British punishment "Seven years of Transportation".

[sisu]

@mhendo

Precisely. I have not once defended the 2 percent claim. But the fact that the 2 percent claim is probably low doesn’t mean that there aren’t still considerable numbers of Australians, even people born in the country, who have no convict heritage.

So we have no disagreement then, that’s boring.

[Cazzle]

Estimates for the number of convicts transported to Australia in the 80 year period to 1868 when the final boatload arrived: 165,000.

Population of Australia three years later (1871): 1.7 million.

Number of free settlers arriving in Australia in 1852 alone: 340,000.

I don’t find the 2% figure difficult to believe. When I think of the number of Greeks and Italians I know, and the people of my acquaintance who were born overseas to non-Australians or whose parents were both born overseas, it’s easy to see there are many, many Australians who simply can’t be descended from convicts. The 165,000 must have many, many descendants, but the current population is 22+ million and a quarter of them were born overseas.

[Cazzle]

This article says the figure is around 22%, but it also says 40% of the English speaking population were convicts by the time transportation ended, which is such a bogus figure that it casts everything else in that article in doubt.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

Robert Hughes’s 1987 book The Fatal Shore is also a detailed (although to me, disappointingly boring) account of the settlement of Australia. Hughes made the point that there were so many British capital offenses in the late 1700s and early 1800s, convicts sentenced to death had their sentences commuted to transportation in wholesale lots by royal prerogative. As noted above, many were nonviolent thieves.

The judges thus got to look tough, the King could appear merciful, Parliament had a ready pool of colonists, and the prisoners lived for another day. Winners all around (mostly).

[Ceri]

I did a bit of family research and found out that my great great x6 uncle was transported to Australia for the crime of stealing a pig!! He worked for one of the founding governers over there for over 7 years before being released. From what I can work out he never returned to England and married in Australia. Unfortunately he doesn’t seem to have had any children, so no long lost cousins to go and visit…

[slaphead]

@Chronos

I, too, find the 2% figure to be ludicrously low. Most people won’t be primarily descended from convicts, and maybe convicts only make up 2% of peoples’ total ancestry on average, but almost everyone is going to have at least one ancestor who was one of those convicts.

For some reason I am visualising Roger ‘Randy’ Gristlethrob, sentenced to transportation for the crime of fornication…

[AK84]

@Elendil_s_Heir

The judges thus got to look tough, the King could appear merciful, Parliament had a ready pool of colonists, and the prisoners lived for another day. Winners all around (mostly).

The hangmans guild, the coffin makers union and the Undertakers association would disagree with you on that score.

[Learjeff]

If we’re to believe Wikipedia,

Over the 80 years more than 165,000 convicts were transported to Australia. The number of convicts pales in comparison to the immigrants who arrived in Australia in the 1851–1871 gold rush. In 1852 alone, 370,000 immigrants arrived in Australia. By 1871 the total population had nearly quadrupled from 430,000 to 1.7 million people

I still don’t buy the 2% figure as stated simply because the number of ancestors nearly doubles going back each generation. Go back 200 years, that’s a million! OK, not really, but you get the idea.

[Horatio_Hellpop]

@sisu

I often argue I would rather be in a country founded by convicts than one founded by puritans…

Where would that be? Plymouth Bay Colony was founded by a majority of speculators and a minority of Puritans, even on the Mayflower, and they don’t figure significantly in any other colony/state’s past.