Memory, Place and Aboriginal-Settler History: Understanding Australians' Consciousness of the Colonial Past
264
Memory, Place and Aboriginal-Settler History: Understanding Australians' Consciousness of the Colonial Past
264Hardcover
-
SHIP THIS ITEMIn stock. Ships in 3-7 days. Typically arrives in 3 weeks.PICK UP IN STORE
Your local store may have stock of this item.
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781783086818 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Anthem Press |
| Publication date: | 09/27/2017 |
| Series: | Anthem Studies in Australian History , #1 |
| Pages: | 264 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 1.00(d) |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
HISTORICAL INHERITANCE: TRACING THE PAST
In the case of living memory [...] critical examination cannot be reduced to a fragmented analysis [... the historian] must examine all the stages of elaboration, conservation and emergence of the recollection. Criticism must go back in time, from the present moment of the account to the time when the recollection was created, passing through all the intermediate stages.
Numerous scholars working in diverse fields and disciplines who are interested in understanding how the past is recollected through individual, social and collective memory stress the important link between experience and memory. They point out that individual memory is crucial to the production of information that passes through the generations; memory is not a random terrain where anything goes – nothing will be transmitted unless someone, at some time, has remembered it on the basis of personal experience and communicated this memory to others. Regarding social memory, scholars remind us of the need to keep in view the 'experiential bases on which collective memory rests' and that histories which are told in specific places are closely related to very specific experiences. Myths similarly arise in the course of human experience; they too have human/ historical sources and are created and recreated in the midst of historical contingency.
These conclusive findings reinforce the need for memory scholars to seriously acknowledge that settler descendants' understandings and narratives of the colonial past are connected to aspects of reality experienced by previous generations. Factors such as the timing of arrival, geography of place of settlement and, relatedly and most importantly, the extent, nature and calibre of my interviewees' forebears' relations with Aboriginal people are historical contingencies which must be taken into account. Historical research enables us to distinguish between different types of colonists – pastoralists and freeholders, for example. By providing a more nuanced account and utilising more precise, accurate terms, we are better placed to demonstrate how one's forebears' experiences shape current generations' attitudes and perceptions of the colonial past. We are also better able to critically question and test memory in order to learn what in settler descendants' narratives and understandings is empirically accurate and what has a different, but equally significant, status.
Learning from the Historical Records
Myth
Mid-northern settler descendants who have grown up on or closely connected with land occupied by their forebears in the nineteenth century have a consciousness of the colonial past that is oriented around the first forebear to arrive in the district and purchase what was to become the family farm. Common among this group is a perception that their families were the first people to live on the land that became the family property. This lack of recognition of prior Aboriginal occupation indicates that the nationwide myth of terra nullius (a legal term used to 'to justify the occupation or possession of territories that were unoccupied or not occupied according to Western precepts of civilisation') continues to prevail in twenty-first-century Australia. Myths can be understood as stories drawn from a society's history which symbolise that society's complexities and contradictions; they are formulated as ways of explaining problems that arise in the course of historical experience. At the international level, among settler-colonial collectives, narratives of unutilised land and 'immaculate origin' are common. However Australia's foundation myth of terra nullius differs from other settler-colonial societies and reflects our different history.
At the national level, South Australia's foundation myth reflects historical contingencies which distinguish South Australia from other Australian states. South Australians proudly perceive their state's origins as different from other Australian states and are aware their state has a long history of being at the forefront of political and social reform. Certain unique aspects of the colony's foundation – the lack of convicts, lack of an established church, the Wakefield scheme's principles of regulated land sales and assisted migration, and relative legislative independence – endure in collective memory. Informatively, what is not incorporated into South Australian's collective consciousness is the groundbreaking clause inserted into the state's founding document and proclamation which recognised Aboriginal rights to land.
In the early 1830s, when the establishment of the colony of South Australia was becoming a reality in the Colonial Office in London, an awareness of Aboriginal occupancy of and attachment to specific tracts of land was widespread and accepted enough for relevant government officials to ensure that 'proper mechanisms for acquiring land from the Aborigines' were clearly articulated in the Colony's relevant founding documents. In the Letters Patent sealed in February 1836, King William IV clearly stated that Aboriginal people's proprietary rights to land were to be respected. The Colony of South Australia could be officially proclaimed:
Provided always that nothing in those our Letters Patent contained shall affect or be construed to affect the rights of any Aboriginal Natives of the said Province to the actual occupation or enjoyment of their own Person or the Person of their descendants of any Lands therein now actually occupied or enjoyed by such natives.
Governor John Hindmarsh reiterated this provision when he proclaimed the Colony at Holdfast Bay on 28 December 1836. Although the word 'ownership' does not appear in the Letters Patent or other affiliated documents (instead, Aboriginal people were understood as possessing lands 'in occupation and enjoyment'), observant Europeans soon became aware that Aboriginal people had a system of hereditary ownership and strict laws governing territorial rights. Five years after the establishment of the colony, a Select Committee of the House of Commons was presented with evidence that 'every adult native possesses a district of land which he calls "his country", and which he inherited from his father'.
As a clear indicator of how myths are based on a selective interpretation of historic events, although vague and self-congratulatory understandings that the founders and settlers of South Australia were less violent and more enlightened in their dealings with Aboriginal people endure, the Letters Patent's groundbreaking clause recognising the rights of Aboriginal people and their descendants to continual occupation and enjoyment of their land has not been incorporated into South Australia's foundation myth.
History of land occupation
In contrast with other Australian colonies, from its conception South Australia had an official policy of systematic and concentrated settlement. However, slow government surveys did not meet the colonists' demand for land. Within months of the colony's establishment, newcomers began occupying unsurveyed land. As an interim measure, Governor George Gawler introduced Special Surveys in 1839– 1840 which enabled wealthy Britons to pay £4,000 for a private survey of 16,000 acres in a district of their choice from which they were entitled to select 4,000 freehold acres. By mid-1840, vast tracts of fertile and well-watered country had been claimed for Special Survey. With the exception of land around Pt Lincoln and Mt Gambier, this land generally lay within a day's ride from Adelaide. Regarding unsurveyed country, colonists secured their right to occupy and depasture stock on such country by purchasing annual occupation licences, which were introduced in 1842. A licence cost £5 annually, plus one penny per head of sheep and sixpence per head of cattle. After 1851, pastoral leases of 14 years duration based on the size and quality of the lease were introduced (at a rate of £1 per square mile for 'first class' land, 15 shillings for second class and 10 shillings for third class). Occupation licence holders and pastoral lessees became known as squatters or pastoralists, and their leases were referred to as 'runs'.
Much can be gleaned about Europeans' desire for a particular country and, ultimately, the intensity and extent of European– Aboriginal relations by learning which districts were chosen for government surveys and Special Survey, the timing of applications for occupation licences and, later, pastoral leases, the size of the runs and the timing of land purchases. Much of the country in the North-East Highland district, including but not limited to the Booborowie and Mt Bryan Valleys, was leased by two pairs of brothers. John and William Browne originated from Wiltshire. Both had medical degrees from Edinburgh University. On arriving in South Australia, the Brownes purchased freehold land in the Barossa Valley. By 1843 the Brownes occupied 160 square miles of country known as the Booborowie/ Canowie lease. They purchased the freehold for 46,978 acres of the Booborowie run (which contained some of the best sheep-grazing and wool-growing country in Australia) in 1863.14 The Brownes had enormous landholdings across the colony and did not reside on their Booborowie/Canowie run. In 1866 the brothers dissolved their partnership and returned to England, after which their estate was controlled by trustees. In 1897, three years after William Browne's death, the Brownes' Booborowie station was sold and subdivided.
In the early 1840s, John Hallett and his brother Alfred were granted 'Lease no. 10' – 'Willogoleche' – which stretched 20 miles north to south, consisted of about 200 square miles and included the mountain (named by Governor Gawler) Mt Bryan and the areas upon which the future townships of Hallett and Mt Bryan were built. Between 1844 and 1855, the Halletts sold the northern half of the run (which retained the name Willogoleche) to the Brownes' Barossa Valley neighbour and brother-in-law Joseph Gilbert. The Halletts retained 14,000 acres of the southern section and leased 'outside country' to the east of Wandillah. After John Hallett's death in 1868, Alfred continued running the properties, which were sold at public auction after Alfred's death in 1877. In 1851 an occupation licence containing 156 square miles was issued to Joseph Gilbert for a run which became known as Mt Bryan station. Gilbert purchased the freehold of ten square miles of the Mt Bryan run in 1881 before selling it to Edmund and Charles Bowman in 1883.
The Brownes, Halletts and Gilbert purchased and leased enormous tracts of country throughout the colony. Not all who leased land in the North-East Highlands had such extensive landholdings. In 1851 William McVittie (also a Barossa Valley neighbour of Gilbert's and the Browne brothers) leased 17 square miles in the Booborowie Valley which bordered the Brownes' Booborowie run to the north and the Willogoleche run to the east. Gilbert acquired the lease, which became known as 'McVittie's Flat', in the 1860s. Gilbert later purchased the freehold for McVittie's Flat which he sold to my forebear, John Murray, in the early 1870s. By 1845 a young Cockney named William (Billy) Dare was shepherding his own flocks on McVittie's Flat. Informally partnering with his friends Hiles and Chewings, the three youths worked together and managed to lease, stock and eventually purchase drier land to the east of Hallett and Mt Bryan in the mid-1850s. Billy remained in the district throughout his life.
Brothers Frederick, Samuel and Edwin White arrived in the Wirrabara district in late 1843. By 1854 they had successfully applied for pastoral leases for an area totalling 269 square miles. Freehold sections were purchased between 1845 and 1847, but by 1861 the Whites had sold their leases and freehold sections (known successively as Whites' Run, White Park and Charlton) to C. B. Fisher, who renamed the run Wirrabara Station. The Whites returned to England in the late 1850s. From 1861 to 1867 Wirrabara Station went through several changes of (absentee) ownership. Alexander Borthwick Murray (hereafter A. B. Murray) purchased a share of Wirrabara Station in 1867 and became sole owner in 1870.24 He purchased large portions of freehold land when the pastoral leases were subdivided and put up for sale in the 1870s. A. B. Murray did not reside in the Wirrabara district himself, but three of his sons consecutively managed the station, each dying unexpectedly at relatively young ages. The Murray family retained Wirrabara station until 1903.
*
Broadly speaking, there were three types of squatters-cum-pastoralists. There were those like Billy Dare who had limited funds, resided on their runs and suffered the privations of squatting life while building up their flocks and fortunes. There were those like the Whites who had a (limited) private income which they used to employ a few shepherds and erect various 'improvements', including a relatively comfortable hut or house in which they resided. Finally, there were those like the Browne and Hallett brothers and Joseph Gilbert who had access to substantial amounts of capital, leased vast tracts of country and employed numerous men as shepherds and hut-keepers. These men could afford to stock enormous leases and employ overseers to manage their runs while they resided in Adelaide or on country estates closer to Adelaide whose freehold title they had purchased.
Cross-cultural relations during the early pastoral period
When the British officially established the colony, the Ngaduri and Nukunu populations were in the high hundreds. During the squatting/ early pastoral years, Aboriginal people were very present. This was a liminal time and space of dynamic and often violent cross-cultural interaction. Aboriginal people outnumbered the newcomers, continued to confidently assume and assert their ownership of land and expectantly helped themselves to sheep (they took flocks of between 30 and 100 sheep) often in full view of the shepherds (whom they sometimes held down). Motivated by a desire to build up their flocks and their fortunes, nervous pastoralists and their employees displayed no hesitation in injuring or killing Aboriginal people to protect their stock.
There are no known first-hand accounts (no diaries or letters) or reminiscences written by either the Browne, Hallett or White brothers, Joseph Gilbert or any of their employees concerning life on their mid-northern runs. Instead, we have to rely on the writings of those who occupied other mid-northern runs. Six months prior to the Whites' occupation of the Wirrabara district, J. B. Hughes (who occupied the most northern run in the colony and was to become the Whites' southern neighbour) wrote to the colonial secretary informing him that 'the Aborigines from the east, north and south come in such large numbers' that, due to the 'scarcity of game and the inclemency of the season', without police protection 'in simple self defence we shall be compelled to shoot more of them, as we are continually annoyed by them trying to steal our sheep'. In 1854 the overseer at a run situated between the North-East Highland and Wirrabara districts wrote in his diary of the arrival of Mr Pinkerton from Port Lincoln who 'is said to have killed more blacks than any other man in the Colony' and boasted he 'never missed a black that he got a chance to kill'. Another overseer recalled that, in the late 1840s, 'we bore the brunt of every thieving tribe of natives from all points' and 'each petty tribe [...] had to be terrified before their depredations ceased'. These chilling excerpts unequivocally convey the brutality of the early pastoral years; Aboriginal people were indiscriminately murdered, and Europeans tried to terrify the Aboriginal people into submission.
However, the duration and intensity of violence varied, and, in many districts, within the first decade of European occupation, some sort of truce was reached and Aboriginal people were employed as station hands, shepherds and lamb minders. Recognising the pastoral years as a time of dynamic cross-cultural interaction, accommodation and fusion enables us to recognise Aboriginal people as active agents rather than passive victims and helps prevent current generations of non-Aboriginal people from all too readily distancing ourselves from our forebears (by indiscriminately judging and condemning all Europeans present in rural districts during the early colonial years as violent towards Aboriginal people and, consequently, perceiving the actions and legacies of nineteenth-century colonists as separate from us, in the here and now).
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "Memory, Place and Aboriginal — Settler History"
by .
Copyright © 2017 Skye Krichauff.
Excerpted by permission of Wimbledon Publishing Company.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
List of Figures ix
Preface xi
Acknowledgements xiii
Introduction 1
1 Historical Inheritance: Tracing the Past 31
2 Dwelling in Place: Absorbing the Past 61
3 The Social Community: Networks of Memory and Attachment to Place 93
4 The Cultural Circuit: Making Sense of Lived History 111
5 'Memory' to 'History': From Verbal Transmission to Text 147
6 Settler Belonging, Victimhood and Trauma 165
7 Unsettling the Disconnect 193
Appendix 1 Interviewees 209
Appendix 2 Towns /Settlements Whose Public Spaces Were Surveyed 211
Appendix 3 List of Mid-Northern Written Histories Surveyed 213
Notes 215
Bibliography 235
Index 243
What People are Saying About This
‘“It didn’t happen here.” What do people forget? Why do they forget? Can memory and history meet? This beautifully written book explores these and similar questions, especially around early settler treatment of Aborigines. A book for all Australia.’ —Bill Gammage, Emeritus Professor, Humanities Research Centre, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
‘This fine new work on the communal memory of rural Australians explores how settler narratives of belonging are made, and how they obscure, mitigate or intersect with histories of indigenous dispossession. It shows us more than ever that, in addition to nation-wide political campaigns and legislative reform, processes of reconciliation demand a deeper engagement with intimate histories of place. This is a book that offers all settler nations a powerful reminder of our shared responsibility to unsettle the colonial past.’ —Amanda Nettelbeck, Professor in Department of History, School of Humanities, University of Adelaide, Australia
‘Skye Krichauff delves into the historical consciousness of Australian settler-colonialism and explores the contested memories of places and pasts. In doing so, she shows us that history-making is as much about forgetting as remembering, and that these “silences” are critical to understanding how we think about our history and ourselves.’ —Anna Clark, ARC Future Fellow, Co-director, Australian Centre for Public History, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia