a land as large as New Holland, and situated in temperatezones, simply must be valuable. They have now been vindicated, but opinion of the time was weighed against them. Although Banks' advice in 1779 is often cited as a crucial intervention,the Bunbury Committee did not lead to the establishmentof a colony in New Holland. Inquiries were made about suitable locations in Africa, but it was concluded that the prevalence of malaria would rendertransportation to Africa tantamountto a delayed capital punishment.13

5 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

COMPETING CLAIMS FOR AUSTRALIA

Several petitions forthe colonisation of New Holland had been discouraged in Holland and Britain even before Britain entered this field of interest with William Dampier's voyages in 1688 and 1699.14 For Britain,the voyages of Byron,Wallis, Carteretand Cook had shiftedinterest away fromfinding the Great South Land and towards the islands of the East Indies and the Pacific. Despite the 1605 Spanish passage throughTorres Straitby the Torres/deQuiros expedition, it was generally thoughtthat Australia and Papua New Guinea formeda single landmass, referredto as Java la Gande from 1530 to Drake's circumnavigationof Java in 1579, later Zuytlandt, and from 1644 as Nieuw Holland.

Three successive European nations had lain inchoate claim to what is now Australia,but none had followed theirclaims with any active presence. In the 1500s, Spain already claimed all unknownterritories south of the Spice Islands and, in 1605, de Quiros followed up by taking possession of Australia del Espíritu Santo as far as the south pole.15Dirk Hartog claimed a partof the westerncoast forHolland in 1616 and, in 1770, James Cook took possession of theeastern part of New Holland forGeorge III of England. At this timethe map of the yet poorly chartedAustralian continentwas dotted with names claiming Dutch sovereignty16and New Holland had recentlyalso been attractinginterest fromthe French.17

Britainhad asserted its maritimeprowess over Holland in the early 1650s but theEast Indies - the lucrativespice islands - remained firmlydominated by the Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC), the Dutch East India Company, formedin 1602, two years afterthe BritishEast India Company (BEIC). It was underthese conditionsthat New Holland excited the Britishimagination.

FOMENTING PLANS

During the 1780s, British merchants continued to press for the privilege of establishinga tradingstation or settlementin the area, but each time the idea was rejected in favour of maintaining the BEIC's trading monopoly which extendedfrom the Cape of Good Hope to the Straitsof Magellan (Cape Horn).

Lord North, as Home Secretary,rejected an application by James Matra for a tradingstation in the south-westPacific in 1783. Matra suggested it could be peopled by American loyalists, and settlersfrom nearby islands and China.18 WithLord Sydney installedas new Home Secretary,Matra at once renewed his lobbyingefforts in 1784, now incorporatingLord Sydney's idea of a convict 6 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

- colony. Admiral Sir George Young who had previously mooted a trading - settlementat Madagascar which was foiled in 1782 by the BEIC monopoly then collaborated with Matra, Lord Sandwich, Banks and Lord Mulgrave to submita proposal fora settlementat Botany Bay which he recommendedfor its equal ease of access to China, India and the coast of Africa. The plan reiterated that settlersmight be broughtfrom nearby islands and China, and it would be usefulfor settlingloyalists and convicts.This proposal underwenttwo revisions, de-emphasising trade and underliningthe convict idea, and emphasising the shipping routes which could supplythe new settlement,securing for the BEIC alternativeroutes from India to China withoutrelying on the Dutch East Indies. The proposal, in otherwords, was modifiedto accommodatea pressingproblem of the Home Secretary,responsible for prisons as well as colonies, and strategic concerns recentlyraised by the BEIC in the case of hostilitieswith Holland.19 Again the proposal was vetoed, by Alexander Dalrymple of the East India Company. Clearly the major source of resistance came fromthe BEIC's China interests.Alan Atkinson observes that each revision of the proposal placed China at a greaterdistance. In the firstproposal China was 'not morethan about seven hundred leagues away', in the second 'not more than a thousandleagues' distant,and in thethird 'about fifteenhundred leagues' distance.20

While the proposals fora privatelyfunded settlement were being considered in 1785, a furtherCommission of inquiryinto transportationwas convened under Lord Beauchamp. It concluded thatconvict transportation needed to be resumed but did not recommenda location, presumablybecause Young's proposals were still under consideration. Young's thirdproposal was printedin April 1785; Beauchamp's firstreport was issued in May; and, in July,the BEIC vetoed Young's proposal. Two weeks later Beauchamp released a second report suggestingDas Voltas Bay on the south-westcoast of Africa,outside the BEIC's jurisdiction.21

In August of the following year, afterfurther inquiries had foundDas Voltas Bay unsuitable, Lord Sydney issued instructionsto the admiraltyto prepare a fleetto transportconvicts to Botany Bay. What motivessettled the issue in great hurryremain, in the absence of historicalrecords to disclose them,veiled. A great uproar in the British press immediatelycommenced to probe into the reasons why, of all the bountifulplaces known in the world, Botany Bay had been chosen, where only one explorer'sparty had spentnine days and had found it 'ratherbarren' and unpromising.22

7 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

THE CHINA TRADE IN THE EUROPEAN EYE

As far as Europeans were concerned, Canton was opened fortrade in 1757, and quickly became well enmeshed in a trading networkof European, Malay and Chinese traffic.From 1759, Alexander Dalrymple of the BEIC startedto push for a concertedeffort to graftonto this trade by establishinga portto compete with the Dutch at Batavia, within easy reach of perahus (Malay boats) and Chinese junks. Balambangan, between Palawan and NorthBorneo, was selected as a suitable site but both attemptsat such a settlement(1772-74 and 1803-05) failed.23

Dallas observes that the BEIC's China trade had received a great boost after Cook's second voyage showed an alternative route to India, bypassing the hazardous Sunda Straits. Cook's third voyage, completed afterhis death by LieutenantJames King, resulted in 'news of immense wealth in furs,forests and fisheries'.King had sold £2,000 worth of fursin Canton.24The Pacific Rim was just emergingas an attractivewhaling and sealing area, with China as the main marketfor South Pacific seal skins.25South Pacific sealing underlicence from the BEIC was to begin in 1791, and was indeed so successful thatthe Chinese market for seal skin became glutted within a few years and other uses were developed such as hat-makingand seal oil.26

John Ward roundly considers the China trade the 'inner citadel' of the BEIC's South Pacific trading interests,which prevented the establishmentof a British settlementin the South Pacific until 1786.27 China was 'themost jealously guarded of the Company's monopoly markets' and 'the greatestobstacle in the way of developmentof British interestsin the Pacific had been the monopolyof the Company'.28It had quashed Sir George Young's plans fora settlementat Madagascar in 1782, as well as plans in 1785 to settle Norfolk Island, when Alexander Dalrymple predicted that such a colony 'would become the base of piratical excursions against the islands and the coast of China, where the East 29 India Companyenjoyed a rich trade'.

Michael Roe, too, finds thatthe Company was 'ever fearfulof the development of an extra-monopolytrade with China'.30As a result,the Britishconvict colony at Botany Bay was severely limited in its capacity to trade and transport.In order not to antagonise the BEIC, all goods and transportshad to be conducted on BEIC vessels, and shipbuilding was prohibited. Intercoursewith the East India Companysettlements and China was expresslyforbidden.31

8 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

THE CHINA TRADE AND THE CONVICT COLONY

The vessels transportingconvicts to the governmentsettlement were privately owned, eitherby the BEIC or underlicence agreementwith it, and the transport of convicts was only part of the purpose of theirjourneys. Even some of the First Fleet vessels, afterdepositing their cargo of convicts at Botany Bay in 1788, proceeded to Canton to purchase tea.32Vessels used to transportconvicts became attractedby the abundance of sperm whales offthe New South Wales coast and whaling began in the south-westPacific as a result, drawing British vessels fromthe EasternPacific as well as American and otherforeign vessels.33

Tea and silk were highlydesirable productsfrom China but the Chinese market forBritish goods was small. New South Wales was beset by a huge trading deficitat any rate in its trade with Britain,but Dorothy Shineberg has calculated thattea importsfrom China alone exceeded the value of all exportearnings from wool, oil, hides, horns,seal skins,and timber.Tea was partof the weekly rations of governmentofficers and was one of the largest importitems between 1825 and 1830.34Sandalwood and trepang,on the otherhand, founda readymarket in China. Consequently, the islands of the Pacific became the third leg in an emergingtrading triangle. Trepang, a holothurianalso known as beche-de-mer (fromthe Portuguese bicho di mar) and in China as hai-sen, became translated intoEnglish in the eighteenthcentury as 'swallo'.35

While the colony was under severe restrictionsso as not to violate the BEIC's tradingmonopoly, trade between the islands and the new colony was permitted and the colony was firmlyorientated towards the sea. 'The maritimeindustries, based on the Australian coast and the islands, and the island industriessuch as sandalwood and trepangoffered excellent prospects and were developed with considerablerapidity.'36 Sandalwood tradingtook offin 1804, startingwith Fiji and Tonga (then referredto as the FriendlyIslands).

These island products were not for domestic use but attractivefor the China trade.Once landed in Sydney, the goods had to await BEIC transport.British and colonial traderswere at a great disadvantage compared to 'neutral'(foreign, including American) vessels that were not affected by the BEIC monopoly. Governor King made two urgent approaches in 1806, pleading that the new colony ought to have access to the China trade, exporting sealskins, trepang, sandalwood and other colonial produce.37The BEIC, however,resisted any move to release the colony from the confines of a single penal settlement. Consequently,King was forced to especially forbid intercoursewith China.38 Joseph Banks then lent his influential support to the idea of commercial developmentof the colony, suggestingthat colonial ships 'should be allowed to navigate freelyto the northernmostextremity' of Australia, but he discouraged 9 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 the idea of tradingto China and engaging in the trepangtrade.39 Presumably, he was keenly aware of the BEIC's resistance, and sought to pursue ways of expanding the commerce of the colony withoutstriking too directlyat the BEIC.

No amount of protection and diplomacy could eventually save the BEIC's outdated monopoly in the face of thrivingtrade. Concessions which eroded the BEIC's monopoly rights were at firstmade for whaling and sealing (in 1798, - 1802, 1803 and 1811) until, in 1813, the company having had to borrow - money fromthe government 'lost practicallythe whole of its monopoly rights save in the China trade and in tea (the main productof the China trade)'.40The China monopoly was finallyabolished in 1833 and sandalwood tradingtook off in earnest.41

THE CHINA-AUSTRALIA TRADE WITHOUT EUROPEANS

But well beforethe establishmentof a Britishcolony, the trepangtrade formed an important historical link between Australia and China. It existed quite independentlyof the British and perhaps also independentlyof any European involvement,despite its centralorchestration from the old Portugueseharbour of Makassar and the strongDutch interestin the long-standingtrading networks of a region which have been 'little understood' in Australia.42Governor King's urgentrequests were merely an attemptto graftonto an already lively trade 'at the northernmostextremity' of the continent,powered by Chinese demand for trepang.

A regular annual trade was conducted by the seafarersof Sulawesi (formerly Celebes) between Timor, Makassar, Kayu Jawa (the Kimberley coast of Western Australia) and Marege (the northcoast of ArnhemLand). Vessels were crewed by Bugis fromnorth Celebes and Makassans fromthe south, and often under command of a Chinese merchant.Practically all Australian trepangwas exportedto China.43

It is not entirelycertain when or why theyturned their attentions to the northern coast of New Holland. Britishand Dutch sources make referenceto the China- Makassar-Australia trading triangle only from the 1750s, and then with increasing frequency.This may indicate the beginningof a regular trade, or it may indicate the awakening of a colonial interestin it. Campbell Charles Macknight, who has produced the most extensiveand authoritativestudy of the Australian trepangtrade to date, dates this developmentto between 1650 and 1700.44 Othersfavour an even longertimeframe of culturecontact between Yolgnu people of Arnhem Land and the archipelago,based on anthropological and archaeological evidence.45Still, as faras a tradingtriangle with China is 10 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

concerned,no credible doubt has yet been cast on the accuracy of Macknighťs estimate.

The earliestreliable evidence of a tradingjourney to northAustralia is datedas 1751. A Chinese traderconducted the voyage. He set out fromTimor 'to see if he could reach the large sand-platebeyond Rotti,to search forturtle-horn'. (Roti is a small island off the southwesterntip of Timor.) Reportingthe journey,the Dutch Resident of Timor did not creditthe Chinese with a voyage of discovery or exploration,but statedthat 'afterfive days sailing before the wind and two days and nights having drifted',he reached a southern coast where he met indigenous people. 'Though said Chinese took it for a large island, we do not doubt or it will have been the mainlandcoast of the Southland.'46

This news, when it eventuallyreached Amsterdam,sparked greatinterest in the VOC. The directors requested more information,but by this time a new Timorese resident had been appointed who could furnishno furtherdetails. Batavia recapitulatedthat the journey to the land south-eastof Timor was 'made now and then from Timor and Makassar, but produces so far as we know nothingbut trepang,being dried jelly-fish,and wax'.47 To referto trepangas driedjellyfish suggests littleacquaintance withthe details of the trade.A further VOC exploration was sent to the Southland in 1756, under Captain Gozal in command of Rijder and Buis, but could not contributeanything on the trepang trade. Yet only a few years later,Alexander Dalrymple (1759, see above) was aware of a regularBugis tradeto the 'Southland'.

Withinless than fiftyyears, a considerable industryappeared which could no longer be overlooked by colonial observers. By the early 1800s, at least 30 varietiesof trepang were traded at Makassar, most destined forsale in southern China.48By 1820, trepanghad become the largestexport from the Dutch East Indies to China, next to pepper.49How did thisindustry come about?

During the early seventeenth century, Celebes was fracturedinto several principalities, with Gowa and Tallo' in the southwest and Boni, Wajo' and Soppeng in the centraland east. As the Dutch startedto gain ascendancy in the East Indies, Makassar became an attractivealternative port forBritish, Danish, Malay, Indian, and Javanesevessels. The kingdomof Gowa on the southwestof Celebes rapidly expanded its political and militarypower at the expense of neighbouring kingdoms. The Dutch (assisted by the Rajah of Boni) finally defeated it in a decisive sea battle at Buton in 1667 and the port city was ransacked in 1669. The Dutch restrictedthe direct trafficfrom Canton and Amoy to Makassar to one journeyper year.50

11 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

Macknight thinksthat the throttlingof the Makassar trade by the Dutch after 1667 may have stimulateda greaterconcentration on voyages to northAustralia which did not relyon trading importedcommodities, but focused on productive activities,such as trepangfishing, which required a large workforcefor on-the- spot processing.Makassan oral historyalso suggests that at the battleof Buton some perahus escaped to the Gulf of Carpentaria and theircrews lived there for a considerableperiod.51

It was not until 1820 that the Dutch trading restrictionswere lifted and the trafficbetween China and Makassar increased (or recovered). But Chinese residentmerchants, or taukeh, like the one who voyaged fromTimor in 1751, were presentin the archipelago throughoutthis time. When called in 1803, the European population of Kupang had been reduced by recent hostilities with the British to three Dutchmen (the governor,a surgeon and a 'young gentleman'), a Swiss sergeant-major, two or three soldiers, and 'no merchants':'What may be called the trade of Coepang is mostly carried on by the Chinese, some of whom are settled in the town, and have intermixedwith the Malays.' They traded sandalwood, beeswax, honey and slaves, mostly to Batavia, and imported rice, arrack, sugar, tea, coffee, betelnut, 'and the manufacturesof China, with some fromIndia and Europe'.52

The taukeh participatednot only in the Dutch-controlled importand export trade; they were also well enmeshed in the distributivetrade of the archipelago which bypassed European dominance. Chinese tradinggoods were described by Captain Thomas Forrestin 1775:

The Chinese provided iron tools, chopping knives, axes, blue and red cloth, China beads, plates and bowls, receiving in returnMisoy bark, slaves, ambergris,trepang, tortoise-shell small pearls, black parrotsand large red parrots, birds-of-paradise, and many kinds of dead birds, dried in a particularway.53

The trading goods of the islands were 'tortoise-shell, mother-of-pearls,sea- shells, coral, seaweed (agar-agar), various kinds of dried shell-fish,birds' nests, mangrove bark and wood, roots for dyeing, honey, beeswax, eaglewood and dammar'.54The Aru Islands were among the tradingbases forthis inter-island trade.By 1825, about 30 perahus traded fromMakassar to Aru each year,and in 1841 the visitingfleet carried some 5,000 persons on 'four or five ships and brigs and a numberof prows'. On theirdeparture they left'some dozen Chinese and about 300 Bugis and Makassars' on the island.55

Despite the wide range of trading goods of interest to the taukeh, trepang became the major trading item. Macknight observes that Chinese imports of 12 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 trepang from Southeast Asia did not commence before the late seventeenth century.He believes thatthe oldest referenceto trepang in China ( hai-su ) was the Shi-wu pen-t'sao in the sixteenthcentury.56 Earlier medical works by Li Shih-chen(1552 and 1578) make no referenceto it whereas, by the seventeenth century,there are frequentreferences to trepangin Chinese literature,even in poetry. It may be assumed, then,that in the late seventeenthcentury Chinese demand fortrepang was growingsufficiently to seek new sources of supply.

The trepangtrade to China exerted a transformativeinfluence on trade and power in the archipelago. A large Makassan population settled at Sumbawa island in order to trade to the Kimberley region 500 miles distant, while observers of the maritime people of southernCelebes, Luang island east of Timor, and Fordate in the Tanimbar Islands, commented in 1825 and 1839 that trepangingwas the major economic activityon these islands. This suggests a shift froma subsistence economy to specialised commodity production. For Makassans, too, trepangingbecame 'theircentral concern'.57

Going by the only figuresavailable, China importedon average over 900 tons of trepang(1868-72) fromforeign vessels, and over 500 tons (in 1871) in Chinese vessels. 'If these statisticsare even approximatelyright it means that around the middle of the nineteenthcentury the northAustralian coast was supplying a significant part of the total China market', perhaps a quarter or more, supplementedby importsfrom south-east Asia, and possibly Japan.58Chinese demand was clearly the driving force behind Australia's engulfment in the trepangtrade.

THE POLITICAL IMPACT OF THE TREPANG TRADE IN AUSTRALIA

During his circumnavigationof the continentin 1802-03, Matthew Flinders was surprised to find a fleet of Makassan trepangers in the islands of northeast Arnhem Land. The diary of this voyage conveys a sense of foreboding as wreckage and signs of foreign visits were first encountered in the Gulf of Carpentaria.Pieces of pottery,scraps of blue calico frompantaloons, and 'such hats as are worn by the Chinese' from palm leaves stitched with cotton, suggested to Flinders that the visitors were Chinese. That the discovery of foreign contact was considered to be significant is clear from the detailed attentionthat it is afforded in an account of almost unrelieved monotony, consisting of bearings and measurementsand the naming of landmarks for orientation.Flinders' surpriseat meetingforeign visitors was matched by their astonishmenton hearing of a British settlementat Port Jackson. They were

13 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 coming every year and were familiarenough withthe area to give Flinderssome advice on dealing withthe Yolgnu people inhabitingthe north coast.

Flinders extracted as much informationas possible fromthe commanderof the fleet, and afterwards lost little time in heading straightfor Kupang, a port scarcely able to provision the ship, but able to shed some furtherlight on the trafficto New Holland. The returnjourney proceededwith great speed and little time for coastal survey on a rottingship.59 Upon his return,Flinders proposed the name of 'Australia' forthe whole continentto replace"New Holland'. Perhaps the meeting of strangershad underlinedthe need to symbolically re-createthe continentunder Britishauspices.

Flinders' estimate of the commencementof the tradeto northAustralia remains the most conservative. He understoodthe trade to have commenced in about 1783, though Brown's journal of the same voyage implies that Flinders' informant,Poobassoo, commencedjourneying to Australiaat thattime, not that the trade itself then commenced. Other early observerstended to lend greater antiquity to the trade. A 1911 estimate by customs collector Alfred Searcey ('about two centuries') puts the commencementat about 1700, whereas the French navigator Dumont d'Urville in 1837 thoughtthat it 'doubtlesslypreceded the Dutch'.60

At the same time as Flinders, a French expedition with Nicholas Baudin in command of Geographe was plying the northernwaters and found Makassans fishingfor trepang on the Kimberleycoast. They learnedthat 'the existence of the continenthad been known fora long time' butthat regular voyaging to it was of recentorigin, stimulatedby increasingChinese demandfor trepang.61This is the backdrop against which both GovernorKing and JosephBanks became keen on extendingthe Port Jacksontrade into the north.

Continuing Flinders' work, Philip Parker King on Mermaid (181 8-2 1) found furtherevidence of recent trepang fishing activities in the Kimberley, at VansittartBay near Long Island and on Jar island southof the bay. He found a woman at Melville Island beckoning in what appeared to be Portuguese language ('ven aça, ven aça' - come here) suggestinga long-standingcontact with Timor. Soon after his report,and even beforethe western half of New Holland was claimed forthe British(in 1829), a Britishdrive to northAustralia commenced in an attemptto graftonto thisexisting trade.

Singapore, established as a British free trade port in 1819, became a spectacularly successful tradingpost, attractingmuch trade fromMakassar. It served as an inspirationfor a similarendeavour in northAustralia. In the hope thata northernport could attractMakassan trade and become the basis of 'trade 14 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 with the Celebes, Moluccas and other eastern islands and ultimately with China',62three successive outpostswere establishedon the farnorthern coast: Fort Dundas on Melville Island (1824-29), Fort Wellington at Raffles Bay on Cobourg Peninsula (1827-29) and 'Victoria' at Port Essington on Cobourg Peninsula (1838-49). They were all unsuccessful in attractingthe Makassan fleets fortrade, but the implicationis that the Yolgnu-Makassan-Chinese trade expedited the Britishclaim over the whole continentand made it a more urgent, and more promising,prospect.

It also had an impact on the Yolgnu people of northeastArnhem Land. As a result of theirlong-standing contact with outsiders, Yolgnu people were better prepared than were Aborigines elsewhere to withstandthe onslaughtof British colonisation. They had been exposed to smallpox, yaws and venereal disease, to firearms,tobacco and alcohol. They had a foreign language that was able to overcome regional differences,and they had been coping with the presence of strangerswith whom they enteredinto barteringrelationships but with whom they also had occasional clashes. Yolgnu people had been overseas, some had lived in Makassar for years, and some Makassans had lived with them and married into local families.63Yolgnu today will say about Makassans that'we are one people'.

The traces of Makassan contactin Yolgnu materialculture, ritual and lore are so profoundthat a number of anthropologistsand archaeologists have favoured a much longer timeframeof contactthan the documentaryrecord supports. John Mulvaney has described the impact of this contact on Yolgnu society as 'all pervading'.64The weight of archaeological evidence suggests considerable lifestyle changes as a result of this contact, with larger groups, drawn to the coasts and islands, placing a greateremphasis on the more permanentmarine resources, and characterised by decreased mobility and seasonality. It is presumed that the introduction of dugout canoes and hunting technology suitable formarine mammals facilitatedthis lifestyle.That tradingintensified is suggested by the presence of non-local stone artefactsin post-contactmiddens. The radiocarbon dating of artefactsfrom several sites suggests externalcontact up to 800BP. Pondering the divergence between the historical and archaeological evidence, Anne Clarke thinks that 'the long archaeological chronology of Macassan contact is as likely as the short, documentary chronology'.65

How ancient the contact between the East Indies and northAustralia might be remains uncertain.It is certain,however, that the Chinese demand for trepang involved the northernparts of Australia in an extensive tradingnetwork which emerged before the arrival of the British in 1788. This networkboosted the

15 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1.pp.3- 19

Dutch position in the East Indies and temptedthe Britishinto emulation.It also stimulatedthe Britishembrace of the whole continent.

CONCLUSION

The China trade was an importantconsideration in the deliberations over the establishment of Botany Bay and, once the colony was established at Port Jackson, it again came into prominent concern with the emergence of new tradingnetworks grating against the jealously guardedmonopoly over the China trade and the discovery of old ones. It must be concluded that the China trade impacted on early Australianhistory in a numberof importantways. It delayed the establishmentof a British colony in the south-westPacific and caused a confinementof the settlementwithin the parametersof a penal colony out of considerationfor the BEIC tradingmonopoly. It also enhanced the attractionof Pacific trading to secure produce for China, and eventually powered the commercial expansion of the colony. The lively trade with northernAustralia out of Makassar and supplyingChina made it seem both desirable and feasible to establishBritish hegemony over the entirecontinent.

Taken together, this makes for a rather strong Chinese imprint on early Australian history,but it is necessary to consult quite specialised sources to reach this conclusion. It is not that Australianhistorians have been unawareof either the trade that linked northAustralia to China before the coming of the British, or of the importanceof the China trade in the 1780s. But, in Belich's words, as it did not extend British history,it was not rememberedvery hard.66 Those who are more interestedin Australianthan in British historymay trya little harder,and seriously consider the trade relationsof indigenous people as part and parcel of our nationalhistory.

GriffithUniversity Regina Ganter

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authorwishes to acknowledgethe assistance of the Australian Research Council for this research,and the generous advice of C.C. Macknight.This article first appeared in Henry Chan,Ann Curthoys and Nora Chiang (eds), TheOverseas Chinese in Australasia: History, Settlementand Interactions, National Taiwan University, 2001. REFERENCES

1 The 1776Hulks Act in fact remained in forceuntil 1857. E.C.K. Gönner,'The Settlement ofAustralia', English Historical Review, vol.3, 1888, 16 TheGreat Circle Chinaand the Beginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 pp.625-643;E.M. O'Brien,The Foundation of Australia, 1786-1800: a studyin English criminalpractice and penal colonization in the eighteenth century, Angus and Robertson, Sydney,1950; Michael Roe, 'Australia's Place in the Swing to the East', 1788-1810', HistoricalStudies , vol.8, 1957-59, pp.202-213; Manning Clark, Historical Studies , vol.9, 1960,pp.22 1-232; Alan Atkinson, 'Whigs and Tories and Botany Bay', Journal of the Royal AustralianHistorical , vol.62,1976, 3 Society pp.73-90. GeoffreyBlainey, 'Botany Bay or GothamCity?', Australian Economic History Review , vol.8,1968, pp. 154- 163 (the journal carried a debatebetween Blainey and Geoffrey Bolton); AlanFrost, 'The Choice of Botany Bay: thescheme to supplythe East Indies with naval stores',Australian Econmomic History Review , vol.15, 1975, pp. 1-20 (the journal carried a debatebetween Alan Frost and Ged 4 Martin). K.M. Dallas,'The First Settlements inAustralia: considered in relation to sea-power in worldpolities', Tasman Historical Research Association Papers 1952 , no.3,p. 12 (thejournal followedup with an articleby Michael Roe); H.T. Fry,'Cathay and the Way Thither: the backgroundto BotanyBay', Historical Studies , vol.14, 1969-71, pp.497-510 (published after articlesby Shaw and Blainey); Ged Martin,'The Alternatives toBotany Bay', University of NewcastleHistorical Journal , vol.3, 1975, pp.1 1-26 (followed by a numberof articles in otherjournals by the same author in 1975and 1976). 5 G. Martin(ed.), TheFounding of Australia: the arguments about Australia's origins , Hale 6 Iremonger,Marrickville, 1978. Dallas,in Martin, Founding of Australia, pp.40-41. Gonner,in Martin, Australia, 8 Foundingof p.37. Roe,in Martin, Australia, 60. 9 Foundingof p. Atkinson,in Martin, Founding of Australia, pp.200, 186, 187. Citedin Christopher Harding et al., ImprisonmentinEngland and Wales:a concise history, Croom Helm, London, 1985, p.100. J.D.Hooker (ed.), Journal of the Rt. Hon. Sir Joseph Banks, London, 1896, p.298. Q.G. Mackaness,Sir Joseph Banks , Sydney,1936, p. 19. Gonner,in Martin, Founding of Australia, p.32. Courteenpetitioned King James I in 1624to be allowedto setup a colonyin Terra Australisbut was giventitle to the island of Barbados instead. G. Collingridge,The Discovery Australia,Golden Press, 1989(1895), and270-71. of15 Sydney, pp.295-99 Ibid.,pp.156, 310. Theclaims were over Eendraghtsland onthe west coast, claimed by Dirk Hartog as captain ofEendraght in 1616;Leeuwinland at CapeLeeuwin (lioness), claimed by Leeuwin in 1542; PeterNuyts Land, claimed by the crew of Guide Zeepaert at the eastern end of the Great AustralianBight in 1627;de WittsLand at 21 degreesouth, claimed by Gerrit de Witton Vianenin 1628;and van Diemen's Land, claimed by commodore Abel Tasman on Heemskerk andZeehean in 1642. 271,272, 273, 279, 280, 288. 17 Collingridge,Discovery, pp.261, In 1772,an expeditionunder St Alouarnon GrosVentre examined part of the Kimberley coaston theway from Shark Bay to Timor,and in 1788a Frenchfleet arrived at BotanyBay a dayafter the British. C. Clement,'Pre-settlement Intrusion into the East Kimberley', EKAIP WorkingPaper No. 24, CRES, ANU, 1987,p. 12. HRNSWI part2, pp.1-6, cited in Alan Atkinson 'Whigs and Tories and Botany Bay', in Martin, Australia, 191. 19 Foundingof p. Ibid., 192ff. 20 p. Ibid.,p.l94. Atkinsonobserves that the Cape also gained in distance through the revisions, eitherto emphasizethe isolation of the location as a suitableconvict settlement, orto suggest less interferencewith the BEIC's monopoly.Young followed up with the idea of a private 17 TheGreat Circle ReginaGanter Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19 commercialsettlement atNorfolk Island and, in 1793,renewed his idea ofa settlementat In 1788, againrequested a lease forNorfolk Island. Ibid., p. 199. 21Madagascar. Young Ibid.,p.l97ff. W.J.L.Wharton (ed.). CaptainCook's Journal, London, 1893, pp.3 17-325, cited in John Ward,British Policy in the South Pacific , Australasian Publishing Company, Sydney, 1948, p.3. 3 Fry,in Martin, Founding of Australia, p.1 37ff. Dallas,in Martin, Founding of Australia, p.42. Ward,British Policy, p. 16. 26 Ibid., 27 p.6. Ibid, 28 p.9. Ibid., 10. 29 p. Ibid,p. 11. 30 Roe,in Martin, Founding of Australia, p.60. 31 Instructionsto Phillip, HRNWS I (2),p.91, in Ward,British Policy , p.9. 32 MarianDiamond, 'Tea andSympathy: foundations of the Australia/China trading networks'in ReginaGanter (ed.), Asians in Australian History - QueenslandReview, vol.6, no.2,1999, 33 p.24. Ward,British Policy, pp. 1 4- 1 5 . DorothyShineberg, They Came for Sandalwood: a studyof the sandalwood trade in the south-westPacific 1830-1865, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, 1967. 35 C.C. Macknight,The Voyage to Marege: Macassan trepangers in Northern Australia , Melbourne Press,Melbourne, 1976, pp. 6-7. 36 University Ward,British 13. 37 Policy,p. to Hobart,14/8/1804 and 20/12/1804, HRA I, v, pp.8-9,202-203. 38King HRNSWVI, pp.109ff, summarized inWard, British Policy, p.25. 39Ibid. 40 Ibid,pp. 19-21. 41 Ibid., and Sandalwood. 42 p.27 Shineberg, Macknight,Voyage to Marege, p. 1 1 . 43 Ibid.,p.12. 44 Ibid.,p.97. 45 D.F. Thomson,Economic Structure and the Ceremonial Exchange Cycle in Arnhem Land, Macmillan,Melbourne, 1949; Ronald and Catherine Berndt, Arnhem Land: itshistory and its people, Cheshire,Melbourne, 1954; Lloyd Warner, A BlackCivilization: social stud'> of an Australiantribe, Harper and Roe, Chicago, 1958; Ian Crawford,'Late Prehistoric Changes in AboriginalCultures in Kimberley, Western Australia', PhD thesis,University of London, 1969;Anne Clarke, 'The "Moormans Trowsers": Macassan and Aboriginal interactions and thechanging fabric of indigenous social life', Modern Quaternary Research in South East Asia,no. 16, pp.3 15-335; Peter Spillett, 'A Race Apart:notes on the Sama Bajo peopleof Sulawesi,Nusa Tenggara Timor and Northern Australia', Darwin, unpublished. 46 WillemRobert, The Dutch Explorations, 1605-1756, of the North and NorthwestCoast of Australia, Philo Press, Amsterdam, 1973, pp. 146- 149. 47 GovernorGeneral of DEIC, Batavia,1754, in Macknight,Voyage to Marege,p.95. 48 Ibid, 40. 49 pp.1, D.J.Mulvaney The Prehistory ofAustalia, Penguin, Ringwood, 1975 (1969), pp.25-28. See alsoJohn Crawford, A History of the Indian Archipelago, Edinburg, 1820, vol.3, p.441, citedin Macknight, Voyage to Marege, p. 14. 50 Macknight,Voyage to Marege, pp.8-9. 18 TheGreat Circle Chinaand theBeginning of Australian History. Vol 25. No 1. pp.3-19

51 Macknight'sinformant gave conflictinginformation, suggesting that they lived there for 25 or returnedafter a fewmonths. Ibid., 96. years,~ p. MatthewFlinders, A Voyageto TerraAustralis, Nicol, London, 1814, p.255. T. ForrestA Voyageto New Guineaand the Moluccas , p. 106, cited in Macknight, Voyage to , 13. 54Marege p. to , 14,based on workon sea-nomads. 55 Macknight,Voyage Marege p. Sopher's Ibid.,p. 13. Accordingto adviceby Prof Wang Gungwu to Macknight, this work no longer exists as translated in Ibid., 7. except57 excerpts Japanese. p. Ibid., 58 p.14-15. Ibid.,p. 16. 59 Flinders,Voyage to TerraAustralis. Macknight,Voyage to Marege, p. 162. Peronand de Freycinet,Voyages de Découvertes, vol.2, 1816, p.248, cited in Crawford, 'Late 62 prehistoricchanges', p.98. WilliamBarns, cited in Alan Powell,Far Country- a shorthistory of the Northern Melbourne Press,Melbourne, 1988, 63Territory, University p.47. Macknight.Voyage to Marege , p. 86-89;Michael Cooke, 'Makassar and Northeast Arnhem Land:missing links and living bridges' , Batchelor College, N.T., July 1987; Peter Spillett 'A Race Apart'. Mulvaney,Prehistory, p.39. Clarke,'The "Moormans Trowsers'", p.328. JamesBelich, Making Peoples: a historyof the New Zealanders from Polynesian settlementtothe end of the nineteenth century, University ofHawaii Press, Honolulu, 1996, p.xx.

19