Story of the peoples of Australia

User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

The title of the thread is the name of a new book.

Would it surprise you that (scientifically based) Australian aboriginies were the first bread bakers in the history of mankind using solar ovens?

And that they invented aquaculture and agriculture 42 thousand years ago.

That may not mean much to anyone except for the fact that history lessons in schools have always portrayed Aboriginies as a bedrabbled nomadic cave dwelling lot.

Well it seems they werent nomadic at all but established the first form of property ownership ......moving between tribal properties ....... just like cars...... or anyone else who summers in Spain or Bali as the seasons dictate. They were as nomadic as anyone walking around their own neighbourhood looking for a cheaper grocery store.

They also had 'signage' directional as well as cautionary.



I find this quite amazing considering what i was taught at school about them.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by gmc »

It's the same with the peoples of the americas - If you consider the impact just their agriculture had on our daily lives yet most people are unaware of the connection. When any attempt is made to teach children about it or the effect slavery had you always get the political correctness of such things condemned by the loony right. Except the loony right has now become mainstream and is in government.

I'm not sayinmg the imperial powers' descendants should apologise or pay reparations but we should be aware of our own past and not pretend it was all glorious.
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

You're talking to a daughter of convict stock. You aint telling me nothin. From British farmers/tradesmen/noblemen......to ready hand slave. I like honest historians.

At least the pilgrims listened to the agricultural side of Indians . The British here didnt. Well not officially anyway, unless its hidden in the diaries in some dark receptegal of a mueseum........ i can picture the aboriginals looking on confused watching people with fishing rods only metres away from a fish trap..
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6437
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by FourPart »

I, too, am descended from Convict Stock. Although the name James Brine may not be that well known over here, I have learned that he is considered a bit of a folk hero over in Oz.

James Brine (from whom I am a direct descendant) was one of the Tolpuddle Martyrs - the very first Trade Union. I guess Socialism is in my blood.
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

I think I am a bit surprised to find that the Aborigines were the first bread bakers. I'd have guessed India, myself, as the first place it might have happened. edit: If not Africa, thinking about it.

I only found out quite recently that archaeology and I think genetic studies now suggest that the route of the first successful human migration out of Africa (successful in that we are all descended from them afaik) travelled East across to India, then through SE Asia, down the peninsula and modern archipelago which was back then all dry land because the very serious Ice Age meant a huuuuuge amount of water was locked up in the ice and then walked to Australia. Apparently our ancestors then expanded north up through China and across to America via Alaska in another, less serious, Ice Age and also westward into Mongolia, Russia and only then into Europe from the East and South East.

Since the seas rose and Australia became separate after that first migration, the Aborigines are, I think it was claimed, directly descended from that first wave of migrants who must have been a pretty resourceful bunch to BE the first successful migrants. There were earlier waves of migrants who made it out of Africa - they've found traces in the Middle East, I gather - but apparently they all died out (climate change can be a killer and isn't always caused by humans...). In other areas of the world human populations flourished, died out, vacant areas were colonised and recolonized, populations grew apart then mixed again but the Aborigines remained a single viable population that flourished and remained unbroken in isolation down to the present. I think that's an amazing and rather wonderful thing.

I am rather surprised that iirc there were NO seaborne arrivals in Australia after it became separate, given the epic voyages made by the Polynesians. Or did prevailing winds and currents always push them east? Do you know anything about that?
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

Clodhopper;1508326 wrote: I think I am a bit surprised to find that the Aborigines were the first bread bakers. I'd have guessed India, myself, as the first place it might have happened. edit: If not Africa, thinking about it.

I only found out quite recently that archaeology and I think genetic studies now suggest that the route of the first successful human migration out of Africa (successful in that we are all descended from them afaik) travelled East across to India, then through SE Asia, down the peninsula and modern archipelago which was back then all dry land because the very serious Ice Age meant a huuuuuge amount of water was locked up in the ice and then walked to Australia. Apparently our ancestors then expanded north up through China and across to America via Alaska in another, less serious, Ice Age and also westward into Mongolia, Russia and only then into Europe from the East and South East.

Since the seas rose and Australia became separate after that first migration, the Aborigines are, I think it was claimed, directly descended from that first wave of migrants who must have been a pretty resourceful bunch to BE the first successful migrants. There were earlier waves of migrants who made it out of Africa - they've found traces in the Middle East, I gather - but apparently they all died out (climate change can be a killer and isn't always caused by humans...). In other areas of the world human populations flourished, died out, vacant areas were colonised and recolonized, populations grew apart then mixed again but the Aborigines remained a single viable population that flourished and remained unbroken in isolation down to the present. I think that's an amazing and rather wonderful thing.

I am rather surprised that iirc there were NO seaborne arrivals in Australia after it became separate, given the epic voyages made by the Polynesians. Or did prevailing winds and currents always push them east? Do you know anything about that?


The prevailing winds, and surface ocean currents do not look like they would make an eastbound voyage from Australia to South America very easy.

If they went south they could ride currents along the Antarctic region to what is now Southern Chile. That would be a long and miserable voyage without power and heat.
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by spot »

magentaflame;1502766 wrote: I find this quite amazing considering what i was taught at school about them.


I think perhaps you're lumping a lot of different behavior under a single label. There were hundreds of Aboriginal Australian tribes before the first fleet arrived and they displayed many ways of life, from settled to nomadic. I'm not sure any ever domesticated a crop though, and "bread" tends to imply the domestication of corn or grain. Maybe there's a web page you could show us about it.

There's utter cultural denial on their part that they themselves ever "arrived". One consequence of that denial is that their ancestors' wholesale extinction of those species which had evolved independently in Australia is also denied, along with their ancestors' continent-wide environmental devastation. What European settlers have done to Australian habitats, by contrast, is minimal. The Australian Aboriginal culture has far more to atone for than the European.

The other oddity I find in your thinking is that the genocide was in some way a British thing rather than a settler thing. The human inhabitants of Tasmania weren't destroyed by military action, they were killed by farmers whose ancestors were primarily colonists or ex-convicts, either through the introduction of European diseases or the rather more blatant use of firearms and enslavement. The same applies even more when you look at the mainland. The vast majority of the people who destroyed Australian Aboriginal culture didn't speak Oxford Received, they spoke Strine and they farmed or mined or traded, and most of it happened within the last hundred years.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

Don't know enough about the Aborigines to comment much, though I seem to remember that some northern tribes had a legend that their ultimate mother had come from the north. Could be wrong about that.

But what I'm pretty sure of is that the Australian continental plate is hurtling north at an immense speed, something like 5cm a year, and this has led to well, not so much climate change as Australia moving through climatic zones, which put immense pressure on some species and would likely have led to their extinction anyway. If that's the case the Aborigines probably assisted the process but were not the ultimate cause. I also find it hard to blame them for killing creatures that hunted them.

It's a tricky question, who we blame for the appalling behaviour of most settlers from the British Isles, voluntary and involuntary, in America as well as Australia and other places too. Simply put, these people were often oppressed at home and promptly oppressed others when they got the chance, usually much worse. We're all quite happy to celebrate and own their achievements, but their dark side is an orphan.

I think we have to say humans can be bloody unpleasant when they let themselves be - all of us. And we should face it, because without facing it we can never overcome it. So I think we should say, Yeah, those were our people who went out there and behaved like that. But the Aussies and Yanks (and Canucks) should say, They were us, too.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by spot »

Clodhopper;1508332 wrote: But what I'm pretty sure of is that the Australian continental plate is hurtling north at an immense speed, something like 5cm a year, and this has led to well, not so much climate change as Australia moving through climatic zones, which put immense pressure on some species and would likely have led to their extinction anyway. If that's the case the Aborigines probably assisted the process but were not the ultimate cause. I also find it hard to blame them for killing creatures that hunted them.


A sense of timescale helps. The Australian megafaunal catastrophe took place between 60,000 and 40,000 years ago and coincided with the fire-razing of the continent by the newly-arrived Homo Sapiens. During that 20,000 year period, the continent drifted one kilometer northward. The rate of drift is 7km per 100,000 years.

The extinction event doesn't coincide with any global climate shift of which I'm aware - perhaps you could name what I should look for.

It does, however, coincide with the arrival of Homo Sapiens.

So do the North and South American megafaunal extinction events, 20,000 years later.

The trail of humans across Eurasia defines the sudden extinction of the mammoth, from the arctic circle down to those cute little contemporary hobbit people on Flores genociding the indigenous dwarf mammoths 10,000 years ago.

The only scientific community in denial about what caused the Australian megafaunal extinction event is Australian academics trying hard not to point fingers at the Australian Aboriginal invasion. Conflicting with Australian Aboriginal origin myths is apparently taboo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia ... _megafauna lists the species which went extinct during that period. I can see possibly three which might have posed a threat to a single armed human if they met without backup. What proportion of that list do you think hunted humans.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

You've jogged my memory a bit - I think it was a programme about those extinctions suggesting that humans might not have been quite the devastators they seem to have been and that I've certainly argued they were, in the past. On here iirc, talking about the Clovis spear tip.

I didn't know the timescale of the extinction event in Aus at all, so it's interesting to see. 20,000 years is a heck of a long time in human terms.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by spot »

Clodhopper;1508344 wrote: You've jogged my memory a bit - I think it was a programme about those extinctions suggesting that humans might not have been quite the devastators they seem to have been and that I've certainly argued they were, in the past. On here iirc, talking about the Clovis spear tip.

I didn't know the timescale of the extinction event in Aus at all, so it's interesting to see. 20,000 years is a heck of a long time in human terms.


The timeframe is me being cautious, from the earliest date Homo Sapiens could have arrived to the latest plus 2000 years. The extinction event, I would suggest, as an uneducated guess, had a timeframe of perhaps three thousand years at most but nobody has a good pinpoint on when they started. I've been very broad with that span of dates for the start, so as to avoid focusing the discussion on when it actually happened.

More than 85 percent of Australia's mammals, birds and reptiles weighing over 100 pounds went extinct shortly after the arrival of the first humans, said Miller.

The ocean sediment core showed the southwest is one of the few regions on the Australian continent that had dense forests both 45,000 years ago and today, making it a hotbed for biodiversity, said Miller, also associate director of CU Boulder's Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research.

"It's a region with some of the earliest evidence of humans on the continent, and where we would expect a lot of animals to have lived," Miller said. "Because of the density of trees and shrubs, it could have been one of their last holdouts some 45,000 years ago. There is no evidence of significant climate change during the time of the megafauna extinction."

Humans, not climate change, wiped out Australian megafauna



That's three months old, reporting a paper from Nature Communications, and it plumps for 45,000 years ago and (it looks to me) less than a 3,000 year process.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by gmc »

LarsMac;1508328 wrote: The prevailing winds, and surface ocean currents do not look like they would make an eastbound voyage from Australia to South America very easy.

If they went south they could ride currents along the Antarctic region to what is now Southern Chile. That would be a long and miserable voyage without power and heat.


I'm sure I read somewhere - (seven daughters of eve I think) that the genetic makeup of australian aborigines and the natives of tierra del fuego bear remarkable similirities.
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

gmc;1508350 wrote: I'm sure I read somewhere - (seven daughters of eve I think) that the genetic makeup of australian aborigines and the natives of tierra del fuego bear remarkable similirities.


I'm pretty sure the accepted version based on fairly sparse archaeology is that South Americans walked down from the north, but that genetic studies have boosted the trans-Pacific theory and the matter is back up for debate. chuckle. I think my original question got slightly lost in the wash somewhere: Were there really no incomers to Australia from the north across the sea, when Polynesians were making epic voyages all across the Pacific but not, apparently, to Australia.

So I was wondering if it was a matter of winds and currents pushing the Polynesian wanderers east. Or did they get slaughtered on landing in Australia? Did the Barrier Reef hold them out completely? Or what?
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

gmc;1508350 wrote: I'm sure I read somewhere - (seven daughters of eve I think) that the genetic makeup of australian aborigines and the natives of tierra del fuego bear remarkable similirities.


I was thinking along that line, but had no time currently to research that. next week may be slow at work, so maybe I can do so.
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

Clodhopper;1508360 wrote: I'm pretty sure the accepted version based on fairly sparse archaeology is that South Americans walked down from the north, but that genetic studies have boosted the trans-Pacific theory and the matter is back up for debate. chuckle. I think my original question got slightly lost in the wash somewhere: Were there really no incomers to Australia from the north across the sea, when Polynesians were making epic voyages all across the Pacific but not, apparently, to Australia.

So I was wondering if it was a matter of winds and currents pushing the Polynesian wanderers east. Or did they get slaughtered on landing in Australia? Did the Barrier Reef hold them out completely? Or what?


The winds would not have favored bringing them to Australia, it seems.

Ocean Currents
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

gmc;1508350 wrote: I'm sure I read somewhere - (seven daughters of eve I think) that the genetic makeup of australian aborigines and the natives of tierra del fuego bear remarkable similirities.


A quick search turned this up: The Enigma of the Natives of Tierra del Fuego
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

LarsMac;1508368 wrote: The winds would not have favored bringing them to Australia, it seems.

Ocean Currents


Looking at the currents and the proximity of Aus to New Guinea it's hard to believe there was negligible communication. Hey ho. It's an interesting area of research, that's for sure and it seems there's a fair bit of research going on - you hear new stuff really quite often these days.
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

spot;1508345 wrote: The timeframe is me being cautious, from the earliest date Homo Sapiens could have arrived to the latest plus 2000 years. The extinction event, I would suggest, as an uneducated guess, had a timeframe of perhaps three thousand years at most but nobody has a good pinpoint on when they started. I've been very broad with that span of dates for the start, so as to avoid focusing the discussion on when it actually happened.

More than 85 percent of Australia's mammals, birds and reptiles weighing over 100 pounds went extinct shortly after the arrival of the first humans, said Miller.

The ocean sediment core showed the southwest is one of the few regions on the Australian continent that had dense forests both 45,000 years ago and today, making it a hotbed for biodiversity, said Miller, also associate director of CU Boulder's Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research.

"It's a region with some of the earliest evidence of humans on the continent, and where we would expect a lot of animals to have lived," Miller said. "Because of the density of trees and shrubs, it could have been one of their last holdouts some 45,000 years ago. There is no evidence of significant climate change during the time of the megafauna extinction."

Humans, not climate change, wiped out Australian megafauna



That's three months old, reporting a paper from Nature Communications, and it plumps for 45,000 years ago and (it looks to me) less than a 3,000 year process.


Interesting article. Thanks. Imperceptible overkill is an interesting idea. I also wonder if the Australian fauna at that time didn't have a fear of humans, like the dodo or some of the NZ fauna. That wouldn't have helped and could have led to a very rapid human population explosion. 3,000 years seems to me to be quite a short time to wipe out that number of species over that much territory - but entirely possible, I suppose. edit: Especially if lunch just lumbers up to the fire and looks at you dozily...
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

Clodhopper;1508392 wrote: Looking at the currents and the proximity of Aus to New Guinea it's hard to believe there was negligible communication. Hey ho. It's an interesting area of research, that's for sure and it seems there's a fair bit of research going on - you hear new stuff really quite often these days.


I guess it depends on who was doing the sailing, and when. The Polynesians seafarers where much different people than the earlier trekkers who seem to have taken root in Australia and New Guinea. And while Hyerdahl may have proved it could be done, sailing off to distant continents would have been an arduous voyage, claiming the lives of many who attempted it. The early sailors were likely island hoppers, and the few who found their way to distant locations were likely those who for one reason or another were taken off course and survived long enough to get somewhere else.
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by gmc »

LarsMac;1508394 wrote: I guess it depends on who was doing the sailing, and when. The Polynesians seafarers where much different people than the earlier trekkers who seem to have taken root in Australia and New Guinea. And while Hyerdahl may have proved it could be done, sailing off to distant continents would have been an arduous voyage, claiming the lives of many who attempted it. The early sailors were likely island hoppers, and the few who found their way to distant locations were likely those who for one reason or another were taken off course and survived long enough to get somewhere else.


Then where they ended up would depend on the ocean currents and prevailing winds at the time. You get palm trees on the west coast of scotand that grew from coconuts carried on the gulf stream which is quite incredible when you consider the distances involved.
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

spot;1508330 wrote: I think perhaps you're lumping a lot of different behavior under a single label. There were hundreds of Aboriginal Australian tribes before the first fleet arrived and they displayed many ways of life, from settled to nomadic. I'm not sure any ever domesticated a crop though, and "bread" tends to imply the domestication of corn or grain. Maybe there's a web page you could show us about it.

There's utter cultural denial on their part that they themselves ever "arrived". One consequence of that denial is that their ancestors' wholesale extinction of those species which had evolved independently in Australia is also denied, along with their ancestors' continent-wide environmental devastation. What European settlers have done to Australian habitats, by contrast, is minimal. The Australian Aboriginal culture has far more to atone for than the European.

The other oddity I find in your thinking is that the genocide was in some way a British thing rather than a settler thing. The human inhabitants of Tasmania weren't destroyed by military action, they were killed by farmers whose ancestors were primarily colonists or ex-convicts, either through the introduction of European diseases or the rather more blatant use of firearms and enslavement. The same applies even more when you look at the mainland. The vast majority of the people who destroyed Australian Aboriginal culture didn't speak Oxford Received, they spoke Strine and they farmed or mined or traded, and most of it happened within the last hundred years.


Here's some reading.

https://penguin.com.au/books/the-story- ... 0670078028

http://www.earlyamericancrime.com/convi ... n-solution ( for Fourpart) "The first fleet of 11 ships carrying 548 male and 188 female convicts set sail from England to Australia on May 3, 1787. These convicts faced very different experiences from their American cousins when they landed and were put to work in a penal colony in Botany Bay. Convicts sent to America were never placed in a penal colony and instead were generally sold off to private plantation owners. Convicts sent to Australia, on the other hand, were under much tighter control. They fell under the direct supervision of the government and were subject to convict discipline, including the use of chain gangs, convict barracks, slop clothing, and forced labor. They could not buy their freedom, as convicts shipped to America could. Convict servants in America were essentially treated like indentured servants, so they could basically blend in with the general population. In Australia, convicts and indentured servants were distinct. "

AIATSIS map of Indigenous Australia | Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies

Spot your comment about those who did damage to the aboriginals didn't have Oxford Recieved but used Strine is kinda funny. If you delve into the American link I have linked to there's a small quote from a past king. I'm not sure about your latin but I'm pretty sure Terra Nullus is self explanatory when it came to the indigenous of Australia. ( the official line from those who don't speak strine but noble businessmen, scientists and royalty.)
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

Clodhopper;1508392 wrote: Looking at the currents and the proximity of Aus to New Guinea it's hard to believe there was negligible communication. Hey ho. It's an interesting area of research, that's for sure and it seems there's a fair bit of research going on - you hear new stuff really quite often these days.


Recently, (last twenty years) they have only found evidence of canoes etc leaving rather than arriving maybe some round trips but essentially leaving .

For your perusal.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-26/d ... ts/7968950

Extremely interesting insight to new discoveries about where we actually came from. And more importantly why. I have the show very very interesting I'm sure it will be on youtube or something.
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

Most of the "Convicts" shipped to the Americas during the American Colonial period (1620 to 1760) were petty criminals who we allowed to transport to the colonies instead of going to jail, assuming someone would pay their passage in exchange for working 5 to 7 years. They were treated the same as other indentured immigrants from Europe. A bit different from many of the convicts packed up and shipped off the Australia and other European Penal Colonies of the late 18th and early 19th Century.

There were some people in my family history that came here through an indenture contract and worked off their passage in the Pennsylvania colony.

magentaflame;1508515 wrote: Recently, (last twenty years) they have only found evidence of canoes etc leaving rather than arriving maybe some round trips but essentially leaving .

For your perusal.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-26/d ... ts/7968950

Extremely interesting insight to new discoveries about where we actually came from. And more importantly why. I have the show very very interesting I'm sure it will be on youtube or something.


Some very interesting info.

I was also just reading that some folks suspect the Sherpas may have got their adaptation to the very high altitudes from Denesovian DNA,
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by gmc »

Have a look at Brian Sykes the Seven Daughters of Eve. As to the high altitude adaptation if I remember correctly they have actually been able to find evidence to back it up - can't remember where I saw or read it ior I would post the link.
Clodhopper
Posts: 5115
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:11 pm

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by Clodhopper »

...wondered why some of my posts weren't appearing. Just realised why: I've hit reply to thread, not post quick reply. There will be a short interlude while I bang my head on the desk.

tweet, chirrup (thump!) trill, twitter (wham!)...
The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"

Lone voice: "I'm not."
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

Clodhopper;1508527 wrote: ...wondered why some of my posts weren't appearing. Just realised why: I've hit reply to thread, not post quick reply. There will be a short interlude while I bang my head on the desk.

tweet, chirrup (thump!) trill, twitter (wham!)...


No no! Stand back everybody...ill get this.

THWACK! To the back of the head.

Ill be back later (its 5:30 am and about to go crabbing YUM. If anyone has any good recipes feel free to share. :)
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by spot »

Eating crabs should be illegal.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12150
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by LarsMac »

magentaflame;1508531 wrote: No no! Stand back everybody...ill get this.

THWACK! To the back of the head.

Ill be back later (its 5:30 am and about to go crabbing YUM. If anyone has any good recipes feel free to share. :)


Shell the crabs. take about half a kg of crab meat

2 eggs

4-6 tablspn Mayonaise

mince green onions

2 tblspn butter

1 cup cracker crumbs

tarragon

crushed red pepper

a pinch of Cilantro

Mix in a bowl,

heat oiled iron skillet

make 1/4 pound patties of the mixed ingredients and brown both sides in skillet

Serve with beer
“All it takes to get elected in twenty-first-century America is a mob of frightened sheep and a wolf with a nice smile,”
― Greg Bear, Darwin's Children
User avatar
magentaflame
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Victoria, Australia

Story of the peoples of Australia

Post by magentaflame »

FourPart;1502904 wrote: I, too, am descended from Convict Stock. Although the name James Brine may not be that well known over here, I have learned that he is considered a bit of a folk hero over in Oz.

James Brine (from whom I am a direct descendant) was one of the Tolpuddle Martyrs - the very first Trade Union. I guess Socialism is in my blood.




https://convictrecords.com.au/convicts/ ... ames/30413

One of a group of the ‘Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers’ and betrayed by a fellow farm worker Edward Legg, Brine and his co-accused were charged with swearing a secret oath to the society which was in effect a trade union. The group became known as the Tolpuddle Martyrs and were tried and convicted to be transported under the unlawful oaths act of 1797. Brine together with James Loveless, Thomas Standfield, his son John Standfield and James Hammett were shipped to Sydney on the ‘Surrey. A sixth member, George Loveless was too ill to travel and left later on the William Metcalfe to van Diemen’s Land. In England they became a cause célèbre and 800,000 signatures were collected for their release. All were pardoned in March 1836 with the support of the home secretary Lord John Russell, on condition of good conduct. Brine departed Sydney on the ‘John Barry’ and returned home 17 March 1838
The 'radical' left just wants everyone to have food, shelter, healthcare, education and a living wage. Man that's radical!....ooooohhhh Scary!

Return to “History”