Hi IsMise,

Yeah, my wife had relations on both sides, mainly on the side of the dissident women, led by her step-sister Dulcie. I think that some of the proponents honestly believed that, because women in the far north held what were called locally, "secret women's business" ceremonies, i.e. private and individual ceremonies relating to the land obligations of any women marrying into the community from elsewhere, that, on the basis that Aboriginal culture was the same everywhere, therefore Ngarrindjeri women must have had, at one time, similar secret women's business.

Of course, Aboriginal cultural practices vary across Australia, as Paul has rightly emphasised, particularly between those from the patriarchal and semi-desert north, and the bilineal and riverine lower Murray. As the Berndts noted in their magisterial work, 'A World That Was', a gold-mine for interested readers, the Ngarrindjeri [they used the term 'Kukabrak'] did not appear to have any secret or sacred ceremonies. Their informants, an old man and an old woman, back in the early forties, were renowned elders at the time. They didn't seem to know anything of this 'business.'

As for a 'meeting of the waters', it appears that the proponents were not aware of tides, and differential river flow: at king tides and low river flow, the 'meeting' could be fifty km up the river; at low tides and high river flow, the 'meeting' could be anywhere up to fifty km out to sea. Rivers and sea don't meet at a particular point for long, not even at the Goolwa wharf. So inconvenient.

The Ngarrindjeri word for 'pregnant' is mundana (moo-dah-nah), which doesn't sound much like Kumarangk, one name for Hindmarsh Island, which was divided between three clans of three different dialect groups of the Ngarrindjeri: the Jaraldi, the Ramindjeri and the Warkend. Sturt noted burial platforms on the Island back in 1830. He named Pt McLeay after his commanding officer back in Sydney (McLeay Street, the McLeay River, etc.)

[TBC]

[continued]

The consulting anthropologist hired by the proponent women appeared to believe that the Goolwa Barrages acted like a raft 'floating' (an engineering term) on the river, and thereby did not impinge on the river flow - the stopping of which, after all, was the purpose of the Barrages - to hold back the sea-water and bank up the river-water for irrigators up-stream.

One of the objections by Island residents to the Bridge was that it would open up the Island to ordinary people: one of their privileges had been to be able to drive to the head of the queue for the Ferry (even on Saturday mornings), while ordinary people lined up, sometimes for hours. Privilege is very hard to give up, isn't it ?

The Bridge, a beautiful arch, now allows ordinary people to visit any time they like. Sic transit gloria.

Joe

Is Mise,

Thank You for reminding us of the Hindmarsh controversy.
According to The Australian newspaper an apology is
warranted.

Anyway, there's quite a few facts that have been
brought out concerning the controversy that
might interest you:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/hindmarsh-where-lies-the-truth-20030509-gdvo98.html

Foxy,

By Margaret Simons ? The person who didn't know anything about tides and river flow ? 'The meeting of the waters' at the Goolwa wharf ?

The main witnesses who she slagged from the SA Museum, Phillip Clark and Phillip Jones, have unblemished records as straight-down-the-line experts, going back forty years. Phillip Jones remarked early on about the Hindmarsh Island scam, something along the lines of 'Of all groups in Australia to attribute this to, the Ngarrindjeri would be the most unlikely.' He may have been referring to the simple fact that the Ngarrindjeri environment was so bountiful that 'increase ceremonies', so vital to northern culture, would have been totally unnecessary amongst the Ngarrindjeri.

Thanks, Foxy, that was good for a laugh.

Joe

The Bradshaw paintings are really quite remarkable. Most aboriginal rock art is so-so. Not at all dissimilar to pre-historic rock art from around the world and not particularly technically proficient.

As with the fish-traps, the only way to get excited about the aboriginal rock-art is to be utterly ignorant of the world's rock art heritage.

But the Bradshaw's are very different. They are technically proficient and much, much more advanced than art of a similar period almost anywhere on the planet. If it could be shown that the ancestors of current natives were the artists, the Bradshaw's would be lauded high and low. The ABC would have to start a whole new channel just to handle all the documentaries they'd make about them.

But, in fact the Bradshaws were almost certainly done by a now extinct race who were in WA before the arrival of the aboriginals to that area and likely wiped out by them. So two completely disqualifying marks against the Bradshaw peoples - more proficient than the aboriginals and here first.

Its a similar story about the Daintree Pygmies. Another example of people who were likely here before the aboriginals and forced to retreat into the Daintree to survive. That they existed even into the 20th century is virtually certain. But, because they represent a counter-narrative history, they are written out of history.

I've got now truck against teaching the current generation about pre-historic Australia. But that won't happen. They'll instead be taught the fables about pre-historic Australia. The best outcome would be to teach comparative history, comparing say 10,000 BC aboriginal society to societies from the same period around the world. But that won't happen because the kids would get the right story but the wrong narrative.

Foxy,

I have no problem with people taking pride in their heritage, but with roughly 2% of the population being of aboriginal heritage lessons in indigenous history is only tangentially relevant. And as pointed out earlier, without written records, history prior to settlement is at best fuzzy and largely anecdotal.

My guess is that the left whingers in the education system would love to teach Pascoe's versions of history as fact in spite of the flimsiness of his research.