Found this interesting resource. Threadworthy for the ocean lovers and historians amongst us. Not everybody will be a fan tho . On This Day: 22 April 1770 Captain Cook aboard the Endeavour passes Ulladulla and Pigeon House http://southseas.nla.gov.au/journals/cook/17700422.html http://southseas.nla.gov.au/journals/cook/contents.html https://collections.lib.uwm.edu/digital/collection/agdm/id/1090/rec/5 edit : Yes I do realise date was yesterday
Cartographer was on rums... Who TF draws a map with North orientating laterally! Took me a while to orientate myself there. And I am sober.
All the stuffing around answers one question I have always wondered about. How did he chart the coast that he passed at night? The answer is that he ponced around in almost the same place for days.
That orients the map correctly, but all the writing is sideways or upside down. I guess it is just a convention that north is at the top of a chart.
That's another thing that baffles me about Cook. First landing at Botany Bay. Second landing at The Town of 1770. How could he resist having a poke around at many more sites?
Interesting - lots of familiar names. I suppose that the Map Police weren’t around to force Cook to put North at the top. The direction is clearly marked, however. Maybe he wanted the coast aligned with the long axis of the sheet of paper he had to use.
Maybe the map was drawn like that because he was looking at it from a northern hemisphere perspective - (everything upside down and around about). Low pressure / high pressure systems spinning winds the opposite way, all would have been very confusing etc.
While most of Cooks names stuck, a few didn't. One of the moat notable is Point Hicks on the coast near Cann River in Victoria. It was named after Lt. Zachary Hicks, the first person to spot the east coast of Australia after HMS Endeavour had sailed across from New Zealand. However it was later renamed Cape Everard. But on the 200th anniversary Point Hicks was reinstated in honour of the first westerner to see the east coast of this country. One thing that saddened me is that formal plans to celebrate the 250th anniversary of that world changing voyage were cancelled last year, well before the present contagion, because a celebration might allegedly offend aborigines. Now I reckon every aboriginal person has come to terms with western settlement of Australia by now, so wasn't cancelling commemoration of the voyage just a little bit precious and overly P.C.?
This. Needs to be acknowledged for what it was. An awesome bit of exploration. These guys had real balls sailing off into the unknown for years at a time.
The "north up" convention is actually a reasonably modern phenomenon. Previously it had been all over the place. Interesting read on the history of "north" in cartography: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160614-maps-have-north-at-the-top-but-it-couldve-been-different
Ooh yeah. Locally tho the vibe is "we" are not to blame. It's getting there. I agree with the Koori's btw. Lets see the Pommies pull that same stunt again.
Cook was drawing a map, so he starts drawing in a corner. where coast goes is where it goes on the page. If your very finite supply of paper is rectangular and the coast is hinting North South you draw with NS in the long direction on the paper.
Isn't there some evidence suggesting there may be another "secret" journal kept solely for Admiralty eyes only? Can't recall the article but a suggestion he may have gone overland and mapped Sydney Harbour while in Botany Bay which is the reason it was the destination for the First Fleet and kept secret from the ship's crew
And? First landing Botany Bay, where he spent several weeks. Second landing at 1770. My bafflement is undiminished.
Here's another worthy read. I took it down South , was gifted to me by good mate after I had mentioned to him .... I had heard Guy Hull interviewed on ABC local ( SE ) driving up the hill one day . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-25/history-of-the-australian-cattle-dog/10390626
Agreed Legs. Too many opportunities for food and water along the way. Tho they lacked the Roo dogs straight off the boat. See above .
he/they did. tho was not sufficient for the new colony. hence the need to provide. protein by way of kangaroo. the guns where not accurate for the purpose. bring in the dogs. then breed the dogs ( wolfhound/greyhound x/ for purpose of feeding the colony.
I was hoping along the lines of the colonisation, and settlement of NSW . and further Aus. I sadly accept the traditional land owners have been culturally and environmentally raped . This land was far better before "we" arrived. Don't blame our indigenous folk for their anger. Heading towards bear pit territory tho...
yes. in a nut shell. IMO. Cook arrived .. no food for the new colony. Kangaroo = meat Guns where completely innacurate. so the dogs where the method to capture/kill. the dogs that came over with Cook where not built for the purpose. hence the breeding of the Roo dogs was necessary. and on it goes to the settlement of Tasmania.
Unm Cook came and left. Then came a colony, quite separate events only linked by Banks gushing report about how good Botany Bay was which prompted the poms to select that as the first site for the colony while it was still in London.
true too. my bad. I'm not so aware on the timeline. hence my " in a nutshell" for sake of generalising in my post. edit : more thought = was later, 1788 the first fleet arrived .
They don't love Cook. Thats for sure. Where as the relationship with Maori and other polynesians is completely different.
Actually, an interesting discussion @Bogong, but really required input from the indigenous perspective. I didn't really get what land rights were about until maybe 20 years ago, when I heard a very interesting and engaging talk by an aboriginal woman who explained the importance of country. It wasn't about ownership, it was about connection. A different value system that is at odds with what we have imposed over the land.
The view and treatment of aborigines illustrated in the recent book Truganini was not that new to me but it is the most recent thing I've read on the topic. Worth are read and reflection. This story is the tip of the iceberg of treatment dished out since 1788 and many would argue still continues.
I reckon given how far out they were, you'd be damn picky about where you tried to land. Not on a surf beach. No bar crossings or unknown rivers either. That leaves proper natural harbours and estuaries that are clearly visible from the ocean. From Point Hicks you'd see what - Eden, Batemans bay, Jarvis Bay, the bays in the Sydney region, then Port Stephens...then not much to the Queensland. Isn't that more or less what he charted? In that journal it mentions they passed Jarvis bay but the wind was offshore, and he didn't want to spend the time tacking in.
got my wires badly crossed there. I'll blame the six pack and day in the sun. Colony arrived years after Cook -1788.
This was my understanding as well. And he was keen to get underway as they spent some time in Botany Bay and did need to get cracking.
If he passed Jervis Bay after Botany Bay he does not deserve his reputation as a navigator. Depending on wind and swell direction there are lots of little corners to tuck into.
I was wondering if anyone would pick up my slip there. The Journal reference I was think of was Port Jackson which I think he noted as a possible harbour but did not enter.
