This article was presented at EAAA 2016, 15th – 16th October, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Abstract
The anthropological discipline “ethnography” can trace its roots to the travel reports describing non-European peoples in the age of exploration. This kind of literature provided the European public with overseas intelligence and foreign curiosities during the early modern period, and in modern times it became a source to enhance understanding of the past of peoples with less remaining self-documentation. This presents a dilemma for scholars because historic travel literature does not usually satisfy the modern standards of social science but may be the only source to access parts of the vanished past. A common solution for these later anthropologists is to adapt these sources to fit the framework of their scholarly works. The results are thus rhetorical, but this characteristic is hidden in the objectivity of the language as typically presented.
This paper takes a historical and bibliographical approach to review the case of Philipp Franz von Siebold’s nineteenth-century adaptation of a Dutch naval officer’s journal from the mid-seventeenth century to write about Ainu culture. In 1643, Cornelis Jansz. Coen, a Dutch officer, sailed on the ship Castricum to today’s Hokkaido, Sakhalin, and the southern Kuril Islands; he wrote in his journal about the Ainu people he encountered. Coen’s journal is still considered one of the few descriptions of the Ainu before the Japanese focused their attention on the north of the country in the late eighteenth century. After Coen’s journal was discovered in an archive and subsequently published in 1858, the famous Japanologist Philipp Franz von Siebold wrote a geographical and ethnographical elucidation of the culture of the Ainu based on Coen’s journal. In this article, von Siebold cited Coen’s journal to analyze eight topics of Ainu culture; this analytic frame makes his discourse appear scientific in its language. However, as we return to Coen’s original journal, it is obvious that he recorded his personal experiences on the voyage and that the journal served no ethnographical purpose beyond investigating the commercial opportunities for the Dutch East India Company.
Reviewing this historical and bibliographical context, this paper reveals that von Siebold’s account of Ainu culture was actually constrained by his sources, and his objectivity was a rhetorical product rather than an empirically studied science. This finding alerts modern scholars of the dangers of using historical sources to study the vanished culture of a particular ethnic group; it also highlights that treating a historical source in its true context is the only mean to avoid the danger.
Introduction
The anthropological discipline “ethnography” can trace its roots to the travel reports describing non-European peoples in the age of exploration. This kind of literature provided the early-modern European public with overseas intelligence and foreign curiosities; in modern times, it helped enhance historical understanding of peoples with less surviving self-documentation. To the Ainu in today’s Hokkaido, Sakhalin, and southern Kuril Islands, collectively called “Eso” in the early modern European literature, Dutch Commander Maerten G. Vries’ 1643 voyage gives a precious glimpse of their culture before the Japanese started their expansion and investigation of this area in the eighteenth century. However, it has to be noted that the objectives of the 1643 voyage were not to discover Eso or ethnography but to find trade opportunities in Cathay, Tartaria, and the mythical Pacific islands that are rich in gold and silver. It was the third attempt by the Dutch East India Company (VOC) to find the gold- and silver-rich islands after receiving this intelligence in 1635 and the first attempt to communicate with Cathay, the mysterious nation believed to be in northeast Asia and Tartaria. Eso was just a waypoint in the itinerary. Based on false knowledge and intelligence, this voyage eventually failed in all its objectives. As the fleet returned without finding Cathay or the gold- and silver-rich islands, the ethnographical and geographical observations in Eso became the only fruit of this voyage, and the literature about this voyage then turned the focus on the findings in Eso, which were never expected by the organizers.
The first extant record of this voyage comes from the annual letter of the Governor-General Anthony van Diemen and his council to Heeren XVII, the executive board of the VOC. This letter described the course of Vries’ voyage and its geographical discovery but said little about the Ainu that the crew had encountered. It only highlighted the silver decorations of the Ainu as the evidence of mineral deposits in Eso. This bias may have reflected the Governor-General’s preference for trade and exploitation over ethnographical findings and his treatment of the latter as auxiliary information. Although the Governor-General neglected the ethnographical findings, he still asked the readers to find the observations in the written reports, which are unfortunately not extant. However, a treatise titled “Korte Beschrijvinghe van het Eylandt by de Iapanders Eso genaemt” (Short Description of the Island Called by the Japanese Eso; hereafter, “Short Description”) was published in 1646 in Amsterdam and is believed to be derived from the reports of the 1643 voyage. The “Short Description” contains more ethnographical observations, offering the general public a curious account of a distant foreign country. A half-century later, the learned burgomaster of Amsterdam, Nicolaes Witsen, incorporated Short Description, along with other notes related to Eso and the 1643 voyage, into his encyclopedic volume of Siberia and northeast Asia, Noord en Oost Tartarye (first published in 1692). Witsen’s focus was still geographical in that he tried to clarify the shape of the eastern coastline of Tartaria with these notes, and the ethnographical data were only used to prove the adjacency of Eso to Tartaria.
It was not until 1858, more than two centuries after Vries’ voyage, that the ethnographical observations caught scholars’ attention when naval historian Pieter Arend Leupe discovered Upper-Steersman Cornelis Janszoon Coen’s journal in the archive and published it with renowned Japanologist Philipp Franz von Siebold’s explanatory commentary. By citing Coen’s journal, Under-Steersman Bakker’s note extracted from Witsen’s Noord en Oost Tartarye, and “Short Description,” von Siebold provided an account of Ainu culture in the mid-seventeenth century, and this account was further supported by the latest information that he had collected in Japan (1835−1837). However, the publication of Coen’s journal also publicized the negative aspects of the voyage, which had been mostly hidden under the rhetoric of “geographical discovery” since the very beginning. Through Coen’s journal, the distress of the 1643 voyage was first made known to the public. The ship got lost in the summer mist of the Okhotsk Sea. The crew tried to find the way to Cathay and Tartaria but were hopelessly trapped in Eso, which they believed to be a large island. The crew asked the Ainu, called “Esoers” in the literature, about the way to Cathay but got no answer. They eagerly noted every clue pointing to precious metals and tried to obtain samples for further examination. All observations of Ainu culture were made beside the endeavor to find trading and mining opportunities. However, von Siebold’s commentary quoted ethnographical observations out of context, turned these auxiliary findings into the primary sources, and organized them using an analytic frame and objective language. Thus, the result must be distorted, and it is necessary to recover the historical context of the 1643 voyage in order to properly understand their ethnographical findings and to critically read von Siebold’s commentary.
Instruction: What to See and How to See
When Commander Maerten Gerrisz. Vries departed from Batavia with the fluit ship Castricum and the yacht Breskens, he and his council were given an Instruction (instructie) from the Governor-General. Commander Vries was a skilled skipper who had served in the VOC since 1622. When he served in Formosa (Taiwan), he had been commissioned to inspect the Spanish fortress in 1639 and 1640. This espionage mission suggested Vries was a good and trusted observer, so it was reasonable to assign him to lead the discovery voyage as soon as he returned from the expedition to expel the Spanish from northern Formosa in late 1642. The Instruction was drafted in early 1643 by the pilot-major of the VOC, Willem Verstegen, who reported the intelligence about the gold- and silver-rich islands, Vries himself, and other people with careful knowledge. This instruction specified the itinerary of the fleet, the known geography of northeast Asia, the fleet’s objectives, how to deal with foreign people, and what and how to observe in a foreign country. This instruction determined the framework of observation in the voyage and the scope of the literature derived from this voyage. Therefore, we may start by analyzing the Instruction to reconstruct the historical context of the ethnographical notes made by the crew of Castricum.
The itinerary planned in the Instruction was based on the existing knowledge of the geography of northern Asia and the northern Pacific, which unfortunately did not reflect any reality, but the Dutch did not know that in 1643. According to the Instruction, the Dutch had known about Eso, and the itinerary stated that. Eso was considered a large country on the route between Japan in the south and Cathay and Tartaria situated further north. The Instruction expected that the fleet would reach Eso soon after leaving the east coast of Japan, but it ordered the fleet not to spend too much time on Eso and to save time and energy for the primary goals: Cathay and the gold- and silver-rich islands. These goals only existed in fantasy, and the detailed orders about building trade relations were totally in vain. Despite the failure due to lack of correct knowledge, the crew of Castricum carefully executed the orders about dealing with foreign people and points of observation when they were trapped in Eso, which incidentally resulted in the geographical and ethnographical findings.
To record geography, the Instruction ordered the crew to chart the longitude and latitude of all countries, islands, points, corners, bights, inlets, bays, rivers, shoals, banks, sands, reefs and rocks in the ocean and on the coasts of Japan, Eso, Cathay or Tartary. Navigational landmarks such as mountains, hills, trees, or buildings were also to be recorded. Maps and landfalls were the common ways to represent these geographical data, so a draughtsman was deployed to the flagship for this mission. Besides the features above water, underwater features, such as currents and types of seabed, were to be recorded for safe navigation. Climate, especially the information about wind directions and monsoon seasons, was also important, for all maritime trade in East Asia relied on the monsoon to travel back and forth in different seasons. The risky voyage of discovery was also dominated by climate. The first Dutch attempt to find the gold- and silver-rich islands failed in 1638 because the crew set a wrong departure point in the wrong season. In fact, the Instruction of the 1643 voyage had an option to cross the Pacific in case the wind did not permit returning from east to west at mid-latitude. The primary objective to gathering all these geographical details was to visit and trade there in the future, but it also helped cartographers to draw the map for that part of the world, of which they became aware for the first time.
Likewise, the documentation of ethnography was also oriented to trade. The Instruction ordered the crew to observe “what fruits and livestock there are, the structure of the houses, the form and appearance of the inhabitants, their clothing, weapons, customs, manners, livelihoods, food, religion, government, wars, and other noteworthy things, particularly whether they are good- or ill-natured.” This long list can be divided into several categories. Fruit, livestock, food, clothing, weapons, and livelihoods indicate the material culture of people. This information is important for foreigners to travel in the country, and they also imply the place’s trading commodities. Customs, manners, and religion are the non-material culture of the people that can indicate how to deal with them and how to build good relations to facilitate future trade. Government was considered an indication of civilization. With much experience of trade, the Dutch well understood they might need to deal with local authorities in order to start trading, and they expected to meet such governments in the 1643 voyage. War is another important factor that can facilitate and also ruin trade. As a foreign power, the Dutch had to stand on the right side in order to trade peacefully. In short, the ethnographical information gathered in the voyage was expected to achieve the objectives of trade rather than scientific curiosity.
The Instruction listed many ethnographical topics of observation to the crew of Castricum, but, unlike geographical topics that may be directly observed with the eyes, gathering ethnographical knowledge requires interactions with the people to be observed. The Instruction also expected Castricum to encounter some foreign ships, and it suggested the crew gather some trade intelligence from them. However, any encounter was to be made carefully, so the Instruction warned the crew not to do certain things. It wanted the crew not to cause enmity with foreign people, for the Dutch believed the foreigners would assume the Dutch guests were coming to seize their properties. Accordingly, the crew was to neglect small-scale unhappy incidents, such as petty thievery, and treat the foreigners well and kindly. Moreover, the Instruction ordered the crew to observe what kind of metal the foreigners mostly wanted, but at the same time the Dutch were not to show eagerness for precious metals. This strategy would hide the real value the Dutch attached to precious metals and help them to bargain and to profit from trade. Besides these warnings, the Instruction did not specify how to do such observation but entrusted it to the crew’s experience.
The Instruction also reminded the crew that all observations were to be recorded carefully. Keeping a full and extensive journal was definitely expected, and this careful record would enable the crew to make a comprehensive report on its return. However, we have to keep in mind that the ultimate objective of this voyage was still probing trade opportunities, so all observations of geography, hydrography, and ethnography were intended to facilitate trade. Documentation of a culture was never an objective in this voyage.
Getting Lost in the Sea Mist of Eso
The Instruction was signed by Governor-General Anthony van Diemen and his council members on February 2, 1643, and handed to Commander Vries. After a two-month preparation, Vries’ fleet, composed of the fluit ship Castricum and the yacht Breskens, departed from Batavia on April 4 to catch the southwest monsoon in order to reach Japan’s east coast directly. The fleet encountered a storm on May 19 that separated the two ships. The flagship Castricum arrived at Japan’s east coast alone two days later. After waiting ten days, Castricum continued its mission alone and left Honshu’s northern end on June 4. The crew of Castricum then entered an unknown country. It took two months for them to realize that Cathay was unreachable, and another three months to admit that the geographical and ethnographical circumstances about Eso were the only achievement of this voyage.
Castricum’s first encounter with the Ainu, called Esoers in the literature, was on June 9 off the coast of Tokachi. Two men with a child approached Castricum in a small ship. They shouted “Tambacko” to indicate that they wanted to barter tobacco with dried salmon and elk-skins. The Dutch fulfilled their demand and observed these foreign people keenly when they were aboard. They noted their physical structure, skin color, clothing, appearance, and their manner of lifting their moustaches to drink. The Dutch were also impressed by the silver decorations on their swords and asked them for the source of the silver. The Ainu men’s reply seemed to indicate that the silver was from the northwestern mountains. This encounter increased the Dutch crew’s interest in Eso because of the possibility of precious metal deposits, but the crew still followed the Instruction not to spend time on Eso. Leaving Tokachi, Castricum again encountered the Ainu near the Habomai Islands. Here the Dutch found the Ainu knew the value of gold and silver but valued other commodities more. The Ainu also invited Castricum to Tamary, which seemed to be a general name of a port and related to the Japanese word tomari, but the Dutch refused in order to be on schedule. In fact, they had already lagged behind their schedule. The weather also hindered their voyage. Not only the storm they encountered in May, but also misty weather near Eso, usually blocked their sight when the crew eagerly tried to find a passage to turn west in order to reach Cathay. On the noon of June 19, the crew found a passage between two islands (Iturup and Urup) and turned to enter it. After the successful passage, they anchored at the foot of a high mountain and sent people ashore to investigate the land. They believed the land was the western tip of the American continent. The Dutch also found some indications of precious metals on Urup, like New Spain and Peru where the Spanish silver coins came from. After three days of investigation at Urup, they determined it was an uninhabited land and thus occupied the land by erecting a wooden cross and naming it “Compagnyslant.”
The voyage from Batavia to Compagnyslant, or Urup, generally followed the planned course and the coastline. It was a common way to sail in unfamiliar water. However, when Castricum left Urup on June 24 and continued to sail northwest in the Sea of Okhotsk to what the crew believed to be Cathay, they could no longer see land. After four days of sailing in the mist, they decided to turn south to find the coastline. On July 3, Castricum anchored off the west coast of Kunashiri Island, which they believed was still a part of Eso land. The next day, the Dutch decided to approach the Ainu to gain some intelligence about this country. Cornelis Janszoon Coen, the Upper-Steersman, brought some trifles ashore in order to contact the Ainu and observe their society, lifestyle, and trade customs. It was the Dutch attempt to initiate onshore ethnographical observation in this voyage. The Dutch and the Ainu had a friendly banquet. Coen recorded their way of welcoming guests, house structure, food, domestic animals, and intention to trade with skins. Coen also got the information about the silver mine from the Ainu and learned that the Ainu called silver “cany.” He noticed the Ainu greatly valued iron tools, and he bartered a piece of sea otter skin with an old axe.
On July 10, the council of Castricum held a meeting to decide whether they should continue their voyage to Cathay or not. Because they had found several indications of precious metal in Eso, which promised to fulfill the objective of this voyage, they wondered about the necessity of visiting the unknown Cathay and the gold- and silver-rich islands. They had already been behind schedule for more than one month, and they did not encounter many trading ships as predicted by the Instruction. The resolution of the meeting was to follow the Instruction and continue the voyage to Tartaria where Cathay was believed to be situated. Coen noted the resolution in the journal, but it was the last time that he mentioned this unrealistic goal.
Leaving Kunashiri, Castricum sailed along the coastline, but missed Soya Strait (Laperouse Strait) due to sea mist. On July 16, the mist lifted, and the crew of Castricum found they were in a large bay, which is called Aniwa/Aniva Bay today. The Dutch encountered some Ainu people who approached Castricum in their small boats. When the locals climbed aboard, the Dutch noticed that their clothes were similar to those of the natives they had met before, so determined that they were still in Eso land. However, the Dutch did not give up the final hope of finding Cathay. They asked the Ainu if they knew such place names as Tartaria, Poulosangy, Jangio, Brema, or Cambali. They were surely disappointed to hear that the Ainu had no idea of the places that only existed in Europeans’ fantasy. They called the place they lived “Amiva,” and their village “Tamary.” The former became the name of the bay “Aniwa 亜庭” in the modern map, and the latter became “Oodomari 大泊” under the Japanese rule (1905−1945). Although the Ainus’ response to the inquiry was disappointing, their silver decorations still stirred up Dutch curiosity. Moreover, when the Dutch took silver and iron to barter fish, the Ainu wanted iron rather than silver. All these indications made the council decide to further investigate the source of silver in this land. In the following two days, Coen and assistants visited Tamary, and Coen recorded what he saw in his journal. His observations included the way to welcome guests, house structures, food and the way to eat, tableware and furniture, domestic animals, tombs, and the vegetation of this country. Coen also gave the Ainu some trifles and tobacco to show Dutch generosity. Although Coen made a lot of ethnographical observations in two days, he failed to discover the source of silver. He only corrected his former translation of “cany” from “silver” to “iron.” In fact, Kani is a general term for metal in the Ainu language. Coen’s correction confirmed his observation that the Ainu valued iron more than silver.
Castricum left the bay of Aniva Bay filled with hope. The ship turned north again at the south tip of Sakhalin and on July 26 reached latitude N. 48°54ʹ, which was supposed to be close to Cathay. The council decided to send people ashore the next day to see if the ethnic composition was different from that of Eso. Again, Coen led the investigation team. They found tombs and abandoned houses similar to those that they had seen before. In the afternoon, they encountered two remarkable persons guarded by two warriors. Coen approached them with the gesture of friendship that he had learned before and was welcomed by the remarkable persons. Their fashion, clothes, and swords with silver decorations were similar to the Ainu whom Coen had encountered before, so Coen judged that they were still Esoers. One of the remarkable persons became Coen’s guide. He led Coen to see a “white man” dressed in Japanese fashion. Coen greeted him in Japanese, and he seemed glad, though Coen did not understand his reply and inquiry. Coen’s team was then invited to an Ainu village and enjoyed a banquet. Coen observed their furniture, manner of eating and tableware in the house. Coen found they had animal skins to trade, but trading was not the objective of this investigative trip. After presenting the Ainu with trifles and tobacco, Coen left the village for Castricum with an eagle as the Ainus’ present. On the way out, Coen noticed a bear in a cage around which flower branches and many shavings hung. He believed it was a sort of religious worship.
The Dutch only spent one day investigating this place, which was later named the Bay of Patientie. As Coen returned to Castricum, it lifted anchor, and the crew tried to sail round the cape on their southeast. They tried for five days, but the contrary wind prevented them from sailing further north. On August 3, the council made the resolution not to continue the mission to Cathay, for they had done their uttermost, and the appointed time had already expired. The council decided to sail southeast to return to Eso’s east coast in order to prepare for the next mission: the gold- and silver-rich islands in the Pacific Ocean. On August 15, Castricum arrived at Akkeshi, called “Ackys” in the literature, and the crew started repairing the ship and supplying themselves with fresh water and food. The Dutch built a good relationship with the Ainu of Akkeshi. The chief of Akkeshi, called Noiasack, knew that the Dutch wanted silver and volunteered to guide the Dutch to the mine. However, he claimed that the silver mine was situated in enemy territory, so he refused to go further. Later, other Ainu people confirmed that Akkeshi had no friends but Coutsiaer (Kushiro). Cirarca (Siranuka) had silver, and Tacapsy (present-day Tokachi) had gold, but both places were in the territory of Akkeshi’s enemy. During the stay at Akkeshi, the Dutch had long-term contact with the Ainu, but Coen’s journal did not record his ethnographical observations much. Coen was busy investigating the area surrounding Akkeshi, where he and his team met no human, finding only an abandoned wooden fortress near Akkeshi. Coen only witnessed how the Ainu chief executed his authority by waving his wooden club. Perhaps he also saw the arrangement of pregnant women when they were about to give birth. When Castricum was about to leave Akkeshi for the Pacific, Coen concluded his ethnographical observations briefly in the entry of August 31.
Besides Coen’s observations, it was also at Akkeshi that the Dutch encountered a Japanese-speaking merchant who sailed to Akkeshi from Matsumae. The multiracial merchant’s name was Ory, who had a Japanese father and Ainu mother. Because they could communicate with the Japanese, the Dutch learned more about Eso from Ory. As noted, the Instruction recommended that the crew ask local merchants for trading intelligence, and Ory’s appearance gave the Dutch a perfect chance to understand Eso more deeply. Ory told the Dutch that Eso was a large island and drew a sketch of Eso from memory. He said that the local products of Eso were skins, whale oil, and whale meat, which he traded for rice, frocks, osake, tobacco, and lead rings. Ory suggested the Dutch bring commodities to Matsumae or Cameda (Hakodate) to trade with Matsumaedono, the lord of Eso. He also provided the Dutch with gold and silver samples from Cirarca and Tacapsy. Although Ory should have been familiar with the Ainus’ culture, their communication seemed not to focus on it. Both parties were more interested in trade. Besides, unlike the detailed description of the Ainu that the Dutch had made before, their description of Ory was limited to saying that he was smart. Perhaps Ory looked similar to the Japanese with whom the Dutch had been familiar in Hirado and Nagasaki, so there was no need to describe him much. Ory departed from Akkeshi on August 28. Four days later, the Dutch also left Akkeshi for the gold- and silver-rich islands. They named Akkeshi “the Bay of Good Hope” so that the following voyage would yield the promised result. Unfortunately, the result again disappointed them. They did not find any island and arrived at Formosa on November 18 with the yacht Breskens, which rejoined Castricum in early November on the sea south of Kyushu.
By reviewing Castricum’s voyage, we can conclude some points from Coen’s journal and the Instruction. First, the Dutch had no intention to spend time on Eso, and they investigated Eso in order to find the way to Cathay and Tartaria. Second, although the hope of finding Cathay gradually faded, and the Dutch started to pay more and more attention to the Ainu in July 1643, their primary interest was still precious metal and trade. The encounter in Tamary was initiated by observing the Ainus’ silver decorations. Without noticing the silver decorations, the Dutch would not have made further observations on Ainu culture. That was also true at the Bay of Patientie where the Dutch went ashore to see whether the inhabitants looked the same as Esoers or not, in order to find some clues for the route to Cathay. Even in Akkeshi, where they met a communicative informant, the inquiries were focused on commodities and trade. In sum, even though Coen’s ethnographical observations in Eso were fascinating, leaving precious documentation of Ainu culture in the mid-seventeenth century, the ethnographical observations were always auxiliary findings beside trade intelligence in the literature. It was Phillip Franz von Siebold, the renowned Japanologist, who extracted the ethnographical observations out of the commercial context of the 1643 voyage and turned the literature from travelogue to ethnography.
Von Siebold’s Analytic Frame and Objective Tone
The 1643 voyage obviously did not fulfill its original objectives of reaching Cathay and the gold- and silver-rich islands, but the intelligence about Eso still satisfied Governor-General Anthony van Diemen and his council. Another voyage to Eso was planned, but it was never carried out. The collection and literature of the 1643 voyage to Eso were transferred to the Netherlands in January 1644, and van Diemen and his council praised the discovery of Castricum in their Generale Missiven to Heeren XVII. Although this communication should have been considered confidential at that time, Castricum’s discovery soon became public. As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, the “Short Description” about Eso was published in 1646, which was probably derived from the original report of Vries and his officers. The latest maps of Eso based on Castricum’s discovery were also made by cartographers, such as Jan Jansson’s Eso map dated 1644. However, the primary materials about this voyage, such as original reports, journals, charts, and maps, were kept in archives and separated in the following centuries. The original report and Commander Vries’ journal, which were supposed to exist, were lost. The map of Eso drawn by the crew was transferred to France and is now kept in Bibliothèque nationale de France. The sketches of landfalls and some notes made by crew members still existed in the late seventeenth century, so Nicolaes Witsen could collect and cite these materials in Noord en Oost Tartarye. Witsen’s collection preserved many materials about Eso, but he was perhaps the last European scholar who paid such interest in Eso before the nineteenth century. It was not until Dutch naval historian Pieter Arend Leupe’s publication of Coen’s journal in 1858 that the 1643 voyage and its achievement again gained public attention.
The 1858 publication Reize van Maarten Gerritsz. Vries in 1643 naar het Noorden en Oosten van Japan was composed of two parts, historical materials and scholarly research. The historical materials included the Instruction, the resolutions of the Governor-General and his council to initiate and conclude the voyage, Coen’s journal, and Verstegen’s 1635 memorandum about the gold- and silver-rich islands. These materials demonstrated the context and the course of the 1643 voyage from its initiation to conclusion. The Japanologist Philipp Franz Balthasar von Siebold, renowned for his work Nippon and his studies on Japanese flora and fauna, contributed the scholarly research. The title of this study “Aardrijks- en Volkenkundige Torlichtingen tot de Ondekkingen van Maerten Gerritsz. Vries, met het Fluitschip Castricum Anno 1643” (Geographical and Ethnographical Elucidation to the Discovery of Maerten Gerrtisz. Vries with fluit ship Castricum in 1643) indicated it was a treatise on two distinct subjects. Von Siebold divided this treatise into four parts. The first part focused on the geographical discovery of the 1643 voyage and the identification of historical records with modern coordination and geographical knowledge. The fourth part was dedicated to “Productions of Aino Islands,” which was also geographical. Two ethnographical parts were placed between the geographical parts. The second part was von Siebold’s reconstruction of Ainu culture according to the literature of the 1643 voyage, but this interesting part should be discussed later. The third part was about the Ainu language, but the materials came from travelers’ notes from the nineteenth century. The crew of Castricum did not record much about the Ainu language except a few phrases, such as cany “silver” or “iron” and tacoy, understood as a greeting word or as meaning “friend.”
The reconstruction of Ainu culture was titled “De Aino Stam” (The Ainu Tribe) by von Siebold. Unlike the critical examination in the geographical parts, here von Siebold discussed Ainu culture mostly by quoting passages from historical materials. These materials also included some pre-1643 European sources, which von Siebold placed before the ethnographical observations derived from the 1643 voyage. These travelers included Jesuit Luís Fróis and Hieronymus de Angelis, British Captain John Saris, Dutch Opperhoofd at Hirado François Caron. All these accounts were extracted from Nicolaes Witsen’s Noord en Oost Tartarye. Von Siebold believed it was better to re-publish them together due to the rarity of Witsen’s work. Von Siebold did not comment on these pre-1643 sources perhaps because they were rather superficial and most of these travelers, except de Angelis, had never been to Eso in person. To the sources from the 1643 voyage, the core materials in his ethnographical elucidation, von Siebold added many footnotes to refer to his own Nippon or French and Russian travelers’ accounts in the nineteenth century. In fact, von Siebold valued his own Nippon highly because he believed his collection of modern navigators and Japanese explorers provided a detailed description of Eso. Von Siebold believed that comparing the modern and the early modern accounts would “confirm, elucidate and enrich the communications of our old Dutch navigators.”
Not all the literature of the 1643 voyage was quoted by von Siebold, but he chose three sources that contained most ethnographical observations. The first source was Coen’s journal, which had been incorporated into the same volume. The second one was the “Short Description,” the publication of 1646. Von Siebold mentioned that the “Short Description” was incorporated into Witsen’s work, but it is obvious that he did not quote from Witsen’s version, for Witsen replaced all Latinate words in the original with Germanic equivalents, but von Siebold’s quotation retained Latinate words. The only 1643 account Witsen quoted from was that of Under-Steersman Philips Jakobsz de Bakker, and Witsen’s work provided the only extant copy of it. The most-cited account was Coen’s journal, which von Siebold cited 39 times. The next was the “Short Description,” which he cited 22 times. Bakker’s account was cited only three times. This statistic is not surprising because Coen’s journal contained detailed day-by-day observations. However, constrained by its format, Coen’s journal usually did not provide generalizations about Ainu culture, and he tended to preserve generalization for the report. This suspicion is supported by the “Short Description,” which was probably derived from the general report of this voyage, and in this text generalization was more common.
Counting citations day-by-day in Coen’s journal reveals a more interesting aspect of von Siebold’s selection. The three-day stay at Tamary was cited 17 times, the largest number of citations from the journal. Next were the observations made at the one-day visit to the Bay of Patientie, cited 11 times by von Siebold. The third was the first Dutch encounter with the Ainu off the Tokachi coast. In contrast to these three encounters, other longer visits received less attention from von Siebold. The week-long stay at Kunashiri was cited only four times, and the half-month stay at Akkeshi only five times. Von Siebold’s selection was constrained by his sources, especially by Coen’s preference and motivation to record details. It is understandable that the Dutch would be very interested in the foreign people they first encountered at Eso, and thus give more description of them, especially of their appearance. This enthusiasm gradually reduced as the encounters increased. At Kunashiri, although Coen’s mission was to investigate the circumstances of Esoers, he still felt the people of Kunashiri were poor and not worth an extensive description. The more sophisticated silver decorations encountered at Tamary undoubtedly aroused Dutch interest in the place and the people. At Tamary, Coen recorded in detail his trip ashore, and these observations were von Siebold’s window on Ainu culture two centuries earlier. Coen’s enthusiasm was also demonstrated at the Bay of Patientie, where he provided a detailed account of his one-day trip ashore. At Akkeshi, it seemed Coen was busy investigating the vicinity and other duties, so he said much less on Ainu culture. However, it has to be noticed that his journal entry for Akkeshi was not short, but Coen paid attention to different things, especially to silver mines claimed by the Ainu chief. Indeed, it was impossible for von Siebold to recall Coen’s observations from places other than from his journal, but von Siebold did not reveal this constraint in his treatise. Rather, we see that Coen’s journal, the “Short Description,” and Bakker’s account were divided into passages and quoted out of their original context. Von Siebold used an analytic frame to reorganize the historical sources that turned the subjective accounts into objective tones.
The extracted passages were organized into eight topics, which indicated the aspects of Ainu culture that von Siebold wanted to emphasize. These eight topics were as follows:
- Form and features of the Ainoes;
- Government, Aino-Chiefs, administration of justice, punishment;
- Religion, burial places;
- Manners and customs, manners of life and food;
- Dwellings, houses, huts, barns, forts, etc.;
- Dress, ornaments, etc.;
- Arms, vehicles, instruments for hunting and fishing;
- Trade.
It might be interesting to compare von Siebold’s eight topics with the German tradition of Ethnographie or Völkerkunde, but it might also be meaningless. Because von Siebold’s study was not empirical but induced by the literature of the 1643 voyage, it was hard to expect that he could satisfy every aspect according to a prescribed framework. We also notice that most topics involved visible customs, manners, and artifacts, but abstract ideas were absent. Even if religion is an abstract idea, most of von Siebold’s quotations were limited to the description of burial places, which are still concrete, visible items. This bias was again influenced by the nature of the observations. These observations were made through brief encounters rather than long-term interactions when the crew of Castricum had no means to understand the Ainu clearly. Therefore, von Siebold could only work on these imperfect sources to highlight some aspects of Ainu culture. His solution was to tailor a framework to fit existing sources, and the result is his presentation in this treatise.
However, if we further examine the sources of the cited passages, we can see that von Siebold perhaps generalized about the diversity within Ainu culture. For example, under the topic “Manners and customs, manner of life and food,” von Siebold quoted the following passages to describe the way the Ainu ate and drank:
They make no use of salt.” (J.) [18th July, Tamary] “Both men and women are very fond of strong drinks and are very soon intoxicated.” (K. B.) [9th June, Tokachi] “We drank all round some arac and tobacco, of which they all seemed very desirous.” (J.) [27ht July, Bay of Patientie] “When they drink they lift up their moustaches with one finger.” (J.) [9th June, Tokachi]
He quoted the following passages to describe weapons:
“We admired the cunning manner, in which their arrows were made, some rubbed with poison.” (J.) [6th June, Tokachi]
“The oldest had a quiver hanging to his head, with a bow in his hand and a sword at his side. We saw no arms besides.” [3rd July, Kunashiri]
“The inhabitants (Gulf of Aniwa) had some of them hangers at their sides, the blades of which were inlaid with silver, very curiously, as were also the sheaths and points. The handles of their hangers were also very beautifully inlaid and worked in silver.” (J.) [16th July, Tamary]
The dates and place names in brackets are added by the author to indicate their source in Coen’s journal. With these annotations, it is clear that von Siebold combined several sources to describe aspects of Ainu culture. However, even Coen’s journal describes a certain diversity among the Ainu in different places. According to Coen’s impression, the Ainu in Kunashiri were poor, but the Ainu at Tamary had rich decorations in their houses and bodies. The Ainu in the Bay of Patientie also had rich decorations, but the population seemed smaller. However, it was here that Coen noticed the shaved wood sticks hung around a caged bear as a religious arrangement. All these differences were eliminated in von Siebold’s quotations. Another elimination by von Siebold was actually the most important element of the 1643 voyage, about searching for Cathay and precious metals. In von Siebold’s quotation, no clue reveals these original objectives. Even in the passage about how the Ainu preferred iron to silver, von Siebold did not declare that it was the Dutch’s probation to see how the Ainu value metals in order to bargain for a good price in future trade. Perhaps the most stunning sample to illustrate this intentional elimination is a passage about an Ainu woman:
The women, especially the old ones, are not ignorant and seem to have much authority, “on which the oldest woman, understanding my meaning etc.”
What was Coen’s meaning? We cannot see it in von Siebold’s quotation. In fact, Coen noticed the silver decoration on an Ainu’s sword, so he asked about the source of silver. Only one old woman understood Coen’s question and tried to answer him by gesturing in the direction of a silver mine and showing how to process raw ore to silver:
The plate of his sword was mounted with silver, I asked him with signs how he came by it, or where it was to be obtained; whereupon the oldest female understanding my idea first, immediately showed me, digging with her hands in the sand, and then took some sand in her hands and made a sound of hissing, and then did it into a pot, and gestured that it then was put on a fire, and that it was good. Cany is their way of saying silver.
The entire context was lost in von Siebold’s quotation. This elimination is crucial to represent the 1643 voyage to the public. In von Siebold’s geographical and ethnographical elucidation, the purposes of the 1643 voyage seemed to be purely scientific: to elucidate the geography and the ethnic culture that were unknown to the Europeans. It made the 1643 voyage look like the scientific expeditions led by Comte de Lapérouse or Captain Cook. However, government-sponsored scientific expeditions were an eighteenth-century idea. In the seventeenth century, especially in the VOC, the objectives of the voyage were not science but trade and colonization. The disregard of science in the VOC was vividly illustrated by the lament of Nicolaes Witsen, who was also a member of Heeren XVII: “Why does your Honour ask about scholarly curiosity in India? No. Sir, it is only money and no knowledge which our people are after, which is regrettable.”
Concluding Remarks
By reconstructing the historical context of the 1643 voyage through scrutiny of the literature, this study clarifies that its primary objectives were typical in the seventeenth century, i.e., trade and precious metal. Even though the Instruction from the Governor-General and his council asked the crew to carefully observe customs and manners, the usage of these ethnographical observations was to assist the development of trade in the target countries. The voyage was motivated by trade and search for precious metals, the objectives were all meant to accomplish these goals, and the results of the voyage must also have been. However, as the objectives around Cathay and the gold- and silver-rich islands eventually failed, the circumstances around Eso, an unimportant waypoint according to the Instruction, became the only praiseworthy fruit from the voyage. The General Missiven, reported in 1644, also helped to conceal the failure and to recast the voyage as a successful discovery of Eso trade. After scrutinizing the literature of the 1643 voyage, the study confirms that the ethnographical observations only occupied a small, auxiliary part in the descriptions about Eso. It was the Japanologist Philipp Franz von Siebold who amplified these ethnographical glimpses into a full treatise two centuries after the voyage. Nevertheless, von Siebold’s reorganization of the ethnographical observations disguised the voyage as a scientific expedition by eliminating commercial motivations from his quotations. This elimination turned von Siebold’s “De Aino Stam” (The Ainu Tribe) into a rhetoric of “the Age of Discovery.” The finding of this paper alerts modern readers to the dangers of using historical sources to study the vanished culture of a particular ethnic group, and treating historical sources in the true context is the only means to avoid this danger.
Kleine Schriften 拙搞收集 