essay on aboriginal history in australia

Coming soon

• New releases
• Press Archive 1965–1991
• Authors & editors
• News & events
• For authors
• For libraries

Subscribe to the ANU Press Newsletter

Aboriginal History Journal

• Aims & scope
• Journal information
• Editorial Board
• Submission information

Aboriginal History is an annual journal that contains interdisciplinary historical studies of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ interactions with non-Indigenous peoples. It promotes publication of Indigenous oral traditions, biographies, languages, archival and bibliographic guides, previously unpublished manuscript accounts, critiques of current events, and research and reviews in the fields of anthropology, archaeology, sociology, linguistics, demography, law, geography and cultural, political and economic history. The journal has been in publication since 1977.

The journal is co-published by Aboriginal History Inc. , a publishing organisation based in the Australian Centre for Indigenous History, Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra.

For more information on Aboriginal History Inc., please visit aboriginalhistory.org.au . Aboriginal History journal is committed to the highest standards of ethics in academic research and publishing. We are particularly mindful of the specific ethical practices for undertaking research and publishing in relation to Australian Indigenous peoples.

Ownership and management

Aboriginal History Inc. is a publishing organisation based in the Australian Centre for Indigenous History, Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra. It is governed by an Editorial Board , which meets three times a year. The Corporation also holds an annual general meeting.

The Board is responsible for all journal publishing and business decisions. The Board considers and ratifies all manuscript proposals submitted by the editorial team for the journal.

Aboriginal History journal has an editorial team of four who are responsible for the day-to-day editorial work: a senior and associate editor for journal articles and a senior and associate editor for book reviews.

Aboriginal History journal is co-published by ANU Press and Aboriginal History Inc. Co-published publications are also subject to the ANU Press Publishing Ethics and Publishing Malpractice statement .

Publishing schedule

Aboriginal History is published once a year, in December. Special issues may also be published either within or outside the normal publication schedule of the journal.

Fully open-access scholarly publication is made freely available immediately upon publication. Authors are required to agree with this open-access policy, which enables unrestricted access and reuse of all published papers, with appropriate acknowledgement and citation.

Users are allowed to copy and redistribute the material in printed or electronic format and build upon the material, without further permission or fees being required, provided that appropriate credit is given. The copyright page of the journal will have further information on the specific copyright conditions of particular publications.

Copyright and licensing

Aboriginal History Inc. retains copyright over all published journals and the Aboriginal History Inc. logo.

ANU Press retains copyright over all journal layouts and cover designs that have been created by ANU Press. Where ANU Press has not created this content, this is indicated on the copyright page of the publication. ANU Press also retains copyright of all ANU Press logos and the ANU Press webpages.

Authors retain copyright over their papers, unless otherwise agreed or stated.

Creators of visual and other materials retain copyright over these materials, including photographs, maps, artworks, graphics, video, audio or any other material that might be included in an online publication.

Permission must be obtained to reuse any content that is not published under a Creative Commons licence or where the use of content is not covered by this licence.

Revenue sources

Occasional grants (e.g. Cultural Fund grants in 2015 and 2017 from the Copyright Agency), Copyright Agency remittances for use of copyright material, and remittances from RMIT and ANU Press for sales of Aboriginal History Inc. publications.

Author fees

There are no fees charged to authors for publishing work in Aboriginal History journal.

Peer review process

Aboriginal History journal manuscripts are peer-reviewed by experts and academics in the fields or disciplines relevant to the subject matter of the manuscript being reviewed. A rigorous double-blind peer-review process is used for all articles.

The peer-review process is fair, objective and transparent. Where there is a potential conflict of interest, peer reviewers are expected to remove themselves from the commission. (See Peer reviewer responsibilities and Conflicts of interest below.)

Respect of Indigenous Moral Rights and Intellectual Property

Aboriginal History journal has pioneered interdisciplinary historical studies of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ interactions with non-Indigenous peoples, principally in Australia but also transnationally. It has promoted publication of Indigenous oral traditions, biographies, languages, archival and bibliographic guides, previously unpublished manuscript accounts, critiques of current events, and research and reviews in the cognate fields of anthropology, archaeology, sociology, linguistics, demography, law, geography and cultural, political and economic history.

We model our approach to publication on two guidelines developed by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies:

• Ethical Publishing Guidelines (available at aiatsis.gov.au/aboriginal-studies-press/getting-published/ethical-publishing-guidelines )
• AIATSIS Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies (available at aiatsis.gov.au/research/ethical-research/guidelines-ethical-research-australian-indigenous-studies )

Aboriginal History journal takes very seriously any allegations of improper research conduct or infringement of the copyrights and moral rights of Indigenous people.

Plagiarism and academic misconduct

Aboriginal History journal takes any allegations of academic misconduct concerning any submitted manuscripts or published papers seriously.

Reviewers or Board members are expected to report any suspected case of misconduct or plagiarism in a submitted manuscript to the publication editor or Editorial Board with sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. Where plagiarism or misconduct is identified, Aboriginal History journal will act immediately to suspend publication of the manuscript under question and investigate any allegations until a clarification and successful decision or conclusion is reached.

If a member of the public suspects any case of plagiarism or academic misconduct in any of the articles, book reviews or other content in Aboriginal History journal, we encourage them to notify Aboriginal History Inc. immediately.

Any allegations will be reviewed by the Aboriginal History Inc. Editorial Board. Our investigation will include contacting the author/editor of the suspected manuscript or paper to obtain clarification, setting out the respective complaint or claims made.

Author responsibilities

To publish in Aboriginal History journal, authors must ensure their submitted manuscript meets specific requirements for quality scholarly publications.

The author must warrant that:

• The submitted manuscript is original, has not been published previously and is not being considered for publication elsewhere in either print or electronic form.
• The source of any copyright materials in any submitted manuscripts has been acknowledged, cited or quoted and appropriate permissions to use such copyright material have been obtained.
• The work does not contain any libellous material.
• Any interests, funding or affiliations that may impact on research findings and the impartiality of the submitted manuscripts are disclosed.
• They understand the licence conditions applied to their published papers.
• The submitted manuscripts are in respect of work conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and in compliance with all relevant legislation.
• The submitted manuscripts will report only accurate and reliable data.

Authors must ensure that all persons who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the submitted manuscript will be listed as co-authors.

If others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the submitted manuscript, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the submitted manuscripts and have agreed to its submission for publication.

All authors must also disclose in the submitted manuscript all sources of financial support for the project that the submitted manuscript is written about in order to inform the Readers about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.

Peer reviewer responsibilities

Peer reviewers are an essential part of the journal’s scholarly publishing process. They assist the publisher in determining which publications add value to the scholarly debate and ensure the integrity of the scholarly record. Due to the important role played by peer reviewers, it is essential that reviewers conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner.

It is the responsibility of the reviewer to:

• Ensure they can return a review in a timely manner.
• Declare any conflict of interest before accepting a manuscript for review.
• Ensure that competing interests are declared to the Editorial Board before accepting a manuscript for review.
• Read the full manuscript and provide feedback on all articles.
• Respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process and not use information obtained during the process for their own or another’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
• Not involve anyone else in the review process without first obtaining permission from the Editorial Board.
• Remain unbiased by considerations relating to the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, origins of a manuscript or by commercial considerations.
• Inform the Editorial Board if they find they do not have the necessary expertise to assess the relevant aspects of the manuscript.
• Notify the Editorial Board if they suspect any breach of research or publication ethics immediately.
• Prepare a report for the journal Editor identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript; providing any advice on revisions, edits, additions or omissions they think are required to improve the manuscript; advise the Editorial Board to accept, revise or reject the manuscript.

Aboriginal History journal employs a rigorous double-blind peer-review model. This model ensures that the authors do not know their reviewers, nor the reviewers the author(s). Authors may suggest potential reviewers to the Aboriginal History Journal Editor, but they are not made aware whether these reviewers were used.

Conflicts of interest

Aboriginal History journal undertakes to remove potential conflicts of interests whether identified before or after publications and expects our editors, authors, editorial board members and reviewers to also be alert to such issues.

Such conflicts may arise from employment, consultancies, stock ownership, affiliations, honoraria, paid expert testimonies, funding arrangements or financial holdings, or grants, patent application/registrations that may raise concerns about potential bias in research findings or editorial decisions.

Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. If a potential conflict of interest is identified, the relevant party must declare the interest to the Senior Journal Editor or the Editorial Board and remove themselves from the process while the conflict is investigated. In particular:

JOURNAL EDITORS

Journal Editors will:

• Declare if they have any conflict of interest when receiving a manuscript for consideration.
• Ensure authors and reviewers report potential conflicts of interest that may influence, or be perceived to have influenced, their research findings and conclusions.
• Have in place processes for dealing with submissions from themselves and other members of the Editorial Board.
• Ensure no commercial, advertising or sponsorship arrangements exercise any influence over editorial decisions.

MEMBERS OF EDITORIAL TEAMS/BOARDS

Members of the Editorial Board will declare any conflict of interest before accepting a position on the Board, at the time of submission, declare their interest if they are seeking to publish their own work through Aboriginal History journal.

Authors will declare any potential conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their submitted manuscript to the Journal Editor when they submit a manuscript.

Reviewers will declare any potential conflicts of interest to the Book Review Editor prior to undertaking any review.

Retractions and corrections

In the event an error or a case of academic misconduct is not detected until after publication, a retraction or correction will be issued as soon as practicable.

Authors and other interested parties must promptly report errors or inaccuracies in the officially published version of the journal. The Editor or the Editorial Board will be responsible for adding an erratum to the article or book review. The placement of the erratum will be at the discretion of ANU Press and will be made prominent.

Retractions will be issued in cases of academic misconduct, or in the case of major errors that mean a publication’s findings are not reliable. In this case, the publication metadata will remain on the website with a retraction notice stating the reason for the retraction and its date.

The authors will cooperate with the journal Editor or Editorial Board to retract or correct the published version of the article.

Aboriginal History journal is made available to readers in multiple online formats and as print-on-demand hard copies in perpetuity. ANU Press has also partnered with CLOCKSS to digitally preserve its ebooks and ejournals and future-proof access to these publications.

Confidentiality

Editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and Aboriginal History Editorial Board. Editors will ensure that material submitted remains confidential while under review.

Complaints policy

We take seriously complaints or concerns about Aboriginal History journal, our Editorial Board, our Editors, or the activities or information related to Aboriginal History Inc.

All concerns related to errors or suspicion of academic misconduct should be reported in the first instance to the Aboriginal History Inc. Editorial Board which will follow the procedures outlined in this statement.

Authors who have concerns about the editorial or peer-review process are encouraged to discuss these issues with the Aboriginal History Inc. Editorial Board.

Concerns about the legal status of Aboriginal History Inc. publications, such as copyright, privacy or defamation should be submitted to the Editorial Board.

Contact: [email protected]

Editorial team

• Editor: Crystal McKinnon and Ben Silverstein
• Book Review Editor: Annemarie McLaren
• Copyeditor: Geoff Hunt.

Board members

• John Maynard (chair), The Australian National University
• Maria Nugent, The Australian National University
• Lawrence Bamblett, The Australian National University
• Rebecca Collard (Associate Book Review Editor), The Australian National University
• Liz Conor, La Trobe University
• Val Cooms, Griffith University
• Brian Egloff, University of Canberra
• Karen Fox, The Australian National University
• Sam Furphy, The Australian National University
• Niel Gunson, The Australian National University
• Geoff Hunt (copyeditor)
• Julia Hurst, Melbourne University
• Dave Johnston, The Australian National University
• Rani Kerin (Monograph Editor), The Australian National University
• Harold Koch, The Australian National University
• Shino Konishi, University of Western Australia
• Ingereth Macfarlane (Journal Editor), The Australian National University
• Ewan Maidment, The Australian National University
• Isabel McBryde, The Australian National University
• Ann McGrath (Vice-Chair), The Australian National University
• Annemarie McLaren (Reviews Editor), Griffith University
• Rob Paton (Treasurer/Public Officer), The Australian National University
• Peter Read, The Australian National University
• Tikka Wilson (Secretary, Website Manager)
• Laura Rademaker (Associate Monograph Editor), The Australian National University
• Ben Silverstein (Associate Journal Editor), The Australian National University
• Martin Thomas, The Australian National University

Please send article submissions to [email protected] .

Articles of about 7,000 words in length (including footnotes and references) are preferred, but submissions up to 9,000 words will be considered. Please submit an electronic version of the paper (text only without embedded images or scans) in Microsoft Word or RTF format, along with a short abstract and author biography as a separate document.

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 47 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 46 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 45 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 44 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 43 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 42 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 41 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 40 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 39 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 38 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 37 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 36 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 35 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 34 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 33 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 32 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 31 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 30 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 29 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 28 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 27 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 26 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 25 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 24 »

Aboriginal History Journal: Volume 23 »

ANU Press is a globally recognised leader in open-access academic publishing. We produce fully peer-reviewed monographs and journals across a wide range of subject areas, with a special focus on Australian and international policy, Indigenous studies and the Asia-Pacific region.

View the latest ANU Press catalogue

• Search titles
• News & events
• Freedom of information

+61 2 6125 0262

The Australian National University, Canberra

CRICOS Provider: 00120C

ABN: 52 234 063 906

www.anu.edu.au

NEW: Emerging Scholars in Australian Indigenous Studies, Vol. 4, 2018 ISSN 2208-1232 | Published by UTS ePRESS | https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/student-journals/index.php/NESAIS/index

Lessons to learn: the role of Aboriginal history in promoting reconciliation in the classroom and beyond

Tallulah Thompson

University of Technology Sydney, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, PO Box 123, Ultimo NSW 2017, Australia. [email protected]

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5130/nesais.v4i1.1531

Citation: Thompson, T. 2018. Lessons to learn: the role of Aboriginal history in promoting reconciliation in the classroom and beyond. NEW: Emerging Scholars in Australian Indigenous Studies , 4, 51-57. https://doi.org/10.5130/nesais.v4i1.1531

© 2018 by the author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

Indigenous perspectives are still not fully included within our collective understanding of Australian history, particularly in the classroom. This essay examines the present state of Aboriginal history in Australian school curriculums, arguing that a comprehensive acknowledgement by all major institutions of the nation’s past atrocities is imperative to meaningful progress towards reconciliation.

Aboriginal history; reconciliation; history wars

Australia’s colonial past is fraught with violence, oppression and dispossession. While we cannot change our history, we cannot hide from it either, as the wrongs of our past continue to impact current generations of Indigenous Australians. This essay will analyse the role of Aboriginal history in promoting reconciliation, firstly by considering how Indigenous perspectives are still not fully included within our collective understanding of Australian history, particularly in the classroom. The importance of accepting our history will then be explored in light of the divisive ramifications of student disengagement from the topic. This will transition into a discussion regarding the complexity of teaching Indigenous history when not even the courts can provide meaningful recognition of Aboriginal people. Finally, the current national curriculum and specifically the incorporation of Aboriginal history as a ‘cross-curriculum priority’ will come under the microscope. It is argued that reconciliation is only truly possible when all Australians and major institutions acknowledge and repair the wrongs of our past to ensure they are not repeated in the future. Yet, the apparent failure to incorporate a true and engaging account of history in school curriculums indicates we still have a long way to go.

For the purposes of this essay, ‘reconciliation’ refers to the coming together of Indigenous peoples and other Australians. It is recognised as a process involving truth, justice and forgiveness, in which a collective understanding and accepting of our past plays a major role ( Korff 2018 ). Furthermore, the term ‘Indigenous peoples’ is used to describe both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, who form two culturally and historically different groups, but together comprise the Indigenous peoples of this nation.

Australia has a difficult history, but until all Australians can understand and accept our collective past, we cannot hope to make reparations and strengthen our relationship with the traditional owners of this land. Aboriginal people have lived on this continent for roughly 65,000 years ( Super Nomads 2015 ). They are the oldest living culture in the world, consisting of various nations and an array of traditions and language groups. Today, recognition of pre-colonial lore and sacred sites is tokenistic at best and exploitative at worst, found at the forefront of many tourism campaigns ( Griffiths et al. 2017 ). Yet, the question remains: how can we celebrate the ancient beginnings of our nation without first accepting and acknowledging the oppressive nature of the past 200 years? The objective of colonisation in Australia was settlement, with Aboriginal people consequently rendered a primitive group, “a fossilised stage in human evolution” who would eventually die out ( Griffiths et al. 2017 ; Gillan and Ghosh 2007 , p. 165). As Morris ( 1992 , p. 73) notes, much of the knowledge we have about the ‘other’ was produced as part of colonialism. It is what led to the massacre of Aboriginal peoples in the frontier wars (p. 87), as well as the removal of their children and dispossession of their land ( Goodall, 1995 , p. 76). Excluding them from history effectively reduced their significance, because like any other nation, Australia is a socially constructed and historically produced concept, defined merely by what people believe it to be. The harrowing experiences of Indigenous Australians at the hand of white Australians did not, and arguably still does not, fit with a “white national imaginary” ( Stephenson 2003 , p. 21).

‘The Great Australian Silence’ is how W.E.H Stanner (1974, pp. 24-25) described this exclusion of Aboriginal people from Australia’s narrative of nationhood, noting that “what may well have begun as a simple forgetting of other possible views turned under habit and over time into something like a cult of forgetfulness practiced on a national scale.” Along with the resistance of Aboriginal activists, Stanner was an important figurehead in inspiring the inclusion of Indigenous voices in Australia’s history ( Curthoys 2008 , p. 235). By the 1980s, the nation seemed to be coming to terms with its past ( Manne 2009 ), but this has not necessarily translated into lasting student engagement with Aboriginal history (Clark 2013, p. 76). Indeed, ‘The Great Australian Silence’ still rings true today, as in the case of Clark’s study of students’ experiences with Aboriginal history in schools around Australia. She found students were consistently dismissive of the subject, arguing they had studied it repetitively, despite their understanding being far from comprehensive (Clark 2013, p. 68). Even when students acknowledged the importance of Indigenous history, their experiences had been for the most part repetitive and disengaging (p. 65). This is reflected at a broader societal level, where almost 86 per cent of Australians believe the relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and other Australians is vital, yet there is limited real interaction between the two groups ( Reconciliation Australia 2016 , p. 8). Where personal interaction is not possible, there are many ways to bridge the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, and schools have a vital role in facilitating that. The fact that students are disengaged from learning about Aboriginal history is preventing the advancement of reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

Historical acceptance is one of five interrelated dimensions identified to measure the success of reconciliation in Australia, but one that is being let down, particularly in the classroom. Reconciliation Australia was founded in 2001 to promote a more holistic idea of reconciliation that encompasses rights and practical actions, and has sparked a national debate on prejudice, discrimination and racism ( Reconciliation Australia 2016 , p. 6). There are five key dimensions necessary for achieving reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians: race relations, equality and equity, unity, institutional integrity as well as understanding and accepting the wrongs of our past (p. 7). Notably, progress towards a reconciled nation is only as strong as the least advanced dimension, but there is a clear division between Indigenous people’s and other Australians’ views on how our past has shaped present oppressive circumstances in Aboriginal communities (p. 7). The State of Reconciliation in Australia report highlights a serious lack of understanding and acceptance by non-Indigenous Australians and a sense of historical injustice among Indigenous peoples (p. 2). Today there is still a gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, with the biggest differences in areas of health, education, income, living standards, life expectancy and experiences of racism ( Korff 2018 ). These complex social problems are symptomatic of intergenerational trauma and historical violence, but there is a continued public perception that Aboriginal people are responsible for their own plight ( Reconciliation Australia 2016 , pp. 14-15).

In the classroom too, students’ negative attitudes towards Aboriginal history are having divisive effects (Clark 2013, p. 69). Clark notes familiarity with content breeds contempt, thus students’ reluctance to study this history is somehow legitimised by the excessive repetition and poor subject planning (p. 69). However, the overwhelming dislike for the subject matter is having alienating effects on Indigenous students, who feel as though they cannot, or do not, want to talk about Aboriginal history with their peers (p. 69). Some Aboriginal students even admit they do not think it is particularly important to learn about at all, although the suspicion is they just do not want to be the ‘Indigenous spokesperson’ for risk of not fitting in (p. 69). However, as Marcia Langton ( 2013 , p. 19) argues, the very fact that Aboriginal history is an isolated subject category, rather than part of Australia’s collective history, is driving the colonial commitment to race. Indeed, as seen in Clark’s (2013, p. 70) findings, some students still believe learning about such topics as white settler invasion is a ‘guilt trip’. This is reminiscent of the term ‘black armband’, used to describe an exaggeratedly negative view of Australia’s colonial beginning, and adopted by prominent conservatives including former Prime Minister John Howard ( Taylor 2016 ). Such comments by students suppress the views and culture of their Aboriginal peers and stunt the formation of positive relationships between them. As such, the classroom could be seen as a microcosm for wider society and unless such attitudes change, reconciliation cannot progress. Indeed, we must change the way we tackle the understanding of our past, not only in schools, but in society more broadly. It has been 27 years since Reconciliation Australia was established, and while there have been minor successes, the fact that even Australian courts cannot recognise Aboriginal people’s rights is a cause for concern.

Efforts by the courts to repair past wrongs inflicted on Indigenous peoples have been slow to take place or simply disregarded, thus setting a poor example of reconciliation for wider Australia. Legal justice offers Indigenous peoples a sense of hope that their fraught history can be publicly legitimised and righted. This was the case in 1992 after the success of the Mabo High Court decision, which was the first time the Australian law recognised Indigenous people’s continuous connection and therefore entitlement to land ( Marchetti & Ransley 2005 , p. 534). The Commonwealth Parliament then passed the Native Title Act (1993), which provides a process of determination for the legal recognition of Aboriginal people’s land and water rights, where they have unceasingly maintained a connection to it in accordance with traditional law pre-dating 1788 (NSW Aboriginal Land Council 2017, p. 1). Nonetheless, there is a common perception among Indigenous peoples that the injustices they have faced in the past have still not been fully rectified ( Reconciliation Australia 2016 , p. 15). In the case of native title, for instance, the courts very rarely find in favour of Indigenous claimants. This is partially because racially discriminatory legislation and conduct cannot be used to attract redress of lands dispossessed before 1975, when the Racial Discrimination Act was introduced ( Marchetti & Ransley 2005 , p. 542). Rather, claims for native title are based solely on whether the plaintiffs have maintained a continued traditional connection to the land, without considering the destructive impacts of colonisation. This highlights how Indigenous people’s claims for native title are assessed through a ‘white’ viewpoint and have resulted in unjust effects. Even when a judge strives for equality under the law, they are still applying Eurocentric values ( Marchetti & Ransley 2005 , p. 533).

While a detailed examination of the unconscious racism impacting the justice system is beyond the scope of this essay, the Yorta Yorta case is an interesting example, as it was rejected by the High Court because the claimants’ connection to their land was supposedly “swept away by the tide of history” ( Atkinson 2001 ). Wayne Atkinson ( 2001 , p. 548), Yorta Yorta man and principal claimant on the case, argues the use of European sources in court such as squatters and pastoralists over the array of Indigenous knowledge available is a reversion to colonial practices. Indeed, Indigenous perspectives were never meant to be included in the courts, which to an extent has homogenised the way in which issues pertaining to Aboriginal peoples are dealt with today. To date, only eight native title claims have been successful in NSW and there are 21 applications yet to be determined (NSW Aboriginal Land Council 2017, p. 3). The Yorta Yorta case demonstrates the uncompromising refusal of the state to recognise past wrongs and the need to repair them ( Atkinson 2001 ). Clark (2013, p. 81) states, “The moral questions raised by colonisation, dispossession and even reconciliation aren’t easily answered in the courts, let alone the classroom.” How can teachers be expected to educate students about the facts of history, if, as in the case of native title, even judges in a court of law continue to act as agents of colonisation by effectively ignoring the Indigenous perspective ( Marchetti & Ransley 2005 , pp. 534-535)? In this light, Clark (2013, p. 81), maintains that more support for teachers is required, however, the curriculum today still fails to provide comprehensive detail surrounding Aboriginal history.

While incorporating Aboriginal history as a national ‘cross-curriculum priority’ appears a step towards a more comprehensive understanding of our past, the lack of direction for teachers proves that yet again, these are merely hollow words. According to the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA n.d), cross-curriculum priorities enrich the curriculum through development of focused content. In theory, such focus areas as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures are meant to fit naturally within existing learning areas. In doing this, the Australian Curriculum is supposedly working towards two distinct needs: for Indigenous students to have the opportunity to see themselves and their culture reflected in the curriculum, as well as to engage all students in reconciliation, respect and recognition of Indigenous peoples (ACARA n.d). However, in an opinion piece for The Canberra Times, former ACARA chairman Barry McGaw (2014) stated, “There is no requirement in the Australian Curriculum that subjects be taught through the three cross-curriculum priorities.” As such, the inclusion of Aboriginal history content is left up to the discretion of individual teachers and whether or not they have the time or are willing to include it ( Salter and Maxwell 2015 , p. 309). It is as if the appearance of progress is deemed sufficient, but in actual fact, it simply furthers a sense of ambivalence towards what is, or rather is not being done, risking the total exclusion of Aboriginal voices. Without necessarily meaning to, the school system is reverting to colonial thinking, wherein the history and culture of the ‘other’ is expelled to its “rightful place” (S Salter and Maxwell 2015 , p. 309).

Such attitudes fuel the vague and repetitive approach to teaching Aboriginal history, which is turning students off the subject altogether and oppressing Indigenous students as a result. It also fails to address the calls by students who participated in Clark’s (2013, pp. 86-87) study, who desire more comprehensive discussions that challenge stereotypes and engage them. Heather Goodall ( 2002 , pp. 11-12) argues there are significant differences in how Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians understand how the sharing of such history should be implemented. Most importantly, all Australians, starting with those in school, should understand that histories are not a collection of facts, but rather processes of generating narratives which are “always unfinished and always contingent on the teller, their purpose, the context and the audience to whom they speak” ( Goodall 2002 , p. 12). In addition, while this idea of sharing histories is a key goal of reconciliation, non-Indigenous Australians must respect the fear among Aboriginal communities of giving up custodianship of their stories, especially when bearing in mind the current lack of reparations made to them (p. 11). Clark (2013, p. 88) acknowledges that designing a curriculum is difficult, but says teaching it is even harder. Greater support therefore needs to be provided for those delivering the content in the classroom. Until this is addressed, Aboriginal history will remain marginalised, reconciliation will be even further out of reach, and it will once again be Indigenous people who pay the ultimate price.

In light of the state of reconciliation and lack of meaningful mechanisms for change outlined in this essay, it appears Australia is far from achieving stronger and more trusting relationships between its Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. It is clear we must do better at preparing active and informed citizens of the future who understand and acknowledge the value of Indigenous cultures and possess skills to contribute to and benefit from reconciliation. The repercussions of failing to understand and acknowledge our past are dire, but we as a nation can learn from our mistakes. Perhaps, then, we will have a real chance of achieving reconciliation with the traditional owners of this land. For, as 20 th century American thinker George Santayana (1905, p. 172) wrote, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Atkinson, W. 2001, ‘Not One Iota’ of Land Justice: Reflections on the Yorta Yorta Native Title Claim 1994 – 2001’, Indigenous Law Bulletin, Vol.5, No.6 .

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority n.d, ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures’, viewed 3 June 2018, < https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/cross-curriculum-priorities/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-histories-and-cultures/ >.

Clark, A. 2008, History’s Children: History Wars in the Classroom , Sydney: UNSW Press, ch.3, pp.64-89.

Curthoys, A., 2008, ‘WEH Stanner and the historians’, in M. Hinkson and J. Beckett, (eds), An

Appreciation of Difference: WEH Stanner and Aboriginal Australia , Aboriginal Studies

Press, Canberra, pp. 233-250.

Gillen, P. and Ghosh, D. 2007, ‘Race’ in Colonialism and Modernity, UNSW Press, pp. 156-177.

Goodall, H. 1995, ‘New South Wales’, in A. McGrath (ed.) Contested Ground: Australian Aborigines under the British Crown , Allen & Unwin, St Leonards, NSW, pp. 55-120.

Goodall, H. 2002, ‘Too early or not soon enough? Reflections on ‘sharing’ histories as process not

collection’, Australian Historical Studies, Vol. 33, No 118, pp. 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10314610208596176

Griffiths, B., Russell, L. & Roberts, R. 2017, ‘Friday essay: when did Australia’s human history begin?’, November 17, The Conversation, viewed 28 May 2018,

< https://theconversation.com/friday-essay-when-did-australias-human-history-begin-87251 >.

Korff, J. 2018, What you need to know about reconciliation , viewed 3 June 2018, < https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/people/what-you-need-to-know-about-reconciliation >.

Langton, M. 2013, Indigenous Exceptionalism and the Constiutional ‘Race Power’ , Space, Place and Culture.

Manne, R. 2009, ‘The History Wars’, November, The Monthly, viewed 4 June 2018, < https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2009/november/1270703045/robert-manne/comment >.

Marchetti, E. and Ransley, J. 2005, ‘Unconscious Racism: Scrutinising Judicial Reasoning in ‘Stolen Generation’ Cases’, Social and Legal Studies, Sage Publications, London, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp.533 - 552.

McGaw, B. 2014, ‘Cross-curriculum priorities are options, not orders’, The Canberra Times, 27 February, viewed 3 June 2018, < https://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/crosscurriculum-priorities-are-options-not-orders-20140226-33iae.html >.

Morris, B., 1992, ‘Frontier colonialism as a Culture of Terror’ in, Power, Knowledge and Aborigines, La Trobe University Press in association with the National Centre for Australian Studies, Monash University, Vic, pp. 72-87.

Native Title Act , 1993, (Cth.)

NSW Aboriginal Land Council 2017, Comparison of Land Rights and Native Title in NSW, viewed 31 May 2018, < http://alc.org.au/media/82940/170110%20native%20title%20fact%20sheet%201%20-%20comparison%20of%20land%20rights%20and%20native%20title%20final.pdf >.

Reconciliation Australia 2016, The State Of Reconciliation In Australia , viewed 24 May 2018,  < http://www.reconciliation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/State-of-Reconciliation-Report_SUMMARY.pdf >.

Salter, P. and Maxwell, J. 2015, ‘The inherent vulnerability of the Australian Curriculum’s cross-curriculum priorities’, Critical Studies in Education, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 296-312. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2015.1070363

Santayana, G. 2011, The Life of Reason: Introduction and Reason in Common Sense, MIT Press, Cambridge, Vol. 7, No. 1.

Stanner, W.E.H. 1969, ‘The Great Australian Silence’, in, The 1968 Boyer Lectures: After The

Dreaming , Sydney, ABC Enterprises, pp. 18-29.

Stephenson, P. 2003, ‘Beyond Black and White: Aborigines, Asian-Australians and The National Imaginary’ PhD thesis, The University of Melbourne, Vic.

Super Nomads: 50,000 To 30,000 Years Ago, 2015, documentary episode 1 of 4, First Footprints, ABC.

Taylor, T. 2016, ‘Australia’s ‘history wars’ reignite’, 31 March, The Conversation, viewed 6 June 2018, < https://theconversation.com/australias-history-wars-reignite-57065 >.

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction
• Social groups and categories
• Kinship, marriage, and the family
• Socialization
• Leadership and social control
• Economic organization

Early alien contact

The europeans.

Aboriginal peoples in Australian society

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Broome Historical Society and Museum - Aboriginal Pearlers
• Aboriginal Heritage - Aboriginal History
• State Library of Queensland - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Languages
• Minority Rights Group - Aboriginal peoples in Australia
• Queensland Museum - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures
• Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies - Indigenous Australians: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People
• Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies - Map of Indigenous Australia
• Australian Aboriginal peoples - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Australian Aboriginal peoples - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

Aboriginal peoples who lived on the north coast were the only ones to encounter foreign visitors before European settlement. Seagoing Makassarese traders from the Indonesian archipelago began making regular visits to Arnhem Land sometime before the 1700s to harvest bêche-de-mer (sea cucumber, or trepang) for export to China. They had a powerful impact on local art, music, ritual, and material culture . In the northeast, on Cape York Peninsula , Papuan visitors from New Guinea also had an influence; bows and arrows, dugout canoes, masked ritual dancing, and the use of the drum can all be traced to them. Yet these influences did not penetrate into the rest of the continent , the inhabitants of which had no knowledge of non-Aboriginal people and no need to develop cultural mechanisms aimed at withstanding the impact of alien and culturally different peoples.

Recent News

British settlement , dating from 1788, was altogether different. The arrival of carriers of a powerful imperialist culture cost the Aboriginal people their autonomy and the undisputed possession of the continent, and it forced them into constant compromise and change as they struggled to accommodate the newcomers. Initial contacts were often tentative but friendly. Although the Colonial Office in London prescribed the safeguarding of Indigenes’ rights and their treatment as British subjects, friction soon developed between the colonists and local Aboriginal peoples. Communication was minimal and the cultural gulf was huge. Once European settlement began to expand inland, it conflicted directly with Aboriginal land tenure and economic activities and entailed the desecration of Aboriginal sacred sites and property. Clashes marked virtually all situations where conflicting interests were pursued, and the Europeans viewed Aboriginal peoples as parasites upon nature, defining their cultures in wholly negative terms.

The frontier was a wild and uncontrolled one for a long period. Aboriginal peoples in some areas used their superior bushcraft to wage prolonged and effective guerrilla campaigns until they were finally overwhelmed by force of arms. In the period of “pacification by force,” up to the 1880s, a large number of Aboriginal people were killed. Others were driven into the bush, remaining in small pockets subject to the “civilizing” influence of missions, or were left to fend for themselves in the fringe settlements of cities and towns; still others remained in camps or pastoral and cattle stations to become the nucleus of a labour force .

Introduced diseases exacted a terrible toll and probably killed many more Aboriginal people than did direct conflict. The disappearance of Aboriginal people in southeast Australia was so rapid that the belief arose that all would soon die out. Growing humanitarian concerns and reactions to frontier excesses led the Australian colonies to pass laws, beginning in 1856 in Victoria, concerning the care and protection of Aboriginal peoples. They were put into reserves and given food and clothing to “smooth the dying pillow” as they awaited what the Europeans took to be cultural extinction. These laws offered Aboriginal people no place in the economy or society of the colonists, and in practice they resulted in much greater restriction and control exerted by whites over the lives of Aboriginal people. Aboriginal people were kept off their land and were therefore unable to survive by hunting and gathering. Those who survived were drawn—often forcibly, always uncomprehendingly—into wretched poverty on the margins of life in the developing colonies. Armed conflict was superseded by a more passive but nonetheless determined opposition to cultural absorption by the invaders. Forced adaptation entailed impoverishment, both material and cultural, but no alternatives were left. Gradually, missionaries and government welfare agents began to have some effect, and questions of humane treatment came to have a more practical meaning. But in outlying areas, maltreatment, violence, and the forced removal of children of mixed descent lingered on beyond the 1940s. Further, wherever European settlement was intensive, miscegenation took place, and Aboriginal people of mixed descent eventually outnumbered those with full Aboriginal ancestry in southern and eastern Australia.

Reserves were established in the late 1920s and early ’30s to serve as a buffer between Aboriginal peoples and Europeans. But many were attracted to, or forced into, the fringe settlements, where they formed tribally and linguistically mixed communities . This meant the emergence of a new form of living, structurally linked to the wider Australian society. It was not until the 1960s that the frontier period finally ended, with the move into settlements of the last few nomadic groups from the Great Sandy Desert . Their traditional life ceased to exist as a living reality over much of the southwestern, southeastern, and middle-eastern areas of the continent, though continuities with the past remained important in the values and modes of behaviour surrounding kinship and social relations, and at the turn of the 21st century there was a strong emphasis on cultural revival. In the central and northern regions traditional life remained, even on some pastoral, mission, and government stations, although in a modified form. In more remote areas it was still possible for Aboriginal peoples to live approximately in the way they had before European colonization but with notable modifications, particularly in the arena of law and order. ( See Sidebar: The Quality of Life for Indigenous Australians in the 21st Century .)

In the late 20th century there were growing calls for the Australian government to apologize to Aboriginal people for abuses they had suffered under earlier administrations. For decades the government resisted releasing such a statement, but in February 2008 Prime Minister Kevin Rudd issued a formal apology for the past mistreatment of Aboriginal people. In October 2023 the government of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese staged a national referendum on whether the Australian constitution should be altered to formally recognize Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islander peoples and to create an Indigenous body, the “Voice to Parliament,” to advise the government on policies that affect them. In the vote, some 60 percent of those who participated rejected the proposal, and it failed to gain majority support in all six states. The result was a stunning blow for the country’s Indigenous peoples.

Aboriginal Heritage Office

• North Sydney
• Ku-ring-gai

The Northern Beaches

• Strathfield
• What’s On all areas
• Northern Beaches
• Aboriginal History
• Clans of Sydney
• Filling a Void: history of word ‘Guringai’
• An Aboriginal History of Willoughby
• Flat Rock Gully – an Aboriginal History
• Struggle Town
• Identifying Sites
• Potential Site Areas
• Legislation
• Coastal Erosion
• Rock Climbing & Aboriginal Sites
• Yarnuping – Education
• Yarnupings Newsletter
• 360 Virtual Tours
• Photo Gallery
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Reading List
• Movie, Doco & DVD List
• Links and Resources
• Aboriginal Heritage in Your Local Area
• Sites and Sounds Video
• AHO Services
• Aboriginal Heritage Office Staff
• Info on Volunteer Site Monitoring
• Volunteer Introduction Video
• Contact Form

A Brief Aboriginal History

“The very ink with which all history is written is merely fluid prejudice.” Mark Twain

Since the European invasion of Australia in 1788, the Aboriginal people have been oppressed into a world unnatural to their existence, a way of life that had continued for thousands of years. First came the influx of the strangers who carried with them diseases, which decimated the immediate population of the Sydney tribes. It is estimated that over 750,000 Aboriginal people inhabited the island continent in 1788. The colonists were led to believe that the land was terra nullius (‘no one’s land’), despite what Lt James Cook saw in 1770 during his voyage up the east coast of Australia.

“… they were so ignorant they thought there was only one race on the earth and that was the white race. So when Captain Cook first came, when Lieutenant James Cook first set foot on Wangal land over at Kundul which is now called Kurnell, he said oh lets put a flag up somewhere, because these people are illiterate, they’ve got no fences. They didn’t understand that we didn’t need fences … that we stayed here for six to eight weeks, then moved somewhere else where there was plenty of tucker and bush medicine and we kept moving and then come back in twelve months’ time when the food was all refreshed …”1 the late Aunty Beryl Timbery Beller

It would not be an exaggeration to claim that the Island continent was owned by over 400 different nations at the time of this claim by Cook. When the first fleet arrived in Sydney Cove it is said that Captain Philip was astounded with the theory of Cook’s terra nullius, saying “Sailing up into Sydney cove we could see natives lining the shore shaking spears and yelling.”

The Occupants of the Land

For thousands of years prior to the arrival of Europeans, northern Sydney was occupied by different Aboriginal clans.  Living primarily along the foreshores of the harbour, they fished and hunted in the waters and hinterlands of the area, and harvested food from the surrounding bush. Self-sufficient and harmonious, they had no need to travel far from their lands, since the resources about them were so abundant, and trade with other tribal groups was well established. Moving throughout their country in accordance with the seasons, people only needed to spend about 4-5 hours per day working to ensure their survival. With such a large amount of leisure time available, they developed a rich and complex ritual life – language, customs, spirituality and the law – the heart of which was connection to the land.

European Discovery and Arrival

The arrival of Lt James Cook in 1770 marked the beginning of the end for this ancient way of life. Cook’s voyage of exploration had sailed under instructions to take possession of the Southern Continent if it was uninhabited, or with the consent of the natives if it was occupied. Either way, it was to be taken. Upon his arrival, Lt Cook declared the land he called New South Wales to be the property of Britain’s King George III, and ignored the inconvenient fact that the land was already well populated. His failure to even attempt to gain the consent of the natives began the legal fiction that Australia was waste and unoccupied ( terra nullius : learn more ).

Cook was followed soon enough by the arrival of the First Fleet, in January of 1788, under the command of Captain Arthur Phillip, whose mission was to establish a penal colony and take control of Terra Australia for settlement.

We found the natives tolerably numerous as we advanced up the river, and even at the harbour’s mouth we had reason to conclude the country more populous than Mr Cook thought it. For on the Supply’s arrival in the [Botany] bay on the 18th of the month they assembled on the beach of the south shore to the number of not less than forty persons, shouting and making many uncouth signs and gestures. This appearance whetted curiosity to its utmost, but as prudence forbade a few people to venture wantonly among so great a number, and a party of only six men was observed on the north shore, the governor immediately proceeded to land on that side in order to take possession of this new territory and bring about an intercourse between its new and old masters. Watkin Tench, January 1788

The first act of land ownership by Europeans came within four days of arrival when a group of men from the HMS Sirius went ashore to clear land to gain access to fresh water. By 26 January, the First Fleet had found its way to Sydney Cove and landed there on the harbour.

Aboriginal Life Through European Eyes

The early Europeans took a dim view of the Aboriginal way of life when first they encountered it.

This excerpt is taken from the diary of Watkin Tench, an officer in the First Fleet:

It does not appear that these poor creatures have any fixed Habitation; sometimes sleeping in a Cavern of Rock, which they make as warm as a Oven by lighting a Fire in the middle of it, they will take up their abode here, for one Night perhaps, then in another the next Night. At other times (and we believe mostly in Summer) they take up their lodgings for a Day or two in a Miserable Wigwam, which they made from Bark of a Tree. There are dispersed about the woods near the water, 2, 3, 4 together; some Oyster, Cockle and Muscle (sic) Shells lie about the Entrance of them, but not in any Quantity to indicate they make these huts their constant Habitation. We met with some that seemed entirely deserted indeed it seems pretty evident that their Habitation, whether Caverns or Wigwams, are common to all, and Alternatively inhabited by different Tribes.

Kinship with the Land

… from time immemorial, we believe as Aboriginal people, Australia has been here from the first sunrise, our people have been here along with the continent, with the first sunrise. We know our land was given to us by Baiami, we have a sacred duty to protect that land, we have a sacred duty to protect all the animals that we have an affiliation with through our totem system …1 Jenny Munro, Wiradjuri nation

Food was abundant, as was fresh water and shelter. Everything needed for a fruitful, healthy life was readily available. It was not to remain so. The British arrival brought armed conflict and a lack of understanding, which heralded the demise of the northern Sydney clans, along with the other peoples of the Sydney basin – the Dharawal to the south and the Dharug to the west. Food shortages soon became a problem. The large white population depleted the fish by netting huge catches, reduced the kangaroo population with unsustainable hunting, cleared the land, and polluted the water. As a result, the Aboriginal people throughout the Sydney Basin were soon close to starvation.

Disease and Devastation

Disease struck a fatal and extensive blow to the Aboriginal people, who until that point had been isolated for thousands of years from the diseases that had raged through Europe and Asia. They had no resistance to the deadly viruses carried by the sailors and convicts such as smallpox, syphilis and influenza. In less than a year, over half the indigenous population living in the Sydney Basin had died from smallpox. The region, once alive with a vibrant mix of Aboriginal clans, now fell silent.

Every boat that went down the harbour found them lying dead on the beaches and in the caverns of the rocks… They were generally found with the remains of a small fire on each side of them and some water left within their reach. Lieutenant Fowell, 1789

It is difficult to comprehend how devastating this event was to the Aboriginal clans of the Sydney area. Bennelong told Judge Advocat David Collins that his friend Colebee’s tribe had been reduced to only three people. Those witnessing could not remain unmoved.

At that time a native was living with us; and on our taking him down to the harbour to look for his former companions, those who witnessed his expression and agony can never forget either. He looked anxiously around him in the different coves we visited; not a vestige on the sand was to be found of human foot; the excavations in the rocks were filled with the putrid bodies of those who had fallen victims to the disorder; not a living person was any where to be met with. It seemed as if, flying from the contagion, they had left the dead to bury the dead. He lifted up his hands and eyes in silent agony for some time; at last he exclaimed, ‘All dead! all dead!’ and then hung his head in mournful silence, which he preserved during the remainder of our excursion. Some days after he learned that the few of his companions who survived had fled up the harbour to avoid the pestilence that so dreadfully raged. His fate has been already mentioned. He fell a victim to his own humanity when Boo-roong, Nan-bar-ray, and others were brought into the town covered with the eruptions of the disorder. On visiting Broken Bay, we found that it had not confined its effects to Port Jackson, for in many places our path was covered with skeletons, and the same spectacles were to be met with in the hollows of most of the rocks of that harbour. Judge Advocate David Collins, 1798

The colonists had destroyed within months a way of life that had outlasted British history by tens of thousands of years, and the people soon realised that the trespassers were committed to nothing less than total occupation of the land.

To most settlers, the Aboriginal people were considered akin to kangaroos, dingoes and emus, strange fauna to be eradicated to make way for the development of farming and grazing.

I have myself heard a man, educated, and a large proprietor of sheep and cattle, maintain that there was no more harm in shooting a native, than in shooting a wild dog. I have heard it maintained by others that it is the course of Providence, that blacks should disappear before the white, and the sooner the process was carried out the better, for all parties. I fear such opinions prevail to a great extent. Very recently in the presence of two clergymen, a man of education narrated, as a good thing, that he had been one of a party who had pursued the blacks, in consequence of cattle being rushed by them, and that he was sure that they shot upwards of a hundred. When expostulated with, he maintained that there was nothing wrong in it, that it was preposterous to suppose they had souls. In this opinion he was joined by another educated person present. Bishop Polding, 1845

Despite these impacts, Aboriginal people fought a guerrilla war for many years. In a place renamed Woodford Bay by the settlers, now in Longueville in Lane Cove Council, a stockade was built in 1790 to protect timber and grass cutters from attacks by local clans. Attacks had been mounted against the British elsewhere ( learn more ), however, the ‘eradication’, for the most part, had been easy. Smallpox had destroyed more than half the population and those not ravaged by disease were displaced when land was cleared for settlements and farms. Dispossessed of the land that had nourished them for so long, the Aboriginal people became dependent on white food and clothing. Alcohol, used as a means of trade by the British, served to further shatter traditional social and family structures.

European civilisation devastated, in what amounts to the blink of an eye, an incomparable and ancient people. Because the vast majority of clans living in the Sydney Basin were killed as a result of the 1788 invasion, the stories of the land have been lost forever. Much of what we do know about the northern Sydney clans must be gleaned from their archaeological remains. Middens, shelters, engravings and art remnants of indigenous life are prolific throughout the region, but no one remains to reveal their particular meanings or ancient significance. There are no first hand witness accounts giving the Aboriginal perspective to what was happening.

Rediscovering History

Aboriginal history has been handed down in ways of stories, dances, myths and legends. The dreaming is history. A history of how the world, which was featureless, was transformed into mountains, hills, valleys and waterways. The dreaming tells about how the stars were formed and how the sun came to be.

1. quotation from interview in 2007, printed in Currie J (2008) Bo-ra-ne Ya-goo-na Par-ry-boo-go Yesterday Today Tomorrow: An Aboriginal History of Willoughby Willoughby City Council.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Aboriginal Rights — History of Aborigines in Australia

History of Aborigines in Australia

• Categories: Aboriginal Rights Australia

About this sample

Words: 528 |

Published: Nov 8, 2019

Words: 528 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Geography & Travel

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 640 words

3 pages / 1141 words

1 pages / 2218 words

3 pages / 1445 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Aboriginal Rights

Canada is not a better country now than it was before. Women and First Nations have not been treated as equal humans, in the past and certainly not now. The Millennials and the Generation X are at an unfair disadvantage for the [...]

In our western society, there’s constantly increasing debate over how rampant sexism seems to be in politics, media, and economy. One such argument used by many third wave feminist and other such believers of western sexism is [...]

Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique ignited the onset of the second wave of feminism in the United States. This book is a sociological study about the roots of the feminine mystique and how it turned “into a religion, a [...]

The feminist reader would enjoy Lucrezia Marinella’s The Nobility and Excellence of Women and the Defects and Vices of Men, written in 1600. In her work, Marinella ridicules men’s arguments for the defects and vices of women [...]

Throughout a wide variety of cultures in history, women have had to endure an inferior status to men. Many women and feminists have risen to combat or oppose this inequality, and Virginia Woolf was no exception. In order to [...]

The gender wage gap still exists in America. Data supports this, and yet people still refuse to believe it. Read through any comments on an article on the wage gap - you’re guaranteed to get several, if not most, declaring the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be aware that this website may contain images, voices and names of deceased persons .

Australia's First Peoples

Australia is made up of many different and distinct Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups, each with their own culture, language, beliefs and practices.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are the first peoples of Australia, meaning they were here for thousands of years prior to colonisation.

There are varying estimates for how long Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have lived on this continent, however, upwards of 60,000 years is what current research reveals.

The Torres Strait region is located between the tip of Cape York and Papua New Guinea and is made up of over two hundred islands. Seventeen of these islands are inhabited. There are also two Torres Strait Islander communities, Bamaga and Seisia, on the northern peninsula area of mainland of Australia.  The Torres Strait is also home to the Aboriginal Kaurareg Nation who are the traditional inhabitants of Muralag (Prince of Wales Island), Kirriri (Hammond Island), Ngurupai (Horn Island) and Waiben (Thursday Island).

• View a map of the Torres Strait on the Torres Strait Regional Authority website

In the Torres Strait, people may refer to a cluster or group of islands to define different sections of the Torres Strait region. These include Top Western, Western Islands, Central Islands and so on.

Aboriginal peoples come from all areas of mainland Australia, including Tasmania and other islands.

John Paul Janke, Wuthathi (Eastern Cape York) and Meriam (Murray Island, Torres Strait) man, talks about his Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage.

Who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples?

In 2016, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples made up just 3.3 per cent of the Australian population. Of that group, the majority were under the age of twenty five.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples live in urban, regional and remote areas and are present in all communities, not necessarily on their traditional lands or islands.

Since colonisation, there have been sixty-seven definitions of Aboriginality (Australian Law Reform Commission). In the past, definitions were based on racialised categories called blood quantums or ‘degrees of Aboriginal blood’; classifications that were and remain highly offensive.

Like all people, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples don’t all look the same whether it be skin colour, hair, nose, or height.

The current definition, proposed by the Commonwealth Department of Aboriginal Affairs in the 1980s, is that an Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander person is:

• of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander descent;
• identifies as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander; and
• is accepted as such by the community in which he or she lives or has lived.

It’s important to remember that this definition is very broad and is often reserved for specific situations such as applying for Indigenous-specific services or programs. Each community has their own means of community identification.

What term is best to use?

‘Indigenous Australian’ is a very general term that covers two very distinct cultural groups: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. These terms of grouping are umbrella terms, within which sits a large array of different nations, each with their own culture, language, beliefs and practices. It’s important to acknowledge that there is great diversity within these two broad terms.

Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people do not like to be referred to as ‘Indigenous’ because it is considered too generic and can be applied to all indigenous peoples of the world. There is a growing preference for First Nations Australians as a more encompassing term, because while it also is generic, it acknowledges the diversity of Australia’s First Peoples. There are of course many other terms that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples might use when referring to themselves collectively, for example First Australians or Sovereign peoples.

‘Indigenous Australian’ should only ever be used when speaking about Aboriginal AND Torres Strait Islander people.

Each person has their own specific clans, groups, communities, islands and/or nations that they identify with. Ways of identifying are personal and individual; it’s always best to ask people what they prefer and to recognise that this may be their preference but may not be the case for other First Nations Australians.

Aboriginal peoples

Aboriginal peoples may choose to identify with their language groups and traditional country, for example, Gunditjamara people are the traditional custodians of western Victoria, the Gadigal people of the Eora nation are from Sydney, and the Yawuru people are the traditional custodians of Broome in Western Australia.

Aboriginal peoples might describe themselves in ways that relate to their Country (including their waters), such as ‘saltwater people’ for those who live on the coast or on islands, or ‘freshwater’, ‘rainforest’, ‘desert’ or ‘spinifex’ for people who live in that ecological environment, to name a few.

Some Aboriginal people prefer to be referred to by their regional identity, such as Koori, Murri, Nunga or others. These names ‘place’ them as coming from specific geographical regions, similar to saying you’re a ‘Queenslander’ or ‘Tasmanian’. These regional identities do not necessarily adhere to Australia’s state or territory boundaries.

Torres Strait Islander peoples

Torres Strait Islanders generally define themselves as being from specific islands, tribes, family groups and/or sea country. In the Torres Strait, you may live in one community but have historical ties across multiple different islands.

Torres Strait Islanders may also refer to themselves as Zenadth Kes. This term was created by the late Mr Ephraim Bani, a Torres Strait Elder and linguist who sought to redefine the European name for the region (the Torres Strait) which was named after the Spanish navigator Luis Vaez de Torres who sailed through the area in 1606. The term ‘Zenadth Kes’ is an amalgamation of Torres Strait language names for the four winds that pass through the region.

It's important to remember too that regardless of where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples live, their identity remains connected to their cultural and ancestral homelands. For example, you might identify as a Ngunnawal person (the First Peoples of the Canberra region) but live in Brisbane.

Language use

Language will always change and evolve, so what once may have been used, is today offensive. ‘Aborigine’ is one such word, and should not be used.

When used in Australia, it’s preferable to capitalise the words ‘Indigenous’, ‘Aboriginal’ and ‘Torres Strait Islander’, just like you would with any group of people, and avoid using acronyms like ATSI or TSI. If you’re referring to indigenous peoples generally around the world then ‘indigenous’ is spelt in lowercase.

Language that homogenises or erases diversity should also be avoided, for example, referring to all Torres Strait Islanders as ‘Thursday Islanders’, or calling all Aboriginal peoples ‘Kooris’.

It’s also preferable to use plurals when speaking about Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples. It acknowledges the diversity of the different groups and is inclusive of all the different peoples.

• Please let us know if you found this article useful

Related content

Map of Indigenous Australia

• Understanding the challenges
• Indigenous names
• Thinking about place
• Researching one ancestor
• Develop your research plan
• Get organised
• Start with yourself
• Background reading
• Search for records
• Put it all together
• Photographs
• Birth, death and marriage records
• Burial and cemetery records
• Records about adoption, fostering and institutions
• Military services records
• Mission and reserve records
• Electoral rolls and voter records
• Police gazettes, court and gaol records
• Land and pastoral station records
• Newspapers and magazines
• Tindale genealogies
• Biographical indexes and dictionaries
• Australian Capital Territory
• New South Wales
• Northern Territory
• South Australia
• Western Australia
• How can the Family History Unit help you?
• Funded Research Register
• Search the Collection
• A.M. Fernando notebooks
• Ann Curthoys' diaries
• The Aborigines Inland Mission
• Identity magazine search
• Maningrida Mirage
• NAIDOC Week posters
• To remove and protect
• Accessing items in the Collection
• Return of material to Indigenous communities
• Caring for the Collection
• Donate to the Collection
• Alternative settlements and modelling loss and reparation for compensation
• Livelihood values of Indigenous customary fishing
• Ngunnawal language revival project
• Prescribed Bodies Corporate
• Preserve, Strengthen and Renew in community
• Regional representation
• Report on the Situation and Status of Indigenous Cultures and Heritage
• Returning native title materials
• NILS3 online
• Code of Ethics
• Research Ethics Committee
• Research ethics framework
• Application process
• About the Exchange
• Research grants and projects
• Completed grant projects
• Native title research and access service
• Australian Aboriginal Studies journal
• Native Title Newsletter
• Presentations
• Research books and monographs
• Research reports
• Research guides and resources
• Research issues and discussion papers
• Submissions
• Publishing a research publication with us
• Family history worksheets and checklists
• Finding aids
• How to search the Collection
• Native Title Law Database
• People and languages
• Policy resources
• Preserving your own archive
• Reading lists
• Dictionaries project
• National Indigenous Languages Surveys
• Paper and Talk
• Our Land, Our Stories
• The Little Red Yellow Black resources
• Educational visits to Maraga
• Professional development
• Guide to evaluating and selecting education resources
• Core e-learning suite
• Blak in Books
• Karajarri Wankayi Muwarr
• Understanding Native Title
• Episode 1: Standing up for rights
• Episode 2: Building our nations
• Episode 3: Determining our futures
• Summit 2024
• AIATSIS membership
• About the Foundation
• Partner with us
• Songs of Australia
• Frequently asked questions
• About the Collection
• About our research
• Anindilyakwa returns
• Warumungu returns
• Israel Museum returns
• River Murray and Mallee community return
• Warlpiri returns
• Lardil and the Wellesley Island community return
• Yawuru return
• Arrernte returns
• Yindjibarndi return
• Gangalidda and Garawa return
• Nyamal return
• Bardi Jawi return
• Other resources and programs
• Publish with us
• Permissions
• Stanner Award
• Have you a tale to tell?
• Core cultural learning
• Vision, mission and functions
• AIATSIS Rules
• Annual reports
• Freedom of information
• Information publication scheme
• Reporting fraud
• Current vacancies
• How to apply
• Temporary employment register
• AIATSIS Central Australia
• Aboriginal Studies Press
• Return of Cultural Heritage
• Public Facilities

Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Anglo-Australian Historians

Indigenous historians, islands of exile, the missionaries, bunjilaka gallery.

Indigenous history displays an abundance of controversial issues. Merely adopting a certain stance on these issues is already a sign of subjectivity. Examining the standpoints of Anglo-Australian, as well as of Indigenous historians helps to understand the difficulties posed by the studies of Aboriginal history. The issues such as violence and law, humanitarians in the era of protection, and the islands of exile provide a framework for an analysis of the historian’s viewpoint taken when writing about Indigenous history. Subjectivity and personal attitude displayed by the authors give reason to believe that despite the professional imperative to be dispassionate, an objective standpoint is rather difficult to maintain. It is crucial to understand the responsibility that historians bear regarding the modern interpretation of events of the Indigenous history, and the role it plays in the ongoing efforts of reconciliation.

Henry Reynolds is one of the most prominent Anglo-Australian historians analyzing the history of Aboriginal Australia. Reynolds stresses the historical importance of reassessment of the history of settlement. The traditional viewpoint, i.e. a peaceful process of overcoming the difficulties posed by the land, with no confrontation with the indigenous, was adopted to conceal the problem of frontier violence. 19th-century explorers were rather honest about the fact that the confrontation with the indigenous people was of violent character. The ethical aspect of the settlement reappeared in 1988, revealing the need to reexamine the past to face the current issues.

The attitude displayed by the British settlers towards the legal aspect of the settlement was indicative of a certain interpretation of events. According to Reynolds, Australian land was declared terra nullius , which implied that upon its discovery, British settlers appropriated the land in legal terms using annexation. It also meant the modification of the sovereignty status regarding Australia and Aborigines. It was established by the settlers that the annexation provided the common law on Australian land, which meant that the Aborigines became British subjects. Reynolds implies that the settlers’ approach was neither consistent with human rights nor consistent with the common law principles, as it was discriminatory in its nature.

Another prominent Anglo-Australian historian, Keith Windschuttle widely criticized Reynolds’ take on Aboriginal history. According to Windschuttle, Reynolds’ interpretation of the post-annexation period was largely a story of imperialism, extinguishing the basic proprietary and sovereignty rights from the natives. The debate about the speculations on each side was taking place during the “culture wars.” The number of massacres and the degree of frontier violence were among the issues the historians disagreed on, with the Howard government making sure that only one interpretation of events would be promoted.

According to Behrendt, the culture and history wars were of little importance to the Indigenous. To their mind, the debates seemed to focus not on the Aboriginal history itself but rather on the approach the non-Indigenous were to adopt regarding the way of telling the history. However, the ideological struggle about the issue of interpretation cannot be underestimated. The writing of history should not be treated as an act of political campaign. Nonetheless, this has been the case. The attitude we adopt concerning our past is directly related to the way we approach each other in the present, and how we will treat each other in the future.

Jackie Huggins, one of the most prominent Indigenous historians, elaborates on the issues of the protection era. Upon the declaration of the Queensland Aborigines Protection Act, the following years saw the non-Indigenous people controlling nearly every aspect of the Indigenous lives. Huggins emphasizes the humiliating conditions of the reserves. Constant supervision and interference into the private lives of the Indigenous were the hallmarks of the non-Indigenous approach. The author points out the irony, as the reserves and all the other control measures were established for the protection of the Aborigines. Instead, the natives were forced to conform to the European ways under the pretext of protection, their traditions and customs forbidden. Huggins emphasizes that before the enactment of the document, violent massacres were frequent on the frontier, which was concealed later. Due to the reserves, Aborigines were cut off from the labour market. The police and surveillance officers controlled the employment of the Indigenous.

The exile of Aboriginal people of Tasmania to the Flinders Islands was a painful experience, as described by Boyce in “First Australians” edited by Marcia Langton. The author indicates the incredibly high death rate from the disease among the Indigenous living there. Despite that fact, they had not been allowed to go to the mainland for a long time, as the government saw them as a threat to the balance of local economy, including land prices.

Christian missions were introduced as an extension of the government policy, and education was provided for the Indigenous. Eventually, the missionaries obtained sufficient power to intervene in the lives of Aborigines, and even exercise a certain degree of control. John Harris, an Australian historian, elaborates on these events, emphasizing that the missionaries could not often separate the Christian teachings and the “European civilization”. They adopted a dominant attitude towards the Indigenous, and often “arrogant, rather than humble”.

Harris justifies their approach by explaining that the superiority of European civilization was a common viewpoint at the time. The humanitarians’ mission was to make sure the Indigenous adopted the culture brought by the settlers. Whether any explanation can justify an approach designed to control other people’s lives is not an open question anymore. Justifications of such an attitude can have grave implications, especially for the non-Indigenous people, regarding their current relationship with the Indigenous. However, mitigating the circumstances might increase the possibility of eventual reconciliation.

In an article on the First People Exhibition at the Bunjilaka Gallery at the Melbourne Museum, Witcomb suggests that the collaboration of the Museum with the Indigenous shows promise for the possibility of reconciliation. The author emphasizes the importance of such practices. It is indicative of a willingness to reevaluate the current perception of historical development, as well as alter and rethink the official standpoints on the matter. Witcomb assumes that such projects if undertaken on a wider scale, might significantly improve the relations between the Indigenous and the non-Indigenous population.

Several examples of previous exhibitions are provided, where the diverse cultural approach was employed. Direct integration of Indigenous community members was used, as well as presenting two opposing worldviews: the anthropologist’s outlook (Baldwin Spencer’s) and the worldview of the elder of one of the Indigenous communities. Witcomb indicates the political purposes of these exhibitions. By combining the Indigenous and non-Indigenous worldview, the authors wanted to communicate that the conventions were being rethought and reassessed, and Indigenous diversity was being acknowledged and appreciated.

Overall, the political aspect of writing of indigenous history is very pronounced. Personal aspects also play a decisive role in events interpretation. The debate between Windschuttle and Reynolds demonstrates how critical the stance adopted by a historian can be when it comes to ideological struggle. According to Bongiorno, Keith Windschuttle maintained that the guerilla war, described by Henry Reynolds, is nothing more than criminal actions. As Windschuttle challenges Reynold’s assessment of events related to frontier violence, calling it speculative and dubious, we might be led to think whether altering the widespread perception of the past might improve the Indigenous /non-Indigenous relations, as well as contribute to final reconciliation in the future.

Therefore, historians bear considerable responsibility for the eventual outcome of events such as “culture wars” in Australia. As the debates surrounding the interpretation of past events are strongly tied to the idea of national identity, the subject is rather fragile and requires careful consideration, as well as a thorough reassessment. The way both sides understand their past today will shape the mindset of future generations. While the differences in their worldview cannot disappear, the one thing they have in common is the personal approach, which fuels the ongoing debates.

Behrendt, L., Indigenous Australia for dummies . John Wiley & Sons, Sydney, 2012.

Boyce, James., ‘Towlangany: To Tell Lies. ‘What business have you here?’ in R. Perkins, M. Langton, W. Atkinson, & J. Boyce ed., First Australians , Melbourne University Publishing, Melbourne, 2010, pp. 43-77.

Frank B., review of Frontier, Race, Nation: Henry Reynolds and Australian History , Web.

Harris, J., ‘ Reconciliation with God and with each other: the Church’s ministry with Indigenous Australians ’ , 1998, Web.

Harris, J., One Blood : Two hundred years of Aboriginal encounter with Christianity [online facsimile] , Concilia LTD, 2013, Web.

Huggins, Rita, and Jackie Huggins. Auntie Rita . Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra, 1994.

Reynolds, H. Aboriginal sovereignty: Reflections on race, state, and nation . Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards, 1996.

Reynolds, H. Dispossession: Black Australians and white invaders , Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards, 1989.

Witcomb, A., “Look, Listen and Feel”: The First Peoples exhibition at the Bunjilaka Gallery, Melbourne Museum.” La Revue des Musées de la Civilisation , vol. 1, no. 1, 2014, pp. 49-62.

• Ethnic Conflicts in "A Different Mirror" by Takaki
• The Mi’kmaq People's Culture, Education, Economics
• The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia
• Closing the Gap: Non- and Aboriginal Australians
• "How Aborigines Made Australia" by Bill Gammage
• European Dehumanization of Indians and Africans
• Indians and Colonists Relations and Conflicts
• Mi’kmaq History and the Discovery of America
• Spanish Conquest on Americas: Success Factors
• History: the Conquest of the West
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, July 31). Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing. https://ivypanda.com/essays/anglo-australian-indigenous-peoples/

"Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing." IvyPanda , 31 July 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/anglo-australian-indigenous-peoples/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing'. 31 July.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing." July 31, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/anglo-australian-indigenous-peoples/.

1. IvyPanda . "Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing." July 31, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/anglo-australian-indigenous-peoples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Aboriginal Australia: Indigenous History Writing." July 31, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/anglo-australian-indigenous-peoples/.

• Using this site
• Acknowledgments
• Search Search for
• 60,000+ years
• Colonisation
• Assimilation
• Integration
• Reconciliation
• TORRES STRAIT
• Early history
• Coming of the Light

Colonisation 1788 - 1890

• Frontier wars
• Video: Resistance
• Videos : Bingara & ; WA

1. ATTENDANT CARE

Initial invasion and colonisation (1788 to 1890).

The arrival of Lieutenant James Cook, and then Arthur Phillip in 1788, marked the beginning of ‘white settlement’.

From 1788, Australia was treated by the British as a colony of settlement, not of conquest. Aboriginal land was taken over by British colonists on the premise that the land belonged to no-one (‘terra nullius’).

The history of Aboriginal dispossession is central to understanding contemporary Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal relations. Colonial takeover was premised on the assumption that European culture was superior to all others, and that Europeans could define the world in their terms. A colony could be established by persuading the indigenous inhabitants to submit themselves to its overlordship; by purchasing from those inhabitants the right to settle part or parts of it; by unilateral possession, on the basis of first discovery and effective occupation.

Possession of Australia was declared on the basis of unilateral possession. The land was defined as terra nullius, or wasteland, because Cook and Banks considered there were few 'natives' along the coast. They apparently deduced that there would be fewer or none inland. Their observations were soon proven incorrect. The governors of the first settlements soon found that Aboriginal people lived inland, and had special territories and associations with land on a spiritual and inheritance basis. Nonetheless, they did not amend the terms of British sovereignty.

In the first hundred years there was no consensus about the basis of British sovereignty . “ Deaths in Custody Australia’s colonisation resulted in a drastic decline in the Aboriginal population. Estimates of how many Indigenous people lived in Australia at the time of European settlement vary from 300,000 to 1 million. Estimates of the number of Indigenous people who died in frontier conflict also vary widely. While the exact number of Indigenous deaths is unknown, many Indigenous men, women and children died of introduced diseases to which they had no resistance such as smallpox, influenza and measles. Many also died in random killings, punitive expeditions and organised massacres.

Source: Face the facts p 45

U. Secret Country Extract 3: Empty land (2 min 36 sec)

The Frontier War

The pattern documented at and around Port Jackson - of initial friendly contact, followed by open conflict , reduction in the size of the Aboriginal population and then acceptance of and dependence on the whites by any survivors - was repeated time and time again as the frontier spread across the continent.

Many past histories made it appear as if the Aboriginals simply 'faded away' before white occupation. However, this was not the case. While some Aboriginal people accepted or adjusted to white occupation and some sought to survive as best they could by adapting to the new conditions, many others fought to retain their land and their culture.

Due to the nature of Aboriginal society, resistance took the form of guerrilla warfare - individuals or small groups of settlers were ambushed, isolated settlements attacked, crops, buildings and countryside burnt. In south-eastern New South Wales this type of resistance, organised by people such as Pemulwy around Sydney and Windradyne of the Wiradjuri around Bathurst, continued into the 1820s.

As white settlers moved further away from the centre of government, random shootings of Aboriginals and massacres of groups of men, women and children were common. The most infamous massacre in New South Wales occurred at Myall Creek station in 1838. Twenty-eight Aboriginals were murdered in cold blood by stockmen. The murderers were eventually tried and some were hanged - an unprecedented event which caused an outcry in the white community. Sometimes Aboriginal water- holes were poisoned, or Aboriginal people given flour, sugar or damper mixed with arsenic.

These practices, common in the 19th century, continued into the first half of the 20th century in some parts of Australia. Because of the 'moving frontier' and the different reactions of Aboriginal people to white settlement, the nature of the relationship that existed between black and white was not the same in all parts of the State at anyone time. The fight varied in intensity at different places and at different times.

Source: Aboriginal Australia Aboriginal People of NSW

Significant dates and events

1787 - Before departing England, Phillip’s instructions of 17 April 1787 included the following: You are to endeavour by every possible means to open intercourse with the natives, and to conciliate their affections, enjoining all out subjects to line in amity and kindness with them. And if any of our subjects shall wantonly destroy them, or give them any unnecessary interruption in the exercise of their occupation, it is our will and pleasure that you do cause such offenders to be brought to punishment according to the degree of the offence. (Historical Records of New South Wales, Sydney 1889) These instructions were not followed. The notion of Terra Nullius was created. The great southland was considered wasteland, unoccupied, and belonging to no one. Despite common belief, there was immediate resistance by Indigenous peoples. Amongst its human cargo, the First Fleet brought with it many illnesses. Diseases indigenous to Aboriginal people appear to have been few. Dental disease was relatively rare; smallpox, influenza, measles, whooping cough, tuberculosis, leprosy and syphilis were unknown.

1789 - a disease akin to smallpox decimated the Eora people. Governor Phillip wrote of this incident: It is not possible to determine the number of natives who were carried off by this fatal order, it must be great; and judging from the information of the natives now living with us, and who had recovered from the disorder before he was taken, one-half of those who inhabit this part of the country died; and as the native always retired from where the disorder appeared, and which some must have carried with them, it must have been spread to a considerable distance, as well inland as along the coast. We have seen traces of it wherever we have been (13 February 1790) The plague spread quickly throughout the inland Aboriginal population, leaving anywhere from 20% to 75% of those infected dead. As well as small pox there was an epidemic of venereal disease. None of the Eora people showed any sign of venereal disease when the British arrived in 1788, but by 1791 many were infected. It is most likely that the infection was spread by some of the sailors and convicts who had sexual relations with Aboriginal women. The disease then spread through the communities, causing painful sores, illness, sterility and even death. Collins described the extent of the infection: At one time, about the year 1791, there was not one of the natives, man, woman, or child, that came near us, but was covered with it. It raged violently among them…

1795 - an outbreak of measles spread amongst the Eora, particularly affecting the Kamergal (Cammeraigal) who lived on Sydney Harbour’s North Shore

1802 - Van Diemans Land (now known as Tasmania) was settled. In 1804 settlers were authorised to ‘shoot aborigines’ in response to their resistance.

1814 - Governor Macquarie established a native institution at Parramatta to’ civilise, educate and foster habits of industry and decency in the natives’. This institution was closed in 1820 after Koori people withdrew their children.

1824 - Martial law is proclaimed in Bathurst to quell the Wiradjuri resistance to the white settlers.

1834 - Five thousand men lined up across the breadth of Van Diemans Land and walked the length of the island to force the Aborigines into the Tasman Peninsula. The Aborigines were forced to Flinders Island, where many died. The remainder were moved to Cape Barren Island.

1834 - The Pinjarra massacre in Western Australia is said to have wiped out an entire tribe. The official death count was only fourteen.

1835 - The Myall Creek Massacre in NSW the first of the massacres where (white) offenders were punished under law. 28 Aboriginal people were shot and burnt, mainly women and children.

1835 - A treaty was made between John Batman and the Aboriginal people in 1835. There was an exchange of goods and blankets for 250,000 Ha of land. This treaty was never recognised by the authorities. (Some say that this was because the Governor would not recognise a treaty made in the absence of a declared war, others say it was because you cannot make a treaty with natives who are lower on the evolutionary ladder than you).

1837 - the British select committee finds that the treatment of Australian Aboriginals is very poor. A ’Protector of Aborigines’ was recommended to be appointed.

1848 - NSW sent troopers to Queensland to ‘open the land for settlement and kill natives’.

1863 - Labourers from the Pacific Islands were brought to Queensland.

1863 - The first international sporting team from Australia goes to England to play Cricket. The team was Aboriginal, it is said that the Australian side won the tour. In the same year 150 Aboriginal people were killed in the Kimberly Region for resisting arrest.

1876 - Tasmania’s Truganini dies.

Source: Australian Museum

More dates : Australian Human Rights Commission The history of the separation Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families

READING: 1. Aboriginal people in NSW

• Reading 1B First contacts
• Reading 1C The Frontier War
• Reading 1D Under the Act

Aboriginal Australia Aboriginal People of NSW Produced by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission 1997 (c) Commonwealth of Australia 1997 ISBN 0 664 10152 0

"It is important that we understand the legacy of Australia' s history, as it helps to explain the deep sense of injustice felt by Aboriginal people, their disadvantaged status today and their current attitudes towards non-Aboriginal people and society...."

READING: 2 The Legacy of History: National Report Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody

• Reading 2B : The Dispossession of Aboriginal People
• Reading 2C : Frontier Period: Diseases and Violence
• Reading 2D : Police
• Reading 2E : Aboriginal People and the Law

READING 3: Jack McPhee & Edward Eyre

The famous explorer Edward Eyre set out to explain why Aborigines attacked frontier settlers. He gave seven reasons. EJ. Eyre, Journals of Expeditions of discovery etc. , 2 vol., London, 1845

• Reading 3B : Edward Eyre

READING 102: Upper Hunter History of Aboriginal and European contact: Part A

READING 102B : First contact in the Upper Hunter Valley READING 102C : The Trial of Lieutenant Nathaniel Lowe READING 102D : The Impact of dispossession READING 102E : Caroona and St Heliers READING 102F : St Clair (Mount Olive), Caroona and the Aborigines Inland Mission

Video Clip D: First Australians Ep1 NSW Resistance 1790s (4 min 2 sec)

See: SBS On Demand for full video 1Hour 10 mins

They Have Come to Sta y - This landmark series chronicles the birth of contemporary Australia as never told before, from the perspective of its first people. It explores what unfolds when the oldest living culture in the world is overrun by the world's greatest empire, and depicts the true stories of individuals - both black and white. The story begins in 1788 in Sydney with the friendship between an Englishmen, Governor Phillip, and a warrior, Bennelong.

Video Clip E: Bingara Massacre 1838 (7 min 42 sec)

Myall Creek Massacre involved the killing of up to 30 unarmed Indigenous Australians by ten white Europeans and one black African on 10 June 1838 at the Myall Creek near Bingara in northern New South Wales. After two trials, seven of the 11 colonists involved in the killings were found guilty of murder and hanged.

Video Clip F: First Australians Ep5 WA Jandamarra 1890s (4 min 28 sec)

                 Last updated: June 2020

The history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples advocating for the right to be heard

There is a long history of First Nations people advocating for the right to representation and participation in decisions that affect them. Although colonisation has significantly disrupted First Nations Law, structures and culture, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have persevered, demonstrating remarkable strength, resilience and tenacity when engaging with the Australian nation state to have their rights recognised.

First Nations peoples have resisted state-sanctioned injustice since colonisation began, well before the events listed below. Early examples include mass protests against the inhumane treatment and living conditions imposed upon residents of Aboriginal reservations, such as the Cummeragunja walk-off . The swell of support for change sparked by the Indigenous protest movement in Australia has led to changes to the Constitution in the past, as with the 1967 referendum. Much like the referendum taking place this year, the 1967 referendum was not initiated by a single event, but rather decades of growing national and international advocacy and support for change.

The events listed below are a selection of moments in history when Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have taken action to call for large-scale change by Australian governments to realise their Indigenous rights.

WARNING: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are warned that the following timeline contains names of deceased persons.

Please note, the following timeline uses culturally inappropriate terms of reference that have contributed to the historical erasure of hundreds of distinct Nations, languages and cultures that make up the lands now known as 'Australia'. Terminology can change over time, and it is best practice to find out what the preferred term is from the respective Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander group or individual you are referring to.

This is the fourth of nine resources about the 2023 referendum, produced by the Commission. View the full Voice referendum: Understanding the referendum from a human rights perspective resource kit .

In 1933 Yorta Yorta man William Cooper established the  Australian Aborigines’ League (AAL) in Melbourne together with Margaret Tucker, Eric Onus, Anna and Caleb Morgan, and Shadrach James. Cooper was the founding secretary of the League which lobbied to improve the lives and rights of First Nations peoples, on behalf of their communities. From 1933–1938 Cooper gathered nearly 2000 signatures from First Nations people, on behalf of the AAL, for a petition to the King , calling for First Nations representation in the federal parliament. [i]

The Government refused to present the petition to King George VI. [ii]

In December 1938, William Cooper and the AAL made history when they marched on the German Embassy in Melbourne to protest against the treatment of the Jewish community in Germany following the events known as Kristallnacht. It was the first protest in support of the Jewish community anywhere in the world. [iii]

[i] National Museum of Australia, William Cooper Protests (Web Page 2023).

[ii] National Archives of Australia, William Cooper Petition (Cabinet Paper) 1938 (Web Page 2023).

[iii] National Museum Australia, William Cooper protests (Web Page 2023).

In January 1936, Torres Strait Islanders united against the substandard working conditions of pearl divers. At the time, Torres Strait Islander communities made up a significant proportion of the labour workforce, as was the case with many First Nations groups in northern Australia, meaning that industrial action became a particularly effective tool for advancing change. Through the Maritime Strike, Islanders advocated for the right to choose how they spent their wages and to have control over their own affairs, in other words the right to self-determination. The Strike lasted 9 months and led to the repeal of highly restrictive legislation and the introduction of the Torres Strait Islanders Act in 1939 . [i] Although restrictive, this legislation recognised Torres Strait Islanders as a separate First Nations group with the right to vote and elect their own chairmen and councillors to local government.

The Torres Strait Maritime Strike not only paved the way for future reform towards self-government in the region but is also one of the first recorded strikes by First Nations peoples across the continent, initiating the Indigenous workers’ rights movement in Australia and leading to pivotal events, such as the Wave Hill Walk-Off in 1966.

[i] Torres Strait Islander Act of 1939 (Qld), as repealed by Aborigines' and Torres Strait Islanders' Affairs Act 1965 (Qld) (Web Page 2023).

150 years after colonisation began, celebrations were planned across the lands now known as Australia for the 26th of January 1938. In response to this, the Australian Aborigines’ League and the newly established Aboriginal Progressive Association, declared a Day of Mourning . [i] They held a conference in Sydney, a landmark gathering of First Nations peoples, to draw attention to the violence, dispossession and inhumane conditions imposed upon Aboriginal communities, and to request full citizenship status and rights. [ii] This was one of many First Nations protests against injustice, denial of land and protectionist policies, and is considered by many to be the start of the Indigenous political movement in Australia.

A few days later, members of the Australian Aborigines’ League and the Aborigines Progressive Association led a delegation to the Prime Minister, Joseph Lyons, with a proposed national policy for Aboriginal people. Their requests were rejected by the Government.

[i] National Archives of Australia, William Cooper ’Day of Mourning’ Letter 1938 (Web Page 2023).

[ii] National Museum Australia, Defining Moments: Day of Mourning (Web Page 2023).

In August 1963, two bark petitions were presented to the Australian House of Representatives, one in Yolŋu Matha and the other in English, with differing and distinct paintings framing the text. The paintings represent the two Yolŋu moieties, Dhuwa and Yirritja . This was the Yolŋu’s first formal proposal to have their land rights recognised. The 1963 petitions still hang in Parliament House, Canberra.

The petitions were the first documents to have incorporated First Nations ways of representing relationships to land that were formally acknowledged by the Commonwealth Parliament. Four additional petitions were made and presented in 1968, 1988 (see ‘The Barunga Statement’ below), 1998 and 2008. [i] To this day, these petitions have not been effectively responded to by the Government.

[i] National Museum Australia, Defining Moments: Yirrkala Bark Petitions (Web Page 2023).

In February 1965, Charles Perkins and other students from the University of Sydney’s Student Action For Aborigines group led a 15-day bus journey across Northern NSW ‘to shine a light on the marginalisation of Aboriginal people in regional New South Wales’, known as the Freedom Ride . Ensuring that the protest was covered by the media, the students drew national and international attention to racial segregation and discrimination in public places such as swimming pools, picture theatres, hotels and RSL clubs, refusal of service in shops, and the inhumane conditions under which First Nations people were forced to live. [i]

The Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) – introduced by the Government to implement Australia’s obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) – makes it unlawful to discriminate against a person because of their race, descent, national or ethnic origin.

The Freedom Rides were also a way to campaign for the dismantling of racism facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in accessing health, education and housing services, barriers which still exist today.

[i] AIATSIS, 1965 Freedom Ride (Web Page 2023); Charles Perkins, A Bastard Like Me (URE Sydney, 1975).

On 26 January 1972, Michael Anderson, Billy Craigie, Bertie Williams and Tony Coorey set up a beach umbrella outside Parliament House in Canberra and named it the Aboriginal Embassy, protesting the Government’s stated opposition to Indigenous land rights. [i] In response to persistent forced removal by police, the Aboriginal Tent Embassy operated in multiple locations before its permanent establishment on the lawns in front of Parliament House in 1992. The Embassy continues to operate today, advocating for First Nations land rights, sovereignty and self-determination. [ii]

The Aboriginal Tent Embassy is recognised as the longest continuous First Nations land rights protest in the world . [iii]

[i] Professor Bronwyn Carlson and Lynda-June Coe, A Short History of the Aboriginal Embassy - An Indelible Reminder of Unceded Sovereignty (24 March 2022) The Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House ; National Museum of Australia, Defining Moments: Aboriginal Tent Embassy .

[iii] National Archives of Australia, Aboriginal Land Rights Protest (Web Page 2023).

Leader of the Gumatj clan of the Yolŋu, Galarrwuy Yunupingu, presented the Barunga Statement to the Prime Minister at the Barunga Sport and Cultural Festival. [i] The Barunga Statement is an important part of the tradition of painted legal documents that have been presented to the Australian Government, beginning with the 1963 Yirrkala Bark Petitions. Fusing Yolŋu, Arrernte and Warlpiri symbolism with English text, the Statement calls for First Nations self-management and self-determination, a national system of land rights, compensation for loss of lands, respect for Aboriginal identity, an end to discrimination and the granting of full civil, economic, social and cultural rights for Indigenous peoples.

While the Statement has been permanently exhibited in Parliament House since 1991, many of the calls for action and recommendations within it have not yet been implemented by the Government.

[i] AIATSIS, The Barunga Statement (Web Page 2023).

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) was established to replace the National Aboriginal Conference as a national representative body for First Nations people in Australia. [i] ATSIC consisted of elected regional councils and a board of commissioners to monitor and advise on service delivery and policy decisions directly affecting Indigenous communities. [ii]

ATSIC was abolished by the Government in 2005. [iii]

[i] Dani Larkin et al, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, Law Reform and the Return on the States (11 May 2022) Indigenous Constitutional Law; Kinglsey Palmer, ‘ ATSIC: Origins and Issues for the Future. A Critical Review of Public Domain Research and Other Materials ’ (Research Discussion Paper No 12/2004, Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2004).

[ii] Larissa Behrendt, ‘ The abolition of ATSIC – Implications for democracy ’, Democratic Audit of Australia – November 2005, 1 (Web Page, 2023).

[iii] John Hannaford, Jackie Huggins, and Bob Collins, ‘ In the Hands of the Regions - A New ATSIC Report of the Review of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission’ , Australian Indigenous Law Reporter, Vol. 8 No. 3 pp. 105-112 (November 2003).

Mabo v Queensland (1988) and Mabo v Queensland [No. 2] ( 1992) delivered landmark rulings from the High Court of Australia on the land rights of First Nations people across the country. [i] The High Court recognised and acknowledged the Meriam people’s traditional ownership of their land and waters (including Mer Island), overturning the fiction of terra nullius (‘land belonging to no-one’) that did not recognise Indigenous occupation and custodianship of land and waters. The Mabo [No. 2] decision recognised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ continuing connection and rights to land and waters through native title in the Australian legal system and led to the passing of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).

In the years that followed, amendments were made to the Act that significantly weakened Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ procedural rights to native title claims, effectively diminishing the rights initially recognised through the Mabo decisions.

[i] Mabo v Queensland (1988) 166 CLR 186; Mabo v Queensland [No. 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1.

The Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA) was established as a self-governing body consisting of 20 elected representatives to administer the Torres Strait Islands, aiming to strengthen the region’s economic, cultural, and social development. TSRA, previously the Torres Strait ATSIC regional body, was separated from ATSIC between 1994 and 1997. It survived the abolition of ATSIC in 2005 and continues today, providing local and government services as well as a political representative structure for Torres Strait Islanders. [i]

However, Torres Strait Islander communities have identified further progress towards greater autonomy and the establishment of a self-governing territory as key priorit ies. [ii]

[i] Torres Strait Regional Authority, Section Two: About the TSRA .

[ii] Australian Human Rights Commission, Wiyi Yani U Thangani (Women’s Voices): Securing Our Rights, Securing Our Future Report (Report, 2020) 86.

The first National Sorry Day event was held one year after the tabling of the Commission’s report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, the Bringing Them Home report. [i] The inquiry and report examined the forcible removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families and communities and paid tribute to the strength of First Nations people who shared their stories. Many of the report’s recommendations have still not been implemented by the Government.

Today, First Nations children are removed from their families at rates higher than that of the Stolen Generations , disrupting their connection to Country, community and culture. [ii] Sorry Day continues to serve as an ongoing call to implement the recommendations of the Bringing Them Home report, and an opportunity to acknowledge the systemic failures that contribute to the disproportionate rates of child removals. [iii]

[i] Australian Human Rights Commission, Bringing them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families (Report, April 1997).

[ii] SNAICC – National Voice for our Children, the Family Matters Campaign, Monash University and the University of Technology Sydney, The Family Matters Report 2022 (Report, 2022).

[iii] Bronwyn Carlson, ' National Sorry Day is a day to commemorate those taken. But ‘sorry’ is not enough – we need action ', The Conversation (online, 26 May 2022).

First Nations people in Australia played a key and significant role in the development of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). [i] However, Australia was one of four nation states to vote against the Declaration in 2007, alongside Canada, New Zealand and the United States.

Following considerable international and domestic pressure, Australia reversed its position and formally endorsed the UNDRIP in 2009. Canada, New Zealand and the USA also reversed their opposition around this time. However, Australia has not yet put in place sufficient mechanisms for realising Indigenous rights on a national level and has therefore not effectively incorporated the UNDRIP into domestic law. [ii]

[i] United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples , GA Res 61/295, UN GAOR, 61st sess, 107th plen mtg, Agenda Item 68, Supp No 49, UN Doc A/RES/61/295 (2 October 2007).

[ii] ANTAR, UNDRIP in Australia (16 December 2022).

In 2009, then Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Tom Calma AO, led a national consultation for a new First Nations representative body, culminating in the creation of the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples (NCAFP). [i] The body was established in 2009, comprising three representative chambers: representatives from existing First Nations peak bodies, community representatives and individuals with expertise in different fields. It had a 50/50 gender parity policy for delegates and an ethics council with oversight of elections and organisational operations.

In 2013, the government withdrew the NCAFP’s funding and in 2019, it was forced out of operation and went into voluntary administration.

[i] James Haughton, Former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian Government representative and advisory bodies: a quick guide (16 June 2023) Parliament of Australia.

In June 2016, national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peak organisations and representative bodies came together to develop and announce the  Redfern Statement . The Statement was an urgent call for an end to budget cuts and the restoration of funding to the Indigenous Affairs Portfolio.  It laid out six key priority areas and recommendations, and covered issues ranging from engagement, health, justice, violence prevention, disability, children and families and calls for a new dialogue with the Government to address some of the major challenges facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In February 2017 the Statement was formally presented to the Prime Minister in Parliament House. [i]

[i] Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates , Senate, 15 February 2017, 18 Indigenous Australians – Redfern Statement (James McGrath, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister).

On 26 May 2017, at the National Constitutional Convention in Yulara on the lands of the Aṉangu people, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was presented to the Australian public by a group of First Nations people. [i] Regional dialogues prior to the convention were hosted in 13 locations across Australia. 250 delegates were invited to attend the convention and many were in support of the Statement. For those delegates, it was an expression of desires for substantive constitutional reform and proposed a First Nations Voice to Parliament, and a Makarrata Commission that would undertake agreement-making (treaty) and truth-telling.

[i] ‘ Uluru Statement: a quick guide ’, Parliament of Australia (Web Page 2023).

Friday essay: when did Australia’s human history begin?

Research fellow, Deakin University

Professor, Indigenous Studies and History, Monash University

ARC Australian Laureate Fellow and Director, ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage (CABAH), University of Wollongong

Disclosure statement

Lynette Russell receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Richard 'Bert' Roberts receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Billy Griffiths does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Monash University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU.

University of Wollongong and Deakin University provide funding as members of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

In July, a new date was published that pushed the opening chapters of Australian history back to 65,000 years ago. It is the latest development in a time revolution that has gripped the nation over the past half century.

In the 1950s, it was widely believed that the first Australians had arrived on this continent only a few thousand years earlier. They were regarded as “primitive” – a fossilised stage in human evolution – but not necessarily ancient.

In the decades since, Indigenous history has been pushed back into the dizzying expanse of deep time. While people have lived in Australia, volcanoes have erupted, dunefields have formed, glaciers have melted and sea levels have risen about 125 metres, transforming Lake Carpentaria into a Gulf and the Bassian Plain into a Strait.

How are we to engage with a history that spans 65,000 years? There is a “gee whiz” factor to any dates that transcend our ordinary understanding of time as lived experience. Human experiences are reduced to numbers. And aside from being “a long time ago”, they are hard to grasp imaginatively.

It is all too easy to approach this history as one might read the Guinness Book of Records, to search the vast expanse of time for easily identifiable “firsts”: the earliest site, the oldest tool, the most extreme conditions. The rich contours of Australia’s natural and cultural history are trumped by the mentality that older is better.

To political leaders, old dates bestow a veneer of antiquity to a young settler nation. To scientists, they propel Australian history into a global human story and allow us to see ourselves as a species. To Indigenous Australians, they may be valued as an important point of cultural pride or perceived as utterly irrelevant. Their responses are diverse.

Further reading: Buried tools and pigments tell a new history of humans in Australia for 65,000 years

Recently, one of us, Lynette Russell, asked 35 Aboriginal friends and colleagues of varying ages, genders and backgrounds for their thoughts about Australia’s deep history.

Many of the responses were statements of cultural affirmation (“We have always been here” or “We became Aboriginal here”), while others viewed the long Indigenous history on this continent through the lens of continuity, taking pride in being members of “the oldest living population in the world” and “the world’s oldest continuing culture”.

As expressions of identity, these are powerful statements. But when others uncritically repeat such notions as historical fact, they risk suggesting that Aboriginal culture has been frozen in time. We need to be careful not to echo the language of past cultural evolutionists, who believed, in Robert Pulleine’s infamous words, that Aboriginal people were “an unchanging people, living in an unchanging environment”.

This article seeks to move beyond the view of ancient Australia as a timeless and traditional foundation story to explore the ways in which scientists and humanists are engaging with the deep past as a transformative human history.

Memories of time

The revolution in Australia’s timescale was driven by the advent of radiocarbon dating in the mid-20th century. The nuclear chemist Willard Libby first realised the dating potential of carbon-14 isotopes while working on the Manhattan Project (which also produced the atom bomb). In 1949, he and James Arnold outlined a way to date organic materials from a couple of hundred years old to tens of thousands of years old. The key was to measure the memories of time preserved in carbon atoms.

By comparing the decaying isotope, carbon-14, with the stable isotope, carbon-12, they were able to measure the age of a sample with relative precision. The rate of decay and amount of carbon-14 provided the date.

“A new time machine has been invented”, Australian archaeologist John Mulvaney declared when he realised the implications of the method. In 1962, he used the new technique at Kenniff Cave in the central Queensland highlands and was stunned to discover that Australia had been occupied during the last Ice Age. The dates of 19,000 years overturned the long-standing idea that Australia was the last continent to be inhabited by modern humans and the artefacts he uncovered in his excavations revealed a rich history of cultural adaptation.

The following decade, at Lake Mungo, Australia’s human history was pushed back to the limits of the radiocarbon technique. A sample from spit 17 of Mulvaney and Wilfred Shawcross’ excavations at Lake Mungo revealed that the ancestors of the Mutthi Mutthi, Ngyiampaa and Paakantji peoples had thrived on these lakeshores over 40,000 years ago. Geomorphologist Jim Bowler also revealed the dramatic environmental fluctuations these people endured: what is now a dusty and desiccated landscape was then a fertile lake system with over 1000 km2 of open water.

Further reading Mungo man returns home and there is still much he can teach us about ancient Australia

The date of 40,000 years had a profound public impact and announced the coming of age of Australian archaeology. The phrase “40,000 years” quickly appeared on banners outside the Tent Embassy in Canberra, in songs by Aboriginal musicians and in land rights campaigns. When the bicentenary of European settlement was marked on 26 January 1988, thousands of Australians protested the celebrations with posters reading “White Australia has a Black History” and “You have been here for 200 years, we for 40,000”. The comparison magnified the act of dispossession.

The discovery of 65,000 years of human occupation at Madjedbebe rock shelter on Mirrar land, at the edge of the Arnhem Land escarpment, draws on a different dating method: optically stimulated luminescence. This technique analyses individual grains of sand and the charge that builds up in their crystal quartz lattice over time. By releasing and measuring this charge, geochronologists are able to reveal the moment a grain of sand was last exposed to sunlight.

The archaeological site at Madjedbebe is far more than an old date; it reveals a long and varied history of human occupation, with evidence of profound cultural and ecological connections across the landscape, cutting edge Ice Age technology (such as the world’s earliest ground-edge axe ) and dramatic environmental change.

Perhaps most evocatively, throughout the deposit, even at the lowest layers, archaeologists found ochre crayons: a powerful expression of artistic endeavour and cultural achievement.

In the wake of the discovery, in August 2017, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull seized upon the new date in his speech at Garma , singling out the possibilities of this deep time story for political reconciliation:

I am filled with optimism about our future together as a reconciled Australia. Last month scientists and researchers revealed new evidence that our First Australians have been here in this land for 65,000 years. … This news is a point of great pride for our nation. We rejoice in it, as we celebrate your Indigenous cultures and heritage as our culture and heritage – uniquely Australian.

Although Turnbull revels in the deep time story, his speech avoids reflecting on the more recent past. Here is a statement of reconciliation that does not address the estrangement that it is seeking to overcome. As such it opens itself up to being dismissed as simply a prolonged platitude.

We cannot engage with the past 65,000 years without acknowledging the turbulent road of the past two centuries.

A story of rupture and resilience

When Europeans arrived in Australia in the 17th and 18th centuries they were setting foot onto a land that had been home to thousands of generations of Indigenous men and women. These groups lived along the coasts and hinterlands and travelled into the mountains and across stone plateaus; they thrived in the harsh deserts and gathered in great numbers along waterways and rivers.

Although Australia is a continent, it is home to hundreds of different nations, over 200 language groups and an immense variety of cultural, geographic and ecological regions. To the newcomers these people were simply perceived as “the natives”, and despite the immense cultural diversity across vastly different environmental zones, the disparate groups became labelled with the umbrella term: “the Aborigines”.

There is a similar tendency today to homogenise the deep history of the first Australians. The dynamic natural and cultural history of Australia is too often obscured by tropes of timelessness. Tourism campaigns continue to tell us that this is the land of the “never never”, the home of “ancient traditions” and “one of the world’s oldest living groups”.

Such slogans imply a lack of change and hide the remarkable variety of human experiences on this continent over tens of thousands of years. While there is great continuity in the cultural history of Indigenous peoples, theirs is also a story of rupture and resilience.

The discovery of old dates at Madjedbebe does not make the history of the site any more or less significant. It simply reminds us that science, like history, is an ongoing inquiry. All it takes is a new piece of evidence to turn on its head what we thought we knew. Science is a journey and knowledge is ever evolving.

The epic story of Australia will continue to shift with the discovery of new sites and new techniques, and by engaging and collaborating with different worldviews. It is a history that can only be told by working across cultures and across disciplines; by bridging the divide between the sciences and the humanities and translating numbers and datasets into narratives that convey the incredible depth and variety of human experience on this continent.

The authors of this article will continue this conversation at a public event in Wollongong on Friday 24 November 2017 at the annual meeting of the Australasian Association for the History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Science. There will be two other sets of speakers, exploring issues surrounding precision medicine and artificial intelligence. Register here .

• Indigenous history
• Friday essay
• Human settlement

Service Centre Senior Consultant

Director of STEM

Community member - Training Delivery and Development Committee (Volunteer part-time)

Chief Executive Officer

Head of Evidence to Action

This Noongar man is challenging to become Australia's next boxing world champion

As a professional, if he wins his next fight, he will write his name into the australian sporting history books..

Alex Winwood could be about to make history with his Saturday bout.

Rhoda Roberts tells the story of her cousin Frank, the first Aboriginal Olympian

'This girl is trouble': How Marissa became the first Aboriginal woman to qualify for boxing at the Olympics

The power behind the punch

Boxing legend Lionel Rose celebrated on the world's homepage

Share this with family and friends

Popular stories

Goodways: Episode 4 - Female Friendships

Koori unionist raises awareness about rampant ‘black cladding’ in the construction industry in Victoria

Kickin' Back With Gilbert McAdam - Episode 25

NITV Radio - News 04/09/2024

NITV Radio - News 2/09/2024

Step towards justice as Northern Territory Stolen Wages class action reaches $202m settlement

As Māori grieve for their King, his daughter succeeds him as the new monarch

Rabbitohs have confirmed Latrell is cleared to play at the Koori Knockout

Subscribe to the nitv newsletter, receive the latest indigenous news, sport, entertainment and more in your email inbox..

By subscribing, you agree to SBS’s terms of service and privacy policy including receiving email updates from SBS.

The Point: Referendum Road Trip