Posts Tagged ‘captain cook’

COOK – HARRISON – GREEN: THREE YORKSHIRE MEN WALKED INTO A BAR

Wednesday, August 23rd, 2017

 

 

‘He [John Harrison] wrested the world’s whereabouts from the stars, and locked the secret in a pocket watch’. Dava Sobel, Longitude, Fourth Estate, London, 1998

Harrison H-4 Chronometer

Since earliest times sea-faring nations England, Portugal, France, Spain the Netherlands vied with each other to solve – the Holy Grail of Navigation – longitude – calculating with precision a ship’s position at sea while beyond sight of land.

1714  – Westminster: Legislation, The Act of Longitude 1714, followed an enquiry into England’s first recorded 18th century maritime disaster.

In 1707 off the Cornish coast in heavy weather six (6) of Admiral Clowdisley Shovell’s ships having lost their bearings dashed to pieces against the Scilly Isles with the loss of 1500 lives.

As a consequence in 1714 The Board of Longitude was established to invite and evaluate submissions and award a prize of £20,000 to whom-so-ever solved the problem of determining longitude at sea.

To the detriment of the world’s seafarers the contest developed into a naked grab for cash. The king’s ransom, reckoned now more than £400,000,000 did much to delay recognition of the solution; ‘the perfect time-keeper…a pocket- watch’. .

There were only two (2) viable contenders for the Longitude Prize. Astronomer Royal Rev. Nevil Maskelyne’s Nautical Almanac – Luna Tables  and Star Cataglog –  a system favoured by a succession of Astronomer Royals – and John Harrison a Yorkshire carpenter with his invention a sea-going  pocket-watch’. See: Lotto and Longitude

‘The Board of Longitude was top-heavy with astronomers, mathematicians and navigators…[Harrison] made a special enemy of the Reverend Nevil Maskelyne the fifth astronomer royal, who contested his claim to the [Longitude] prize money and whose tactics at certain junctions can only be described as foul-play’. Dava Sobel. ibid.

The contest cost countless lives.

(more…)

CAPTAIN COOK CAUGHT SHORT 

Tuesday, August 15th, 2017

The Royal Society had accepted the recommendation of the Astronomer [Royal ] that [Dalrymple] the well-known hydrographer of the Pacific should be chosen as ‘a proper Person to be sent to the South Seas’. H.C. Cameron, Sir Joseph Banks, Angus and Robertson, Sydney, 1968

 Rev. Nevil Maskelyne, Britain’s Astronomer Royal adjudged the hydrographer, a Fellow of the Royal Society; ‘a proper Person to be sent to the South Seas’. The Admiralty however would have none of Alexander Dalrymple. See: Malicious Maskelyne 

Instead Admiralty chose James Cook a lowly Warrant Officer of the Royal Navy to replace Dalrymple as Chief Observer of the Transit of Venus at Tahiti an event predicted to occur in early June 1769.

‘[Cook] Whose remarkable qualities as a seaman and as a navigator and cartographer the Admiralty had learned to value because of his outstanding service in the operation under [General] Wolfe in Canada [Seven Years War 1756-1763]. Cameron. ibid. 

(more…)

THE THIRD MAN – CHARLES GREEN

Tuesday, August 15th, 2017

‘The grim roll-call broke his [Cook’s) heart…the death of the astronomer Charles Green marked a wave of those who ‘departed this life’….By the end of January [1771] they had barely enough men to man the ship [HMS Endeavour]’. Vanesssa Collingridge, Captain Cook, The Life, Death and Legacy of History’s Greatest Explorer, Ebury Press, 2002

Charles Green son of ‘a prosperous’ free-hold Yorkshire farmer, born in Swinton towards the end of 1734, received a broad education with a strong emphasis on science.

John his elder brother took Holy Orders and established a school in Soho, London where Charles found his ‘heavenly passion’ astronomy. He stayed and taught mathematics after graduating.

In 1760 Charles Green applied successfully for the position of Assistant Astronomer at Greenwich Observatory. He went on to serve as Chief Assistant to three (3) Astronomer Royals, James Bradley, Nathenial Bliss and briefly Reverend Nevil Maskelyne.

In 1675 King Charles II engaged Sir Christopher Wren to design a National Observatory. Wren considered the ruins of Greenwich Castle a perfect site. For although Oliver Cromwell’s Roundhead Model Army had destroyed its buildings during The Protectorate Interregnum (1653-59) its foundations were intact.

In 1676, Rev. John Flamsteed, England’s inaugural Astronomer Royal, took up residence in the newly minted Greenwich Observatory. He remained in the role until his death in 1720.

Edmond Halley of comet fame succeeded Flamsteed holding  the post for twenty-two (22) years until his death in 1742.

Rev. James Bradley followed Halley. His tenure too was lengthy 1742-1762. Bradley is celebrated principally for his work on the speed of light. In 1728 he estimated light moved at the speed of 295,000 km (183,000 miles) per second. Three (3) centuries later Bradley’s calculations were amended slightly to 299,790 km (186,290 miles) per second

Had Bradley stuck to light and left longitude to Mr. John Harrison inventor of an accurate marine chronometer – a sea-going ‘pocket-watch’ – many a sea-farer would not have met a watery end.

 

(more…)

MOON VERSUS MACHINE

Tuesday, August 15th, 2017

Compared with that of Banks, Mr. Green’s equipment was comparatively modest. On May 5th, 1768, at a meeting of Council of the Royal Society it was resolved that the instruments for the use of the Observers of the South Latitudes be the following:

Two [2] reflecting telescopes of two [2] foot focus…[1] brass Hadley’s sextant, [1] barometer bespoke of Mr Ramsden, [1] Journeyman’s Clock bespoke by Mr Skelton, two [2] Thermometers of Mr Bird, [1] Stand for Bird’s Quadrant, [1] dipping needle bespoke by Mr Ramsden’. H.C. Cameron, Sir Joseph Banks, Angus and Robertson, Sydney, 1966

Who was Mr. Green? Charles Green was former Assistant to James Bradley and Nathaniel Bliss, Astronomer Royals of Greenwich Observatory. He was engaged by the Royal Society to represent them and assist Lieutenant James Cook RN observe and record the Transit of Venus due to take place at Tahiti on 3rd June 1769.

‘John Harrison, the man who solved longitude in 1759’. Peter Ackroyd, Macmillan, London, 2016

Why was Harrison’s marine chronometer ‘H-4 bolted to a window seat in the [Greenwich] Observatory’ when Green set off for Tahiti aboard HMS Endeavour with Lieutenant James Cook. See: Captain Cook, John Harrison, Charles Green – Three Yorkshire Men Walked Into A Bar

‘H-4 [was] bolted to a window seat in the Observatory’.  Dava Sobel, Longitude, Fourth Estate, London, 1998

No doubt H-4 sat under the watchful eye of Rev. Nevil Maskelyne. Britain’s fifth Astronomer Royal. Maskelyne had been elected to that high post in 1765 on the death of Rev. Nathaniel Bliss. Maskelyne held a conservative stranglehold over the position until 1811.

(more…)

MALICIOUS MASKELYNE

Monday, August 14th, 2017

‘The Transit [of Venus] was more than just an astronomical curio, it was the key to a wealth of information about the universe, information that would be seized upon by the intensely curious men of science who characterised the age’. Vanessa Collingridge, Captain Cook, The Life, Death and Legacy of History’s Greatest Explorer, Random House, 2003

1663 – England: In 1663 during the reign of King Charles II (1660-1685) a collection of ‘intensely curious men of science’ – the ‘Invisible College’ – morphed into the Royal Society.

A century later, the Society flowered under the patronage of King George III (1720-1820), to become one of the world’s most celebrated scientific institutions.

In 1767 with the Transit of Venus in the offing – 3 June 1769 – its second appearance that decade – the Society petitioned King George III for financial support to send observers to report on the phenomenon.

‘That the passage of the Planet Venus over the Disc of the Sun, which will happen on the 3rd of June in the year 1769, is a Phaenomenon (sic) that must, if the same be accurately observed in proper places, contribute greatly to the improvement of Astronomy on which Navigation so much depends.

 As the [Fellows] are in no condition to defray this Expense about £4,000 pounds, exclusive of the Expense of the Ships…with all humility and submit the same to your Majesty’s Royal consideration’. Cited, H.C. Cameron, Sir Joseph Banks, Angus and Robertson, Sydney, 1968

1768 – February: To that end James Douglas 14th Earl of Morton, then President of the Royal Society, on 15 February 1768 penned a Memorial requesting the Monarch’s financial support.

Royal money was forthcoming for it was clear accurate and reliable ‘Navigation on which so much depends’ equated with domination over the world’s oceans. Domination would expedite expansion of territory and trade and with strategically placed ‘bases’ more likely assure victory in time of conflict.

‘And the sum of £4,000 pounds clear of fees, [was] to be placed at the disposal of the Society…On March 5th of the next year, 1768, the Navy Board was instructed by the Admiralty to purchase a suitable vessel for the great voyage to the South Seas’. Cameron, Sir Joseph Banks, Angus and Robertson, 1968

1768 – 5 March: Admiralty settled on the Earl of Pembroke. Renamed Endeavour she was a typical coal carriercat-built bark’ of 368 tons ‘stoutly built, flatly bottomed of shallow draught’.

(more…)

LOTTO AND LONGITUDE

Wednesday, August 9th, 2017

‘But by reason of the motion of the Ship, the Variation of Heat and Cold, Wet and Dry, and the Difference of Gravity in different Latitudes, such a watch hath not yet been made”. And not likely to be, either, he implied’.  Isaac Newton cited, Dava Sobel, Longitude, Fourth Estate, London, 1998

‘Not likely’ however in 1736-7 on a timed voyage, England to Lisbon aboard HMS Centurian, H-1 an early model of John Harrison’s  marine watch – proved a reliable time-keeper.

‘He [Harrison] succeeded, against all odds, in using the fourth – temporal – dimension to link points on the three-dimensional globe’. Sobel. ibid.

Accurate time-keeping was essential for the calculation of longitude at sea. John Harrison a Yorkshire carpenter solved that problem  with his sea-going ‘pocket watch’ that gave a ship’s precise position when beyond sight of land.

‘John Harrison, the man who solved longitude in 1759’. Peter Ackroyd, Revolution, Macmillan, London, 2016

(more…)

AUSTRALIA – BRITAIN BY A SHORT HALF-HEAD: CAPTAIN ARTHUR PHILLIP & COMTE JEAN-FRANCOISE LA PEROUSE

Tuesday, April 4th, 2017

‘From the coast of China it [New Holland] lies not more than about a thousand leagues and nearly the same distance from the East Indies, from the Spice Islands about seven hundred leagues, and near a month’s run from the Cape of Good Hope…or suppose we were again involved  in a war with Spain, here are ports of shelter and refreshment for our ships, should it be necessary to sent any into the South Sea’. Admiral Sir George, Historical Records of New South Wales. Vol.1

Captain Louis Antoine de Bougainville’s A Voyage Round the World published in 1771; ‘raised the stakes in the race to see who would open up the Pacific first’. Arthur Herman, To Rule The Waves, Hodder and Stoughton, London, 2005

(more…)

COOK – CAPE YORK TO SOUTH CAPE – COOK – YOUR LAND IS MY LAND

Tuesday, July 19th, 2016

‘The natives of the country…live in Tranquility which is not disturb’d by the inequality of condition; they covet not magnificent Houses, household stuff etc. They sleep as sound in a small hovel or even in the open as the King in His Pallace on a Bed of down.

The Earth and Sea of its accord furnished them with all the things necessary for life’. James Cook, The Endeavour Journal

1770 – 22 August, Cape York: In the name of King George III of England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales Lieutenant James Cook RN, without consent of its owners, claimed ‘discovery’ of the entire eastern coast of New Holland and took possession of it from ‘Cape York in the most northern extremity…to South Cape’.

‘Hugh Grotius [1538-1645] remark[ed] that an act of discovery was sufficient to give clear title to sovereignty ‘only when it is accompanied by actual possession’. Cited, Henry Reynolds, Aboriginal Sovereignty, Three Nations, One Australia, Allen and Unwin, Sydney, 1996

1771 – July, England: When Lieutenant James Cook RN returned to England from the Endeavour voyage (1786-1771) he reported New Holland was inhabited.

(more…)

A CRACKER-JACK OPINION – NO SWEAT

Tuesday, July 19th, 2016

‘During the period 1763-1793 the character of the Second British Empire was being formed…the empire of commerce in the Indian and Pacific Oceans’. Vincent T. Harlow, The Founding of the Second British Empire 1763-1793, Vol. 2 Longmans, 1963

1771 – England: In  July 1771 Lieutenant James Cook RN returned to England from the Endeavour voyage (1786-1771) and reported New Holland was inhabited.

‘The natives of the country…live in Tranquility which is not disturb’d by the inequality of condition’. James Cook, Endeavour Journal

ACTUAL OCCUPATION: ‘EXISTING IN FACT’ – OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY

The whole claim of sovereignty and ownership on the basis of terra nullius [no inhabitants] was manifestly based on a misreading of Australian circumstance, not that this prevented Phillip from hoisting the Union Jack in 1788 and expropriating the owners of Sydney Cove. Stuart Mac Intyre, A Concise History of Australia, Melbourne University Press, 2004  

According to international law of the eighteenth century only if territory had no inhabitants could that territory be claimed by another nation then shared out amongst that other nations’ citizens.

England’s lawyers burned midnight oil as they sought to establish legal grounds that would allow Britain take ‘effective occupation’ from those in ‘actual possessionof the island continent of New Holland.

To that end they studied the tortuous twists and turns of English law, as laid down in the ‘Commentaries’ of Sir William Blackstone England’s leading jurist.

But it was James Cook’s poetic ‘Earth and Sea’ musings, when allied to Swiss born Anglophile Eremich Vattel’s Law of Nations, that provided Britain with NO SWEAT as ‘moral and legal justification’ for wresting New Holland; ‘the fifth great continental division of the earth’ from its Peoples.

Vattel’s Law of Nations, a treatise held to be ‘full of inconsistencies and contradictions’, an English translation published anonymously in 1760, had a profound effect on many of America’s revolutionary pamphleteers including Thomas Jefferson, James Otis and cousins Samuel and John Adams.

‘Study of the pamphlets confirmed my old-fashioned view that the America Revolution was above all else an ideological, constitutional, political struggle’. Bernard Bailyn, Forward, Origins of the American Revolution, Belknap Press, Harvard University, 1967

James Otis, a brilliant somewhat erratic Boston lawyer and prolific pamphleteer, is credited with coining the catch-cry of America’s Patriot Revolutionaries; ‘no taxation without representation’.

AMERICA’S WAR OF INDEPENDENCE: 1775-1783

Post the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763) Patriot America’s call for independence centred on opposition to a plethora of taxes imposed by Britain on her American colonists.

Included were taxes on tea and sugar, Stamp and Navigation Acts, plus a miscellany of nit-picking taxes on domestic things such as glass, paint etc. known collectively as the [Charles] Townshend Acts.

But America’s colonists were not as one. Patriots sought independence from Britain, Loyalists fought for Britain and King George III.

‘The New York loyalist Peter Van Schaack reached his decision to oppose Independence on the basis of a close and sympathetic reading of Locke, Vattel, Montesquieu, Grotius, Beccaria and Pufendorf’. Bailyn. op.cit. 

Patriots and Loyalists however sang from the same hymn sheets, citing the same luminaries.

‘In pamphlet after pamphlet the American writers cited…Vattel on the laws of nature and nations and on the principals of civil government’. Bailyn. op. cit.

1775 – April, Massachusetts: At Lexington the war of words became a war of men and of brothers. While France and Spain joined Washington’s Patriot militia, aside from colonial Loyalists, England was without allies.

1783 – September, Versailles: After eight (8) years of conflict, via the Treaty of Paris against all odds, including treachery from within,  Britain lost the colonies of North and South Carolina, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Rhode Island, her ‘mighty empire in the west’.

‘Britain’s decision in 1786 to occupy New South Wales was partly to compensate for the loss of the American colonies to which unwanted convicts (some 50,000 before the Declaration of Independence in 1776) had been sent and partly to protect Britain’s control of the sea route to Asia via the Southern Oceans’. Professor Martyn, Oxford Companion to British History, 1997

WILLIAM PITT AND NEW HOLLAND

‘Great Britain under the premiership of the younger Pitt (1783-1806)…asserted rights were conferred by effective occupation’. J.A. Williamson, Cook and the Opening of the Pacific, Cambridge University Press, 1946

New Holland was occupied.  Vattel was the go-to man for England’s lawyers. His Law of Nations paved the way for Britain to establish an ’empire of commerce in the Indian and Pacific Oceans’.

EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION: ‘ANSWERING ITS PURPOSE’

‘We had reason to believe, that the natives associate in tribes of many families together…you may often visit the place where the tribe resides, without finding the whole society there…but in the case of any dispute with a neighbouring tribe, they can be soon assembled’. Captain John Hunter, First Fleet Journal, 1793, Bibliobazaar reprint, 2009

In 1788 Captain John Hunter RN commander of HMS Sirius flagship of the ‘First Fleet described Sydney’s Eora Peoples in terms that met Vattel’s criteria of  ‘a civil society...private and exclusive right’.

‘The territory which a Nation inhabits, whether the Nation moved into it as a body, or whether the families scattered over the territory came together to form a civil society, forms a national settlement, to which the Nation, has a private and exclusive right. Every nation which governs itself, under whatever form, and which does not depend on any other Nation has a private and exclusive right’. Eremich Vatel, Law of Nations, 1760

Vattel provided wriggle room – no sweat – ‘failure to cultivate’. Vattel held ‘distinction’ could be made between ‘cultivated and uncultivated lands’.

‘International law recognised an obligation for people to cultivate the land they used. So, in the case of wandering tribes, so he [Vattel] contended, their failure to cultivate the lands they used meant that they [Australia’s First Peoples] had never taken real and lawful possession of these’. Alex Castles, An Australian Legal History, Law Book Company, 1982. 

‘CULTIVATED’ V ‘UNCULTIVATED’ AND ‘EFFECTIVE OCCUPATION’

‘The natives of the country…live in Tranquillity’ Britain knew New Holland was occupied. But lawyers deemed them ‘wandering tribes’. Therefore they had not earned the right to claim ‘real and lawful possession’ of their lands.

‘The main characteristics of wandering tribes throbbed with disapproval’. Henry Mayhew, London Labour and London Poor, 1851, Cited in The Unknown Mayhew, Eileen Yeo and E.P. Thompson, Schocken Books, New York

Mayhew’s insight reveals the mindset that made Vattel’s ‘wandering tribes’ hypothesis such an agreeable fit for Prime Minister William Pitt and his ‘secretive inner cabinet’ – three (3) powerful politicians Henry Dundas, Lord Hawkesbury and Lord Mulgrave.

A multitude of paupers were Britain’s ‘wandering tribes‘. Criminals, petty thieves and n’er-do-wells, despised and shunned ‘for their lax ideas of property…general improvidence…repugnance to continuous labour…disregard of female honour…love of cruelty…pugnacity…utter want of religion’. Mayhew. op.cit.

Australia’s First Nations’ Peoples were not ‘wandering tribes’ seasonal change dictated movement. They lived vigorous, healthy lives governed by strict protocols. Violation and non-observance of clan strictures were punished.

Exacting laws of avoidance, taboo and trespass, preserved a rich family, cultural and spiritual life.

CULTIVATE: ‘TO DEVELOP (FACULTY, MANNER, HABIT) IN ONESELF OR OTHERS BY PRACTICE OR TRAINING’.

Aboriginal cultivation was dynamic. In rhythm with the seasons it was based on the faculty of acute observation, inherited knowledge, training and regular practice. Understanding and obeying the dictates of their semi-arid land provided ‘all the things necessary for life‘.

‘Lieutenant Ball, who had remarked, as well as myself, that every part of the country, though the most inaccessible and rocky, appeared as if, at certain time of the year, it had been all on fire’. Dr John White, Chief Medical Officer, First Fleet Journal, 1794, reprinted Angus and Robertson, 1961

Fire; ‘a carefully calibrated system [fire] kept some areas open while others grew dark and dense’ was the essential ingredient. Judicious use of fire engineered regeneration, guaranteed repetition and allowed predictable outcomes.

By contrast European ‘planter’ cultivation was static. Tied to river systems in this ‘land of drought and flooding rain’ crops and animals would always be prey to the vagaries of weather making outcomes highly unpredictable.

‘The English were the most explicit of all the European colonizers in seeing themselves as ‘planters’. It provided a moral and legal justification for what might otherwise be regarded as the problematic act of dispossessing native peoples of their lands’. David Day, Conquest, A New History of the Modern World, Harper Collins, 2004

Grazing, cropping, harvesting, storage, all labour intensive were inherently confrontational, as each facet demanded protection. Fences – exclusion –  was the ‘planters’ hallmark.

EPILOGUE

Not until the High Court gave its Mabo judgement in 1992 was there a legal recognition that Aborigines owned and possessed their traditional lands…A similar recognition of prior or continuing sovereignty has yet to occur’. Stuart Mac Intyre. ibid. See: Cape York to South Cape – Your Land is My land

‘An effective resolution will require what the British required as long ago as 1768 ‘the consent of the natives’. G. Nettheim, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Monograph No. 7, May 1994, ed. W. Sanders, Australia National University, Goanna Press, 1994

INVASION 1788 – ‘ENGLAND WON AUSTRALIA BY SIX DAYS’ BUT ‘NOT A HINT OF IT SHALL EVER TRANSPIRE’ NT OF IT SHALL EVER TRANSPIRE’

Tuesday, December 2nd, 2014

‘Once again it was [Captain James] Cook’s fate to bring disaster in his wake’. Allan Moorehead, The Fatal Impact, Penguin, 1971

Britain invaded New Holland but; ‘not a hint of it shall ever transpire’.

‘It seems clear that only a few men in the inner circle of [Younger Pitt’s] government knew the exact purposes of the [Botany Bay] settlement; Eden [William Eden later Lord Auckland] was probably not in that secretive circle’. Professor Geoffrey Blainey, Gotham City, The Founding of Australia, The Arguments about Australia’s origins. Ed. Ged Martin, Hale and Iremonger, 1978

Prime Minster William Pitt’s ‘secretive circle’, Lord Hawkesbury, Lord Mulgrave and Henry Dundas, men Australia commemorates and whose names are familiar to Sydney-siders.

(more…)