The document spotlight features
materials related to the voyages of Captain James Cook, a British naval officer
whose 18th century voyages continue to captivate. The materials at Morristown
include two complete early editions of published diaries from Cook’s third
Pacific voyage and an atlas of illustrations by the artist John Webber who
accompanied Cook. The diaries largely contain Cook’s personal observations on
the management of his crew and, more importantly, the many peoples that he and his
men encountered along the way. Webber’s illustrations add depth to Cook’s
writings by illustrating local people and landscapes, as they would have been
seen from a European perspective. Cook’s diaries and accompanying illustrations
fueled the public imagination by describing people, flora, fauna, and natural
resources that most people could only dream of seeing. Many ongoing
celebrations of Cook, however, reflect a romanticized account of his life and
impacts. It is important to acknowledge the romance of historical memory and
interrogate the discourses around individuals that arise as cultural heroes. In
the case of Cook, this means reconsideration of the purposes and impacts of his
voyage, as well as exploring the roles of Aboriginal Australians, Maori, and
Pacific Islanders in their interactions with Cook and beyond.
Brief Introduction to James Cook
Born in 1728, James
Cook grew up in a life of very modest means. His father was a migrant farm
foreman and, though he had schooling until the age of 12, Cook was also a
laborer and worked on the same farm as his father throughout his teens. As a
young man, he completed an apprenticeship at a general store near the coast
where he was introduced to maritime life. At the age of 18, Cook apprenticed
with a local ship owner and learned the trade of an able seaman. Seeking a more
exciting career, Cook eschewed mercantile shipping in favor of the Royal Navy.
He quickly moved through the ranks and was made master of HMS Pembroke at the
age of 29. Prior to his later voyages, which made
him famous, his early naval career was notable for his charting of the
St. Lawrence River, survey of the Newfoundland coast, and his action in the
Seven Years War.[1]
In 1768, Cook was appointed commander of a Pacific expedition - the first of three of his most important voyages. This first expedition, on the ship Endeavor, carried Royal Society scientists led by John Banks. Over the course of two years, Cook charted all of New Zealand and the southern coast of Australia, which was heretofore unknown to Europeans. After the success of his first voyage, Cook was promoted and sent out to the Pacific once more - this time with two ships, Resolution and Adventure. From 1772 to 1775, Cook completed the first west-east circumnavigation, penetrated the Antarctic, and charted several islands previously unknown to Europeans. His final Pacific voyage embarked in 1776, with the ships Resolution and Discovery. The primary, though secret, purpose of this expedition was to find a northwest passage between the Atlantic and Pacific to facilitate trade. Cook was unsuccessful in locating such a passage and the voyage eventually resulted in Cook’s death on the island of Kaua’i (Hawai’i).[2]
Cook’s
demise is perhaps as famous, if not more so, than the man himself. Cook’s first
landing on the Islands of Hawai’i, in 1778, was successful by his measure. The
ships were able to obtain water and food to continue on to the coast of Alaska.
They made landfall in Hawai’i again one year later, in the midst of Makahiki, a New Year festival
celebrating the harvest and the god Lono. As a result of their coincidental
arrival during the festive season, Cook and his crew were honored guests. The
warm reception quickly soured, however, after his crew violated a restriction
to their access to women in the villages and when Cook demanded wood from a
timber fence surrounding a sacred temple and burial ground. His welcome was
thoroughly worn out by the 19th day.[3]
On the 14th of February, Cook attempted to take the Chief Kalaniopuu hostage in
retaliation for the theft of a longboat and was killed by a warrior in his
attempt. His men took revenge by means of the murder of two Hawaiians and
destruction of a village, though relations between the ships and chiefs were
somewhat repaired upon their final departure. Thus was the mortal end of Captain James Cook. The
legends around him and his accomplishments, however, became embedded in Western
cultural discourses around exploration, scientific discovery, and imperialism.[4]
Scholarship about
Cook is largely “imperial in theme and biographical in intent,” without much
ethnographical or cultural sensitivity to the peoples that Cook encountered.
Until mid-twentieth century, almost two hundred years of popular Cook accounts
in the West emphasized the man as explorer and hero, reflecting a hagiographic
agenda that left Indigenous people at the periphery of discourses surrounding
the processes and impacts of European exploration and colonization.[5] Anglophone scholarship began to expand its metropolitan
cultural/historical outlook in the 1960s, although representations of the
exploration of Oceania remained largely Eurocentric. The scholarship of Bernard
Smith represents an important initial divergence from these popular narratives,
however, in which he mused on the role of Indigenous action as an integral
aspect of European impressions of Oceania.[6]
In the years following Smith, historians have actively employed methodologies
that center Indigenous histories, cultures, outlooks, and agency as key factors
in the accounts of James Cook and other European explorers. Demythologizing Cook has become an integral
aspect of scholarship about him, thus allowing his achievements, and
shortcomings, to define him.
Impacts of Cook: Many Systems of Exchange
Cook’s place in the Western canon is based on two central aspects of his life: his interactions with peoples of the Pacific Islands and the mythology of his death. His interactions with indigenous Pacific Islanders are part of a larger share of cultural and historical memory, with his explorations remaining central to discussions of European, Australian, and New Zealander heritage and identity. In addition to being an explorer, Cook is credited with being a sort of proto-anthropologist in his documentation of the cultures that he encountered. The confluence of exploration, trade, and science, allowed Cook to rise as one of the ultimate symbols of the Enlightenment. This made him famous among his contemporaries and that reputation continues to resonate today, with the likes of Christopher Columbus.
An
integral aspect of Cook’s hagiography is the perception of his interactions
with indigenous peoples that had, until that point, remained relatively unknown
to Europeans. Biographer R.A. Skelton wrote of Cook:
“The same qualities of sympathy and recognition of the
right of men to be different characterize Cook’s dealings with native peoples.
His Combination of friendliness and firmness, his success in communication on
equal terms, his eager interests in the island societies of Polynesia, in the
way in which their people organized their lives, in their manner and customs,
and in the reasons for them --- all these factors assured the safety of his
expeditions. More than this: Cook was able to bring back a priceless record of
a way of life that the other Europeans were to destroy.”[7]
This impression of Cook can be attributed to historiographical discourse that suggests that Cook’s voyages, in line with his Enlightenment characterization, “heralded a shift in the goals of discovery from conquest, plunder, and imperial appropriation to scientific exploration devoid of any explicit agenda for conquest or for the exploitation and terrorization of native peoples.”[8] Indeed, scientific exploration was an explicit goal of Cook’s most famous voyages. The voyage of the ship Endeavor was a particularly scientific mission, with projects dedicated to astronomy, botany, zoology, and ethnography--much like a later nineteenth century voyage with a young Charles Darwin.
However, the suggestion that Cook’s main goals - and impacts - were purely scientific is an incomplete assessment. Coded within the scientific discourse of eighteenth century discovery was a discourse of civilization and domestication. Each of Cook’s landings were characterized by materially and symbolically significant imperial performances: Cook mapped locations according to the European tradition, “named” them in the English language, planted English gardens, and introduced European livestock. These acts were motivated by an appropriative desire to alter local landscapes to be more European, an act that was conceived of as beneficial to both the original inhabitants and future European settlers.[9] Cook, along with other European explorers and colonizers, carried an implicit mission of colonization.
Instructions were
given to Cook by Lord Morton, President of the Royal Society, to “exercise the
utmost patience and forbearance with respect to the Natives...restrain the use
of firearms…[and] to have it still in view that shedding the blood of these
people is a crime of the highest nature.”[10]
However, the reality of their encounters was not so humane. Perceived
infractions against Cook and the ships were punished, often brutally.
Regardless of their own laws or social norms, British maritime judicial
practices were imposed upon the islanders on their own land. All Polynesians
were considered to be “subordinate to the commander’s authority…[with] ordinary
Polynesians on par with the crew” and chiefs ranking somewhere between the crew
and officers.[11]
Furthermore, the maritime laws that indigenous peoples were subjected to were
not applied equally and often more severe than those which were imposed upon
the crew. Cook’s own diaries do not document this extensively, but those of his
officers do. Islanders were often
subjected to many dozens of lashes, whereas sailors were not to be punished
with more than twelve lashes under any circumstances. By Cook’s third voyage,
these practices were routine.[12]
Both
formal and informal economic exchange were central to Cook’s mission,
undermining popular representations of his voyages as scientific or
ethnographic. Secret instructions given to Cook for his third voyage explicitly
stated that he was to search for a Northwest Passage by which Europeans could
more easily move trade goods from the Pacific to the Atlantic, bypassing the
Indian Ocean and Africa.[13]
Furthermore, Cook was provided with a significant portion of goods with which
to trade on their voyage. Trade is a prominent item of discussion in his
journals and a lens by which Cook interpreted, judged, and catalogued the
cultures he encountered. By Cook’s measure, those cultures that engaged in
trade practices that resembled British economic values were “superior” to those
that did not.[14]
Informal systems of economic and cultural exchange are less visible in Cook’s accounts, largely enacted between sailors and Indigenous individuals.[15] Although it was not formally conceptualized as part of a system of exchange for many decades of scholarship, biological exchange has come to be realized as a key point of Indigenous and European interaction. The interaction of human bodies were unsanctioned but nonetheless evident in Cook’s accounts through descriptions of “disease” among sailors and the people they encountered. Euphemistic language describing “disease” and “venereal complaints” referred to the liaisons between common sailors and local women that manifested “alternative systems of capital and exchange outside formal networks supported by those in authority.”[16] Cook endeavored to create accounts that would build and maintain relationships for formal economic exchange; his accounts likewise acknowledged the system of sexual exchange. This was permitted in Cook’s early voyages, but disallowed by the third. Venereal complaints were cited as the main reason for restricting his sailors’ access to the women they met. English maritime law also forbade these relationships at great consequence to the sailors, particularly if revealed through the transmission of infection. These rules were informed by the knowledge that these diseases were, and continued to be, introduced to Pacific Island populations by Europeans. Contagious illness had a lasting impact on all lands imposed upon by European traders and colonizers. European disease introduction reduced some populations up to a tenth of their previous size.[17]
Disease was only one
facet of biological exchange. Cook’s voyage could aptly be compared in biblical
terms to Noah’s Ark, in which he brought many animals to be used in the process
of exploration, with the explicit purpose of trade, and to reshape the local
environments to accommodate European-style agriculture. These animals quickly
multiplied and modified the regions in which they resided. In Hawai’i, for
example, introduced flora thrived in new ecological niches carved out by
grazing livestock. The introduction of the european rat had a tremendous impact
on native birds; in turn, other animals, cats and mongooses, were introduced to
manage the growing rat population. These animals would become pests themselves,
leading to lasting depletion of native bird populations.[18]
The sea was also impacted by the arrival of Europeans to the South Pacific
region, as new fishing technologies and agricultural pollution damaged coral
reefs and other aquatic ecosystems. These ecosystems, particularly reefs,
remain in jeopardy to this day.[19]
Indigenous Voices: What Did Indigenous People Think of Cook?
Cook’s impressions and encounters with the peoples that he encountered are documented extensively in his journals. Conversely, it is more difficult to examine the impression these people had of Cook. Cultural differences in historical documentation and belated interest on the part of 19th century Europeans has impeded this effort. However, some oral histories, cultural practices, and historical debates do shed light on the issue of how Cook and his crews were received. One may look to Aboriginal storytelling, which offers generational oral narratives that describe Cook’s landing. Nearly all of them are concerned with the manner by which Cook first entered Aboriginal people’s land on the Australian coast in 1770.[20] One particularly poignant story describes how Cook did not greet the first people he met, the Gweagal people of Botany Bay, thus failing to observe the proper protocols for entering Aboriginal territories and resulting in violence. This failure was evident in Cook’s own account, and continued to echo throughout the relationship between the colonists and Aboriginal Australians.[21] In the decades and centuries to come, Cook came to stand for all European invaders and settlers.
One of the most enduring debates about the reception of James Cook is centered in the theory that, upon his 1779 arrival in Hawai’i, the indigenous Hawaiians that he encountered believed him to be the god Lono, who at that time was being celebrated in the seasonal New Year festival Makahiki. This statement is incorporated as fact into nearly every mainstream account of Cook’s life and death, in which he is acknowledged by priests to be Lono and was treated with respect and adoration until his death.[22] The implication of ritual death has the effects of advancing the notion that Cook’s death was predicated on Hawaiian religious practice and reinforcing his heroism in Western discourses.[23] Late twentieth-century scholarship, however, pushes back on these notions. Gananath Obeysekere, a scholar of Hawaii, points out several issues that undermine the deification theory. Obeyesekere asks whether it is likely that that Hawaiians believed a European-looking person who did not speak their language or know their lifeways could possibly be a god of their pantheon; furthermore, Hawaiians knew that Cook came from “Brittannee” and not the sacred land of Kahiki.[24] Obeysekere also points out that that the ritual reception included Cook prostrating himself before an image of the god Kū and notes that none of the chiefs performed that ritual to Cook - only commoners did, as they would do to their own chiefs.[25] It is more likely, as Polynesian anthropologist Te Rangi Hiroa suggests, that Cook was called Lono, due to the appearance of his ships’ white sails, but not likely thought to be Lono. Cook’s arrival was considered significant and he was certainly elevated to high status, as indicated by ritual prostration, but this status could be linked to that of a chief rather than a god. This is reinforced by the fact that chiefs could be killed “when circumstances demanded.” Finally, deification was a post mortem event, not ante mortem, which aligns with the treatment of Cook’s body after his death.[26]
Reexamining the
Hawaiian reception of Cook is important because it significantly alters
discourses around his death, which perhaps made him more famous than he was in
life. The apotheosis of Cook was a significant cultural milestone of the late
eighteenth century, with popular literature, art, and plays dedicated to the
subject. European understandings of Cook’s final moments influenced his entire
biography and, more importantly, Western perceptions of the Hawaiian people
that would go on to influence their portrayal and treatment by future visitors.
Understanding the contemporary indigenous perspectives of their encounters with
Cook is essential to form honest evaluations of Cook’s exploits, legacy, and
popular cultural memory and also give equal weight to the voices of those that
he impacted.
Other Journeys To Consider: Explorers from the Pacific Islands
Some
of the most important journeys of this time were not those of Cook or other Europeans.
Rather, we should look to indigenous people and their travels to gain a sense
of the vast system of cultural exchange that occurred before and after the time
of Cook. People of the South Seas have a long history of seafaring, with
cultural continuities indicating their migration across massive swaths of the
Pacific Ocean from Tahiti to New Zealand
and the islands of Hawai’i. In the eighteenth century, there were
prominent Pacific Islanders who returned to Europe with various
circumnavigators and made their own forays into Europe. These journeys
continued well into the nineteenth century.
One
such person is Ahutoru, the adopted son of a village chief, who traveled to
France with Louis Antoine de Bougainville. Ahutoru came to know Bougainville
when the circumnavigator completed his voyage in Tahiti and set sail to return
to France. How he came to be on Bougainville’s ship is not entirely clear -
with some accounts describing Ahutoru as an eager adventurer and others
suggesting that he was “offered” to Bougainville by his village. Others imply
that he went willingly, but that he intended to disembark from the ship on the
island Raiatea. However, he was not permitted to disembark and found himself on
a long and harrowing voyage. On the long
trip, Ahutoru was pressed for plant identification by the ship’s botanist and
for information about his religious practices by the captain, who penned an
account of the voyage.[27] Most of
the information in Bourgainville’s book, however, likely came from Ahutoru, as Bourgainville’s
stay on the island was short. His contributions, which are not well-attributed,
made a tremendous impact on the expansion of botanical sciences at the time.[28] During
his time in Paris, Bougainville introduced him to French high society,
including King Louis XV. With a few exceptions, Ahutoru was well-liked and
spent a great deal of time making social calls and venturing out into Paris.
This was bitter-sweet, however, as Ahutoru was regarded as a novelty - an
embodiment of Enlightenment philosophy’s fantasies about unspoiled ways of life
and the stereotype of the “noble savage.”[29]
Ahutoru departed France in 1770, but died from a contagious illness on his
voyage home in 1771.
Omai of the Friendly Isles, by Sir Joshua Reynolds, c.1774 (Public Domain)
Omai,
a young Tahian man from Huahine, would go on to be Ahuturo’s counterpart in
England. He left Tahiti in 1773, following Cook’s second voyage. Much like
Ahutoru, Omai provided Europeans with a great deal of information about his
local customs and culture. During his visit to England, Omai resided with
Joseph Banks, a botanist who Omai had met during Cook’s first voyage. Much like
Ahutoru, Omai became a popular personality over the course of his stay. He was
a favored guest for socialite dinner parties and was presented with a sword by
King George, who also provided a stipend. His portrait was painted by popular
artists and his social life became the subject of conversation in popular
magazines. For all that Omai was popular, many disapproved of the lifestyle he
lived in London, insisting instead that should have received “Christian moral
instruction” or learned a trade.[30] In 1776,
Omai left London to travel with Cook once more on Cook’s third voyage. Omai was
sent off with many gifts ranging from tools and guns to a suit of armor and
supply of port wine. His return was used to advantage by Cook, using it as an
excuse to introduce livestock to the islands they stopped at.[31] Much is
unknown about his life after travelling, although he did pass away several
years following his return.
”Prince Lee Boo,” Henry Kingsbury, published
by George Nicol, published for Henry Wilson, after Georgiana Jane Henderson,
1788 [Courtesy of National Portrait Gallery London]
Other
Pacific Islanders, such as Prince Lee Boo of Palau and Chief Ka’iana of Kaua’i,
embarked on voyages with English captains. Lee Boo was the second son of King
Abbe Thulle, who sent him with Captain Henry Wilson to gather information about
England that could benefit Palau.[32] Much like
Omai, Lee Boo enjoyed popularity as a dinner guest among the English
bourgeoisie and as a student to tutors who instructed him in English at his
request. Wilson hosted Lee Boo and took measures to prevent him from exposure
to smallpox; however, these efforts were in vain. Lee Boo died from the illness
in 1784, at the age of 20. In 1787, the Hawaiian nobleman Ka’iana sought
passage to England by means of Captain John Meares. Meares agreed to take them
along. His voyage was particularly notable, as he was the first Hawaiian chief
to travel to China, the Philippines, and the Northwestern American coast.[33] Ka’iana
never completed his voyage to Europe, having been satisfied by his experiences
in China. Although his time with Meares was short, Ka’iana’s life is
well-documented. On his return to his homeland, he quickly became a close aide
to King Kamehameha I. Ka’iana parlayed his social status relationships with
English merchants to secure favorable terms of trade and to obtain weapons to
supply an ongoing war. He eventually fell out of favor with Kamehameha I, but
his filial associations with the Hawaiian nobility enabled extensive
documentation of his life. His nephew, Kekuanao'a, would eventually complete
Ka’iana’s journey to England in 1823.[34]
"Tianna a Prince of Atooi" or
Ka'iana, lithograph by Spoilumin, located in
John Meares: Voyages Made in the Tears 1788 and 1789 [Courtesy of the State
Archives of Hawaii]
These explorers continued to
traverse the oceans throughout the turn of the century. The Maori of New
Zealand left a particular travel legacy that continues to resonate into the
present. The very first Maori to to leave the shores of New Zealand did so on
the vessel of James Cook, having been brought aboard to act as servants to
Omai. Te Wehura and Koa were the first to leave New Zealand in many hundreds of
years, but many others soon followed. At the end of the eighteenth century,
Maori chiefs embarked on trading vessels to Australia and others sailed aboard
European vessels as crew. However, not all Maori volunteered for these roles -
some were kidnapped, abused, and even abandoned on foreign islands. The first
Maori explorer to visit England was Moehanga, a Ngāpuhi man that arrived in
1806, more than twenty years before New Zealand was declared a British colony.
Many Maori would follow him in the years after his visit, but Moehanga has come
to be celebrated (on Moehanga Day) as first Maori to discover Britain, a nod to
changing discourses around the historical narratives of global exploration and
indigenous autonomy.
Looking Forward: Contemporary Discourses to Captain Cook
In many respects, Captain Cook remains a lauded figure in conventional accounts of maritime history and the establishment of states like Australia and New Zealand. In Australia, Cook is celebrated every year on the 29th of April, commemorating the day that he “discovered” and “founded” modern Australia. Much like Columbus Day in North America, Cook’s anniversary is increasingly challenged by recent interrogations of his impact on Australia. Aboriginal Australians are at the forefront of these debates, as both subject and actor. These discourses acknowledge Cook’s skill as a navigator, but ultimately seek to re-center indigenous peoples in the discourses around him. In this case, the subject of conversation is whether Cook “discovered” Australia at all. Recent dialogues now point out that Australia was discovered many hundreds of years prior to Cook, by the people who came to inhabit the land long before Cook’s arrival. Furthermore, Cook claimed the continent on behalf of the Crown without the consent or collaboration of the people who were already there. Increased interest in the oral histories of Aboriginal Australians has reconfigured the conventional historical narrative, emphasizing the lingering impacts of his encounters in the Aboriginal consciousness.
This
sort of historical interrogation is not unique to discourses around James Cook.
Rather, they continue to spring up around many persistent historical narratives
surrounding the issues of European exploration, the international slave trade,
and European colonization. In turn, practices of historical writing and
remembrance shift to reflect new interests and interpretations that can be the
instruments of social change. Captain Cook, for now, is largely perceived as a benign,
if not heroic, figure in Western history. This perception, however, is evolving
as cultural and historical practices are mobilized to illustrate how truly
complicated his legacy is, as both a man and legendary figure, and how
profoundly he impacted the historical and contemporary outcomes of all of the
places and people that he encountered.
[1] Alan John Villiers,
“James Cook: British Naval Officer, Encyclopedia Britannica (2021), https://www.britannica.com/biography/James-Cook.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ruth M. Tabrah, Hawaii: A History (New York: WW Norton, 1984), 20.
[4] Ibid., 20 -22
[5] Bronwen Douglas, “Voyages, Encounters, and
Agency in Oceania: Captain Cook and Indiginous People,” History Compass 6.3 (2008), 714.
[6] Ibid., 714.
[7] R.A. Skelton as quoted by Gananath
Obeyesekere, The Apotheosis of Captain
Cook: European Mythmaking in the Pacific (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1997), 4.
[8] Ibid., 5.
[9] Ibid., 12.
[10] Ibid., 13.
[11] Ibid.,, 30.
[12] Ibid., 30-32.
[13] Lisa Vandenbossche, “Illicit Trade and
Contagious Disease in the Journals of Captain James Cook,” Cultural Economies of the Atlantic World (New York: Taylor &
Francis 2020), 3-4.
[14] Gordon Sauer, Unspoken Voices: Captain Cook’s Third Voyage, the Lono Question, and
the Discourse of Trade (Thesis: Clemson University), 27 - 32.
[15] Lisa Vandenbosshe, “Illicit Trade and
Contagious Disease in the Journals of Captain James Cook,” ibid.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Moshe Rapaport, “Edin in Peril: Impact of
Humans on Pacific Island Ecosystems,” Island
Studies Journal 1.1 (2006), 114.
[18]Ibid.
[19] Ibid., 115.
[20] Maria Louise Nugent, “‘To Try to Form Some
Connections with the Natives’: Encounters between Cook and Indigenous People at
Botany Bay in 1770,” History Compass 6.2
(2008), 479.
[21] Ibid., 479 - 481.
[22] Ganantha Obeyesekere, The Apotheosis of Captain Cook, 3.
[23] Ibid., 57.
[24] Ibid., 61.
[25] Ibid., 64.
[26] Ibid., 75.
[27] Ernest Dodge, Islands and Empires: Western Impact on the Pacific and East Asia
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1976), 42.
[28] Ibid.
[29] Ibid., 43.
[30] Ibid., 43 - 47.
[31] Ibid., 47.
[32] Ibid., 48.
[33] David G Miller, “Ka’iana, the Once Famous
‘Prince of Kaua’i’”, The Hawaiian Journal
of History 22 (1988), 1 - 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment