1970 1975 1980 1985 1995 2000 2005 2009 Respecto al Distrito Federal (estado más rico)

The Papuan Official Collection

Chapter Two

Under Imperial command, Commodore Erskine was sent to officially proclaim the protectorate o f New Guinea in 18846. They left Sydney on 22 October in HMS Nelson. On Sunday 2 November they saw the ‘green and pretty looking coast o f New Guinea near Hood Point’ and later that day went ashore (n.a., 1885:1-2). The rest o f the short narrative describes how Erskine arrived at Port Moresby on 6 November, and, in front o f assembled Europeans and Papuans, made the proclamation official. Part o f this included his well known speech about the protection offered to the Papuans by the Queen and the firing o f a feu de joie. All o f these proceedings were carefully photographed, and compiled in the report Narrative o f the Expedition o f the Australian Squadron to New Guinea October-December 1884 (n.a., 1885:2-6, Souter

1963:62).

Erskine and his crew made a three week tour o f nearby areas o f the new Protectorate, repeating the proclamation and taking further photos. During the trip someone was responsible for recording descriptions o f the Papuans. Included in these descriptions were comments on the ornamentation o f the people, canoes, drums, weapons and musical instruments as well as the languages spoken, some guesses as to the lineages of some groups (Samoan and ‘M ahori’), as well as the influence o f the Missions (n.a.,. 1885:6-7). An unnamed artist illustrated the volume with a painted portraits of two unidentified Papuans, the ‘stem o f [a] C h ie fs canoe, Dinner Island’, a kap kap

or forehead/breast ornament (Cranstone 1961:96), and a chunum knife (lime spatula) known as the ‘Erskine Drummer’ which Erskine apparently collected, but the whereabouts o f which is presently unstated (Beran 1996:176)

William C Lawrie, a Queensland government official acting in a number o f capacities including former Secretary to the Royal Commission on Recruiting Polynesian Labourers in New Guinea and Adjacent Islands probably collected material that is now part o f the Brisbane M useum ’s 1885 collection o f Milne Bay and Central Province collections during the repatriation o f labourers from Queensland back to their islands (Bolton 1980:28 in Craig 1996:60).

In the National Museum o f Australia is a collection consisting o f only one object, a large (161cm long) drum from the Gogodala people in the Western Division. According to Crawford (1981:238) it was used ‘exclusively for the Aida [a male secret society] ceremony’ and comes from one o f the villages ‘inland from the Fly River’. It was acquired by Viscount Elibank, CG Murray (Craig 1996:91), from Resident Magistrate AH Jiear in 1900 while Elibank was him self a resident magistrate. It is probably the earliest object collected from the Bamu River area (Kohen-Raimondo 1999:9). Elibank took it to England where he presented it to the Australian High Commissioner in 1949. The drum was later brought back to Australia to join the collections at the Australian Institute o f Anatomy (Kohen- Raimondo 1999:8).

This overview o f collecting activities demonstrates the kinds o f methods used to describe and, later, to acquire material from New Guinea. For the most part collecting prior to the establishment o f the colony o f British New Guinea, and its renaming as the Territory o f Papua, was carried out by enthusiastic adventurers in the name o f science, although their activities might now appear amateurish and no longer particularly scientific in nature. One important aspect that separates the goal o f the Papuan Official Collection from its contemporaries and predecessors is that the latter were for the most part removed to museums and other institutions overseas, and this removal was planned from the beginning. Initially, Murray intended to keep his collection in Papua, which for its time was a novel idea.

One aspect shared by the collectors described above is that their collections were the result o f European curiosity. They were mostly made with the goal o f understanding or explaining what the people o f New Guinea represented for Europeans. The presence o f people like the Papuans in the Pacific was initially probably as much o f a surprise to the European explorers as their arrival was to the people on the islands of, and around New Guinea. Collecting the material culture they produced and creating theories to explain what made Papuans what they were, was one o f the few methods o f interpretation available to Europeans early in the exploration o f the Pacific. As explored in Chapter Three, these theories became important components in the establishment and management o f colonies in the Pacific.

The Papuan Official Collection

Chapter Two

Creating colonies

The map o f New Guinea is a result o f nineteenth century European highmindedness, conceit and greed; Australian defence fears; and Indonesian ambition. (Nelson 1974:11)

A number o f unsuccessful European settlements were initiated before formal possession o f any part o f New Guinea took place. The earliest (unsuccessful) attempts were on the western side o f New Guinea in the 1790s. An official Dutch expedition took possession o f the south west coast for the Netherlands in 1828. The settlement failed by 1836 with a large loss o f life to malaria (Souter 1963:22, Joyce 1974:8, Moore 2003:135-139). The Dutch Government confirmed the boundaries o f its possession in 1848 (Souter 1963:23).

From around 1847 various missionary groups tried unsuccessfully to initiate missions in the eastern half o f the island, but these activities are outside the sphere o f investigation o f this thesis. For a more detailed account o f the early missions see Oram (1976:14-16) and Gash and Whittaker (1975). Moore (2003:115-117) gives a succinct summary o f German and other European attempts at establishing trade settlements in north eastern New Guinea from the 1840s to the 1870s which are also outside the scope o f this thesis. The establishment o f British, German and Australian colonies is discussed below.

Over the period o f European movement in the north western Pacific, New Guinea had earned a reputation as an island o f riches: spices, bird pelts and timber and Saavedra had propagated a legend that New Guinea was a source o f gold from 1528 (Nelson 2001). During the 19th century the seas around it were a site for whaling, bêche-de-mer, pearls and pearl shell, and all o f these resources attracted international commercial attention (Joyce 1974:8, Moore 2003:103, Souter 1963:18). The reputation o f the Indigenes as hostile and potentially violent made prospective entrepreneurs cautious, but did not prevent them from moving into the area. It did however generate calls for some form o f government control beyond Queensland’s responsibilities in the Torres Strait.

The establishment in Australia o f a New Guinea Company, and the New Guinea Prospecting Association applied pressure to government entities (the Australian colonies) in the 1860s and ‘70s for access to New Guinea. Captain Moresby, when on his survey o f New Guinea in 1873, also recommended that Australia expand into New Guinea (Joyce 1974:9). Britain had created a 1 Foreign Jurisdiction Act in 1843 which extended British law to cover its subjects beyond British territory’ and allowed Britain to maintain legal control over areas that were not formal territories. This did not constitute a claim to New Guinea, however, and Britain did not take formal responsibility for New Guinea for another forty one years (Moore 2003:133).

In 1883, Sir Thomas Mcllwraith, Premier o f Queensland, forcefully urged the British Government to proclaim a protectorate over the south eastern segment o f New Guinea by annexing it on Queensland’s behalf. This was in part a reflection o f the apparent fears in Australian colonies that moves by France and Germany to set up possessions o f their own in the Pacific - France in New Caledonia, and German commercial interests in the Bismarck archipelago - might impinge negatively on British interests, such as the Australian colonies (Nelson 1974, Joyce 1974:10, Moore 2003:149). Britain refused to ratify the annexation (MacGregor 1897:2). However by 1885, after much political manoeuvring, Britain and Germany had agreed to divide the eastern half o f New Guinea between them (Moore 2003:151). In 1888 the British protectorate became a colony named British New Guinea administered by Britain, and by the Australian colonies o f Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria (Moore 2003:149, Quinnell 2000:82).

Oram suggests that the reason Britain maintained control o f its Possession initially was to protect the Indigenous inhabitants. The Australian colonies already had a bad record concerning the treatment o f the Aboriginal people, and ‘neither the Imperial Government nor local British officials considered that Australian colonial governments were fitted to assume responsibility for the administration o f New G uinea’ (Oram 1976:19). A satirical cartoon captioned ‘Annexation - carrying the blessings o f civilization into New G uinea’ which depicts ‘Queensland’ armed with a knife and whip labeled ‘slavery’, moving towards a cowering ‘New Guinea’ conveys the idea clearly (Sydney Bulletin 9 June 1883, in Gash and Whittaker 1975:60).

The Papuan Official Collection

Chapter Two

Major-General Scratchley was appointed the first special Commissioner in charge o f the British protectorate by the Colonial Office (Joyce 1974:14). Scratchley was apparently keen to employ ideas o f ‘induced indirect rule’ in the protectorate by appointing ‘district chiefs who would be vested with governmental authority’ but due to political complications and bad luck, he did not get far in the application o f this style o f administration. He died from malaria in December 1885 (Joyce 1974:15). Scratchley’s attempt to implement indirect rule was the earliest stated intention to govern any part o f New Guinea by this method.

Sir William MacGregor

Upon the declaration o f the colony o f British New Guinea in 1888, Sir William MacGregor was appointed as its administrator. He was bom in Scotland, and trained in medicine before entering the Colonial Service where he served parts o f his career in the Seychelles, Mauritius, Fiji, Lagos (Nigeria), Newfoundland and Queensland (Quinnell 2000:82). Before he was appointed to British New Guinea, MacGregor had been involved with the administration o f Sir Arthur Gordon, the first Governor o f Fiji. M acGregor’s experiences with Gordon influenced the nature o f the policies he applied in his own administration (West 1968:270). M acGregor’s plan was to follow the basic steps o f indirect rule, a policy used by Gordon and his predecessor in Fiji between 1875 and 1880 and which continued to be popular with administrators in other colonies, for example, Lord Lugard’s administration in Nigeria between 1900 and 1907 (Perham 1956:293, West 1968:270). The general idea o f indirect rule was to maintain and utilise existing Indigenous structures o f authority, in order to introduce and sustain British control. A second component entailed retaining ‘all good native custom s’ as well as at least proclaiming the ‘intention not to make sudden changes even with regard to those which were ‘improper” but which all the same would not be allowed to continue (Thomas 1994:110).

Thus, under colonial administrations, good intentions were held for the upkeep o f the rights o f the Indigenous populations with regard to allowing access, ownership and governance o f their own lands. Similar good intentions were stated for at least a

certain amount o f Indigenous control o f their involvement in (indentured) work. However, the system was paternalistic and viewed Indigenous society generally as primitive, static and unable to survive without European direction. The main difficulty with indirect rule was that components o f ‘direct rule’ were often used to establish control. This included an emphasis on recording all activities in writing, and acts such as the appointment o f ‘chiefs’ by the administration where formerly they did not exist, or at least had not been recognised by Europeans and meant that the original aims o f preserving the Indigenous society were undermined (Thomas 1994). For example, Thomas (1994) observes that in general the policy in Fiji was based on a particular understanding o f the way Fijian society worked. This was usually the system operated by the community with which the administrator was most familiar. This meant that the practices o f one segment o f Fijian society in one area were transposed onto other areas where things functioned differently, disrupting systems already in place and causing ‘[w]hat was being ‘preserved’...to be made up and represented as administration proceeded’ sometimes to the point that ‘[ojrdinary Fijians...had to be told by white men what their customs w ere’ (Thomas 1994:108).

So the style o f administration that MacGregor brought with him was not new, and it may not have been particularly appropriate for Papuan communities which, like those in Fiji, varied from place to place. Some level o f anthropological diagnosis was required to understand the communities under control, yet intensive anthropological studies o f particular Indigenous societies for the sake o f more culturally ‘correct’ or informed administration were some way down the track (Knauft 1993, Thomas

1994:107, West 1968:268).

During both MacGregor and M urray’s administrations, these views pervaded every action. As West so simply states ‘a governor can only work on what he believes to be the best information available and he cannot by some mystic process...step outside time and recognise truths which will only become apparent in the future’ (West 1968:268). This does not release colonial agents from their mistakes and misunderstandings, nor from acts which, even when committed, were sometimes considered improper. It does allow those o f us looking back onto these events some

The Papuan Official Collection

Chapter Two

understanding o f the circumstances o f the time from the point o f view o f those at the time.

MacGregor, upon discovering a lack o f men ‘that are accustomed to manage the affairs even o f a village, to say nothing o f a district or a province’ except in Kiriwina, selected his own (MacGregor 1897:41). He saw this as one o f the ‘unusually difficult’ tasks o f government, as time and patience needed to be put into the task of selecting the men, ensuring they had the confidence to promulgate the administration’s wishes, and then to

instruct them in everything, to prepare them to receive responsibility, to teach them that when they are put in authority it is not done that they may benefit themselves and their near relations, or...that they may balance old accounts with former enemies or rivals. (MacGregor 1897:42)

To facilitate his work, MacGregor divided British New Guinea into six Divisions - Western, Central, Northern, North eastern, Eastern, and South eastern into which he placed European resident magistrates who were to maintain law and order and familiarise the Indigenous population with his administration (Moore 2003: 181, Joyce 1974:19) (Map 2.2). To aid the resident magistrates he set up the armed native constabulary in 1890 (Joyce 1974:19). He also set up a system o f village constables in 1892. These individuals were meant to represent government authority, and enforce the Native Regulations put up by the government, reporting back to the resident magistrates on non-compliance, thus enacting the principal o f indirect rule. By 1898 the system appeared to be functioning, but was still experimental - Murray would later build on the basics established by MacGregor (Joyce 1974:19, West 1968:212). MacGregor also initiated the Executive Council to assist him in the political task o f running the administration. It was composed entirely o f Europeans, primarily public servants and commercial interests (Joyce 1974:19).

MacGregor had a formidable reputation for his physical abilities while on patrol. He has been described as indefatigable; continuing to work on into the night, reading or writing after a hard day’s walking (Bensted 1953:680, Monckton 1920:23, 25, Souter

1963:60-68, West 1968). One o f his further great achievements upon retiring from his position was that he had ‘firmly established’ the authority o f the Government ‘over extensive areas, and a considerable extent o f the country has been roughly exam ined,...so as to give general information as to its capabilities’, although as Murray wrote in his review o f Papua in 1912, the exploration and pacification had quite a way to go (Murray 1912).

Map 2.2 British New Guinea and the Divisions of MacGregor’s administration c.1898 (Source: Joyce 1971:131). This map shows Western, Central, Eastern and South Eastern Divisions. By around 1900 the space between the Central and Eastern Divisions became the Northern/North Eastern Divisions (NLA Map NG6-8.3, ‘Map of British New Guinea 1900’ and map G8.160 NG2-10.4 ‘Map of the Territory of Papua’). See also Maps in Chapter Four for Divisions during Murray’s administration.

The third feat for which MacGregor is renowned is for being a somewhat obsessive collector. He arrived in British New Guinea with the intention o f making ethnographic and natural history collections (Quinnell 2000:82). His scientific background as well as his experiences o f the state o f material culture in Fiji were the inspiration behind his endeavours to make as comprehensive a collection as possible (Quinnell 2000:82-3, Thomas 1989). Within a month o f arriving in British New Guinea MacGregor had made his first official tour, and initiated the British New Guinea Official Collection (Quinnell 2000:83). MacGregor collected at most