In the evaluation of why Britain colonised Botany Bay, Australia, one can draw on many conclusions. When the First Fleet arrived at Botany Bay in January 1788, little did they realise that for years to come historians would be contesting the real reasons as to why the British Parliament planned to establish a colony in Botany Bay. The Botany Bay debate, as it has been known to be called, began among historians in the 1950's when Geoffrey Blainey said that it was colonised for strategic motives#. These motives included such plans as there was a plant nursery to be established on Norfolk Island and Australia was to become a flax farm and a market garden that was to be surrounded by goal walls; there had been a failure of the growing of flax and pine on Norfolk Island, this at first had been very promising; and that flax and timber were vital to Britains economy as explained by the British Politicians in many letters. Along with Blainey's argument came another debate, this being that Botany Bay, was colonised as it was a good outpost for trading purposes. The traditional view in the debate was that Botany Bay was the chosen place for the convict population and it is this traditional view that my argument will follow.…
The 1920s and 30s was a time of deep prejudice against the Aboriginals. They were put through an experiment by the Chief Protector of Aboriginals at that time, Mr. Neville who was trying to "breed out the Aboriginals for their best purposes". Aboriginals were taken from their home land - they were displaced from their homes and taken to white settlements. In No Sugar, Jack Davis introduces the Millumurra family who reside in Northam and were then moved to the Moore River Native Settlement.…
Growth of colonies = not good for Aboriginals – died from diseases, starved after forced to give up land…
Australia has come a long way from who they were back in the 90s, migrants acceptance levels have improved immensely from where they were with the ‘White Australia Policy’ to now Australia being one of the largest multicultural countries in the world with more than 185 different nationalities making their homes in Australia with equality, but the question I’m going to test is Did Australians treat non-European migrants more harshly than European migrants post-war?…
Saul, B 2003,”From White Australia to Woomera: The story of Australian Immigration”, Journal Of Refugee Studies, 16, 4, pp. 449-450, SocINDEX with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 April 2014…
By this time the dominating view was that the Aborigines’ barbarism could not necessarily be ascribed to ‘any inconquerable dullness of intellect, but merely to their love of erratic liberty’ (Colonial Office 1844, p. 150). They would soon be giving up and letting the indigenous peoples be put on reservations where they could transition from hunter to cultivator on their own time. They claimed that “Aborigines were uniquely incapable of improvement in general, and of cultivation in particular”, yet “An ‘intelligent’ Aboriginal witness called before the committee was asked by the chairman: ‘Would any black fellows living about you now like to have a farm and to grow cabbages and other things?’ When told ‘they would not stop by it’, the witness was asked for clarification: ‘They like to walk about?’ To which the answer was ‘Yes’”…
the aboriginals faced many hardships and issues from the effect of colonisation. these are displayed through a number of different texts and films such as 'rabbit proof fence' by phillip noyce, 'the rabbits' by john marsden and shaun tan and oodgeroo noonuccal's poems 'white Australia' and 'then and now'. issues include loss and destruction of the environment, stolen generation and…
Although the 'frontier' period of Australian history can be viewed in the terms of war, there were also many white settlers who were appalled at the treatment of the Indigenous people and wanted to help them. Some of those who tried to help were government officials, others were Christian missionaries. These people truly believed that the Aboriginal people needed their help and without it they would die out. Their somewhat misguided attempts to help the Indigenous people are known as 'paternalism'. Paternalism means looking after someone and taking care of their interests because they cannot do it themselves. Instead of hunting down Aboriginal people and murdering them, government policy changed to treat them as if they were children who had to be protected.…
The European settlement had a devastating impact on the entire Aboriginal population, not only those who died from disease and violence. This is despite the fact that some white settlers, including colonial government officials and Christian missionaries, tried to help Indigenous people. These people believed that the Aboriginal people were primitive and uncultured, and that without their help they would die out. Their somewhat misguided attempts to help the Indigenous people are known as paternalism. Paternalism means looking after someone and taking care of their interests in the belief that they cannot do it themselves.…
Kate Greenville’s novel, The Secret River, displays the conflict between the English settlers and the Aboriginals. This conflict is the actions of the settlers, believing they could do what they want without contemplating the Aboriginals. The conflict shown in The Secret River was never dealt with. The settlers believed that because they were smarter and more powerful than the Aboriginals, all settlers deserved better than any Aboriginal. Not one English settler was noted for attempting to resolve the amassing conflict with any Aboriginal at the time. Without any conflicts being dealt with at this stage in our bloodshed history, depleted relations with the Aboriginal people continue. However why should our ancestor’s actions and words reflect how Australian’s of today’s society feel and act towards Aboriginals. It is the people of yesteryears and their actions that continue to torment and emotionally scar our Aboriginal people. If we are to completely move forward from this horrifying ordeal, we must act upon this conflict.…
* It was really a policy of segregation where Aboriginal culture could be replaced by white culture under the control of the authorities and they could be ‘civilised’ and ‘Christianised’.…
Religion was a vital part of everyday life for the British. They felt that they had been ‘burdened’ with the task of having to spread their faith – Christianity. When the British had come into contact with the Aboriginals, they tried to ‘save’ them by introducing them to their religion, however, the Aboriginals had their own religion – the dreamtime.…
Aboriginals have always had a strong link between them and the land with the belief of the Dreamtime and the art, symbols, rituals and totems that came with it. After the white settlement, the way in which aboriginals lived their everyday life took a dramatic turn. It had affected their culture for many generations with a disconnection with the land to them.…
The statement, ‘Aboriginal spirituality is as diverse and complex as the people themselves’, relates Aboriginal people to their culture and beliefs.…
Belich also sees the “Peopling” (or populating) and the “Imaging” ( or the image of New Zealand that was created in the minds of potential settlers – and sometimes in the minds of those who wanted them to come here) to all be phases of the same process; that of organised progressive British Colonisation. This was begun by the companies in the 1840s, carried on by the Provincial Governments in the 1850s and 60s, and taken over by the central government in the 1870s.…