Society/Culture Greens vow to move Australia Day

[Snake_Baker]

 

[Kram]

There is a massive industry of pretentious dicks sending a cheek swab in and deciding their love of surfing is due to their “Viking ancestry”. Got anything to say about them?

The funny I have a lot more indigenous blood than Mr Pascoe even if his claim is correct, so I'll ask whatever questions that I want thanks.

 

[Roylion]

Read it.

I've read it. I've also read the criticisms of it.

Incidentally Pascoe's ancestry is irrelevant to the strength of his argument.

Pascoe draws on an extraordinary trove of white settler first-person accounts to show that Aboriginal society and technology was far more sophisticated than we've commonly understood it to be.

The Australian Aborigines certainly took hunter-gathering about as far as it could go given the resources they had; all set out in Geoffrey Blainey’s excellent book. Triumph of the Nomads.

And there is certainly evidence that some Australian aboriginals were involved in aquaculture involving eels and fish such as in South West Victoria. Archaeologist Heather Builth's work in the 1990s recognised the ingenuity of the Budj Bim eel traps that were used in the Lake Condah district of western Victoria.

And Aboriginals definitely helped the spread of edible plants by hand long before Europeans arrived, such as the rainforest tree Castanospermum australe or black bean. A recent study revealed through DNA testing that isolated populations of the black bean tree, which were found far inland up mountainsides, were brought there by Aboriginal groups who used the seeds for food.

It seems a gardening revolution began in Sahul (the Australian mainland, Tasmania and New Guinea before the seas rose as the Pleistocene Ice began to retreat about 10,000 years ago. Gardening can be as basic as weeding out undesirable plants and ‘weeding in’ desirable ones. A number of nut species were involved in Sahul agriculture, but no grasses. There were no suitable species for cultivation beyond basic gathering in the wild. Perhaps 19 different species of plant were being gardened by at least 21 different identifiable indigenous groups. These included species of yam, sweet potato and its relatives (such as the “bush potato”), “native millet”, ngardu, “bush tomatoes” and “bush onions”. This was well known long before Pascoe's Dark Emu.

Following on from gardening is agriculture.

In the ancient Middle East there were the ancestors of the three modern staples: wheat oats and barley. In the Americas, ancestral maize and potatoes.
Grain crops have the advantage that they self-preserve as long as they are kept dry. Viable seeds thousands of years old have been recovered from Middle Eastern tombs.

Grain created a need for granaries, which meant settlements and military organisation against non-agricultural bandits. These in turn brought domestication of horses and other draft animals, and the move from the Stone Age into the Bronze and Iron Ages, which also stimulated military developments, and the rise of towns and cities.

Professor John Burton Cleland (whom Pascoe quotes in 'Dark Emu) wrote

"Australia possesses no milk-producing animal that could be kept in domesticated herds and flocks for food purposes. It possesses very few fruits of much value and only a single nut now used in commerce and, with perhaps one exception, no vegetable that has passed into the common service of the white man. In the central parts of Australia grains of various grasses were used but none of these is likely to be capable of cultivation as crops. ...It was only in areas where fish or game, for instance, were abundant that the population became to some degree stabilized. Even here there was no attempt to cultivate food plants.”

It's almost beyond belief, which is why I say it's an absolute gamechanger, but it's all sitting there in plain sight in the archives.

It's amazing that it took Bruce Pascoe to work this out when scholars such as Norman Tindale, Tim Flannery, Geoffrey Blainey, Jared Diamond, Thomas Sowell, Prof John Burton Cleland and Prof Richard Broome amongst others, all conclude that the available evidence (including what was in the 'archives') showed that Australian Aboriginal society was essentially a hunter-gatherer one (as if that was anything to be ashamed of anyway).

Researcher Harry Allen, who has three separate works cited in Dark Emu including, “The Bagundji of the Darling Basin: Cereal Gatherers in an Uncertain Environment” (1974) summarised his peer-reviewed findings in the abstract summary as follows:

"The Bagundji economy was primarily riverine in character based on the collection of aquatic foods and wild cereals. Seasonal variations in their subsistence activities can be related to seasonal variations in the productivity of their habitat. Despite a long period of association with wild cereals, the Bagundji remained hunters and gatherers and apparently made no attempt to cultivate these cereals. Possible reasons for this are examined. No simple explanation can be put forward to explain either the specific problem of the absence of agriculture from the Darling River Basin or the general problem of the absence of agriculture from Aboriginal Australia as a whole."

I'd be more inclined to read Bill Gammage's "The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines made Australia"

 

[Snake_Baker]

And Aborginals definitely helped the spread of edible plants by hand long before Europeans arrived. Such as the rainforest tree Castanospermum australe or black bean, reveals through DNA testing that isolated populations of the black bean tree, which were found far inland up mountainsides, were brought there by Aboriginal groups who used the seeds for food.

Taking a s**t?

It's amazing that it took Bruce Pascoe to work this out when scholars such as Norman Tindale, Tim Flannery, Geoffrey Blainey, Jared Diamond, Thomas Sowell, Prof John Burton Cleland and Prof Richard Broome amongst others, was that the available evidence (including what was in the 'archives') showed that Australian Aboriginal society was essentially a hunter-gatherer one. (as if that was anything to be ashamed of anyway)

Researcher Harry Allen, who has three separate works cited in Dark Emu including, “The Bagundji of the Darling Basin: Cereal Gatherers in an Uncertain Environment” (1974) summarised his peer-reviewed findings in the abstract summary as follows:

"The Bagundji economy was primarily riverine in character based on the collection of aquatic foods and wild cereals. Seasonal variations in their subsistence activities can be related to seasonal variations in the productivity of their habitat. Despite a long period of association with wild cereals, the Bagundji remained hunters and gatherers and apparently made no attempt to cultivate these cereals. Possible reasons for this are examined. No simple explanation can be put forward to explain either the specific problem of the absence of agriculture from the Darling River Basin or the general problem of the absence of agriculture from Aboriginal Australia as a whole."

I'd be more inclined to read Bill Gammage's "The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines made Australia"

The majority of contemporary aboriginal history writing should be deemed as suspect.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Even if any of this were true are we meant to believe that all Aboriginals across this gigantic continent were like this or was it just a tiny sub section in Tasmania?

Read the book. Of course there is great geographical and cultural diversity but it draws on explorer and colonist accounts from much of Australia as best as I can see.

From memory Tassie is not particularly prominent. Why would it be, just out of interest?

 

[quotemokc]

Read the book. Of course there is great geographical and cultural diversity but it draws on explorer and colonist accounts from much of Australia as best as I can see.

From memory Tassie is not particularly prominent. Why would it be, just out of interest?

I am not going to read the book.

Allegedly he is an Aboriginal Tasmanian.

 

[Rob R]

I am not going to read the book.

Allegedly he is an Aboriginal Tasmanian.

Not according to Tasmanian aborigines. https://tasmaniantimes.com/2020/01/bruce-pascoe-is-not-aboriginal/

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I've read it. I've also read the criticisms of it.

Incidentally Pascoe's ancestry is irrelevant to the strength of his argument.



The Australian Aborigines certainly took hunter-gathering about as far as it could go given the resources they had; all set out in Geoffrey Blainey’s excellent book. Triumph of the Nomads.

And there is certainly evidence that some Australian aboriginals were involved in aquaculture involving eels and fish such as in South West Victoria. Archaeologist Heather Builth's work in the 1990s recognised the ingenuity of the Budj Bim eel traps that were used in the Lake Condah district of western Victoria.

And Aboriginals definitely helped the spread of edible plants by hand long before Europeans arrived, such as the rainforest tree Castanospermum australe or black bean. A recent study revealed through DNA testing that isolated populations of the black bean tree, which were found far inland up mountainsides, were brought there by Aboriginal groups who used the seeds for food.

It seems a gardening revolution began in Sahul (the Australian mainland, Tasmania and New Guinea before the seas rose as the Pleistocene Ice began to retreat about 10,000 years ago. Gardening can be as basic as weeding out undesirable plants and ‘weeding in’ desirable ones. A number of nut species were involved in Sahul agriculture, but no grasses. There were no suitable species for cultivation beyond basic gathering in the wild. Perhaps 19 different species of plant were being gardened by at least 21 different identifiable indigenous groups. These included species of yam, sweet potato and its relatives (such as the “bush potato”), “native millet”, ngardu, “bush tomatoes” and “bush onions”. This was well known long before Pascoe's Dark Emu.

Following on from gardening is agriculture.

In the ancient Middle East there were the ancestors of the three modern staples: wheat oats and barley. In the Americas, ancestral maize and potatoes.
Grain crops have the advantage that they self-preserve as long as they are kept dry. Viable seeds thousands of years old have been recovered from Middle Eastern tombs.

Grain created a need for granaries, which meant settlements and military organisation against non-agricultural bandits. These in turn brought domestication of horses and other draft animals, and the move from the Stone Age into the Bronze and Iron Ages, which also stimulated military developments, and the rise of towns and cities.

Professor John Burton Cleland (whom Pascoe quotes in 'Dark Emu) wrote

"Australia possesses no milk-producing animal that could be kept in domesticated herds and flocks for food purposes. It possesses very few fruits of much value and only a single nut now used in commerce and, with perhaps one exception, no vegetable that has passed into the common service of the white man. In the central parts of Australia grains of various grasses were used but none of these is likely to be capable of cultivation as crops. ...It was only in areas where fish or game, for instance, were abundant that the population became to some degree stabilized. Even here there was no attempt to cultivate food plants.”



It's amazing that it took Bruce Pascoe to work this out when scholars such as Norman Tindale, Tim Flannery, Geoffrey Blainey, Jared Diamond, Thomas Sowell, Prof John Burton Cleland and Prof Richard Broome amongst others, all conclude that the available evidence (including what was in the 'archives') showed that Australian Aboriginal society was essentially a hunter-gatherer one (as if that was anything to be ashamed of anyway).

Researcher Harry Allen, who has three separate works cited in Dark Emu including, “The Bagundji of the Darling Basin: Cereal Gatherers in an Uncertain Environment” (1974) summarised his peer-reviewed findings in the abstract summary as follows:

"The Bagundji economy was primarily riverine in character based on the collection of aquatic foods and wild cereals. Seasonal variations in their subsistence activities can be related to seasonal variations in the productivity of their habitat. Despite a long period of association with wild cereals, the Bagundji remained hunters and gatherers and apparently made no attempt to cultivate these cereals. Possible reasons for this are examined. No simple explanation can be put forward to explain either the specific problem of the absence of agriculture from the Darling River Basin or the general problem of the absence of agriculture from Aboriginal Australia as a whole."

I'd be more inclined to read Bill Gammage's "The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines made Australia"

I'm well aware of Gammage's famous book, and I intend to get onto that soon, as well as Eric Rolls "A Million Wild Acres".

I don't think Pascoe is claiming the Australian Aborigines built the great pyramids.

But I think what he does unarguably, is show that Aboriginal society, according to certifiable eyewitness accounts (of those who'd you'd probably agree were least inclined to see anything positive in Aboriginal culture) is brimming with references to a far greater sophistication than is commonly believed today.

I can’t speak of those others you quote. Maybe they didn't look hard enough; maybe they did, but just didn’t grasp the full import of what they were seeing.

Or maybe they take deep issue with Pascoe’s conclusions. I don’t know. But I’m not aware that any of them have rushed into print to denounced his methodology, and the book has been around since 2014.

I'm not his publicist. I've told people about the book, and now they can read it. (Seems everyone else is.)

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I am not going to read the book.

Do you stick your fingers in your ears and go "na nah-na nah nah"?

By all means criticise the book. I'd be more than interested to hear your viewpoint.

But you can't do that unless you read it. Kinda embarrassing to have to point that out.

Ignorance is always excusable. None of us are omniscient.

Deliberate ignorance... well, gee, what word should we use for that?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Allegedly he is an Aboriginal Tasmanian.

So what? Are you saying historians can only speak with authority on their home state?

 

[Taylor]

It will hard to find archaeological evidence of farming without metalworking within the culture.

 

[quotemokc]

Do you stick your fingers in your ears and go "na nah-na nah nah"?

By all means criticise the book. I'd be more than interested to hear your viewpoint.

But you can't do that unless you read it. Kinda embarrassing to have to point that out.

Ignorance is always excusable. None of us are omniscient.

Deliberate ignorance... well, gee, what word should we use for that?

I was operating under the assumption that his book is primarily about Tasmanian aborigines.

So what? Are you saying historians can only speak with authority on their home state?

As above, I assume he is from Tasmania ergo his book is about Tasmania.

 

[ferball]

Even if any of this were true are we meant to believe that all Aboriginals across this gigantic continent were like this or was it just a tiny sub section in Tasmania?

Does that even matter? Its pretty clear people with your attitude view indigenous people as somehow subhuman, otherwise why object to documentation of them doing what humans, even so called primitive tribal ones have done forever.

 

[ferball]

The funny I have a lot more indigenous blood than Mr Pascoe even if his claim is correct, so I'll ask whatever questions that I want thanks.

Why are you asking here?

The only way to know is to ask him, and the mob he belongs too (or claims to belong to) about it.

Either way it has nothing yo do with the actual content of his book.

The only way to test that would be to check the original sources.

 

[quotemokc]

Does that even matter? Its pretty clear people with your attitude view indigenous people as somehow subhuman, otherwise why object to documentation of them doing what humans, even so called primitive tribal ones have done forever.

I object to fake news used to push a political agenda.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Not according to Tasmanian aborigines. https://tasmaniantimes.com/2020/01/bruce-pascoe-is-not-aboriginal/

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Don't you just love all the yokels citing Michael Mansell as an authority on who is and isn't a Tasmanian aboriginal?

The same MM they and their mates demonised and abused for years whenever he claimed to be a Tasmanian aboriginal "Yah, yah, you can't be, theyse was all extincted!"

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I object to fake news used to push a political agenda.

What fake news?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Don't you just love all the yokels citing Michael Mansell as an authority on who is and isn't a Tasmanian aboriginal?

The same MM they and their mates demonised and abused for years whenever he claimed to be a Tasmanian aboriginal "Yah, yah, you can't be, theyse was all extincted!"

Yep. The MO never changes.

Schitte on them for being "full blood".

No "full bloods" left?

Schitte on them for not being full blood.

 

[Roylion]

I don't think Pascoe is claiming the Australian Aborigines built the great pyramids.

No he's not. But he's also not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologist. Yet he claims much more than any of those professionals who have worked in the field for years. Including Gammage.

But I think what he does unarguably, is show that Aboriginal society, according to certifiable eyewitness accounts (of those who'd you'd probably agree were least inclined to see anything positive in Aboriginal culture) is brimming with references to a far greater sophistication than is commonly believed today.

That's my point. It is arguable. One of the biggest criticisms of Pascoe's work is that he selectively quotes from his sources and puts his own slant on it.

Maybe they didn't look hard enough; maybe they did, but just didn’t grasp the full import of what they were seeing.

So why is Pascoe (who isn't a qualified historian, archaeologist or anthropologist) to be believed over the experts I've mentioned previously?

For example I would place much more credence in the work of historian Rupert Gerritsen himself a noted authority on Indigenous Australian prehistory. Coupled with his work on early Australian cartography, before his death in 2013 he played an influential part in re-charting Australian history prior to its settlement by the British in 1788, and noted evidence of agriculture and settlements on the continent before the arrival of settlers. Pascoe uses Gerritson's work as a source frequently

For example Pascoe quotes the Western Australian explorer George Grey’s sightings of a,

“tract of light fertile soil quite overrun with warran [yam]..…and now for three and a half consecutive miles traversed a piece of land, literally perforated with holes the natives made to dig this root; indeed we could walk with difficulty across it on that account whilst the tract extended east and west as far as we could see”, and “the frequent wells...altogether executed in a superior manner”, which he quotes from Rupert Gerritsen.

This description by Grey in Dark Emu leads Pascoe's readers to convince themselves of the existence of a pre-colonial, “sophisticated Aboriginal agriculture complete with an irrigation system for the production of yams” on a vast scale.

What Pascoe doesn’t say however, is that he has lifted this isolated section from Gerritsen, and totally omitted any reference to the crucial paragraphs before, and after, this section. These paragraphs detail Gerritsen’s theory that Dutch survivors from the Batavia shipwreck and mutiny landed on the West Australian mainland and befriended the local aboriginal tribe, the Nhanda, inter-married with them, and introduced them to the cultivation of the Asian yam variety that the Dutch were most probably carrying as supplies.

Or maybe they take deep issue with Pascoe’s conclusions. I don’t know.

I'm just suggesting that you critically question any of Bruce Pascoe's claims, before announcing they are a 'game-changer'. As I've said he's not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologst unlike some of the other names I've mentioned such as Gammage, Gerritsen and Diamond.

I'm not his publicist. I've told people about the book, and now they can read it. (Seems everyone else is.)

I'm sure he's an excellent publicist.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

No he's not. But he's also not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologist. Yet he claims much more than any of those professionals who have worked in the field for years. Including Gammage.



That's my point. It is arguable. One of the biggest criticisms of Pascoe's work is that he selectively quotes from his sources and puts his own slant on it.



So why is Pascoe (who isn't a qualified historian, archaeologist or anthropologist) to be believed over the experts I've mentioned previously?

For example I would place much more credence in the work of historian Rupert Gerritsen himself a noted authority on Indigenous Australian prehistory. Coupled with his work on early Australian cartography, before his death in 2013 he played an influential part in re-charting Australian history prior to its settlement by the British in 1788, and noted evidence of agriculture and settlements on the continent before the arrival of settlers. Pascoe uses Gerritson's work as a source frequently

For example Pascoe quotes the Western Australian explorer George Grey’s sightings of a,

“tract of light fertile soil quite overrun with warran [yam]..…and now for three and a half consecutive miles traversed a piece of land, literally perforated with holes the natives made to dig this root; indeed we could walk with difficulty across it on that account whilst the tract extended east and west as far as we could see”, and “the frequent wells...altogether executed in a superior manner”, which he quotes from Rupert Gerritsen.

This description by Grey in Dark Emu leads Pascoe's readers to convince themselves of the existence of a pre-colonial, “sophisticated Aboriginal agriculture complete with an irrigation system for the production of yams” on a vast scale.

What Pascoe doesn’t say however, is that he has lifted this isolated section from Gerritsen, and totally omitted any reference to the crucial paragraphs before, and after, this section. These paragraphs detail Gerritsen’s theory that Dutch survivors from the Batavia shipwreck and mutiny landed on the West Australian mainland and befriended the local aboriginal tribe, the Nhanda, inter-married with them, and introduced them to the cultivation of the Asian yam variety that the Dutch were most probably carrying as supplies.



I'm just suggesting that you critically question any of Bruce Pascoe's claims, before announcing they are a 'game-changer'. As I've said he's not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologst unlike some of the other names I've mentioned such as Gammage, Gerritsen and Diamond.



I'm sure he's an excellent publicist.

Of course qualified historians tend to write better history; just as for climate change, I always defer to the experts.

But I think in the field of history there are more than a few examples of gifted people with no specific historical qualifications who have written excellent history.

Eleanor Dark was not a historian by training, but the research she undertook for her novel The Timeless Land made it a game-changer in an earlier period, a point which (indisputably) qualified historian Tom Griffiths makes in his excellent (and highly recommended) book The Art of Time Travel - Historians and Their Craft; in fact he devotes his entire first chapter to her and her groundbreaking novel.

Thank you for showing an example of how Pascoe may have over-egged his point from time to time. You have rightly shown how we need to be circumspect always, though I don't think it's a clincher. And as I said, I'm not aware of a howl of protest from professional historians. (Do point me to this howl if it's passed me by.)

The book has been out since 2014, so it’s not as if they haven’t had plenty of time to shoot his claims down in flames (and I do recall one journalist - was it Rick Morton? - recently spent several days checking Pascoe's sources in the various national and state archives, and pronounced them 100% solid.)

Anyway thanks for your post. You're clearly very knowledgeable on the subject and I appreciate you sharing that knowledge.

Finally, re your dig about Pascoe’s skills as a self-promoter - read a little about the man and he comes across as anything but that. Of course, he may be an evil mastermind posing as a humble plodder. And feel free to read this, which I posted a few pages back, if you haven’t already.

Andrew Bolt’s disappointment

MY FRIENDS TAKE a breath, lean across the table and assume the tone of Richard Dawkins explaining dinosaurs to intelligently designed Christians. They believe that in my promotion of Aboriginal achievement I’m simply being loyal to family or wanting to take a belligerent stance on our country’s...

www.griffithreview.com

 

[Bigjobss]

No he's not. But he's also not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologist. Yet he claims much more than any of those professionals who have worked in the field for years. Including Gammage.



That's my point. It is arguable. One of the biggest criticisms of Pascoe's work is that he selectively quotes from his sources and puts his own slant on it.



So why is Pascoe (who isn't a qualified historian, archaeologist or anthropologist) to be believed over the experts I've mentioned previously?

For example I would place much more credence in the work of historian Rupert Gerritsen himself a noted authority on Indigenous Australian prehistory. Coupled with his work on early Australian cartography, before his death in 2013 he played an influential part in re-charting Australian history prior to its settlement by the British in 1788, and noted evidence of agriculture and settlements on the continent before the arrival of settlers. Pascoe uses Gerritson's work as a source frequently

For example Pascoe quotes the Western Australian explorer George Grey’s sightings of a,

“tract of light fertile soil quite overrun with warran [yam]..…and now for three and a half consecutive miles traversed a piece of land, literally perforated with holes the natives made to dig this root; indeed we could walk with difficulty across it on that account whilst the tract extended east and west as far as we could see”, and “the frequent wells...altogether executed in a superior manner”, which he quotes from Rupert Gerritsen.

This description by Grey in Dark Emu leads Pascoe's readers to convince themselves of the existence of a pre-colonial, “sophisticated Aboriginal agriculture complete with an irrigation system for the production of yams” on a vast scale.

What Pascoe doesn’t say however, is that he has lifted this isolated section from Gerritsen, and totally omitted any reference to the crucial paragraphs before, and after, this section. These paragraphs detail Gerritsen’s theory that Dutch survivors from the Batavia shipwreck and mutiny landed on the West Australian mainland and befriended the local aboriginal tribe, the Nhanda, inter-married with them, and introduced them to the cultivation of the Asian yam variety that the Dutch were most probably carrying as supplies.



I'm just suggesting that you critically question any of Bruce Pascoe's claims, before announcing they are a 'game-changer'. As I've said he's not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologst unlike some of the other names I've mentioned such as Gammage, Gerritsen and Diamond.



I'm sure he's an excellent publicist.

You're too well researched and level headed to be posting in the politics section of this forum.
You need to call somene a C*** before you get labelled a bot.

 

[Rob R]

Don't you just love all the yokels citing Michael Mansell as an authority on who is and isn't a Tasmanian aboriginal?

The same MM they and their mates demonised and abused for years whenever he claimed to be a Tasmanian aboriginal "Yah, yah, you can't be, theyse was all extincted!"

Have I ever said anything about MM? Or is it just that any time anyone provides a fact that challenges even a small part of your belief, you can only respond with insults?

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Rob R]

Of course qualified historians tend to write better history; just as for climate change, I always defer to the experts.

But I think in the field of history there are more than a few examples of gifted people with no specific historical qualifications who have written excellent history.

Eleanor Dark was not a historian by training, but the research she undertook for her novel The Timeless Land made it a game-changer in an earlier period, a point which (indisputably) qualified historian Tom Griffiths makes in his excellent (and highly recommended) book The Art of Time Travel - Historians and Their Craft; in fact he devotes his entire first chapter to her and her groundbreaking novel.

Thank you for showing an example of how Pascoe may have over-egged his point from time to time. You have rightly shown how we need to be circumspect always, though I don't think it's a clincher. And as I said, I'm not aware of a howl of protest from professional historians. (Do point me to this howl if it's passed me by.)

The book has been out since 2014, so it’s not as if they haven’t had plenty of time to shoot his claims down in flames (and I do recall one journalist - was it Rick Morton? - recently spent several days checking Pascoe's sources in the various national and state archives, and pronounced them 100% solid.)

Anyway thanks for your post. You're clearly very knowledgeable on the subject and I appreciate you sharing that knowledge.

Finally, re your dig about Pascoe’s skills as a self-promoter - read a little about the man and he comes across as anything but that. Of course, he may be an evil mastermind posing as a humble plodder. And feel free to read this, which I posted a few pages back, if you haven’t already.

Andrew Bolt’s disappointment

MY FRIENDS TAKE a breath, lean across the table and assume the tone of Richard Dawkins explaining dinosaurs to intelligently designed Christians. They believe that in my promotion of Aboriginal achievement I’m simply being loyal to family or wanting to take a belligerent stance on our country’s...

www.griffithreview.com

Very well written comment, having looked at some of his work recently after all the arguments going on. I certainty agree that he isnt a self promoter and has done a good job of recognising earlier contributions.

It does seem that he overstated a few claims by taking extracts from historical records a bit out of context but no more than many other authors would have and he makes some good arguments and highlights some interesting facts not well known that outweigh that small criticism.

There may be questions (and only questions not proof) about whether he should be entitled to win awards set aside for indigenous Australians however that doesnt detract from his works as an author or in the community.

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ferball]

No he's not. But he's also not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologist. Yet he claims much more than any of those professionals who have worked in the field for years. Including Gammage.



That's my point. It is arguable. One of the biggest criticisms of Pascoe's work is that he selectively quotes from his sources and puts his own slant on it.



So why is Pascoe (who isn't a qualified historian, archaeologist or anthropologist) to be believed over the experts I've mentioned previously?

For example I would place much more credence in the work of historian Rupert Gerritsen himself a noted authority on Indigenous Australian prehistory. Coupled with his work on early Australian cartography, before his death in 2013 he played an influential part in re-charting Australian history prior to its settlement by the British in 1788, and noted evidence of agriculture and settlements on the continent before the arrival of settlers. Pascoe uses Gerritson's work as a source frequently

For example Pascoe quotes the Western Australian explorer George Grey’s sightings of a,

“tract of light fertile soil quite overrun with warran [yam]..…and now for three and a half consecutive miles traversed a piece of land, literally perforated with holes the natives made to dig this root; indeed we could walk with difficulty across it on that account whilst the tract extended east and west as far as we could see”, and “the frequent wells...altogether executed in a superior manner”, which he quotes from Rupert Gerritsen.

This description by Grey in Dark Emu leads Pascoe's readers to convince themselves of the existence of a pre-colonial, “sophisticated Aboriginal agriculture complete with an irrigation system for the production of yams” on a vast scale.

What Pascoe doesn’t say however, is that he has lifted this isolated section from Gerritsen, and totally omitted any reference to the crucial paragraphs before, and after, this section. These paragraphs detail Gerritsen’s theory that Dutch survivors from the Batavia shipwreck and mutiny landed on the West Australian mainland and befriended the local aboriginal tribe, the Nhanda, inter-married with them, and introduced them to the cultivation of the Asian yam variety that the Dutch were most probably carrying as supplies.



I'm just suggesting that you critically question any of Bruce Pascoe's claims, before announcing they are a 'game-changer'. As I've said he's not a professional historian, archaeologist or anthropologst unlike some of the other names I've mentioned such as Gammage, Gerritsen and Diamond.



I'm sure he's an excellent publicist.

Cultivation of yams happened across the continent including in the Tweed Valley near where I live.

What Gerritson has is a theory that reflects his European bias. The same bias that this book runs headlong into. It might be accurate, it might not but there is no reason to assume what he says is the defining opinion on the subject.

His ideas on language were strongly questioned by experts on Nhanda language so that puts doubt on the rest of his theories too.

Not knowing enough about this some of my questions are along the lines of what specific species of yam did they grow? and if it's that specific introduced species is there some sort of pathway where this plant turns up leading to areas on the northern coastline?

 

[FredLeDeux]

Have I ever said anything about MM? Or is it just that any time anyone provides a fact that challenges even a small part of your belief, you can only respond with insults?

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

You just cited Mansell, WTF?
And you never "provided any facts".