Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

The Black Triangle. German Colonialism in Oceania and the Hunt for Gutta-Percha

Fig. 1: Paul Langhans: Deutsche Kolonial-Wandkarten. Nr. 2. Südsee-Schutzgebiete, Gotha 1909.
Gotha Research Library, Perthes Collection.

The cartouche of the Colonial Wall Map, which was first produced by the Justus Perthes publishing house in 1909, is artistically drawn.1 A black-and-white frame surrounds several colourful maps showing the Pacific Ocean regions that were part of the German colonial empire between 1899 and 1914. The drawings depict several raw materials that were found in and exported from the colonies, including caoutchouc, banana trees, coffee, and tobacco plants, as well as a tortoise representing tortoiseshell. The wall map measures 165 × 215 cm and comprises several smaller maps of various sizes and contents, all of which are connected to the Pacific colonies. In this paper, we will explore two of these maps (with a scale of 1:2,000,000, fig. 2). The first is the one in the bottom left-hand corner, which provides an overview of raw materials in Kaiser-Wilhelmsland (now part of Papua New Guinea) and the Bismarck Archipelago. For example, coconut plantations are depicted by small palm trees. Copra, the inner part of the coconut, was the main export of German New Guinea. This raw material can also be found on the second map we will take into account: a map of the German Empire – placed in the top middle section of the wall map. There, the same symbols indicate where copra was processed. The palm trees show the observer that the coconut pith was used to make oil, soap, and candles in cities such as Mainz and Mannheim.

Fig. 2: Two maps from the wall map shown above, depicting the “colonial raw materials” in Kaiser-Wilhelmsland and the Bismarck Archipelago, as well as the processing of colonial raw materials in the German Empire.
Paul Langhans: Deutsche Kolonial-Wandkarten. Nr. 2. Südsee-Schutzgebiete, Gotha 1909.
Gotha Research Library, Perthes Collection.

This Colonial Wall Map was one of many wall maps produced for use in schools. Hermann Haack, the chief cartographer at the publishing house Justus Perthes in Gotha, was responsible for creating most of them. According to his guidelines, wall maps were designed to convey clear, accurate, and visual messages (Haack 1900: 118). Haack had established a specific design concept that gave the map an unprecedentedly bright colouring and plasticity. The “harmony” of the composition of letters, symbols, and terrain depiction was also fundamental. Furthermore, the maps were designed to be visible from a distance to pupils sitting at the back of the classroom (Henniges/Meyer 2016: 37, 40).

In contrast to Haack’s design, Langhans’ wall maps usually consist of several primary and secondary maps combined. These maps form a complex and detailed conglomerate of diverse information. They visually connect phenomena that are spatially distant, illustrating the relationships between seemingly disparate locations. This is particularly evident in the juxtaposition of islands in the Pacific Ocean with those in northern Germany (top right corner), which serves to highlight the scale of colonial possessions. Langhans’ maps are characterised by their high density of detail and information, reflecting his pursuit of scientific rigour in visual representation. However, unlike Haack’s maps, they were less suitable for educational purposes, as Langhans focused on conveying a wealth of information rather than providing a clear, descriptive narrative. His map style was more in line with the conventions of 19th-century cartography (Meyer 2021: 94–103).

Furthermore, Langhans’ maps must be analysed in the light of his political orientation. He was a supporter of the Völkisch movement, which grew in the German Empire from 1890 onwards. Supporters of this movement believed that belonging to a state was based on a shared ancestry and aimed to achieve an ethnically homogeneous society (Hering 2003: 12). Langhans belonged to various nationalistic, antisemitic and völkisch groups. He was for example a founding member of the local branch of the antisemitic Deutschsoziale Reformpartei (German Social Reform Party) in Gotha in the 1890s. The cartographer also had strong connections with the German Kolonialbewegung (colonial movement). He transferred his political and social ideas onto his maps, and is considered by historians of cartography to be a völkisch geographer and political activist of the radical right (Brogiato 2005). Published between 1893 and 1897, the Deutscher Kolonial Atlas (German Colonial Atlas) is an excellent example of the influence of his political orientation on his work. This atlas mainly focuses on the formal and informal colonialism of the German Empire, showing areas of German migration and the distribution of German culture. Economic and geographical aspects also play a central role, as arguments in favour of the commercialisation of the colonies were used to justify their possession (Meyer 2021: 51–54).

In this context, the production of the Colonial Wall Map can be seen as an illustration of “the economic viability of the colony”,2 as described in the Perthes catalogue for the 1909/10 school year (Justus Perthes Verlag 1909). The map shows that the Pacific colonies were rich in raw materials whose extraction directly benefited the German Empire’s economy. However, yearly reports and statistics tell a different story. The German economy was not significantly affected by products from the Pacific colonies. Copra, for instance, the main export commodity of the Pacific colonies, accounted for only about eight percent of Germany’s total copra imports. In total, trade with the Pacific colonies accounted for less than 0.15 per cent of Germany’s foreign trade in 1909 (Conrad 2008: 58).

The discrepancy between the story told by the wall map and the reality of the colonies becomes even clearer when looking at a specific example. Gutta-percha is depicted on the map by a small black triangle. This rubber-like material was mainly used to insulate deep-sea cables and was one of the most important commodities in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. According to the map, gutta-percha can be found in the hinterland of Kaiser-Wilhelmsland, near the colonial settlement of Stephansort. However, the black triangle is missing from the map of the German Empire. No location for its processing is marked on the map. Based on this observation, in this paper, we will explore why gutta-percha was highlighted on the map, and why the German Empire was interested in this raw material. We will then examine the discrepancy between the two maps.

A Revolutionary Technology: Deep-Sea Telegraphic Cables

The telegraph was one of the most significant technological developments of the 19th century. Messages were transmitted via electrical impulses through copper wire cables, using a code developed by Samuel Morse in 1847. The first transnational cable was successfully laid underwater between Dover and Calais in 1851 (Headrick 1981: 158). Initially, this technology was mainly used for economic reasons. Companies could transmit information about the prices of raw materials across the English Channel, and later the Atlantic, within minutes. Governments quickly realised that this technology would give them the opportunity to maintain constant contact with their overseas territories. This was important not only for economic reasons, but also for political and military purposes. Colonial governments could respond more swiftly to anti-colonial uprisings and intensify their control over the colonies. The strategic importance of telegraphy led to the rapid expansion of the network making it a key tool through which colonial powers dominated the non-Western world (Tully 2009: 562f., 569). By the turn of the 20th century, even the most distant outposts of empires were connected to European cities via an extensive network of wires. Most of these wires were laid underwater. By 1903, approximately 230,000 nautical miles (ca. 426,000 km) of cable connected different parts of the world. Each of these deep-water cables was insulated with gutta-percha (Godfrey 2018: 1). As can be seen in the picture of a cable manufactured by Siemens & Halske in the 1890s, the material was pressed around the copper wire to form the second layer of the cable (fig. 3). This was the most effective method of insulation, as the material becomes pliable when heated and can be moulded into almost any shape. After cooling, the mould remains intact. Furthermore, gutta-percha withstands cold and salty water and is highly resistant (Tully 2009: 566f.).

Fig. 3: Longitudinal section of a deep-sea cable by the company Siemens & Halske. The cable was laid across the Atlantic between Ireland and Canada in 1894.
Deutsches Museum Munich, inventory no. 19807. Image: Christian Ferstl. Link↗

As telegraphic communication grew and more cable connections were established worldwide, the demand for gutta-percha steadily increased. Since gutta-percha is a natural material harvested from tropical forests, its intensive extraction led to the near extinction of these trees in many regions. As a result, the expansion of the telegraph network became intertwined with the broader struggle among Western nations for access to the world’s remaining natural resources.

The Extraction of Gutta-Percha

Gutta-percha latex is extracted from the gutta-percha tree, which grows in a restricted geographical area of the tropical rainforests of Southeast Asia. This area is visualised on the map Pflanzliche Rohstoffe (plant-based raw materials), also created by Langhans and published in his Handelsschul-Atlas (Commercial School Atlas). The purple areas show regions where plant juices used for technical purposes, such as gutta-percha, were found, primarily in today’s Malaysia, Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Thailand, Cambodia, the Mekong Delta region of Vietnam and the southern Philippines (Tully 2009: 567).

Fig. 4: The purple-coloured areas highlight those regions in which gutta-percha occurred and could be extracted.
Paul Langhans: Handelsschul-Atlas. Unter Förderung des Deutschen Handelsschulmänner-Vereins, Gotha 1904, no. 5. Link↗

In its region of origin, gutta-percha was used to make products such as waterproof containers and handles for knives and axes. It first arrived in London via Singapore in 1656, but its use as an insulator for cables was not discovered until the 19th century (Tully 2009: 566). The tree producing the latex was difficult to spot, and only indigenous collectors had the necessary skills and knowledge to locate, harvest, and transport the gutta-percha out of the forest. Collecting the material could take months, not only because of the dangerous forest environment – home to tigers and deadly snakes – but also because of the demanding nature of the work itself (Tully 2009: 571). However, for local traders, it was worth the risk, as it brought prestige and wealth.

The latex was harvested directly from wild forest trees. To obtain the liquid, the tree was felled and incisions were made in the bark to collect the sap. The trees were only tapped on one side, leaving half of the latex to rot on the forest floor. This destructive practice was especially harmful when carried out on a large scale for cable production. The tree’s sap was collected in holes in the ground, then washed, rubbed and rolled into sheets, before being folded into blocks. These blocks never consisted of latex from a single tree. Good- and poor-quality material was mixed together. Historians, such as Tully, estimate that over 88 million trees were felled to supply insulation material (Tully 2009: 575). At the time, it was believed that the gutta-percha trees took up to thirty years to produce a sufficient yield, making plantation cultivation unattractive to European companies (Godfrey 2018: 4). The extraction and trade of gutta-percha differs from most other raw materials used in cable production. The copper needed for the wires and the iron used to coat the cable were extracted at industrial sites such as mines, which were operated by big companies that employed miners and factory workers (Tully 2009: 570). This made deep-sea cables a high technology depending on an underdeveloped and deeply destructive extraction method.

The German Empire and Its Interest in Gutta-Percha

As early as the late 19th century, traders, botanists, and politicians observed that the method of extracting gutta-percha was consuming the resource so quickly that it would eventually leave the cable industry without its most important material. By 1884, the tree was already considered extinct in Singapore, Malacca, Selangor, and Perak (Tully 2009: 574). Recognising the need to explore other regions in search for additional sources of gutta-percha, various colonial empires sent out scientific expeditions. In 1845, for example, the French Ministry of Commerce sent an expedition to its colony French Indochina. British expeditions followed, exploring the British Malay territories in 1883. The US government even undertook a secret mission to Southeast Asia, offering high prices to Chinese traders in an attempt to break the British monopoly on the gutta-percha market (Godfrey 2018: 71).

Companies from the German Empire also took part in the hunt for gutta-percha. For example, Siemens & Halske in Berlin, the Land- und Seekabelwerke in Cologne, or the Norddeutsche Seekabelwerke in Nordenham, produced deep-sea cables in Germany and sold and installed them worldwide. It was mainly private companies, rather than governments, that owned the cables, and their use was primarily driven by economic rather than national considerations. However, the political influence over this important infrastructure became apparent when the Boer War in South Africa began in 1899, with the British government dictating that the cables should primarily be used for its own communications. In some cases, the Kingdom of the Netherlands was completely cut off from its trading posts and colonies in Africa and the Pacific. As a direct result of this conflict, the Netherlands and the German Empire established their own telegraphic network. The Deutsch-Niederländische Telegraphengesellschaft was founded with the aim of connecting Germany and the Netherlands with their colonial possessions, mainly in the Pacific, which would be independent of British control. The Norddeutsche Seekabelwerke produced the cables, and the network connection between Manado, Yap, Shanghai, and Guam was established in 1905 (Jahn 2018: 9–15).

The Dutch-German endeavour led to an increase in the demand for gutta-percha. This highlights how the supply of gutta-percha, its extraction and processing must be considered in a global context. German companies such as Norddeutsche Seekabelwerke employed agents in Singapore to purchase the raw material. However, prices were shaped by the British monopoly and fluctuated with the availability of the supply. Like other empires, the German Empire and its companies, therefore, sought to open up new regions for gutta-percha extraction. As Langhans’ map shows, Kaiser-Wilhelmsland was considered a potential region for harvesting ‘German’ gutta-percha. His map is based on the findings of the German botanist Rudolf Schlechter who undertook two expeditions to German New Guinea, one in 1902 and a second from 1906 to 1909. Both expeditions were funded by the Kolonial-Wirtschaftliches Komitee (Colonial Economic Committee) and the German rubber manufacturing industry. Schlechter’s second expedition in particular was sent out to identify how much gutta-percha could be harvested, to establish an infrastructure in the colony, and to educate the local population in extracting the raw material (Schlechter 1911: iii). The latter can be seen in the picture below, which was probably taken in Kaiser-Wilhelmsland.3

Fig. 5: Gutta-percha was obtained after the tree had been felled. By making several incisions in the bark, the tree’s latex could be tapped. 
University Library Frankfurt am Main, Image archive of the German Colonial Society, Image no. 025-0289-28. Link↗

In his report, Schlechter claimed that the density of gutta-percha trees he encountered was higher than that in Sumatra or Borneo (Schlechter 1911: iv). The Annual Report of the Colony of the years 1902/03 stated that the material could be blended with higher-quality gutta-percha and used in cable production (Sack/Clark 1979: 242). In reality, however, the gutta-percha from Kaiser-Wilhelmsland failed to attract interest from the cable industry. The acquisition costs were too high for a low-quality product. Furthermore, collecting the raw material proved to be difficult due to the colony’s poor infrastructure and the lack of skilled workers. The local population did not use gutta-percha latex and had to be instructed in how to locate and harvest the material.

The black triangles depicted in the Colonial Wall Map correspond precisely with the region in which Schlechter conducted his work. Since the map was first produced in 1909, it incorporated his discovery of gutta-percha-producing trees. This reflects the publishing house’s awareness of recent expeditions and research in the German colonies. A short article about Schlechter’s expedition was published in Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen in 1907 (Wichmann 1907). Moreover, it shows Langhans’ work ethic. He was known for collecting all the material and information necessary for creating his up-to-date maps (Meyer 2021: 98). However, the map of the German Empire also reveals a discrepancy. The gutta-percha found in Kaiser-Wilhelmsland was of such low quality that it proved unusable for the German cable industry, which is probably why it is absent from the map. Nonetheless, the wall map not only conveys the optimism that Schlechter’s findings – considered significant at the time – would facilitate the future sourcing of gutta-percha by German cable producers (Godfrey 2018: 71–73). It becomes evident that the political interests of the map’s creators had a significant impact on its depiction. The products of the colonies and their economic value are highlighted, underlining the usefulness of the oversea territories.

Conclusion: The German Empire, Technical Development and Natural Destruction

Gutta-percha was one of the most important raw materials at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. Its unique properties made it indispensable to undersea telegraphy, one of the era’s most significant technologies. Native only to the forests of Southeast Asia, gutta-percha was used to insulate deep-sea cables connecting the metropolises of Western empires with their colonies. However, the extractive harvesting practices of local traders, the insatiable demand for the material, and the indifference of both the cable industry and colonial administrations contributed to the widespread depletion – and in some regions, the extinction – of gutta-percha-producing trees.

Langhans’ Colonial Wall Map conveys the impression that raw materials from Germany’s Pacific colonies had a direct impact on the German economy. However, the case of gutta-percha reveals a different reality. The material sourced from the area around Stephansort was of poor quality, and its extraction proved too costly to be of interest to German cable producers. The discrepancy between how gutta-percha is depicted on the maps of the Pacific colonies and the German Empire highlights the difference between imperial ambition and economic reality.

Sources

Haack, Hermann: Schulkartographie und Pädagogik, in: Geographischer Anzeiger 1 (1900), pp. 106f., 118f.

Justus Perthes Verlag Gotha: Wandkarten, Atlanten, Bücher und Zeitschriften für den geographischen Unterricht und zum Gebrauch des Lehrens, Schuljahr 1909/1910, Gotha 1909.

Langhans, Paul: Handelsschul-Atlas. Unter Förderung des Deutschen Handelsschulmänner-Vereins, Gotha 1904.

Id.: Deutscher Kolonial-Atlas. 30 Karten mit 300 Nebenkarten, Gotha 1897.

Sack, Peter, Dymphna Clark (eds.): German New Guinea. The Annual Reports, Canberra 1979.

Schlechter, Rudolf: Die Guttapercha- und Kautschuk-Expedition des Kolonial-Wirtschaftlichen Komitees, wirtschaftlicher Ausschuss der Deutschen Kolonialgesellschaft nach Kaiser Wilhelmsland 1907–1909, Berlin 1911.

Wichmann, H.: Geographischer Monatsbericht. Australien und Polynesien, in: Petermanns Geographische Mitteilungen 53 (1907), p. 24.

Literature

Brogiato, Heinz Peter: Paul Langhans. Der völkische Kartograph, in: URANIA Kultur- und Bildungsverein Gotha e. V. (ed.): Gothaer Geowissenschaftler in 220 Jahren, Gotha 2005, pp. 39f.

Conrad, Sebastian: German Colonialism. A Short History, Cambridge 2012.

Godfrey, Hellen: Submarine Telegraphy and the Hunt for Gutta Percha. Challenges and Opportunity in a Global Trade, Leiden 2018.

Headrick, Daniel R.: The Tools of Empire. Technology and European Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century, New York 1981.

Henniges, Norman, Philipp Julius Meyer: „Das Gesamtbild des Vaterlandes stets vor Augen“. Hermann Haack und die Gothaer Schulkartographie vom Wilhelminischen Kaiserreich bis zum Ende des Nationalsozialismus, in: Zeitschrift für Geographiedidaktik 44.4 (2016), pp. 37–60.

Hering, Rainer: Konstruierte Nation. Der Alldeutsche Verband 1890 bis 1939, Hamburg 2003.

Jahn, Nicola: Der gute Draht zum Nachbarn. Die deutsch-niederländische Kooperation im Telegraphenwesen ihrer Kolonien und Interessensphären im Pazifischen Raum 1899–1936, Münster 2018.

Meyer, Philipp Julius: Kartographie und Weltanschauung. Visuelle Wissensproduktion im Verlag Justus Perthes 1890–1945, Göttingen 2021.

Tully, John: A Victorian Ecological Disaster. Imperialism, the Telegraph, and Gutta-Percha, in: Journal of World History 20 (2009), pp. 559–579.

  1. The wall map was first offered for sale in the publisher’s catalogue of 1909/10. Its price ranged from 12 to 24 marks, depending on the version: unmounted, mounted on canvas, on canvas with rods, or with a painted surface. The wall map of the South Seas was added to the range after the wall map of Africa, which had already been advertised in the 1908/09 catalogue. []
  2. “zur Veranschaulichung der wirtschaftlichen Nutzbarkeit der Deutschen Schutzgebiete“. []
  3. The photograph is part of the German Colonial Society’s collection. The images were primarily intended for illustrative purposes, as a result they often lack captions. Nevertheless, the men depicted and their clothing provide sufficient evidence to conclude that the image is related to the extraction of gutta-percha in Kaiser-Wilhelmsland. []

OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Sara Müller (August 18, 2025). The Black Triangle. German Colonialism in Oceania and the Hunt for Gutta-Percha. Mapping Africa and Asia. Retrieved February 14, 2026 from https://doi.org/10.58079/14hfa


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.