Taking sides over Dark Emu

[Herne Hill Hammer]

With stories passed from generation to generation for millennia, paintings, rock art etc how come we're only just heating about this type of thing now?

Yes language and culture is being destroyed but surely some of this survived and snuck through.

For years they've been ridiculed for inventing a 'burnt stick, why has not one person stepped forward before? Well, not that I can remember

 

[Chief]

With stories passed from generation to generation for millennia, paintings, rock art etc how come we're only just heating about this type of thing now?

Yes language and culture is being destroyed but surely some of this survived and snuck through.

For years they've been ridiculed for inventing a 'burnt stick, why has not one person stepped forward before? Well, not that I can remember

Roylion knows of other authors who have covered this.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Roylion knows of other authors who have covered this.

Hopefully he responds.

 

[HairyO]

With stories passed from generation to generation for millennia, paintings, rock art etc how come we're only just heating about this type of thing now?

Yes language and culture is being destroyed but surely some of this survived and snuck through.

For years they've been ridiculed for inventing a 'burnt stick, why has not one person stepped forward before? Well, not that I can remember

Clearly it was a Rosetta Stone moment and Bruce figured it all out.

If Im 1/16 16 different races/nationalities which am I?

If Im 1/16 one, 15/16 another, which am I?

The correct answer is, it doesnt matter as long as one of them is Aboriginal.

Now give me my 40 acres and a mule.

 

[Sainteric]

With stories passed from generation to generation for millennia, paintings, rock art etc how come we're only just heating about this type of thing now?

Yes language and culture is being destroyed but surely some of this survived and snuck through.

For years they've been ridiculed for inventing a 'burnt stick, why has not one person stepped forward before? Well, not that I can remember

My limited understanding is that whilst for instance alot of the central Australian mobs survived with culture intact, the ones around the east coast didn't as much. If you don't have to spend as much time to do the necessities of life them your society advances somewhat.

 

[Balls In]

I have seen some ridiculous things done by aboriginal trackers but that doesn't make them more advanced pre european than there society suggests. Just a different skillset.

My point is there's much to be proud of in indigenous culture that there's no need to embellish it with a re-invention of the historical record. Moreover his assertion that the indigenous people were not hunter gatherers I find very hard to believe for one simple reason. It's known that advanced agriculture and establishment of permanent dwellings is the forerunner to the modern world. Once humans worked out how to produce a permanent supply of food, water and shelter he created many hours a day of spare time in which to use his intellect. This led to bronze and iron ages, overland and sea exploration, technical innovation and ultimately the industrial revolution. The world Pascoe presents is one where we are expected to believe that a long established advanced agricultural society existed including towns filled with permant dwellings existed... but none of the other advancements ocurred that are typical of an agricultural society.

 

[HairyO]

My limited understanding is that whilst for instance alot of the central Australian mobs survived with culture intact, the ones around the east coast didn't as much. If you don't have to spend as much time to do the necessities of life them your society advances somewhat.

There is enormous written records from Day 1 of settlement on the East coast. And from other parts as settlers expanded.

The problem is, there simply isnt corroborating 1st hand evidence. And Pascoe relies on clsiming white settlers were racist snd refused to acknowledge what they saw.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

There is enormous written records from Day 1 of settlement on the East coast. And from other parts as settlers expanded.

The problem is, there simply isnt corroborating 1st hand evidence. And Pascoe relies on clsiming white settlers were racist snd refused to acknowledge what they saw.

Actually, Pascoe does use corroborating 1st hand evidence—the diaries and journals of Sturt and Mitchell. He also uses accounts by white settlers.

 

[Pie eyed]

I thought it was fiction? Is it meant to be a histiorical work of non fiction?

It's meant to be a historical opinion piece as far as I can tell. The fact that people like Bolt are getting hot and bothered by it is clear example of their type reeling against any opinion other than one which fits theirs.

All of the key propositions are supported by evidence, albeit mostly first hand eye witness reports from early settlers and explorers, so not very much of it the peer reviewed science people like Bolt would require to even entertain anything but the very same type of evidence they so wilfully just accept as fact unquestioningly, as it fits their bias.

No doubt as with all these types of "arguments" the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes.
Some can live with that, even marvel in it, seem others feel it tears down the fabric of the reality they have constructed in their heads.

 

[EasternTiger]

Actually, Pascoe does use corroborating 1st hand evidence—the diaries and journals of Sturt and Mitchell. He also uses accounts by white settlers.

He butchers Mitchell's journal though.

Pascoe says "In the early 1800s Major Thomas Mitchell set out to survey NSW. He came back with stories of fields of grain which reached the horizon, hay-like bundles and earth turned up as if it had been ploughed by a hoe. These were not the farms of Mitchell’s fellow colonisers, though. These were Aboriginal practices. “Mitchell rode through nine miles of stooked grain. His fellow explorers said it looked like an English field of harvest. This is an enormous devotion of labour and ingenuity and couldn't be described as hunting and gathering in any way,”

What Mitchell actually says "The Panicum loevinode of Dr. Lindley seemed to predominate, a grass whereof the seed ("Cooly") is made by the natives into a kind of paste or bread. Dry heaps of this grass, that had been pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed, lay along our path for many miles. I counted nine miles along the river, in which we rode through this grass only, reaching to our saddle-girths, and the same grass seemed to grow back from the river, at least as far as the eye could reach through a very open forest. I had never seen such rich natural pasturage in any other part of New South Wales."

What Mitchell said is they rode through 9 miles of grass that grew saddle high, and there were dry heaps of the grass scattered along the way, which the hunter gatherers gathered to make bread.

Pascoe mischievously makes it look like there's 9 miles of these huge hay like bundles of stooked grain, when Mitchell is actually just marveling at the lovely native grass.

There's no mention of these tremendous farming techniques at all, just grass pulled up and drying for the express purpose of collecting the seed to make bread.

You can read Mitchell's journal for free on gutenberg.

The bit I just quoted is from Chapter III 9th March.

Journal of an Expedition

Maybe do some actual research occasionally, and even read the book in question before you go off on one of your progressive rants, and embarrass yourselves.

 

[Brick Loosener]

Anyone that managed to invent something as cool and ingenuous as the boomerang isn't that primitive.

True. The Egyptians invented the boomerang too.

 

[Chief]

True. The Egyptians invented the boomerang too.

heck off they copied it from aliens.

 

[Brick Loosener]

fu** off they copied it from aliens.

One of the classic Stargate episodes.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

He butchers Mitchell's journal though.

Pascoe says "In the early 1800s Major Thomas Mitchell set out to survey NSW. He came back with stories of fields of grain which reached the horizon, hay-like bundles and earth turned up as if it had been ploughed by a hoe. These were not the farms of Mitchell’s fellow colonisers, though. These were Aboriginal practices. “Mitchell rode through nine miles of stooked grain. His fellow explorers said it looked like an English field of harvest. This is an enormous devotion of labour and ingenuity and couldn't be described as hunting and gathering in any way,”

What Mitchell actually says "The Panicum loevinode of Dr. Lindley seemed to predominate, a grass whereof the seed ("Cooly") is made by the natives into a kind of paste or bread. Dry heaps of this grass, that had been pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed, lay along our path for many miles. I counted nine miles along the river, in which we rode through this grass only, reaching to our saddle-girths, and the same grass seemed to grow back from the river, at least as far as the eye could reach through a very open forest. I had never seen such rich natural pasturage in any other part of New South Wales."

What Mitchell said is they rode through 9 miles of grass that grew saddle high, and there were dry heaps of the grass scattered along the way, which the hunter gatherers gathered to make bread.

Pascoe mischievously makes it look like there's 9 miles of these huge hay like bundles of stooked grain, when Mitchell is actually just marveling at the lovely native grass.

There's no mention of these tremendous farming techniques at all, just grass pulled up and drying for the express purpose of collecting the seed to make bread.

You can read Mitchell's journal for free on gutenberg.

The bit I just quoted is from Chapter III 9th March.

Journal of an Expedition

Maybe do some actual research occasionally, and even read the book in question before you go off on one of your progressive rants, and embarrass yourselves.

I corrected another poster, who incorrectly claimed that first-hand accounts weren't used in Dark Emu. That is not a 'progressive rant,' it is just a matter of fact as primary sources were used.

You cite one example of Pascoe drawing on a primary source, and claim he 'butchered it'; an argument you ripped from a politically motivated blog.

Your argument (or the blogs) is somewhat self-defeating, considering Mitchell clearly does describe stooked grain (what are 'dry heaps of grass') and the subsequent task of threshing ('pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed'). You claim that Mitchell is simply 'marvelling at the lovely native grass,' yet the entire context of the Mitchell quotation revolves around the description of harvesting seed to make bread. Needless to say, you don't bold those bits of Mitchell's passage that contradict your argument.

Thanks for your concern, but I have read the book. And so I notice that you don't bother with other passages from Mitchell, cited by Pascoe, such as turned up earth resembling 'ground broken by the hoe', or other journal references to dams, planting, types of irrigation, food storage in dwellings, etc.

Obviously, there are differences between the way Europeans and Aboriginals organised the landscape. But there is mounting evidence that pre-contact Indigenous people had their own systems of agriculture and aquaculture beyond hunter-gatherering.

 

[EasternTiger]

Thanks for your concern, but I have read the book. And so I notice that you don't bother with other passages from Mitchell, cited by Pascoe, such as turned up earth resembling 'ground broken by the hoe', or other journal references to dams, planting, types of irrigation, food storage in dwellings, etc.

I linked Mitchell's journal in my previous post. You can read the whole thing. http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks/e00034.html#chapter06

He even talks about the hoes:

Chapter VI 13 August.

"We crossed some patches of dry swamp where the clods had been very extensively turned up by the natives, but for what purpose Yuranigh could not form any conjecture. These clods were so very large and hard that we were obliged to throw them aside, and clear a way for the carts to pass. The whole resembled ground broken up by the hoe, the naked surface having been previously so cracked by drought as to render this upturning possible without a hoe."

What Mitchell is saying is the ground resembled ground broken by hoe, but what really happened is the drought created so many cracks it was possible to turn over the soil with sticks and by hand.

And that's how the first peoples did it. Using sticks and hands.

Possibly to gather the roots and yams under there.

There's good historical books, and then there's Pascoe's book. Nothing wrong with taking liberties. And there's certainly nothing wrong with being a hunter gatherer.

Some of you would fair dinkum believe Chariots Of The Gods is an accurate historical book if it suited your agenda.

 

[Sainteric]

I corrected another poster, who incorrectly claimed that first-hand accounts weren't used in Dark Emu. That is not a 'progressive rant,' it is just a matter of fact as primary sources were used.

You cite one example of Pascoe drawing on a primary source, and claim he 'butchered it'; an argument you ripped from a politically motivated blog.

Your argument (or the blogs) is somewhat self-defeating, considering Mitchell clearly does describe stooked grain (what are 'dry heaps of grass') and the subsequent task of threshing ('pulled expressly for the purpose of gathering the seed'). You claim that Mitchell is simply 'marvelling at the lovely native grass,' yet the entire context of the Mitchell quotation revolves around the description of harvesting seed to make bread. Needless to say, you don't bold those bits of Mitchell's passage that contradict your argument.

Thanks for your concern, but I have read the book. And so I notice that you don't bother with other passages from Mitchell, cited by Pascoe, such as turned up earth resembling 'ground brokenhearted by the hoe', or other journal references to dams, planting, types of irrigation, food storage in dwellings, etc.

Obviously, there are differences between the way Europeans and Aboriginals organised the landscape. But there is mounting evidence that pre-contact Indigenous people had their own systems of agriculture and aquaculture beyond hunter-gatherering.

I can tell your motivated to believe this, but their are other components to a non hunter gatherer lifestyle, such as a complex structured large population (by comparison) trading society that did not seem to exist.

 

[ferball]

The theory is Dutch survivors from the Batavia shipwreck taught the locals some European farming techniques.

The s**t theory that might not stand up to scrutiny.

 

[ferball]

I always leant towards people finally not being embarrassed to admit to being aboriginal if it wasn't easily apparent by looking at them. This would refer to the urban areas.

Fwiw the census counts a mission as an urban area.

 

[ferball]

Pretty much, mostly. I certainly think what you're saying has happened too. People digging into their ancestry that they wouldn't have done before, finding they have a small diluted amount in their far past and ticking the box.

I remember at the time when there was the huge jump in numbers thinking the same as I do now plus some of what you think. I certainly wouldn't think the higher birth rates notion holds any water, certainly not to account for the size of the increase.

I actually know a person who has done it. I'm lifelong friends of the family, the mother does some digging after all the kids have left home, finds some Aboriginal DNA on her side of the family and one of the sons who up until that point had just drifted through life, couldn't tick that box fast enough in everything he was eligible to, he rode that pony for all it's been worth. It didn't start until he was in his 30s. It opened all sorts of doors for him and he has now been in stable employment for that past 15 or so year at a big university and even advocates on their behalf. He's about as sincere as a politician.

Are you saying he is an insincere advocate who doesn't do his job properly or to the best of his ability?

 

[ferball]

Yup as I said a seperate class of citizens, it's the way the law has been going. A little concerning.

The only problem with that decision is that it doesn't apply to every Australian born somewhere else to one Australian parent.

As an aside - the law has been to hell since sept 11 2001. At least.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

Are you saying he is an insincere advocate who doesn't do his job properly or to the best of his ability?

I have no idea what the quality of his work is.

 

[ferball]

I haven't read the book I was just putting into context why there's controversy in the first place. My position is I don't think its appropriate to have this version of history taught in schools until the theories presented in the book are proved. Those disputing him have gone to Pascoes sources and there appears to be a wide disconnect, even deliberate distortion. Yet there are far too many people willing to hitch to these theories due to their ideological beliefs and that is not how history works.

Theories can't be proved, only disproved.

No theories that have been proven are taught. Except maybe maths ones and they are essentially logical games for idealised situations.

Why don't you read the book, check the sources and make up your own mind?

 

[ferball]

I have no idea what the quality of his work is.

And yet you've cast aspersions on it by claiming he is as sincere as a politician.

A casual, not careful, reading of your comment might lead people to think you are accusing him of lying on a private document.

A careful reading of it leaves me wondering if you're implying that he is lying without saying it.

Here's another interpretation of that person. Not that I've met him but who cares...

He drifted for years because he couldn't relate to the empty meaninglessness of western consumer culture. As a result his life felt empty and he was unable to commit to anything because he thought it was all bullshit.

Suddenly he was given a connection to something outside himself, something bigger than him and something that forced him to reevaluate who he was and act on that.

As a result he's been in stable employment for15 years and advocates on behalf of his community.

 

[Sainteric]

The only problem with that decision is that it doesn't apply to every Australian born somewhere else to one Australian parent.

As an aside - the law has been to hell since sept 11 2001. At least.

That's been the law for 20;+ year iirc. With 1 parent Australian If you move to Australia you can apply and generally are given citizenship

1 Australian parent born in Australia = Australian

1 Australian parent in a third country = can be Australian

Only if the child is born in the second parents country or technically the USA and does not gain Australian citizenship before committing a crime can you be sent out of the country if they don't have aboriginality

 

[medusala]

It's a bloody reverse one-drop rule with these RWNJs. The minute someone is not dark enough for them, they're "not a real aboriginal".

There is plenty of animosty betweent those who think they are truly aboriginal against those who they perceive not to be. There was a big argument in Tasmania over this going back a few years. Hardly a spat between your so called RWNJs.

You can't even work out what homelessness means so the definition of "real aboriginal" is rather unlikely to be something that you could grasp.