Home > Student Archival Essays > Syrian and Lebanese Women

Syrian and Lebanese Women

by Courtney Colclough

Application for Certificate of Exemption from Dictation Test 1930

Syrians Returned, The Register

Employment of Syrians

Syrian and Lebanese migration to Australia between 1880 and 1930 was a culturally and historically unique experience which occurred at a time when Australian immigration policies constituted what is known as the White Australia Policy. An important aspect of Syrian and Lebanese immigration during this period was the role of women in these communities and thus this essay will contend that women and, much more broadly, family are key distinguishing factors in the history of the Syrians and Lebanese in Australia. Using a range of historical sources in conjunction with secondary sources, this essay will begin by outlining the relevant elements of the White Australia Policy before providing a brief overview of Syrian and Lebanese migration to Australia from 1880 to 1930. This essay will then examine the presence of Syrian and Lebanese women in Australia and the implications this had for these communities, particularly in relation to how they were viewed by white Australians. Finally, this essay will focus on the role and effects of Syrian and Lebanese women in paid employment as well as the way in which Syrian women were perceived by the broader Australian community. As Lebanon was a semi-autonomous part of Syria from 1880 until 1920,[1] contemporary sources refer to Lebanese people as merely ‘Syrian’ and henceforth this essay will refer to both the Lebanese and Syrians in Australia as simply ‘Syrian’ to ensure that this point of reference remains consistent.

The beginning of the White Australia Policy was marked by the enactment of the Immigration Restriction Act in 1901, a piece of legislation which was designed to stem the flow of non-European migrants into Australia due to widespread concerns about racial purity and labour conditions during this period.[2] Various sections of the act legitimised methods of discrimination against non-Europeans including section 3(a), which required immigrants to write out fifty words in a given European language in order to be allowed into the country.[3] Criticism surrounding the White Australia Policy has identified the dictation test as a means of providing officials with an apparently “neutral” reason for not allowing a certain person or groups of people into the country.[4] Despite the fact that the dictation test was inextricably linked with issues of race[5] and therefore implicitly racist, the test itself was described at the time as a measure of education.[6] Providing historians with a wealth of information are Certificates of Exemption from the Dictation Test, which a number of Syrians were able to obtain. The Nationality Act of 1920 continued to legitimise the notion of White Australia, with a certificate of naturalisation only attainable for “aliens” who satisfied the Governor-General that they are “of good character” and have “an adequate knowledge of the English language”.[7] Hence, the Australian government’s legislation on migration and citizenship during this period reinforced both social and political discrimination against those who did not fit into the vision of White Australia, reflecting widespread attitudes towards non-European migrants which culminated at the beginning of the twentieth century.

The first “wave” of Syrian migration to Australia has been agreed on by academics as beginning in 1880 and ending at the outbreak of the Second World War.[8] Syrian emigration began in comparatively small numbers in the 1870s and continued to increase up until the 1890s, where what has been described as a “major exodus” occurred.[9] Many Syrians began emigrating to escape religious persecution and the declining economy, lured to Australia’s wealth of opportunities.[10] While Syrian migration to Australia slowed significantly with the introduction of the 1901 Immigration Restriction Act,[11]  a smaller number of Syrians continued to enter Australia and can be been mapped in geographic “clusters”, which resulted from the gravitation towards familial ties which already existed in certain parts of the country.[12] Historian Anne Monsour explains that this was the result of both strong family links as well as contemporary government policy which restricted immigration to those Syrians who already had family or friends residing in Australia.[13] The notion of family and its importance in Syrian migration to Australia is an incredibly central aspect of the narrative of early Syrian settlement in the country and is something which works to differentiate Syrians living under the White Australia Policy from other races entering Australia. Government documents, such as Philip Tomay’s request for permission to bring his Syrian brother-in-law George Sykeli and his family into Australia in the early 1920s,[14] are not uncommon in archival files regarding Syrian immigration. Moreover, while many Chinese and Indian men were coming into Australia to work without wives or families during this period, many Syrian men arrived with their wives and families or applied for permission for them to enter the country once they had established themselves.[15] A 1902 application for exemption from the provisions of the Immigration Restriction Act reveals that Syrian-born Joseph Abood was attempting to bring his wife and son to Queensland from Mount Lebanon after hawking in Bundaberg for five years.[16]

From 1880 to 1930 there was a substantial amount of xenophobia and racism directed towards those who were not of British origins, particularly Asians, a category under which Syrians were classified.[17] Historical sources classified Syrians under the category of “brown” peoples,[18] however the fact that Syrians generally had lighter skin and identified as Christians meant that they were often treated differently to other “Asiatics”.[19] These facts formed the basis of a campaign in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century for equal treatment of Syrians when compared to white Australians. One letter to the editor in an 1896 edition of the Sunday Times written by a “Semitic Syrian” refers to the fact that Syrians are white and worship Jesus Christ in an attempt to differentiate Syrians from other races, imploring readers not to mistake Syrians for Indians, Afghans, Arabians or Assyrians.[20] Furthermore, historical sources would indicate that the Syrian community was not as insular as other racial groups, with a book published in 1927 entitled Non-Britishers in Australia stating that“[Syrians] keep less together than probably any other race or nationality.”[21] Moreover, contemporary sources examining the position of Syrians in Australian society discuss the weakened links to culture and language which are commonplace, particularly in the second generation.[22]

Aside from their comparatively light skin and identification as Christians, Syrians were generally more favourably received by white Australians due to the high proportion of Syrian women who were migrating along with the men. Syrian migrants, when compared with other migrant groups in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, had one of the most balanced gender ratios, particularly in relation to other races which also fell under the Asian category. In 1911, of the total number of Syrians living in Australia, 1297 were male and 1042 were female.[23] Conversely, in 1921 the number of Chinese males in Australia was 14820 compared with 237 Chinese females.[24] Consequently, Syrians migrating to Australia appeared to be much more likely to permanently settle in Australia with their family or with the intention of creating one.[25] Results from the 1921 census prove that this claim was accurate: of the 2892 Syrians living in Australia, over half were recorded as being born in Australia.[26] These statistics rendered Syrians in Australia a unique group, antithetical to a number of other migrant, particularly the Chinese,[27] as it became clear that many Syrians were looking at Australia as a place to call home.

Further, an atmosphere of fear surrounded the figure of the male migrant and the idea of mixed-race children in Australia during this period. Social theory around the notion of “alien” bodies in the process of crossing borders has alluded to the complexity of views on migrant men entering Australia: often looked upon as a “danger”.[28] In the context of White Australia, white women were considered vulnerable and in need of protecting from allegedly rogue migrant men. Contemporary sources discuss the danger of foreign quarters of Australian cities such as Chinatown, known for its gambling and opium dens, as a cause of demise for white women whose self-respect had been “weakened”.[29] The result of this was said to come about in the form of “self-destruction” or by the wedding of the white woman with a Chinese man.[30] Even in Parliament debate raged about the degenerate effect of “inferior” non-European races on the purity of white women, with one politician declaring that the act of a “noble” white woman marrying “some degenerate debauchee” seldom achieves more than the dragging down of the white woman.[31] Despite the stigma of interracial marriages which persisted into the early twentieth century, historical sources indicate that while there was a relative gender balance in Australia’s Syrian community, unions between “Syrians and Australian women” were in fact occurring.[32] Reporting on this issue in 1906, the Darling Downs Gazette called upon politicians to prevent the “horror” of the “fusion of the Australian race with these aliens”.[33] However, the common perception during this time remained that Syrian men, particularly when compared with Chinese or Indian men, were not seen seriously as a “threat” to white women due to the significant presence of Syrian women in Australia.[34]

Many Syrian migrants in Australia during this period took up the occupation as hawking, including a significant number of women, which formed a unique part of the cultural identity of Syrians in Australia. Contemporary photographs, newspaper articles, police reports and government documents demonstrated the prevalence of Syrian women hawking in Australian towns and cities. In 1902, The Sydney Morning Herald reported that of the sixteen hawking licences granted to Syrians by the annual Licensing Court, 11 were granted to women.[35] A newspaper article on the Syrian colony in Redfern in 1892 is accompanied by an illustration of “A Typical Syrian Hawker” depicting a Syrian woman with a basket of goods in one hand a young child in the other.[36] Another newspaper in 1903 discussed the potential restriction of hawking licences to Syrian women, stating that there was “some good sense” in the proposal.[37] Alien Registration Forms for women such as Syrian-born Annie Abrahams in 1910 are invaluable sources of information relating to the prevalence of female hawkers in Australia.[38] However, contemporary newspapers and police reports would indicate that many more Syrian women participated in the hawking trade, albeit not in an entirely legal capacity. An edition of the Brisbane Telegraph in 1893 reported the case of a Syrian woman, Ruby Hannah, who was fined £5 for hawking without a licence.[39] In 1891, a “Police News” column in The Age reported that two Syrian women, a mother and daughter, had been charged for hawking without licences in Melbourne and consequently received a nominal fine from the mayor.[40] A newspaper article in the Toscin in 1902 reveals an alleged Mount Lebanon to Melbourne hawker trafficking trade, with the newspaper indicating that a popular hawking spot in the Melbourne CBD for Syrian women hawkers was rife with this “cruel” source of “cheap female labour” and must be stopped.[41] While contemporary sources referred to female Syrian hawkers as “pests”,[42] attitudes towards male Syrian hawkers were overwhelmingly centred around the threat they posed, particularly in relation to white women. A discussion in the Queensland Parliament in 1905 referred not only to the “nuisance” of male Syrian hawkers but also the fact that they “intimidate women in lonely places”.[43]

In addition to hawking, many Syrian women also participated in paid employment in other industries or assisted family members with their occupation or businesses. The 1930 Application for Certificate of Exemption From Dictation Test of Syrian-born Mary Sedawie reveals that the 55 year old woman had worked as a machinist for a clothing manufacturer in Carlton, Melbourne for 25 years. Moreover, the Alien Registration Form of Syrian-born Mary Homsey in the early twentieth century states that her occupation was that of a white worker, while the Alien Registration Form of another Syrian-born woman, Lizzie Jacob, similarly demonstrates that she had been involved in a drapery business with her father for a number of years. Further, a report on the employment of women in Australia has indicated that in 1901 48% of working women in Queensland were employed in domestic service[44] and a 1916 Alien Registration Form lists the occupation of Syrian-born May Solomon as a General Servant. While the existence of these archival documents indicate that Syrian women worked in a number of different fields in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, a lack of documentation of Syrian women working in domestic service appears to indicate that this was not a popular occupation for Syrian women. Henceforth, historical sources alluding to the array of occupations taken up by Syrian women in Australia, particularly in the textile industry, demonstrate the important economic contribution of women in Australia’s Syrian community during this period.

The role of Syrian women as a group in paid employment is a key factor which distinguishes Syrians from other racial groups. Historians have attributed the somewhat unique “family movement” aspect of Syrian migration to the economic contributions of Syrian women, as a large proportion of Syrians migrating to Australia were female.[45] In Australia, women in paid employment were not generally perceived as an economic threat because it was assumed that their incomes would be used to support a family. Thus, many believed that Syrian women would refuse to work for lower wages, something which was a source of anxiety in Australia during this time.[46] Moreover, the increased likelihood of Syrian wage earners having a family, as opposed to other racial groups, meant that they were more likely to retain their wages in Australia and spend their money in Australia.[47]  The newly found economic independence of many Syrian women back home began to challenge the patriarchal constraints in traditional Syrian society. A study of the social impact of women and girls working in factories in Mount Lebanon in the late nineteenth century examines claims that the “honour of the Mountain was being trampled” through the subversion of the traditional role of women.[48] The perceived effect of the mass move of women into factory work in regions of Syria was that women back home were gaining “greater social power”.[49] However, the economic role of Syrian women and its effects both back home and in Australia were very much dependent on the social class of these women and therefore experiences differ greatly.

While the presence of women was undoubtedly beneficial to the Syrian community living in Australia during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, this would only appear to be the case in the context of the intact family unit. Women generally, and particularly migrant women in Australia, had very little autonomy compared to men and were often subject to discrimination. In the 1920 Nationality Act, “disability” refers to the “status of being a married woman, or a minor, lunatic or idiot”.[50] Further, the Act states that the status of a married woman is dependent upon that of her husband: “The wife of a British subject shall be deemed to be a British subject, and the wife of an alien shall be deemed to be an alien”.[51] These provisions in turn made it difficult for women separated from their husbands to gain naturalisation as they were not always able to provide proof of their marriage in their applications.[52] This therefore had the potential to jeopardise the ability of single women to support themselves or their families, especially in Queensland where two Syrian women found themselves in this situation before 1904, as “aliens” in the colony were unable to purchase land or obtain a hawking license.[53]

In addition to the employment and legal status of Syrian women in Australia from the late nineteenth to early twentieth century, this area of study also intersects heavily with ideas of class and social perceptions of Syrian women.  A Ladies’ Column in the Mornington Standard assures readers that Syrian women hawker “pests” are merely a phenomenon of the lower classes and it is therefore “not fair” to interpret the actions of the “lower orders” as representative of all Syrian women.[54] The same column goes on to discuss the “beauty” and “gracefulness” of “the higher classes of Syrian women”, arguing that “lovelier women” could not be found anywhere else in the world.[55] Another Australian newspaper in 1892 wrote of the “beauty” and enviable “native dignity” of Syrian women, whilst simultaneously discussing the common criticism of their Syrian husbands as “lazy” and “selfish”.[56] Further, contemporary sources have often commented on the perceived whiteness of Syrian women, with an official at the Department of External Affairs in 1914 reporting that some Syrian women were “as fair-skinned as any women to be met in our cities”.[57] Conversely, Syrian men were often considered “dark”, however both Syrian men and women were perceived by government officials to be closer to European races than those in Asia, a fact which significantly altered the experience of Syrian migrants living under the White Australia Policy.[58]

Syrians living in Australia from the late nineteenth to early twentieth century had a unique experience under the White Australia policy due to a number of surface factors, including the fact that Syrian migrants typically had lighter skin and identified as Christian. However, the complex position of women within Syrian communities cannot be underestimated, as both the role of women and presence of family had the effect of drastically altering the dynamic of Syrian communities, as well as perceptions of Syrians when compared with other migrant groups. As this essay has illustrated, the presence of women in the Syrian community transformed the group into one which intended to make Australia home, and the prevalence of paid employment among Syrian women contributed to this notion. Henceforth, the experience of Syrians living under the White Australia policy during this time was much more favourable, despite discriminatory legislation and social attitudes towards non-Europeans.

References