Australia itself is massive, I mean wouldn’t travellers from Europe discover the North-west corner first and start building from that end? But the biggest cities are all the way on the other side of a continent. Why?
In: 7
It wasn’t one country back then, it was five separate colonies. On my father’s side, we came to Adelaide in 1856. On my mother’s side, our first ancestor came to New South Wales (in handcuffs…) in 1802. So that’s why there are five main cities.
The thing to know is that unlike the scramble to settle the Americas, Europeans took about 200 years to get from exploring the coast of Australia to actually trying to colonize it. When they did finally make serious attempts, they looked hard for places that would support settlement with rivers and plentiful grass, not just the first spot they found.
The east coast is a lot wetter and more temperate than the west coast, so even though the boat trip to the west is shorter it’s much easier to colonize the east.
You wouldn’t be too happy if you were deposited on the desolate coast of a desert to start your colony.
The simple answer is the climate.
Just look at [this map](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ian-Barr/publication/279304969/figure/fig1/AS:294326790836224@1447184383255/Climate-zones-and-the-location-of-the-most-populous-cities-within-Australia-The-map-was.png) and consider where you would like to create a colony.
The colonization started with the first British penal colony. The induction was to make a colony at Botany Bay but the anchorage was not good enough and there was not a lot of fresh water so the move-up shot distance to Sydney Cove. Botany Bay is not a part of the city. It is 12 km from Sidney harbor bridge and Sidney Airport extends out into it where land in reclaimed.
A good natural harbor, access to fresh water, and the ability to grow food are what you need if you try to start a colony overseas. There is a limited number of great spots because of the natural harbor requirement and you will see that that initial colonial city will be where good natural harbors exist.
Europeans didn’t travel to Australia via the north west.
The initial discovery of Australia by the British, namely the voyage of James Cook, came from the east across the Pacific Ocean. Cook identified the ideal places for settlement along the east coast, primarily Botany Bay – though it turned out that this was far from ideal and what later became known as Port Jackson (Sydney Cove) was chosen by Arthur Phillip with the First Fleet.
The First Fleet used the [Roaring Forties](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Forties), a strong westerly wind at southern latitudes, to make quicker journeys via the Cape of Good Hope. The fleet would therefore by travelling from the south west and navigate towards the east coast of the continent, not from the north west.
Due to the Great Dividing Range on the east side, the climate around the east coast was far more suitable for settlement. Aside from Perth on the west side, the climate around the rest of Australia was poorly suited for large settlements, nor were there many accessible routes to build cities outside of those ideal regions.
The east coast has a mountain range (well….’mountain’ by Australian standards) running along it. This results in the east coast being relatively well watered and climatically temperate. It’s much more suited for growing crops and just living comfort generally.
The west coast, outside of the extreme south-west around Perth, is mostly arid or semi-arid. While the northern parts are tropical, it’s a ‘savannah’ type tropical climate, where it’s arid for 8 months a year and torrential monsoon for the other 4. Not really an environment for long-term sustainability of a large population.
Latest Answers