Circumstances have made me think about the lost generation again.

I’m sort of trying to develop chronological eras, as in:

• Fight for life era – where whites were treated as just another tribe to fight.
• First humanitarian era – where attempts were made to arrest murderers, house the homeless, feed the starving.
• Second humanitarian era – with attempts to bring comprehensive medical care, limit domestic violence, and stop child prostitution.
• First generation aboriginal activists – fight for assimilation within the white community, aboriginal activists run state government, stop mismanagement.
• Second generation aboriginal activists – anti-assimilation, land rights, pride in aboriginal heritage.

Essentially the chronological eras work their way up through Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The eras could be just about the same in every country with an indigenous population?

Does anyone have a link to the earlier thread about the lost generation?

This has also made me think about the Tasmanian aborigines. Does anyone really know what happened there, or had the population already mostly collapsed before anyone decided to investigate the problem?

Already, I’ve found out that no-one has a clue how many aborigines were in Tasmania before white settlement in 1803, estimates range from 3,000 to 15,000. Numbers had crashed to about 400 in just 32 years, and there were just 47 left in 1847 – even before the gold rush era.

mollwollfumble said:

Circumstances have made me think about the lost generation again.

I’m sort of trying to develop chronological eras, as in:

• Fight for life era – where whites were treated as just another tribe to fight.
• First humanitarian era – where attempts were made to arrest murderers, house the homeless, feed the starving.
• Second humanitarian era – with attempts to bring comprehensive medical care, limit domestic violence, and stop child prostitution.
• First generation aboriginal activists – fight for assimilation within the white community, aboriginal activists run state government, stop mismanagement.
• Second generation aboriginal activists – anti-assimilation, land rights, pride in aboriginal heritage.

Essentially the chronological eras work their way up through Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The eras could be just about the same in every country with an indigenous population?

Does anyone have a link to the earlier thread about the lost generation?

This has also made me think about the Tasmanian aborigines. Does anyone really know what happened there, or had the population already mostly collapsed before anyone decided to investigate the problem?

Already, I’ve found out that no-one has a clue how many aborigines were in Tasmania before white settlement in 1803, estimates range from 3,000 to 15,000. Numbers had crashed to about 400 in just 32 years, and there were just 47 left in 1847 – even before the gold rush era.

There are wide discrepancy regarding Aboriginal populations before European settlement. Remember you are dealing with something like 250 language groups, so even they would have little idea on an Australia wide basis. Secondly the diseases whites brought to Australia decimated whole populations and when coupled with mass killings their number were greatly reduced, which forced different groups to come together for survival reasons. The Tasmanian Aboriginals were alive and healthy before white settlement and were decimated in much the same way as the mainland Aboriginals.

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

Circumstances have made me think about the lost generation again.

I’m sort of trying to develop chronological eras, as in:

• Fight for life era – where whites were treated as just another tribe to fight.
• First humanitarian era – where attempts were made to arrest murderers, house the homeless, feed the starving.
• Second humanitarian era – with attempts to bring comprehensive medical care, limit domestic violence, and stop child prostitution.
• First generation aboriginal activists – fight for assimilation within the white community, aboriginal activists run state government, stop mismanagement.
• Second generation aboriginal activists – anti-assimilation, land rights, pride in aboriginal heritage.

Essentially the chronological eras work their way up through Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The eras could be just about the same in every country with an indigenous population?

Does anyone have a link to the earlier thread about the lost generation?

This has also made me think about the Tasmanian aborigines. Does anyone really know what happened there, or had the population already mostly collapsed before anyone decided to investigate the problem?

Already, I’ve found out that no-one has a clue how many aborigines were in Tasmania before white settlement in 1803, estimates range from 3,000 to 15,000. Numbers had crashed to about 400 in just 32 years, and there were just 47 left in 1847 – even before the gold rush era.

There are wide discrepancy regarding Aboriginal populations before European settlement. Remember you are dealing with something like 250 language groups, so even they would have little idea on an Australia wide basis. Secondly the diseases whites brought to Australia decimated whole populations and when coupled with mass killings their number were greatly reduced, which forced different groups to come together for survival reasons. The Tasmanian Aboriginals were alive and healthy before white settlement and were decimated in much the same way as the mainland Aboriginals.

That’s what i was wondering. The biggest killer from Cape York to the Kimberlies was measles. I’d be interested to know if the same was true down south.

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

mollwollfumble said:

Circumstances have made me think about the lost generation again.

I’m sort of trying to develop chronological eras, as in:

• Fight for life era – where whites were treated as just another tribe to fight.
• First humanitarian era – where attempts were made to arrest murderers, house the homeless, feed the starving.
• Second humanitarian era – with attempts to bring comprehensive medical care, limit domestic violence, and stop child prostitution.
• First generation aboriginal activists – fight for assimilation within the white community, aboriginal activists run state government, stop mismanagement.
• Second generation aboriginal activists – anti-assimilation, land rights, pride in aboriginal heritage.

Essentially the chronological eras work their way up through Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The eras could be just about the same in every country with an indigenous population?

Does anyone have a link to the earlier thread about the lost generation?

This has also made me think about the Tasmanian aborigines. Does anyone really know what happened there, or had the population already mostly collapsed before anyone decided to investigate the problem?

Already, I’ve found out that no-one has a clue how many aborigines were in Tasmania before white settlement in 1803, estimates range from 3,000 to 15,000. Numbers had crashed to about 400 in just 32 years, and there were just 47 left in 1847 – even before the gold rush era.

There are wide discrepancy regarding Aboriginal populations before European settlement. Remember you are dealing with something like 250 language groups, so even they would have little idea on an Australia wide basis. Secondly the diseases whites brought to Australia decimated whole populations and when coupled with mass killings their number were greatly reduced, which forced different groups to come together for survival reasons. The Tasmanian Aboriginals were alive and healthy before white settlement and were decimated in much the same way as the mainland Aboriginals.

That’s what i was wondering. The biggest killer from Cape York to the Kimberlies was measles. I’d be interested to know if the same was true down south.

Probably diabetes now.

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

There are wide discrepancy regarding Aboriginal populations before European settlement. Remember you are dealing with something like 250 language groups, so even they would have little idea on an Australia wide basis. Secondly the diseases whites brought to Australia decimated whole populations and when coupled with mass killings their number were greatly reduced, which forced different groups to come together for survival reasons. The Tasmanian Aboriginals were alive and healthy before white settlement and were decimated in much the same way as the mainland Aboriginals.

That’s what i was wondering. The biggest killer from Cape York to the Kimberleys was measles. I’d be interested to know if the same was true down south.

Probably diabetes now.

A entirely different, and much grimmer picture is emerging from Tasmania.

Possibly because before on mainland Australia I was looking at period 1900 to 1950. In Tasmania i’m looking at 1800 to 1850. Definitely not measles. This is war.

1808 – first white settlement.

1817 – Any Person or Persons charged with killing, firing at, or committing any Act of Outrage or Aggression on the Native People, the Offender or Offenders shall be prosecuted in the criminal court. – Good.

1818 – Notwithstanding the hostility which has so long prevailed in the breasts of the Natives of this Island towards Europeans, we now perceive with heartfelt satisfaction that hatred in some measure gradually subsiding. Several of them are to be seen about this town (Hobart) and its environs. – Good.

1818 – That most shameful, cruel, and barbarous custom of encouraging the Black people to murder or mangle one another for the sport of the Europeans. – Aagh!

1824 – The only tribe who have done any mischief, were corrupted by Musquito, a Sydney black; who, with much and perverted cunning … he had become addicted to rum and tobacco, for the procuration of which it cannot be doubted his subsequent offences have been perpetrated.

1825 – In the course of last week about 200 of the aborigines made their appearance in the Town of Launceston, and immediate neighbourhood, encouraged no doubt by the accounts of the kindly reception, and civil treatment, which their sable brethren recently experienced on the other side of the Island. … poor wanderers of the woods, on their first approach towards civilization.

1825 – With considerable pain we communicate that the Aborigines, on lately visiting Macquarie Plains, speared a poor man, whose name was Johnson.

1825 – Tegg … outrages committed by armed tribes whose employment of musquetry … unless the enraged Aborigines are pacified immediately.

1826 – a party of about 150 natives attacked Mr. Stocker’s hut, near the Western Creek, and wounded one of his servants, James Cupid, in three places with spears.

1826 – From the best information I have been able to collect, these poor creatures have been persecuted from the very moment a settlement was formed on the banks of this River up to the present time. Thus goaded, they have been roused to retaliate; and within the last few years many white men have fallen victims to their provoked rage. They have been driven from their places of resort — and, in a few years, when colonization has extended to the distant parts of the country, they will be deprived of the possibility of procuring subsistence.

1826 – The Aborigines of this Island possessing more barbarous habits than those of New South Wales.

1826 – This day the Jury returned a Verdict against the two Aborigines, Jack and Dick, for the wilful murder of Thomas Colly, a servant to Mr. Hart, at Oyster Bay. … Executed, along with 21 whites convicted of other crimes.

1826 – (Learning Tasmanian aboriginal words).

1826 – On Tuesday last, a tribe of the aborigines, about 80 in number, came down to the saw-pits of Mr. JOHN RISELEY, at Cockatoo Valley, in the Macquarie District. They entered into a friendly intercourse with the sawyers and shingle-splitters – asked them for tobacco and provisions, which were cheerfully given by the sawyers; indeed all they had. The natives (mark the now sagacious conduct of these people) asked if they had any muskets; and were answered in the negative, – the firearms being fortunately in the possession of the shingle-splitters, who were at work at some distance from the pits. The blacks then departed, without violence; but, shortly afterwards returned, with as many more. They immediately rushed upon the men – murdered John Monks, and speared Willam Priest (a native youth) in the back of the neck … two missing presumed dead. These violent outrages, in addition to the murders of Mr. George Taylor, Mr. Osborne, James Scott, the shepherd, and many (we may safely venture to say twenty) others.

1827 – Aboriginal natives have lately kept the Colony in one continual state of alarm. Many lives have been lost on the European side, and we doubt not many more on that of the Aborigines. With such mutual hatred.

1827 – (Many more murders by aborigines).

Did many Aboriginals die from introduced diseases

Cymek said:

Did many Aboriginals die from introduced diseases

Also shot and/or poisoned.

mollwollfumble said:

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

That’s what i was wondering. The biggest killer from Cape York to the Kimberleys was measles. I’d be interested to know if the same was true down south.

Probably diabetes now.

A entirely different, and much grimmer picture is emerging from Tasmania.

Possibly because before on mainland Australia I was looking at period 1900 to 1950. In Tasmania i’m looking at 1800 to 1850. Definitely not measles. This is war.

1808 – first white settlement.

1817 – Any Person or Persons charged with killing, firing at, or committing any Act of Outrage or Aggression on the Native People, the Offender or Offenders shall be prosecuted in the criminal court. – Good.

1818 – Notwithstanding the hostility which has so long prevailed in the breasts of the Natives of this Island towards Europeans, we now perceive with heartfelt satisfaction that hatred in some measure gradually subsiding. Several of them are to be seen about this town (Hobart) and its environs. – Good.

1818 – That most shameful, cruel, and barbarous custom of encouraging the Black people to murder or mangle one another for the sport of the Europeans. – Aagh!

1824 – The only tribe who have done any mischief, were corrupted by Musquito, a Sydney black; who, with much and perverted cunning … he had become addicted to rum and tobacco, for the procuration of which it cannot be doubted his subsequent offences have been perpetrated.

1825 – In the course of last week about 200 of the aborigines made their appearance in the Town of Launceston, and immediate neighbourhood, encouraged no doubt by the accounts of the kindly reception, and civil treatment, which their sable brethren recently experienced on the other side of the Island. … poor wanderers of the woods, on their first approach towards civilization.

1825 – With considerable pain we communicate that the Aborigines, on lately visiting Macquarie Plains, speared a poor man, whose name was Johnson.

1825 – Tegg … outrages committed by armed tribes whose employment of musquetry … unless the enraged Aborigines are pacified immediately.

1826 – a party of about 150 natives attacked Mr. Stocker’s hut, near the Western Creek, and wounded one of his servants, James Cupid, in three places with spears.

1826 – From the best information I have been able to collect, these poor creatures have been persecuted from the very moment a settlement was formed on the banks of this River up to the present time. Thus goaded, they have been roused to retaliate; and within the last few years many white men have fallen victims to their provoked rage. They have been driven from their places of resort — and, in a few years, when colonization has extended to the distant parts of the country, they will be deprived of the possibility of procuring subsistence.

1826 – The Aborigines of this Island possessing more barbarous habits than those of New South Wales.

1826 – This day the Jury returned a Verdict against the two Aborigines, Jack and Dick, for the wilful murder of Thomas Colly, a servant to Mr. Hart, at Oyster Bay. … Executed, along with 21 whites convicted of other crimes.

1826 – (Learning Tasmanian aboriginal words).

1826 – On Tuesday last, a tribe of the aborigines, about 80 in number, came down to the saw-pits of Mr. JOHN RISELEY, at Cockatoo Valley, in the Macquarie District. They entered into a friendly intercourse with the sawyers and shingle-splitters – asked them for tobacco and provisions, which were cheerfully given by the sawyers; indeed all they had. The natives (mark the now sagacious conduct of these people) asked if they had any muskets; and were answered in the negative, – the firearms being fortunately in the possession of the shingle-splitters, who were at work at some distance from the pits. The blacks then departed, without violence; but, shortly afterwards returned, with as many more. They immediately rushed upon the men – murdered John Monks, and speared Willam Priest (a native youth) in the back of the neck … two missing presumed dead. These violent outrages, in addition to the murders of Mr. George Taylor, Mr. Osborne, James Scott, the shepherd, and many (we may safely venture to say twenty) others.

1827 – Aboriginal natives have lately kept the Colony in one continual state of alarm. Many lives have been lost on the European side, and we doubt not many more on that of the Aborigines. With such mutual hatred.

1827 – (Many more murders by aborigines).

The victors write the history.

Cymek said:

Did many Aboriginals die from introduced diseases

In 1849, there was a “camp des Invalides” in this area for the Aboriginal women who had contracted venereal diseases.

Ref: A Distant Field of Murder by Jan Critchett.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Did many Aboriginals die from introduced diseases

Also shot and/or poisoned.

I was thinking that would fly under the radar as European caused deaths

Just flipping through the index on Jan Critchett’s book, looks like smallpox was a very big killer

buffy said:

Just flipping through the index on Jan Critchett’s book, looks like smallpox was a very big killer

All isolated peoples were decimated from disease after European interaction.

It didn’t help their state of health that they were dispossessed of land, and had to compete for food with an influx of new people, which would have meant starvation. Then those that weren’t shot, kidnapped or in hiding were rounded up with assurances that they would be able to return to their lands. They were stuck in miserable conditions on an island, and fed poorly.

If you want a meticuously researched book, get Professor Lyndall Ryan’s book ‘Tasmanian Aborigines’.

PermeateFree said:

buffy said:

Just flipping through the index on Jan Critchett’s book, looks like smallpox was a very big killer

All isolated peoples were decimated from disease after European interaction.

Australian Aboriginies less so than Native Americans though because there was sporadic contact with Macassans on the north coast. Small Pox was the big killer in NSW with first contact

Did the Polynesians suffer a similar fate?

Peak Warming Man said:

Did the Polynesians suffer a similar fate?

Apparently much of Polynesia was protected by late discovery (by the time Europeans discovered Fiji or Samoa, enough was known about smallpox to ensure quarantine). Not so lucky with influenza.

The Maoris suffered some losses a few times, and Hawaii had a major smallpox epidemic in 1853.

dv said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Did the Polynesians suffer a similar fate?

Apparently much of Polynesia was protected by late discovery (by the time Europeans discovered Fiji or Samoa, enough was known about smallpox to ensure quarantine). Not so lucky with influenza.

The Maoris suffered some losses a few times, and Hawaii had a major smallpox epidemic in 1853.

Jolly good.

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

buffy said:

Just flipping through the index on Jan Critchett’s book, looks like smallpox was a very big killer

All isolated peoples were decimated from disease after European interaction.

Australian Aboriginies less so than Native Americans though because there was sporadic contact with Macassans on the north coast. Small Pox was the big killer in NSW with first contact

I imagine at first it was just bad luck being in the wrong place but would have been used as a means to wipe out specific groups when realised immunity was lacking

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

PermeateFree said:

All isolated peoples were decimated from disease after European interaction.

Australian Aboriginies less so than Native Americans though because there was sporadic contact with Macassans on the north coast. Small Pox was the big killer in NSW with first contact

I imagine at first it was just bad luck being in the wrong place but would have been used as a means to wipe out specific groups when realised immunity was lacking

There are records of settlers giving blankets that had been in contact with smallpox victims to the natives, most of which later died from the disease.

The youngest kids from the Pintupi Nine, who first encountered white people in 1984, are younger than me.

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Australian Aboriginies less so than Native Americans though because there was sporadic contact with Macassans on the north coast. Small Pox was the big killer in NSW with first contact

I imagine at first it was just bad luck being in the wrong place but would have been used as a means to wipe out specific groups when realised immunity was lacking

There are records of settlers giving blankets that had been in contact with smallpox victims to the natives, most of which later died from the disease.

Yes I remember reading about that

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Australian Aboriginies less so than Native Americans though because there was sporadic contact with Macassans on the north coast. Small Pox was the big killer in NSW with first contact

I imagine at first it was just bad luck being in the wrong place but would have been used as a means to wipe out specific groups when realised immunity was lacking

There are records of settlers giving blankets that had been in contact with smallpox victims to the natives, most of which later died from the disease.

>>Was Sydney’s smallpox outbreak of 1789 an act of biological warfare against Aboriginal tribes?

An outbreak of smallpox in Sydney in 1789 killed thousands of Aborigines and weakened resistance to white settlement. Chris Warren argues that the pandemic was no accident, but rather a deliberate act of biological warfare against Australia’s first inhabitants.

In April 1789, a sudden, unusual, epidemic of smallpox was reported amongst the Port Jackson Aboriginal tribes who were actively resisting settlers from the First Fleet. This outbreak may have killed over 90 per cent of nearby native families and maybe three quarters or half of those between the Hawkesbury River and Port Hacking. It also killed an unknown number at Jervis Bay and west of the Blue Mountains.<<

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/was-sydneys-smallpox-outbreak-an-act-of-biological-warfare/5395050

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

Cymek said:

I imagine at first it was just bad luck being in the wrong place but would have been used as a means to wipe out specific groups when realised immunity was lacking

There are records of settlers giving blankets that had been in contact with smallpox victims to the natives, most of which later died from the disease.

>>Was Sydney’s smallpox outbreak of 1789 an act of biological warfare against Aboriginal tribes?

An outbreak of smallpox in Sydney in 1789 killed thousands of Aborigines and weakened resistance to white settlement. Chris Warren argues that the pandemic was no accident, but rather a deliberate act of biological warfare against Australia’s first inhabitants.

In April 1789, a sudden, unusual, epidemic of smallpox was reported amongst the Port Jackson Aboriginal tribes who were actively resisting settlers from the First Fleet. This outbreak may have killed over 90 per cent of nearby native families and maybe three quarters or half of those between the Hawkesbury River and Port Hacking. It also killed an unknown number at Jervis Bay and west of the Blue Mountains.<<

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/was-sydneys-smallpox-outbreak-an-act-of-biological-warfare/5395050

>>A medical model for the contact period in the late 18th and 19th centuries is proposed. This model considers three major stages in the disease environment of Aboriginal populations in Southeast Australia; a pre-contact stage with endemic pathogens causing chronic diseases and limited epidemics, an early contact stage where introduced exotic human diseases cause severe epidemics of infectious and respiratory diseases among Aboriginal populations, and a third stage where remaining Aboriginal populations were institutionalised on government and mission settlements and were subjected to a high level of mortality from the introduced diseases.

The major epidemic diseases during the early contact stage were smallpox, syphilis, tuberculosis, influenza, and measles. Each of these diseases were responsible for excessive morbidity and mortality. During the period of institutionalisation infectious and respiratory diseases were responsible for over 50% of recorded deaths on 8 separate Aboriginal settlements in Southeast Australia. The major diseases recorded as causes of death were tuberculosis, bronchitis, pneumonia, diarrhoea and dysentery. <<

A considerable amount of information in the thesis for moll to read:

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/7529/1/02Whole_Dowling.pdf

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

There are records of settlers giving blankets that had been in contact with smallpox victims to the natives, most of which later died from the disease.

>>Was Sydney’s smallpox outbreak of 1789 an act of biological warfare against Aboriginal tribes?

An outbreak of smallpox in Sydney in 1789 killed thousands of Aborigines and weakened resistance to white settlement. Chris Warren argues that the pandemic was no accident, but rather a deliberate act of biological warfare against Australia’s first inhabitants.

In April 1789, a sudden, unusual, epidemic of smallpox was reported amongst the Port Jackson Aboriginal tribes who were actively resisting settlers from the First Fleet. This outbreak may have killed over 90 per cent of nearby native families and maybe three quarters or half of those between the Hawkesbury River and Port Hacking. It also killed an unknown number at Jervis Bay and west of the Blue Mountains.<<

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/was-sydneys-smallpox-outbreak-an-act-of-biological-warfare/5395050

>>A medical model for the contact period in the late 18th and 19th centuries is proposed. This model considers three major stages in the disease environment of Aboriginal populations in Southeast Australia; a pre-contact stage with endemic pathogens causing chronic diseases and limited epidemics, an early contact stage where introduced exotic human diseases cause severe epidemics of infectious and respiratory diseases among Aboriginal populations, and a third stage where remaining Aboriginal populations were institutionalised on government and mission settlements and were subjected to a high level of mortality from the introduced diseases.

The major epidemic diseases during the early contact stage were smallpox, syphilis, tuberculosis, influenza, and measles. Each of these diseases were responsible for excessive morbidity and mortality. During the period of institutionalisation infectious and respiratory diseases were responsible for over 50% of recorded deaths on 8 separate Aboriginal settlements in Southeast Australia. The major diseases recorded as causes of death were tuberculosis, bronchitis, pneumonia, diarrhoea and dysentery. <<

A considerable amount of information in the thesis for moll to read:

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/7529/1/02Whole_Dowling.pdf

Will read that link later. Sydney had two flu epidemics, in 1820 and 1826. The aborigines did not fare well in these, many died.
———————

Trying to solve the mystery of the population crash in Tasmania. Nothing yet to suggest anything other than deliberate extermination by some of the whites.

1827 – He continually cries out how greatly the virulence of the blacks has abated, and that they are now quite or nearly inoffensive

1828 – the body of William Walker, who had been attacked by the blacks … offering a reward for the apprehension of the murderers. This would at least be the means of placing many of them in custody (and so finding out why they felt compelled to attack Europeans).

1828 – end all this dreadful carnage, and general terror. Unless the blacks are exterminated or removed, it is plainly proved, by fatal and sanguinary experience, that all hope of their ceasing in their aggressions is the height of absurdity. Rally our resources, and save our fellow countrymen from the Aboriginal spears! A tribe of Aborigines, whose aggregate number cannot be more than 2000.”

1828 – it is the humane intention of the Lieutenant Governor to ameliorate the condition of the Aborigines of this Colony; for these poor creatures lead a most miserable life. I know enough of their language to understand the many sorrowful tales they have related of their treatment by the white men. (It’s often difficult to determine whether the writers mean mainland Australia or Tasmania).

1829 – plundered of sugar, one of the black natives carrying away in his arms the child, which, upon one of the men hallowing to him, he dropped. We are exceedingly glad to find this marked instance of humanity, in this savage race of Aborigines.

1830 – (Many more thefts by aborigines).

1830 – Perhaps you will think me paradoxical when I tell you the character of the Aborigines has been much misrepresented ; I judge them to be a mild unoffending race. … the Aboriginal owners of the soil – a people naturally amiable and intelligent.

1830 – as none of Mr. Gilbert Robertson’s ingenious plans to capture the Aborigines, have been crowned with success, I propose that that a party of fifteen mounted on Horses, having pack-saddles, and carrying, each, from ten to twelve red night-caps, shall be sent out with all convenient expedition and that when they come up with the Natives.

1830 – The Members of the Committee on the Aborigines … humane interest you so laudably take in the fate of these our wretched fellow creatures … prevent by every possible means, the hostile attacks by your servants, and compel them to adhere to a system of self-defence and not of wanton aggression, and in all cases of confidence or surrender to treat Aborigines with every kindness. Aborigines clearly demonstrate that they can and do discriminate between their friends and their foes; thus leading to the gratifying hope of future conciliation.

1830 – Aborigines in our neighbourhood every day affords some proof of their determination to destroy, and their declaration to war with the whites. Whenever an opportunity presents itself they have invaded our district in almost almost every direction, during the last eight months, with considerable success as respects their hostile attacks, particularly in taking the lives of several individuals, and in having accomplished the ruin of whole families.

1830 – The following is an extract from a Government Order, respecting the capture of the Aborigines, The Lieutenant Governor has directed that a reward of five pounds shall be given for every, adult Aboriginal native, and two pounds for every child who shall be captured and delivered alive at any of the Police station. – Aagh!

1830 – John Danvers and his party have pursued the Aborigines with the most indefatigable perseverance, he has not suffered them to rest any where ; he has driven them from their places of rest and their food, prevented them from robbing the stock huts, and killing the whites. When the Aborigines made their appearance at Mr. Young’s, on the Big River, and were repulsed by Mr. Young and his people, Danvers came up an hour after.

1830 – there are some who contend that a thousand Aborigines of this Island possess positive right to convert an Island of equal size with Ireland into a vast hunting ground.

1830 – death, ruin, and destruction – houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive – all done, performed, and accomplished by 700 savages, men, women, and children, upon something above 20,000 whites.

1830 – We announce with sincere regret, that the expedition against the Aborigines has terminated, rather as we feared than as we had hoped. The result of the expedition cannot fail of being severely felt by all parties who assisted in the operations – that £27,000 should be expended for the destruction of just two of our sable enemies must be vexing in the extreme.

1831 – It is now about 12 months ago, since Mr. G. A. Robinson with his little party set out on his expedition, in order to communicate with the several tribes of the blacks, and to endeavour to conciliate them into a peaceful, understanding with the white inhabitants. He has now for the first time since his departure, revisited Hobart town, having made a complete tour of the island. … Aborigines of the interior of tasmania, the tribe of Blacks that inhabit that region are not only of a much more peaceable disposition than any of those on this side of the island, but are much more ingenious and intelligent. Their huts are built with considerable skill and neatness, and are not made of rude pieces of bark laid, together like those of the other tribes … Among the 31 Blacks whom Mr. Robinson has succeeded in placing in a state of security on Swan island is the sanguinary chief of the tribe that has so long infested the country about George town and the opposite side of the Tamar, and who some time ago was the instigator among many other atrocities of the barbarous murder of 5 individuals (Very interesting article The Hobart Town Courier, Sat 22 Jan 1831, Page 4, THE ABORIGINES)

mollwollfumble said:

PermeateFree said:

PermeateFree said:

>>Was Sydney’s smallpox outbreak of 1789 an act of biological warfare against Aboriginal tribes?

An outbreak of smallpox in Sydney in 1789 killed thousands of Aborigines and weakened resistance to white settlement. Chris Warren argues that the pandemic was no accident, but rather a deliberate act of biological warfare against Australia’s first inhabitants.

In April 1789, a sudden, unusual, epidemic of smallpox was reported amongst the Port Jackson Aboriginal tribes who were actively resisting settlers from the First Fleet. This outbreak may have killed over 90 per cent of nearby native families and maybe three quarters or half of those between the Hawkesbury River and Port Hacking. It also killed an unknown number at Jervis Bay and west of the Blue Mountains.<<

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/ockhamsrazor/was-sydneys-smallpox-outbreak-an-act-of-biological-warfare/5395050

>>A medical model for the contact period in the late 18th and 19th centuries is proposed. This model considers three major stages in the disease environment of Aboriginal populations in Southeast Australia; a pre-contact stage with endemic pathogens causing chronic diseases and limited epidemics, an early contact stage where introduced exotic human diseases cause severe epidemics of infectious and respiratory diseases among Aboriginal populations, and a third stage where remaining Aboriginal populations were institutionalised on government and mission settlements and were subjected to a high level of mortality from the introduced diseases.

The major epidemic diseases during the early contact stage were smallpox, syphilis, tuberculosis, influenza, and measles. Each of these diseases were responsible for excessive morbidity and mortality. During the period of institutionalisation infectious and respiratory diseases were responsible for over 50% of recorded deaths on 8 separate Aboriginal settlements in Southeast Australia. The major diseases recorded as causes of death were tuberculosis, bronchitis, pneumonia, diarrhoea and dysentery. <<

A considerable amount of information in the thesis for moll to read:

https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/7529/1/02Whole_Dowling.pdf

Will read that link later. Sydney had two flu epidemics, in 1820 and 1826. The aborigines did not fare well in these, many died.
———————

Trying to solve the mystery of the population crash in Tasmania. Nothing yet to suggest anything other than deliberate extermination by some of the whites.

1827 – He continually cries out how greatly the virulence of the blacks has abated, and that they are now quite or nearly inoffensive

1828 – the body of William Walker, who had been attacked by the blacks … offering a reward for the apprehension of the murderers. This would at least be the means of placing many of them in custody (and so finding out why they felt compelled to attack Europeans).

1828 – end all this dreadful carnage, and general terror. Unless the blacks are exterminated or removed, it is plainly proved, by fatal and sanguinary experience, that all hope of their ceasing in their aggressions is the height of absurdity. Rally our resources, and save our fellow countrymen from the Aboriginal spears! A tribe of Aborigines, whose aggregate number cannot be more than 2000.”

1828 – it is the humane intention of the Lieutenant Governor to ameliorate the condition of the Aborigines of this Colony; for these poor creatures lead a most miserable life. I know enough of their language to understand the many sorrowful tales they have related of their treatment by the white men. (It’s often difficult to determine whether the writers mean mainland Australia or Tasmania).

1829 – plundered of sugar, one of the black natives carrying away in his arms the child, which, upon one of the men hallowing to him, he dropped. We are exceedingly glad to find this marked instance of humanity, in this savage race of Aborigines.

1830 – (Many more thefts by aborigines).

1830 – Perhaps you will think me paradoxical when I tell you the character of the Aborigines has been much misrepresented ; I judge them to be a mild unoffending race. … the Aboriginal owners of the soil – a people naturally amiable and intelligent.

1830 – as none of Mr. Gilbert Robertson’s ingenious plans to capture the Aborigines, have been crowned with success, I propose that that a party of fifteen mounted on Horses, having pack-saddles, and carrying, each, from ten to twelve red night-caps, shall be sent out with all convenient expedition and that when they come up with the Natives.

1830 – The Members of the Committee on the Aborigines … humane interest you so laudably take in the fate of these our wretched fellow creatures … prevent by every possible means, the hostile attacks by your servants, and compel them to adhere to a system of self-defence and not of wanton aggression, and in all cases of confidence or surrender to treat Aborigines with every kindness. Aborigines clearly demonstrate that they can and do discriminate between their friends and their foes; thus leading to the gratifying hope of future conciliation.

1830 – Aborigines in our neighbourhood every day affords some proof of their determination to destroy, and their declaration to war with the whites. Whenever an opportunity presents itself they have invaded our district in almost almost every direction, during the last eight months, with considerable success as respects their hostile attacks, particularly in taking the lives of several individuals, and in having accomplished the ruin of whole families.

1830 – The following is an extract from a Government Order, respecting the capture of the Aborigines, The Lieutenant Governor has directed that a reward of five pounds shall be given for every, adult Aboriginal native, and two pounds for every child who shall be captured and delivered alive at any of the Police station. – Aagh!

1830 – John Danvers and his party have pursued the Aborigines with the most indefatigable perseverance, he has not suffered them to rest any where ; he has driven them from their places of rest and their food, prevented them from robbing the stock huts, and killing the whites. When the Aborigines made their appearance at Mr. Young’s, on the Big River, and were repulsed by Mr. Young and his people, Danvers came up an hour after.

1830 – there are some who contend that a thousand Aborigines of this Island possess positive right to convert an Island of equal size with Ireland into a vast hunting ground.

1830 – death, ruin, and destruction – houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive – all done, performed, and accomplished by 700 savages, men, women, and children, upon something above 20,000 whites.

1830 – We announce with sincere regret, that the expedition against the Aborigines has terminated, rather as we feared than as we had hoped. The result of the expedition cannot fail of being severely felt by all parties who assisted in the operations – that £27,000 should be expended for the destruction of just two of our sable enemies must be vexing in the extreme.

1831 – It is now about 12 months ago, since Mr. G. A. Robinson with his little party set out on his expedition, in order to communicate with the several tribes of the blacks, and to endeavour to conciliate them into a peaceful, understanding with the white inhabitants. He has now for the first time since his departure, revisited Hobart town, having made a complete tour of the island. … Aborigines of the interior of tasmania, the tribe of Blacks that inhabit that region are not only of a much more peaceable disposition than any of those on this side of the island, but are much more ingenious and intelligent. Their huts are built with considerable skill and neatness, and are not made of rude pieces of bark laid, together like those of the other tribes … Among the 31 Blacks whom Mr. Robinson has succeeded in placing in a state of security on Swan island is the sanguinary chief of the tribe that has so long infested the country about George town and the opposite side of the Tamar, and who some time ago was the instigator among many other atrocities of the barbarous murder of 5 individuals (Very interesting article The Hobart Town Courier, Sat 22 Jan 1831, Page 4, THE ABORIGINES)

The link I supplied was an extensive thesis on Disease Environments and Epidemiological Considerations. It covers the side of the situation that your summery totally ignores. This is a scientific document where you might actually get the facts.

Plenty of deliberate extermination…..have a look for The Black Line in 1830. Over 2,000 fellows went in a co-ordinated effort to move the tribes out and onto a designated area away from the land that that had been taken on the mainland. Now, you can’t tell me that that was going to be a peaceful operation with no casualties.

Seriously, Moll, get Lyndall Ryan’s book. Not only does it go thoroughly into what happened prior to The Black Line, it also went into sad detail about how they were treated when the remaining people gave up and trusted that they would be looked out for.

ruby said:

Plenty of deliberate extermination…..have a look for The Black Line in 1830. Over 2,000 fellows went in a co-ordinated effort to move the tribes out and onto a designated area away from the land that that had been taken on the mainland. Now, you can’t tell me that that was going to be a peaceful operation with no casualties.

Seriously, Moll, get Lyndall Ryan’s book. Not only does it go thoroughly into what happened prior to The Black Line, it also went into sad detail about how they were treated when the remaining people gave up and trusted that they would be looked out for.

Not that the black line was successful. But in my mind it proves the whites warred on the aborigines.

3 May 1804
Risdon Cove, on the far side of the Derwent.

The original records show that a large group of Aborigines blundered into the British settlement. The soldiers mistakenly thought they were under attack and killed some of the intruders.

About 300 aboriginals, men, women and children, who had banded together approached the Risdon Cove settlement whilst occupied on a kangaroo hunt. The Aborigines had arrived at the settlement and some were justifiably upset by the presence of the colonists. There had been no widespread aggression, but if their displeasure spread and escalated, Lt. Moore, the commanding officer at the time, and his dozen or so soldiers, could not be expected to be able to protect the settlement from a mob of such size. The soldiers were therefore ordered to fire a carronade (a short-barrel, heavy calibre naval cannon known to sailors as “the smasher”) in an attempt to disperse the aboriginals; it is not known if this was a blank round, although some allege grape shot was used to explain an alleged but uncorroborated high figure of deaths. In addition, two soldiers fired muskets in protection of a Risdon Cove settler being beaten on his farm by aboriginals carrying waddies (clubs). These soldiers killed one aboriginal outright, and mortally wounded another, who was later found dead in a valley. Moore’s account lists three killed and some wounded. It is therefore known that in the conflict some aboriginals were killed, and that the colonists “had reason to Suppose more were wounded, as one was seen to be taken away bleeding”. It is also known that an infant boy about 2–3 years old was left behind in what was viewed as a “retreat from a hostile attempt made upon the borders of the settlement”.

“There were a great many of the Natives slaughtered and wounded” according to the Edward White, an Irish convict who later spoke before a committee of inquiry nearly 30 years later in 1830, but could not give exact figures. White alleged to have been an eyewitness, although he was working in a creek bed where the escarpment prevented him from viewing events. Claiming to be the first to see the approaching aboriginals, he also said that “the natives did not threaten me; I was not afraid of them; (they) did not attack the soldiers; they would not have molested them; they had no spears with them; only waddies”. That they had no spears with them is questionable, and his claims need to be assessed with caution. His contemporaries had believed the approach to be a potential attack by a group of aboriginals that greatly outnumbered the colonists in the area, and spoke of “an attack the natives made”, their “hostile Appearance”, and “that their design was to attack us”.

wiki. risdon cove.

The Cape Grim massacre was an incident on 10 February 1828 in which a group of Aboriginal Tasmanians gathering food at a beach in the north-west of Tasmania is said to have been ambushed and shot by four Van Diemen’s Land Company (VDLC) workers, with bodies of some of the victims then thrown from a 60-metre (200 ft) cliff. About 30 men are thought to have been killed in the attack, which was a reprisal action for an earlier Aboriginal raid on a flock of Van Diemen’s Land Company sheep, but part of an escalating spiral of violence probably triggered by the abduction and rape of Aboriginal women in the area. The massacre was part of the “Black War”, the period of violent conflict between British colonists and Aboriginal Australians in Tasmania from the mid-1820s to 1832.

News of the Cape Grim killings did not reach Governor George Arthur for almost two years. Arthur sent George Augustus Robinson, who held an unofficial government role as an Aboriginal conciliator, to investigate the incident, and later statements from company workers, a diary entry by the wife of a ship’s captain and the testimony of an Aboriginal woman provided some further information. Despite the witness statements however, detail of what took place is sketchy and Australian author Keith Windschuttle and some other historians have subsequently disputed the magnitude of the massacre or denied it occurred at all.

The site of the massacre has been identified as the present-day Suicide Bay, facing the island outcrops known as The Doughboys. Because a number of tribes were in the area at the time, it is uncertain which one was involved in the clash, although historian Lyndall Ryan states that those killed were members of the Peerapper clan.

-Wiki Cape grim massacre.

https://think-tasmania.com/wybalenna/

When Truganini met George Augustus Robinson, the Protector of Aboriginals, in 1829, her mother had been killed by sailors, her uncle shot by a soldier, her sister abducted by sealers, and her fiancé brutally murdered by timber-cutters, who then repeatedly sexually abused her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truganini

Mathinna was the daughter of a Port Davey chieftain, Towtrer (also written as Towgerer) and his wife Wongerneep.

Towtrer and his family were some of the last to hold out against George Augustus Robinson’s ‘Black Line’ plan to move all Tasmanian Aborigines to Flinders Island.

Towtrer was suspicious of Robinson when he first approached him in 1830, so Robinson returned in 1833 to try again, this time with a plan to force Towtrer to come to him.

Robinson captured Towtrer’s child, forcing the man and his wife to come to Robinson and to agree to move to Flinders Island.

Robinson noted in his diary that Aboriginal families should not be split up by force, because ‘ they afterward pine away and die’.

Despite this, Towtrer’s first daughter was not returned to her family but was sent to an orphanage in Hobart where she died a few years later.

Mathinna was born to Towtrer and Wongerneep on Flinders Island in 1835.

When she was about five years old, Sir John and Lady Jane Franklin visited Flinders Island and took a fancy to Mathinna and decided to adopt her.

“They took her back to Hobart where she became a sort of black princess,” says Richard.

The Hobart Mercury’s report of Mathinna, one of the very few written records of the girl, said Mathinna arrived at Government House with a kangaroo skin, a rush basket, some shell necklaces and a pet possum.

Mathinna shared a governess with the Franklin’s own daughter Eleanor and was regularly seen sharing a carriage with Lady Franklin, but for some reason when the Franklins were called back to London in 1843 they left little Mathinna behind.

She was sent to same orphanage where the sister she never met had died.

“The Saint John’s orphanage…was a terrible place, even by the standards of the day,” says Richard.

Mathinna was in the orphanage for about a year before she was sent back to Flinders Island, now aged about nine.

“We know she lived there with Fanny Cochrain Smith.”

Fanny Cochrane Smith later said she was treated very badly by the preacher of Wybalenna, whose house she shared with Mathinna, but no record is known of Mathinna’s time there.

Mathinna never seems to have settled into any community after her experience with the Franklins.

“She seems to have a very odd position, she seems to be disliked by white society but to have a certain contempt for black society and she exists in a strange nether world between them both,” says Richard.

Mathinna didn’t have long to live in her nether world. She did what many who feel they don’t fit in anywhere do, she turned to alcohol abuse.

“We don’t even know the year she died.

“The most reliable account has her leaving a pub down in North West Bay and then drowning in a puddle in 1852 by which time she would have been 17 years of age.”

https://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2011/02/16/3140544.htm

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Cymek said:

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

There was a fear that the convicts would run away with the natives.There was a shut down on any convicts behaving in anyway like the natives. This meant that the white man also failed to learn about country from the natives.

I should ask whether you actually read my post about the Julie Gough exhibition…the one I posted shortly before you started this thread.

Actually are my posts even being read? Should I be bothering to post?

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

Pick out a working class area in any city, go to the roughest district and the roughest pub, then give them all a gun and send them off with no supervision to do virtually what they like. This is the type of person who interacted with the Aborigines. It must have been hell.

sarahs mum said:

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

There was a fear that the convicts would run away with the natives.There was a shut down on any convicts behaving in anyway like the natives. This meant that the white man also failed to learn about country from the natives.

I should ask whether you actually read my post about the Julie Gough exhibition…the one I posted shortly before you started this thread.

Actually are my posts even being read? Should I be bothering to post?

Probably not, moll has be supplied with a number of good references of which he ignores all, except an extreme biased account of his own that for some reason satisfies the level of knowledge he wishes to be exposed.

PermeateFree said:

sarahs mum said:

mollwollfumble said:

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

There was a fear that the convicts would run away with the natives.There was a shut down on any convicts behaving in anyway like the natives. This meant that the white man also failed to learn about country from the natives.

I should ask whether you actually read my post about the Julie Gough exhibition…the one I posted shortly before you started this thread.

Actually are my posts even being read? Should I be bothering to post?

Probably not, moll has be supplied with a number of good references of which he ignores all, except an extreme biased account of his own that for some reason satisfies the level of knowledge he wishes to be exposed.

Thanks for the response.

I have been reading the comments in response to Julie Gough’s exhibition reviews. She was an archeologist before she studied fine arts. Her whole art practice is a response to the Tasmanian archive and country. So many comments are ugly or ill-informed. (‘She’s just whipping up lies to sell her book’-It’s not a book. It’s an art exhibition. There is no entry fee at the state gallery. ‘She’s wrong about that’ -yeah, because these people have read and copied any documentation about Tas aborigines held here and over there. And because art must be ‘right’? To whom? In one work Gough takes a rock from the driveway of the properties of large landholders at the time. To her this is a performance about stealing the land. Comments are that she should be charged with theft.) It’s ugly out there.

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

sarahs mum said:

There was a fear that the convicts would run away with the natives.There was a shut down on any convicts behaving in anyway like the natives. This meant that the white man also failed to learn about country from the natives.

I should ask whether you actually read my post about the Julie Gough exhibition…the one I posted shortly before you started this thread.

Actually are my posts even being read? Should I be bothering to post?

Probably not, moll has be supplied with a number of good references of which he ignores all, except an extreme biased account of his own that for some reason satisfies the level of knowledge he wishes to be exposed.

Thanks for the response.

I have been reading the comments in response to Julie Gough’s exhibition reviews. She was an archeologist before she studied fine arts. Her whole art practice is a response to the Tasmanian archive and country. So many comments are ugly or ill-informed. (‘She’s just whipping up lies to sell her book’-It’s not a book. It’s an art exhibition. There is no entry fee at the state gallery. ‘She’s wrong about that’ -yeah, because these people have read and copied any documentation about Tas aborigines held here and over there. And because art must be ‘right’? To whom? In one work Gough takes a rock from the driveway of the properties of large landholders at the time. To her this is a performance about stealing the land. Comments are that she should be charged with theft.) It’s ugly out there.

People will completely circumflex their spines in order to dehumanise aboriginal people

dv said:

sarahs mum said:

PermeateFree said:

Probably not, moll has be supplied with a number of good references of which he ignores all, except an extreme biased account of his own that for some reason satisfies the level of knowledge he wishes to be exposed.

Thanks for the response.

I have been reading the comments in response to Julie Gough’s exhibition reviews. She was an archeologist before she studied fine arts. Her whole art practice is a response to the Tasmanian archive and country. So many comments are ugly or ill-informed. (‘She’s just whipping up lies to sell her book’-It’s not a book. It’s an art exhibition. There is no entry fee at the state gallery. ‘She’s wrong about that’ -yeah, because these people have read and copied any documentation about Tas aborigines held here and over there. And because art must be ‘right’? To whom? In one work Gough takes a rock from the driveway of the properties of large landholders at the time. To her this is a performance about stealing the land. Comments are that she should be charged with theft.) It’s ugly out there.

People will completely circumflex their spines in order to dehumanise aboriginal people

yes. :(

And the history is ugly enough on its own.

>>>>2016 Census: Tasmania – Australian Bureau of Statistics

https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/…/7F1A862B6F8B6BA0CA258148000A41AC?…

Jun 27, 2017 – A total of 23,572 Tasmanians reported having Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander origins, an increase of 3,947 people since 2011.
——

There are a lot of people out there who think this number should be zero because the Tas aboriginals were wiped out. Yet Gough has found records of almost 200 children stolen into the colonist’s ranks. She assumes that there were more than what is recorded. And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

Oh a sarcasm detector, that’s a REALLY useful invention

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

dv said:

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

Oh a sarcasm detector, that’s a REALLY useful invention

It’s not sarcasm, I’m interested in why sm would say this.

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

Ahh, OK. Thank you.

sarahs mum said:

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

The human race hasn’t really learnt about treating various peoples any better today, if the weaker people have something the powerful people want they will just take it, it’s dressed up a bit better and hidden much better but still there.

Yes and no. It is dressed up a bit better, and that’s a real change. There have always been the goodies and the baddies. The hard thing is keeping them apart.

On the loss of the Tasmanian race, I’ve noticed a rapid decline in the size of a typical tribe in Tasmania.

Year, Typical_tribe_size
1825, 200
1826, 150
1830, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 700
1831, 31
1832, 26
1833, 20, entire aboriginal population of mainland Tasmania estimated at 40

These estimates are extremely inaccurate, out a factor of two perhaps, but the downwards trend is clear.

Some other dates to compare this with:
1808 to 1816 – no mention of aborigines in Tasmanian newspapers.
1817 – law protecting aborigines from whites.
1818 – “encouraging the Black people to murder one another for the sport of the Europeans”
1824 – only one tribe has done any mischief
1825 – start of an aboriginal campaign against the whites – spearings
1826 – 20 whites killed in separate incidents by aborigines
1827 – many more killings of whites
1828 – “dreadful carnage, and general terror”, call for the blacks to be exterminated or removed
1829 – fewer murders (speculate because tribes are now smaller)
1830 – “houses burnt – churches demolished – men massacred – women ill treated – children eaten alive”
1831 – many more spearings, and return shootings

In the campaign against the aborigines.
1830 – massive government project to kill or relocate blacks is a complete farce, with only 2 kills and 1 capture.
1830 – government offers a 5 pounds bounty on every aborigine captured and delivered to a police station,
1830 – Mr Gilbert Robinson and a small party of men begins a campaign to capture and relocate all Tasmania’s aborigines.
1833 – Mr Robinson completed capture and relocation of Tasmania’s aborigines.

The most extremely disturbing thing about this to me is the complete failure of the whites to recognise the differences between different tribes. With a few minor exceptions, it was impossible to go after individual murderers because each tribe acted as one. But it damn well ought to have been possible to distinguish between peaceable and warlike tribes. Equally disturbing is that there must have been a huge amount of shooting of aboriginals that went unrecorded.

There was a fear that the convicts would run away with the natives.There was a shut down on any convicts behaving in anyway like the natives. This meant that the white man also failed to learn about country from the natives.

I should ask whether you actually read my post about the Julie Gough exhibition…the one I posted shortly before you started this thread.

Actually are my posts even being read? Should I be bothering to post?

I didn’t see it, but then generally I don’t go back and read all the 6:30 pm to am posts.

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

sarahs mum said:

And you know, mainland aborigines cannot move to Tassie. That wouldn’t happen.

Why is that?

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

Nothing to do with happy, but for years it was pushed that whitey killed all the Tasmanian aboriginals and Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, and I am not sure that that is not incorrect,

AwesomeO said:

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

Why is that?

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

Nothing to do with happy, but for years it was pushed that whitey killed all the Tasmanian aboriginals and Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, and I am not sure that that is not incorrect,

Aside from the stolen children..there were the women stolen by sealers…who I think ended up in South Australia?
But yes, Trugannini is still considered the last.

AwesomeO said:

sarahs mum said:

sibeen said:

Why is that?

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

Nothing to do with happy, but for years it was pushed that whitey killed all the Tasmanian aboriginals and Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, and I am not sure that that is not incorrect,

Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, as full blood Aborigines were not made welcome by the sealers. However, many consider only full bloods represent true Aborigines, with many early records ignoring mixed race ones.

PermeateFree said:

AwesomeO said:

sarahs mum said:

I was being facetious. There are still people out there who aren’t happy unless it says Tasmanian/Aborigines/zero.

Nothing to do with happy, but for years it was pushed that whitey killed all the Tasmanian aboriginals and Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, and I am not sure that that is not incorrect,

Truganini was the last full blooded Tasmanian aboriginal, as full blood Aborigines were not made welcome by the sealers. However, many consider only full bloods represent true Aborigines, with many early records ignoring mixed race ones.

Should read, full blood MALE Aborigines were not made welcome by the sealers