This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/15/why-the-number-of-indigenous-deaths-in-the-frontier-wars-matters

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Why the number of Indigenous deaths in the frontier wars matters Why the number of Indigenous deaths in the frontier wars matters
(about 3 hours later)
Precisely howPrecisely how
many Indigenous Australians died in the frontier wars that raged across themany Indigenous Australians died in the frontier wars that raged across the
continent after European occupation in 1788?continent after European occupation in 1788?
When writingWhen writing
about the issue, I have consistently used the figure of 20,000 Indigenous Australians and about 2,000 colonial soldiers, police and settlers. I’ve said this aabout the issue, I have consistently used the figure of 20,000 Indigenous Australians and about 2,000 colonial soldiers, police and settlers. I’ve said this a
conservative estimate, based largely on the academic research of Henryconservative estimate, based largely on the academic research of Henry
Reynolds, John Connor and others.Reynolds, John Connor and others.
That figure –That figure –
translating to about 10 Indigenous deaths for each European killed – has beentranslating to about 10 Indigenous deaths for each European killed – has been
hotly contested by conservative historians, but newhotly contested by conservative historians, but new
collaborative academic research credibly suggests that the real frontier warcollaborative academic research credibly suggests that the real frontier war
fatality figure could be at least three times greater, and that the ratio offatality figure could be at least three times greater, and that the ratio of
black to white deaths could be 44 to one.black to white deaths could be 44 to one.
We will neverWe will never
know for certain. The documentation needed to determine an exact figure – be itknow for certain. The documentation needed to determine an exact figure – be it
100,000, 60,000, 20,000 or, as many conservative historians insist, far fewer – either never existed or has been destroyed, wilfully or100,000, 60,000, 20,000 or, as many conservative historians insist, far fewer – either never existed or has been destroyed, wilfully or
accidentally.accidentally.
Certainly theCertainly the
stories of massacres of Indigenous Australians are everywhere in the archivesstories of massacres of Indigenous Australians are everywhere in the archives
of the major cultural institutions of Australia and Great Britain. The diaries,of the major cultural institutions of Australia and Great Britain. The diaries,
letters, journals and memoirs of colonial and postcolonial officials, troops,letters, journals and memoirs of colonial and postcolonial officials, troops,
police, farmers, frontiersmen and women are replete with accounts of fightspolice, farmers, frontiersmen and women are replete with accounts of fights
against – and massacres of – the “marauding blacks”.against – and massacres of – the “marauding blacks”.
Early newspapersEarly newspapers
also offer remarkably detailed concurrent and retrospective accounts ofalso offer remarkably detailed concurrent and retrospective accounts of
frontier violence. Such stories arefrontier violence. Such stories are
so often defined by a chilling, deeply disturbing candour, so detached are theso often defined by a chilling, deeply disturbing candour, so detached are the
killers from the humanity of their victims. But read, as I have, enough of themkillers from the humanity of their victims. But read, as I have, enough of them
(such as the reminiscences of Korah Halcomb Wills) and you’ll be impressed with(such as the reminiscences of Korah Halcomb Wills) and you’ll be impressed with
an overwhelming sense that the orchestrated violence was very widespread,an overwhelming sense that the orchestrated violence was very widespread,
well-orchestrated and committed continent-wide from occupation until far intowell-orchestrated and committed continent-wide from occupation until far into
the 20th century.the 20th century.
There is anotherThere is another
rich source that supports the colonial and postcolonial white evidence. It is arich source that supports the colonial and postcolonial white evidence. It is a
source that the deniers have long rejected and sought to discredit; the richsource that the deniers have long rejected and sought to discredit; the rich
oral histories in Indigenous communities of the massacres that reverberate asoral histories in Indigenous communities of the massacres that reverberate as
ongoing trauma through the generations.ongoing trauma through the generations.
Many of theMany of the
stories have transmuted into songs and visual artwork, such as thestories have transmuted into songs and visual artwork, such as the
controversial painting Mistake Creek Massacre (depicting the murder of eightcontroversial painting Mistake Creek Massacre (depicting the murder of eight
Indigenous men, women and children in 1915), by the Kimberley artist QueenieIndigenous men, women and children in 1915), by the Kimberley artist Queenie
McKenzie.McKenzie.
When consideringWhen considering
the cultural resonance of frontier war it helps to remember that the lastthe cultural resonance of frontier war it helps to remember that the last
widely-accepted massacre, at Coniston in the Northern Territory in 1928, iswidely-accepted massacre, at Coniston in the Northern Territory in 1928, is
considerably closer to the living memory of the communities it affected thanconsiderably closer to the living memory of the communities it affected than
the invasion of Gallipoli in 1915 - the first act in a war that would killthe invasion of Gallipoli in 1915 - the first act in a war that would kill
about 62,000 Australians and, contestably, define the nationhood of the newabout 62,000 Australians and, contestably, define the nationhood of the new
federation (incidentally, one of the main perpetrators of the Coniston Massacre was afederation (incidentally, one of the main perpetrators of the Coniston Massacre was a
Gallipoli veteran, George Murray, who would later boast in an interview aboutGallipoli veteran, George Murray, who would later boast in an interview about
killing territorial Aboriginals.)killing territorial Aboriginals.)
There is noThere is no
denying the profound social, political and cultural impact of Australia’s worlddenying the profound social, political and cultural impact of Australia’s world
war one losses. From a population of about five million more than 416,000 menwar one losses. From a population of about five million more than 416,000 men
enlisted, some 62,000 died, another 155,000 were wounded. The hole was vast andenlisted, some 62,000 died, another 155,000 were wounded. The hole was vast and
profound.profound.
But is itBut is it
relevant when discussing the number of Indigenous Australians killed inrelevant when discussing the number of Indigenous Australians killed in
frontier war?frontier war?
Yes. Two historians,Yes. Two historians,
Raymond Evans and Robert Ørsted-Jensen, have concluded that in Queensland aloneRaymond Evans and Robert Ørsted-Jensen, have concluded that in Queensland alone
– the epicentre of frontier war in the mid-19th century Australia –– the epicentre of frontier war in the mid-19th century Australia –
at least 65,180 Aboriginal Australians were killed from the 1820s until theat least 65,180 Aboriginal Australians were killed from the 1820s until the
early 1900s.early 1900s.
Considering thatConsidering that
their research focuses on Queensland alone, their findings are freighted with atheir research focuses on Queensland alone, their findings are freighted with a
disturbing implication about the number of Indigenous Australians killeddisturbing implication about the number of Indigenous Australians killed
continent-wide. Australian deathscontinent-wide. Australian deaths
in world war one would pale in comparison.in world war one would pale in comparison.
If Evans andIf Evans and
Ørsted-Jensen are to be taken seriously (and, on the basis of a paper theyØrsted-Jensen are to be taken seriously (and, on the basis of a paper they
delivered at a conference in Queensland last week, their research deserves todelivered at a conference in Queensland last week, their research deserves to
be pored over and discussed widely) then Australia should be poised for a newbe pored over and discussed widely) then Australia should be poised for a new
debate about its bloody colonial genesis and the near eradication of one of thedebate about its bloody colonial genesis and the near eradication of one of the
world’s oldest peoples.world’s oldest peoples.
Evans is aEvans is a
respected historian who has been researching Australian frontier violence sincerespected historian who has been researching Australian frontier violence since
the 1960s, and Ørsted-Jensen a Danish master of social science and doctoralthe 1960s, and Ørsted-Jensen a Danish master of social science and doctoral
candidate at the University of Queensland. They have scoured the remainingcandidate at the University of Queensland. They have scoured the remaining
records of the Queensland Native Police Force and studied the prevalence ofrecords of the Queensland Native Police Force and studied the prevalence of
“black police” barracks across the colony’s frontier from 1859 to 1898 to“black police” barracks across the colony’s frontier from 1859 to 1898 to
determine the approximate number of patrols, contacts and killings based ondetermine the approximate number of patrols, contacts and killings based on
reported body counts. Their paper, Assessing Violent Mortality on the Queensland Frontier, reads:reported body counts. Their paper, Assessing Violent Mortality on the Queensland Frontier, reads:
We arriveWe arrive
at the total of 41, 040 Aborigines killed during 3,420 official frontierat the total of 41, 040 Aborigines killed during 3,420 official frontier
dispersals across almost 40 years of conflict. This mortality figure is adispersals across almost 40 years of conflict. This mortality figure is a
statistical projection, produced by cautiously sampling fragmentary evidencestatistical projection, produced by cautiously sampling fragmentary evidence
from the long project of land dispossession. It is not and can never be afrom the long project of land dispossession. It is not and can never be a
precisely accurate figure. That number will never be known.precisely accurate figure. That number will never be known.
Let us beLet us be
clear about what we are claiming here. The 41,000 death rate does not representclear about what we are claiming here. The 41,000 death rate does not represent
the full quotient of killings. It is merely a Native Police statistic that doesthe full quotient of killings. It is merely a Native Police statistic that does
not cover official dispersal activities across the prior decade of 1849-59.not cover official dispersal activities across the prior decade of 1849-59.
These may have accounted for another 3,000-4,000 deaths.These may have accounted for another 3,000-4,000 deaths.
Neither doesNeither does
their figure include vigilante actions against Indigenous people by settlers andtheir figure include vigilante actions against Indigenous people by settlers and
raiding parties. Based on a sample of 644 frontier clashes, Ørsted-Jensen foundraiding parties. Based on a sample of 644 frontier clashes, Ørsted-Jensen found
57% involved Native Police and the remaining 43% settlers.57% involved Native Police and the remaining 43% settlers.
Given there wereGiven there were
3,420 official dispersals across 40 years, the historians argue “the settlers'3,420 official dispersals across 40 years, the historians argue “the settlers'
43% must approximate to another 2,580 attacks”. “Together, our43% must approximate to another 2,580 attacks”. “Together, our
totals for settlers and Native Police amount to no less than 61,680 in 6,000totals for settlers and Native Police amount to no less than 61,680 in 6,000
attacks,” they conclude. Evans andattacks,” they conclude. Evans and
Ørsted-Jensen add “an estimated minimum of 3,500 kills associated with NativeØrsted-Jensen add “an estimated minimum of 3,500 kills associated with Native
Police activity and 1,500 European deaths to “arrive at an aggregate 66,800Police activity and 1,500 European deaths to “arrive at an aggregate 66,800
killed” between the 1820s and early 1900s. They write:killed” between the 1820s and early 1900s. They write:
We are awareWe are aware
that we have been incrementally conducting this research during a time whenthat we have been incrementally conducting this research during a time when
conscientious historians have been pilloried for even suggesting that a fange conscientious historians have been pilloried for even suggesting that a range
of serious massacres once occurred in Australia. We are acutelyof serious massacres once occurred in Australia. We are acutely
sensitive to the wider denialist mood in some sectors of Australian society andsensitive to the wider denialist mood in some sectors of Australian society and
its mainstream media. And so we proceed with caution and conservativeits mainstream media. And so we proceed with caution and conservative
assessment.assessment.
The frontier war,The frontier war,
they say, was “our Great War – a war for both the defense and conquestthey say, was “our Great War – a war for both the defense and conquest
of Australia”.of Australia”.
In the countdownIn the countdown
to the centenary of Anzac this proposition might pose troubling questions forto the centenary of Anzac this proposition might pose troubling questions for
those who view this country’s contribution to world war one as an expression ofthose who view this country’s contribution to world war one as an expression of
uniquely Australian values. Such as: what diduniquely Australian values. Such as: what did
the other war say about the real genesis of Australian nationhood?the other war say about the real genesis of Australian nationhood?