Did cook really discover Australia?

Answer 1

No because the Aboriginals were there first. But if you prefer;

Although it is possible that Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa in 1568 and the Portuguese Luis Vaez de Torres and Pedro Fernandes de Queirós could have sighted Australia in 1605, the first documented and undisputed European sighting (and landing) of Australia was in 1606, by the Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon aboard the Duyfken.

Occasional claims have been made in support of earlier encounters, particularly for various Portuguese explorations. Evidence put forward in favour of this theory, particularly by Kenneth McIntyre,[1] include rock paintings of what appear to be the type of ships used by the Portuguese, the Mahogany Ship, the Geelong Keys, coins found on the Victorian coast, and evidence based on the Dieppe maps. However, this issue is very hotly debated, and any early Portuguese discovery is by no means a historical certainty, and denied by many if not most historians.

In the 13th century, Marco Polo referred to reports of a large land mass to the south of Asia, but did not see it himself.

Answer 2

The first recorded European sighting of the Australian mainland was made by the Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon, who sighted the coast of Cape York Peninsula in 1606. During the 17th century, the Dutch charted the whole of the western and northern coastlines of what they called New Holland, but made no attempt at settlement. In 1770, James Cook sailed along and mapped the east coast of Australia, which he named New South Wales and claimed for Great Britain. The expedition's discoveries provided impetus for the establishment of a penal colony there.

The British Crown Colony of New South Wales started with the establishment of a settlement at Port Jackson by Captain Arthur Phillip on 26 January 1788. This date was later to become Australia's national day, Australia Day. Van Diemen's Land, now known as Tasmania, was settled in 1803 and became a separate colony in 1825. The United Kingdom formally claimed the western part of Australia in 1829. Separate colonies were created from parts of New South Wales: South Australia in 1836, Victoria in 1851, and Queensland in 1859. The Northern Territory (NT) was founded in 1911 when it was excised from South Australia. South Australia was founded as a "free province" — that is, it was never a penal colony. Victoria and Western Australia were also founded "free", but later accepted transported convicts. The transportation of convicts to the colony of New South Wales ceased in 1848 after a campaign by the settlers.

Answer 3

Cook discovered the
East coast of australia while the dutch discovered the west coast.

Answer 4

From a European point of view yes but other races found it first. The first non indigenous animal to be introduced to Australia was the Dingo which was brought to the continent from peoples native to what is now Papua New Guinea

Answer 5

Of course he did , its a historical fact , and how can an indigenous people discover there own land they were always there

Answer 6

Strictly speaking No.

There were LOTS of people living there before he turned up :-)

It's a European conceit to suggest that it was an explorer that discovered somewhere when there native people living there for hundreds (and thousands) of years.
Of course, they don't count as they were savages ;-)

Answer 7

Roger cook?

Answer 8

Many people would, - I think, - claim, that the ANSWER, you seek, is a resounding "YES!"

But, - at least, to the "NATIVE" Australians, - who had BEEN there, (as EVIDENCE has PROVED) for THOUSANDS of years, before Captain Cook, and his crew, arrived, - and pillaged EVERYTHING that they could lay their HANDS on, - the answer is a resounding "NO!!!!!"

Answer 9

Yes, from the British point of view (not from the point of view of the Dutch, Portuguese or Polynesians (or perhaps the Japanese or Chinese) etc. etc. of course) ..

Answer 10

no, because there were people already living there