ASSYRIANS IN AUSTRALIA (1877–1928)

Australian-Assyrian history does not commence with the post-war migration period that many believe. It goes back to the arrival on these shores of men and women who recorded their country of birth as Assyria, who identified themselves as Assyrians; as early as the 1880s. Even though such a state has not existed since the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE.

Australia did not yet exist when the first Assyrians came here. It was a collection of six British colonies, who, in 1901, joined together to form the Commonwealth of Australia. Assyrians have an approximately 125-year recorded history in this wide brown land. Under the terms of this country’s White Australia Policy, non-European immigration was very strictly limited. Section 39 (5) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act read that no aboriginal native of Australia, Asia, Africa, or the Islands of the Pacific (except New Zealand) were allowed to vote or to stand as candidates in elections, except under certain exemptions. Even if they were naturalised British citizens. Native born Asians included Turks, Arabs, Iranians and Assyrians, who did manage to settle in Australia and were thus excluded from gaining citizenship. Exceptions were few and far between. Despite years of protests and lobbying this situation did not change for decades.

Interestingly enough, Hellenes, Armenians and Jews born in Asia were considered to be Europeans. A migrant from Syria, Richard Demitri Saleeby wrote to the Secretary of the Department of External Affairs on 5 May 1904 claiming, among other things that “although I am a native of Syria, I am no more an Aboriginal of that Country than the Britisher who is born in Australia or New Zealand, is an Aboriginal of those countries.” Born in ;Sud-el-Garb, Lebanon, Syria on 7 February 1872, Saleeby had arrived in Australia from New Zealand on 15 June 1895. He first enquired about, then applied for, British (and Australian) citizenship on 21 January 1904.

Having not received a satisfactory response, Saleeby wrote once again to the Departmental Secretary on 17 May 1905 claiming, among other things: (1) That the modern Syrian has no relation whatsoever to the Ancient Aboriginal Syrians. (2). That the Syrian language is not spoken by the present nation, although they are called Syrians. (3). That the lineal line of my Ancestors in particular dates back from the Crusaders, as the name of the family bear this contention out, being the literal Arabic translation of ‘Crusaders’. (4). That the modern Syrians are admitted to be of the White or Cocaisian races of the world and no coloured stigma has ever been attributed to my people in any era.

Saleeby settled in Redfern in central Sydney, went as far as to claim in 1905 that certain of his ancestors at some remote and unspecified date emigrated to Syria from Normandy by way of Scotland ; and that qualified him as a European.. Saleeby’s aim was simply to gain naturalisation. In his own words, Saleeby said that his grandparents are Normans ...their immigration to Syria ... place from Scotland where some of this family are residing now (his words).

His application for citizenship was finally rejected on 29 September 1905. As mentioned earlier, what pre-occupied the Australian authorities the most was the maintenance of a White Australia through the severe restriction of immigration from countries outside Europe. The infamous Immigration Restriction Acts, the first of which came into force at the beginning of 1902. Perhaps surprisingly, this policy was actively supported by some migrants from the Middle East. In 1909 the then-Minister for External Affairs, Mr Batchelor, was of opinion that Syrians should certainly be permitted to become naturalised. Perhaps if any modification of the existing practice in administering the Immigration Act is contemplated the position of relatives of persons resident in Australia might be given first consideration. It may be mentioned that the Syrian community of Melbourne has during the recent war crisis shown considerable public spiritedness some of the younger Australian born members of the community having joined the expeditionary forces while others have contributed large sums towards the relief funds.

In letters criticising the Alien Law as regards the Syrians to the newspapers in Sydney and Melbourne on 10 January 1910, a native of Beyrouth, Syria named W. Abourizk, who had been naturalised in Austrlia, wrote: “I am strongly in favour of a white Australia but in a wider sense of the word. Keep Australia free from the Mongolian and black races. Keep it free from those base Europeans whose actions brand them the worst type of convicts about. I am not in favour of admitting all classes of Syrians into Australia. On the contrary I always objected to their coming in great numbers to the Commonwealth merely because some of them were a disgrace to their countrymen; but it is really very unjust to put restrictions on them which are very humiliating in the extreme. Why no Syrian can leave the Commonwealth without being subjected to the humiliating process of hand print and without his photo being taken in four different positions - a process which befits criminals only. I should suggest an amendment of the act in a way enabling educated Syrians with some capital to get into the Commonwealth. Syrians already in Australia should be allowed to travel unmolested i.e. without being compelled to print their hands.

In a memorandum dated 16 March 1910, the Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Foreign Affairs, Mr Attlee Hunt wrote that Mr. Abourizk, is strongly in favour of a white Australia, and thinks the country should be kept free from Mongolians and the baser sort of Europeans. Young Syrians, educated and with some capital, are always leaving their country because they do not like its Government. Abourizk had lived in Australia for 18.5 years before returning to Beirut in June 1909. According to Mr Attlee, Abourizk thinks he can open trade between Australia and Turkey in leather, wheat, flour, opal, etc. Abourizk wrote to the Minister for External Affairs, Mr Batchelor, on 7 June 1910: “Syrians are a white race, although they are born under an Asiatic sun. (Abourizk wanted Australia to permit more Syrian and European emigration.) Why not admit Syrians who know English and who have at least the sum of 20 (pounds) and why not appoint a Syrian on the examination board of immigrants.” Abourizk received a final response from Attlee Hunt on 16 July 1910: “Admission will not be permitted in the case of Syrians arriving here unless applications have been submitted to and approved by the Department before the persons concerned come to Australia.”

What is curious though is that in a 4 January 1911 letter to the General Secretary, Australian Natives Association, Perth, Western Australia, the Minister for External Affairs, Mr E.L. Batchelor, wrote: “It was the practice in all the States to issue Certificates of Naturalisation to Syrians prior to the 1st January, 1904. Consequently cases are often brought to my notice where some brothers of a family who applied to the States were naturalised and are now fully qualified Australian citizens, while other brothers who applied to the Commonwealth subsequently are refused. Batchelor however offered neither an explanation for these discrepancies nor a solution: “I fear nothing from the inclusion in the ranks of citizens of the Commonwealth of Syrians - men of a race not far removed from our own stock, and whose religion is very often the same as ours.”

In a 27 October 1914 memorandum from the Chief Clerk to the Minister, the author wrote that the “Syrians hold that they belong to the Caucasian stock and that therefore the fact that they have been born on Asiatic soil should not stamp them as Asiatics; in the general acceptation of that term as understood in connection with the administration of the Act. Instances have come under the notice of the Department where different members of the same family have been born, some in Turkey in Europe, and some in Syria (Turkey in Asia), the former being eligible to secure naturalisation as Europeans while the others born in Syria are debarred from securing that privilege on account of the Asiatic birth.” These people make a strong protest that so much difference is shown in administration on the point whether a man is born on one side of the Bosphorus or the other.

In another memorandum from the Secretary to the Minister, dated 27 October 1914, the author wrote that “the question of how to deal with Syrians has caused the Department considerable difficulty. It will be remembered that the Act prohibits no nationalities or races by name. This feature of the law has been valuable on account of the elasticity which it permits to the Department, although at the same time it makes continuity in administration difficult.” Once again, the Australian official underlines the geographic basis of ‘Syrian’ identity. The people whom we roughly describe under this name come from that part of Turkey in Asia which lies to the North of Palestine and of which the principal towns are Beirut, Damascus and Tripoli. In appearance Syrians approximate far more closely to the European types than to those of India or parts of Asia further east. Syrians cannot be distinguished from the people of Southern Spain, Italy or Greece and in fact are considerably lighter in complexion than the Turks. They are practically all Christians being adherents either of the Greek Church or of a Church affiliated with the Roman Catholic. Courts in the United States had decided that a Syrian was a free white person, and consequently eligible to be naturalised.”

The author of the memorandum informed the Minister that the final decision was up to him, but “In my opinion if there is no restriction there will be a considerable influx which I personally would consider undesirable. Moreover the unrestricted admission of Syrians will give rise to administrative difficulties in regard to other inhabitants of Asia Minor many of whom, notably the Armenians, are practically white. Regard should be had also to their clannishness and the fact that they hardly ever engage in the producing industries so that on the whole I consider that unrestricted admission would be a mistake.” The Secretary favoured admitting only the dependants of individuals already here. C.W.C. Mann wrote to a Member of the Legislative Council (NSW) on 12 January 1928: “complaints were made to the Department by several well-known Syrians residing in different States as to the necessity for special care to be taken to prevent the poorer types of Syrians from being introduced.”

All non-British citizens in Australia were required to register with the Commonwealth authorities. During wartime, all countries adopt special security measures aimed at monitoring people from hostile countries resident in their lands. In 1916 Australia adopted the War Precautions (Alien Registration) Regulations Act which required “all persons (male and female) who are not British subjects” to register with the police station nearest to the place they were living. Failure to comply meant a fine of up to 100 pounds or up to six months in prison. The original Alien Registration Forms are now kept in the Australian National Archives in capital cities across the country. Each state kept its own records, so far the purposes of this paper I will be looking at the NSW records. Each form recorded personal information like name, sex, date of birth, birthplace, nationality, residence, occupation and the date the individual entered Australia. Physical features like height, hair and eye colour and notable marks were also recorded. Those who could not sign in writing, did so with a thumb print.

To historians, these documents hold many fascinating details. To scholars of Assyrian history, they are even more special. Here we have men and women, living in New South Wales in 1916, born in the 1800s, declaring their nationality to be “Assyrian”. Some even list their country of birth as “Assyria”, even though the entire region at the time was under the Ottoman Turks. One couple, Roger Andrew Batros and his wife Saleemy who declared themselves to be of Syrian nationality, told Australian authorities on 14 May 1910 that they had come to these shores because: “I am a Christian Syrian and the Christians in SYRIA have been persecuted by the TURKS because of their religion and their sympathies with the Allies.”

There are many Alien Registration Forms that record “Syria” and “Syrian” for the country of birth and nationality. So who were these “Syrians”? These are not to be confused with the citizens of the Arab Republic of Syria, nor with the followers of the Syriac Orthodox or Syrian Catholic Churches. These “Syrians” were predominantly what we now call Maronite Catholic Lebanese. The Governor of New South Wales, His Excellency G. Strickland, wrote to the Foreign and Colonial Office in London on 10 June 1914 on the “Syrians” living in his state: “I am informed that the Syrians in New South Wales number between 2,500 and 3,000. They are as to religious grouping divided into Malachites, Maranites (adherents to the Roman Catholic Church), Greek Orthodox, and Members of the Jewish Community. The Malachites and Maranites each have a church in Redfern. Those professing Greek Orthodox tenets have not got a separate church, but frequent a Greek Church at Surry Hills.”

The point of Governor Strickland’s letter was: “The Reverend Nicholas Schehadie asked that he should be recognised by me as the Head of an Established Religious Community desiring to have their religious services conducted in Arabic.” His Beatitude Exarkos Nicholas Schehadie, from Kura in Lebanon, had been sent to Australia by the Patriarch of Antioch Gregorios IV. A few years after this letter was written, St. George’s Antiochian Orthodox Church opened its doors, again in the suburb of Redfern, where it still stands today. In a letter dated 19 July 1914, the British Consul at Damascus, Mr G.P. Devey, confirmed that Exarkos Nicholas Shehadie was legitimate and that the Syrian Greek Orthodox were Arabic-speaking. He estimated there were about 1,000 in Sydney, another 1,000 in Melbourne and a smaller number in New Zealand. Official recognition was then granted to the Exarkos.

The “Greek Church” the letter mentions is the Greek Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity (Ayia Triada) on the corner of Bourke and Ridge Streets, Surry Hills. Still operating today, it is the oldest Orthodox church in the Southern Hemisphere. The church committee was formed in 1897 including two “Syrians”, Aziz Melik and Joseph Malouf, with the foundation stones being laid on 29 May 1898 and the inauguration being held on 16 April 1899. A number of “Syrians” are listed amongst the donors to the building fund and two of them, J. Malouf and Abraham Aboud, were among the church’s original trustees. Orthodox “Syrians” continued to attend services at Ayia Triada until 1920 when they built their own, Arabic-speaking, church. The construction of Melbourne’s first Orthodox church, the Evangelismos tes Theotokou (Annunciation of Our Lady) in 1900-1901 was also accomplished with the co-operation of “Syrians”. These Orthodox “Syrians” were not followers of the Syriac Orthodox Church (Suryoyo, nicknamed Jacobites, not considered to be Orthodox by the Oecumenical Patriarchate) but Arabic-speaking Antiochian Orthodox, as they are known today. The Malachites the letter refers to are the Melkite Catholics, whose church (St. Michael’s, on Golden Grove Street, Redfern) is still operating today. As early as the 1890s there was a Syrian Maronite Church; and a Syrian Maronite Association; operating in Sydney. This church is still operating today, now known as St. Maroun’s Maronite Catholic Church; in Elizabeth Street, Redfern, in central Sydney.

The Sydney Morning Herald published a report from the Independent Cable Association in its 29 June 1916 edition titled “Turkey Starving Syrians”. Speaking in the House of Lords, in regard to the Arab revolt against the Turks, the Marquis of Crewe, Lord President of the Council, said that the conditions in Syria were deplorable. He declared that the Turks had drawn a cordon around the Lebanon district, and were virtually starving the inhabitants. Bearing in mind the fate of Armenia, it was impossible not to feel the gravest concern as to the doom which threatened the inhabitants of Syria. The Turks, he added, were exercising the greatest tyranny toward Syrian notables. Twenty had been sentenced to death, and many others to imprisonment or exile. He understood that representations had been made by Washington, and it was difficult to see what further could be done. In its 16 July 1916, the same newspaper published: “Syrians Left to Starve”. A Mussulman, writing in the Journal de Geneve, protests against the cruelties practiced on the Christians in Lebanon by the Young Turks. He states that 80,000 have died of starvation since the beginning of May, and that thousands of persons of the highest Syrian society have been deported. [The inhabitants of the district of Lebanon, estimated at 220,000, are a hardy race of people of Syrian descent, who keep large herds of sheep and goats. The predominating element is the (Christian) Maronites; next come the Druses and heretical Moslems. After the bloody quarrels of the Druses and Maronites in 1860 the district of Lebanon was separated from the Turkish pashalik of Syria, and put under a Christian governor. European powers constituting themselves the guardians of the new province.] ;

A number of interesting points emerge from this collection of correspondence and media reports. Firstly, they all define “Syrians” not as an ethnic group but as people from the geographic region of Syria, just as Tanya Gogan recorded in her article “East Meets West: Lebanese and Syrian Peddlers in Rural Nova Scotia, c.1890-1914”, published in the Journal of Maronite Studies July-December 2001 Volume 5, No. 2.

Secondly, the Assyrian name and identity is proven to be not a recent invention, as some insist. The National Archives of Australia contain numerous documents completed by migrants from across the Middle East who declare their birthplace as “Assyria” and/or their nationality as “Assyrian”
.
Thirdly, use of the term “Assyrian” as a national identifier was not restricted to followers of the Church of the East (nicknamed the “Nestorian” church). Although religious denomination was not recorded on the Alien Registration Forms, the fact the majority of these individuals were not from south-eastern Turkey or northern Mesopotamia (the heartland of the Church of the East) indicates that followers of other Christian denominations (such as Maronite Catholic, Syrian Catholic, Syrian Orthodox) also considered themselves of “Assyrian” nationality. The Assyrian community in Australia has been deeply divided over religion and politics for many years and has recently been deeply scarred by the financial catastrophe that has befallen it. It will however recover and rebuild. When the first Assyrians arrived on these shores in 1880s, they set about building a new life for themselves, their families and their nation. They overcame incredible obstacles and laid the foundations for the diverse and vibrant Australian Assyrian community of today.

APPENDIX A

Alien Registration Forms

The following individuals registered their nationality as “Assyrian” and/or place of birth as “Assyria”, when completing their Alien Registration Forms. Australian-born women who married Assyrian men were also made to register, and are included in this list.

There are also a number of other Forms completed by individuals whose names or other personal details indicate Assyrian origin but who declared themselves to be Turkish nationals.

APPENDIX B

Aliens Register Sydney 23 December 1898 - 7 January 1902 {Details recorded: Name, Occupation, Place of Birth, Nationality, Date of Arrival in NSW, Passenger by Ship, Age, Height, Naturalisation, Date of Register and more}