The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia 1606-1765 Part 1

The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia 1606-1765.

by J. E. Heeres.

INTRODUCTION.

{Page i}

I.

OCCASION AND OBJECT OF THE PRESENT WORK.

In writing my biography of Tasman, forming part of Messrs. Frederik Muller and Co.'s edition of the Journal of Tasman's celebrated voyage of discovery of 1642-1643, I was time and again struck by the fact that the part borne by the Netherlanders in the discovery of the continent of Australia is very insufficiently known to the Dutch themselves, and altogether misunderstood or even ignored abroad. Not only those who with hypercritical eyes scrutinise, and with more or less scepticism as to its value, a.n.a.lyse whatever evidence on this point is submitted to them, but those others also who feel a profound and sympathetic interest in the historical study of the remarkable voyages which the Netherlanders undertook to the South-land, are almost invariably quite insufficiently informed concerning them. This fact is constantly brought home to the student who consults the more recent works published on the subject, and who fondly hopes to get light from such authors as CALVERT, COLLINGRIDGE, NORDENSKIOLD, RAINAUD and others. Such at least has time after time been my own case. Is it wonderful, therefore, that, while I was engaged in writing Tasman's life, the idea occurred to me of republishing the doc.u.ments relating to this subject, preserved in the State Archives at the Hague--the repository of the archives of the famous General Dutch Chartered East-India Company extending over two centuries (1602-1800)--and in various other places? I was naturally led to lay before Messrs.

Frederik Muller and Co. the question, whether they would eventually undertake such a publication, and I need hardly add that these gentlemen, to whom the historical study of Dutch discovery has repeatedly been so largely indebted, evinced great interest in the plan I submitted to them.[*]

[* See my Life of Tasman, p. 103, note 10.]

Meanwhile the Managing Board of the Royal Geographical Society of the Nether lands had resolved to publish a memorial volume on the occasion of the Society's twenty-fifth anniversary. Among the plans discussed by the Board was the idea of having the doc.u.ments just referred to published at the expense of the Society. The name of jubilee publication could with complete justice be bestowed on a work having for its object once more to throw the most decided and fullest possible light on achievements of our forefathers in the 17th and 18th century, in a form that would appeal to foreigners no less than to native readers. An act of homage to our ancestors, therefore, a modest one certainly, but one inspired by the same feeling which in 1892 led Italy and the Iberian Peninsula to celebrate the memory of the discoverer of America, and in 1898 prompted the Portuguese to do homage to the navigator who first showed the world the sea-route to India.

{Page ii}

How imperfect and fragmentary even in our days is the information generally available concerning the part borne by the Netherlanders in the discovery of the fifth part of the world, may especially be seen from the works of foreigners. This, I think, must in the first place, though not, indeed, exclusively, be accounted for by the rarity of a working acquaintance with the Dutch tongue among foreign students. On this account the publication of the doc.u.ments referred to would very imperfectly attain the object in view, unless accompanied by a careful translation of these pieces of evidence into one of the leading languages of Europe; and it stands to reason that in the case of the discovery of Australia the English language would naturally suggest itself as the most fitting medium of information[*]. So much to account for the bilingual character of the jubilee publication now offered to the reader.

[* The English translation is the work of Mr. C. Stoffel, of Nijmegen.]

Closely connected with this consideration is another circ.u.mstance which has influenced the mode of treatment followed in the preparation of this work. The defective acquaintance with the Dutch language of those who have made the history of the discovery of Australia the object of serious study, or even, in the case of some of them, their total ignorance of it, certainly appears to me one, nay even the most momentous of the causes of the incomplete knowledge of the subject we are discussing; but it cannot possibly be considered the only cause, if we remember that part of the doc.u.mentary evidence proving the share of the Netherlanders in the discovery of Australia has already been given to the world through the medium of a leading European tongue.

In 1859 R. H. MAJOR brought out his well-known book _Early Voyages to Terra Australis, now called Australia_, containing translations of some of the archival pieces and of other doc.u.ments pertaining to the subject.

And though, from P. A. LEUPE'S work, ent.i.tled _De Reizen der Nederlanders naar het Juidland of Nzeuw-Holland in de 17e en 18e eeuw_, published in 1868, and from a book by L. C. D. Van Dijk, brought out in the same year in which MAJOR'S work appeared, and ent.i.tled _Twee togten naar de golf van Carpentaria_; though, I say, from these two books it became evident that MAJOR'S work was far from complete, still it cannot be denied that he had given a great deal, and what he had given, had in the English translation been made accessible also to those to whom Dutch was an unknown tongue. This circ.u.mstance could not but make itself felt in my treatment of the subject, since it was quite needless to print once more in their entirety various doc.u.ments discussed by MAJOR. There was the less need for such republication in cases which would admit of the results of Dutch exploratory voyages being exhibited in the simplest and most effective way by the reproduction of charts made in the course of such voyages themselves: these charts sometimes speak more clearly to the reader than the circ.u.mstantial journals which usually, though not always, are of interest for our purpose only by specifying the route followed, the longitudes and lat.i.tudes taken, and the points touched at by the voyagers. These considerations have in some cases led me only to mention certain doc.u.ments, without printing them in full, and the circ.u.mstance that my Tasman publication has been brought out in English, will sufficiently account for the absence from this work of the journal of Tasman's famous expedition of 1642/3.[*]

[* I would have the present work considered as forming one whole with my Tasman publication and with the fascicule of _Remarkable Maps_, prepared by me, containing the Nolpe-Dozy chart of 1652-3 (Cf. my Life of Tasman, pp. 75 f). Together they furnish all the most important pieces of evidence discovered up to now, for the share which the Netherlanders have had in the discovery of Australia.]

{Page iii}

The doc.u.ments, here either republished or printed for the first time, are all of them preserved in the State Archives at the Hague[*], unless otherwise indicated. They have been arranged under the heads of the consecutive expeditions, which in their turn figure in chronological order. This seemed to me the best way to enable readers to obtain a clear view of the results of the exploratory voyages made along the coasts of Australia by the Netherlanders of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

[* My best thanks are due to Jhr. Th. Van Riemsdijk, LL. D., Princ.i.p.al Keeper, and to Dr. T. H. Colenbrander, a.s.sistant-Keeper, of the State Archives of the Hague.]

For this and this only, was the object I had in view in selecting the materials for the present work: once more, as completely and convincingly as I could, to set forth the part borne by the Netherlanders in the discovery of the fifth part of the world. I have not been actuated by any desire to belittle the achievements of other nations in this field of human activity. The memorial volume here presented to the reader aims at nothing beyond once more laying before fellow-countrymen and foreigners the _doc.u.mentary evidence_ of Dutch achievement in this field; perhaps I may add the wish that it may induce other nations to follow the example here given as regards. .h.i.therto unpublished doc.u.ments of similar nature.

Still, it would be idle to deny that it was with a feeling of national pride that in the course of this investigation I was once more strengthened in the conviction that even at this day no one can justly gainsay MAJOR'S a.s.sertion on p. Lx.x.x of his book, that "the first authenticated discovery of any part of the great Southland" was made in 1606 by a Dutch schip the Duifken. All that is a.s.serted regarding a so-called previous discovery of Australia has no foundation beyond mere surmise and conjecture. Before the voyage of the ship Duifken all is an absolute blank.

II.

CHRONOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE DUTCH DISCOVERIES ON THE MAINLAND COAST OF AUSTRALIA.

If one would distribute over chronological periods the voyages of discovery, both accidental and of set purpose, made by the Netherlanders on the mainland coast of Australia, it might be desirable so to adjust these periods, that each of them was closed by the appearance in this field of discovery and exploration, of ships belonging to other European nations.

The first period, extending from 1595 to 1606, would in that case open with the years 1595-6, when JAN HUYGEN VAN LINSCHOTEN, in his highly remarkable book ent.i.tled _Itinerario_, imparted to his countrymen what he knew about the Far East; and it would conclude with the discovery of Torres Strait by the Spaniards in 1606, a few months after Willem Jansz.

in the ship Duifken had discovered the east-coast of the Gulf of Carpentaria, the latter discovery forming the main interest of this period.

The second period may be made to extend from 1606 to 1622, i.e. from the appearance of the Spaniards on the extreme north-coast of the fifth part of the world, to the year in which the English ship Trial was dashed to pieces on a rock to westward of the west-coast of Australia; the discovery of this west-coast by the Dutch in and after 1616, and of the south-western extremity of the continent in 1622, const.i.tuting the main facts of the period.

{Page iv}

We next come to the palmiest period of Dutch activity in the discovery of Australia (1622-1688), terminating with the first exploratory voyage of importance undertaken by the English, when in 1688 William Dampier touched at the north-west coast of Australia. This period embraces the very famous, at all events remarkable, voyages of Jan Carstensz (1623), of Pool and Pieterszoon (1636), of Tasman (1642-1644), of Van der Wall (1678), etc.

The last period with which we wish to deal, lies between Dampier's arrival and Cook's first visit to these regions (1688-1769), and is of secondary importance so far as Dutch discoveries are concerned. We may just mention Willem de Vlamingh's voyage of 1696-1697, and Maerten van Delft's of 1705; Gonzal's expedition (1756) is not quite without significance, but the results obtained in these voyages will not bear comparison with those achieved by the expeditions of the preceding period. Besides this, the English navigator Dampier and afterwards Captain Cook now began to inscribe their names on the rolls of history, and those names quite legitimately outshine those of the Dutch navigators of _the eighteenth century_. The palmy days of Dutch discovery fell in _the seventeenth century_.

In some such fashion the history of the Dutch wanderings and explorations on the coasts of Australia might be divided into chronological periods.

The desire of being clear has, however, led me to adopt another mode of treatment in this Introduction: I shall one after another discuss the different coast-regions discovered and touched at by the Netherlanders.

III.

THE NETHERLANDERS IN THE GULF OF CARPENTARIA[*]

[* As regards the period extending from 1595-1644, see also my Life of Tasman, Ch. XII, pp. 88ff.]

We may safely say that the information concerning the Far East at the disposal of those Dutchmen who set sail for India in 1595, was exclusively based on what their countryman JAN HUYGEN VAN LINSCHOTEN, had told them in his famous _Itinerario_. And as regards the present Australia this information amounted to little or nothing.

Unacquainted as he was with the fact that the south-coast of Java had already been circ.u.mnavigated by European navigators, VAN LINSCHOTEN did not venture decidedly to a.s.sert the insular nature of this island. It might be connected with the mysterious South-land, the Terra Australis, the Terra Incognita, whose fantastically shaped coast-line was reported to extend south of America, Africa and Asia, in fact to the southward of the whole then known world. This South-land was a mysterious region, no doubt, but this did not prevent its coast-lines from being studded with names equally mysterious: the charts of it showed the names of Beach [*], the gold-bearing land (provincia aurifera), of Lucach, of Maletur, a region overflowing with spices (scatens aromatibus). Forming one whole with it, figured Nova Guinea, encircled by a belt of islands.

[* That the Dutch identified Beach with the South-land discovered by them in 1616, is proved by No. XI A of the Doc.u.ments (p. 14).]

{Page v}

So far the information furnished by VAN LINSCHOTEN [*]. At the same time, however, there were in the Netherlands persons who had other data to go by. In 1597 CORNELIS WIJTFLIET of Louvain brought out his _Descriptionis Plolomaicae augmentum_, which among the rest contained a chart on which not only Java figured as an island, but which also represented New Guinea as an island by itself, separated from Terra Australis. The question naturally suggests itself, whether this chart [**] will justify the a.s.sumption that the existence of _Torres Strait_ was known to WIJTFLIET.

I, for one, would not venture to infer as much, seeing that in other respects this chart so closely reproduces the vague conjectures touching a supposed Southland found on other charts of the period, that WIJTFLIET'S open pa.s.sage between New Guinea and Terra Australis cannot, I think, be admitted as evidence that he actually knew of the existence of Torres Strait, in the absence of any indications of the basis on which this notion of his reposed. Such indications, however, are altogether wanting: none are found in WIJTFLIET'S work itself, and other contemporary authorities are equally silent on the point in question [***].

[* See No. I of the Doc.u.ments, with charts Nos. 1 and 2.]

[** COLLINGRIDGE, Discovery, p. 219, has a rough sketch of it.]

[*** Cf. also my Life of Tasman, p. 89, and Note 8.]

After this digression let us return to the stand-point taken up by the North-Netherlanders who first set sail for the Indies in 1595. They "knew in part" only: they were aware that they knew nothing with cert.i.tude. But their mercantile interests very soon induced them to try to increase and strengthen their information concerning the regions of the East. What sort of country after all was this much-discussed New-Guinea, they began to ask. As early as 1602 information was sought from the natives of adjacent islands, but these proved to have "no certain knowledge of this island of Nova Guinea" [*]. The next step taken was the sending out of a ship for the purpose of obtaining this "certain knowledge": there were rumours afloat of gold being found in New Guinea!

[* See No. II of the Doc.u.ments.]

On the 28th of November 1605 the ship Duifken, commanded by Willem Jansz., put to sea from Bantam with destination for New Guinea. The ship returned to Banda from its voyage before June of the same year. What were the results obtained? What things had been seen by Willem Jansz. and his men? The journal of the Duifken's voyage has not come down to us, so that we are fain to infer its results from other data, and fortunately such data are not wanting. An English ship's captain was staying at Bantam when the Duifken put to sea, and was still there when the first reports of her adventures reached the said town. Authentic doc.u.ments of 1618, 1623, and 1644 are found to refer to her voyage. Above all, the journal of a subsequent expedition, the one commanded by Carstensz. in 1623, contains important particulars respecting the voyage of his predecessors in 1605-6. [*]

[* See pp. 28, 42, 43, 45 _infra_. I trust that these data will go far to remove COLLINGRIDGE'S doubt (Discovery p. 245) as to whether the ship Duifken sailed farther southward than 8 15'.]

On the basis of these data we may safely take for granted the following points. The ship Duifken struck the south-west coast of New Guinea in about 5 S. Lat., ran along this coast on a south-east course [*], and sailed past the narrows now known as Torres Strait. Did Willem Jansz.

look upon these narrows as an open strait, or did he take them to be a bay only? My answer is, that most probably he was content to leave this point altogether undecided; seeing that Carstensz. and his men in 1623 thought to find an "open pa.s.sage" on the strength of information given by a chart with which they had been furnished. [**] This "open pa.s.sage" can hardly refer to anything else than Torres Strait. But in that case it is clear that Jansz. cannot have solved the problem, but must have left it a moot point. At all events he sailed past the strait, through which a few months after him Luiz Vaez de Torres sailed from east to west.

[* As regards the names given on this expedition to various parts of this coast, see my Life of Tasman, pp. 90-91, and chart No. 3 on p. 5 _infra_.]

[** See pp. 47, 66 _infra_.]