Elaine Newby
Aug 25, 2017 · 3 min read

Indigenous presence is far more broadly taught today and James Cook is presented as one in a far longer history of exploration and settlement. Currently indigenous settlement is taught as about 60,000 years ago (most recently now 65,000 years ago) while the far more recent European exploration and settlement is taught as such — (Willem Janzoon on the Dutch Dufkyn 1606, Dirk Harton 1616 and Abel Tasman 1642, 1644 are taught while Carstensz (1623), Thijsssen (1637) and Willem de Vlamingh (1689)generally aren’t. But it was enough for Terra Australis to then also be known as New Holland (Nieuw Holland or Nova Hollandia) in ‘the old world’! Like the later French (including d’Entrecasteaux who wrote of those they encountered ‘the most perfect image of a pristine society, in which men have not been stirred by passions or corrupted by the vices caused by civilisation’ (a reflection of current French views in regard to ‘primitive’ civilisations as innocent and uncorrupted’ and closer to the ‘purity’ of nature, these societies were often thought to be innocent — such an admiration, however, did not stop the French shipping 3 to four times the number of slaves to the US as the UK I understand…) These often explored and landed etc but did not establish settlement, while other maps from China and elsewhere suggest others had also touched the coast even earlier...
But it was the British who ‘claimed’ the land … seemingly not ‘owned’, unsettled by those whom they thought ‘roamed’ the landscape which ‘they’ could turn to productive use… The terra nullius fiction and views of it are taught not ignored. The impact of settlement in terms of disease, dispossession, even massacres are taught — as its heritage … Landrights, its origin, activism, the difficulties that faced the demand to demonstrate ‘continuous occupation’ when the parties involved were consciously excluded, and more recent success (and current limits) is also covered. In regards to Science, HSIE etc sky views are taught as various / contrast with a European zodiac; the various calendars that exist in Indigenous communities reflecting their environments are also taught.
Your ‘non-white less than human’ comment does not represent the views of a number of missionaries who sought to learn local languages (particular Lutheran in SA/NT) and use them to communicate on the very basis that the locals were indeed human… some of their diaries and records are used in the revival and reconstruction of Indigenous languages. Some were later forced by governments to ban the use of local languages or abandon the schools the missionaries provided before governments made them available. I agree and applaud much of what you have written, especially ‘Australia is founded on three grand stories: the First Nations, the British tradition and the richness of our migration story. But it starts with us. We are not invisible.’ Our public memorials could be more nuanced, the explanatory wording added to; and recognition given in public spaces to the opposition offered to white settlement and to peacemakers. In regard to language, there are many (I assume a typo in the above text) which is the task of learning language was easier recommended in NZ than here where there very proliferation in a highly mobile society make acquisition difficult. That does not mean they should not be appreciated, and words learnt and grammar recognised to gain an appreciation of how language reflects societal experience, but in a context of many not one. There is more thant could be said but I will leave it here … PS LOVE your last line : ‘ After all, we discovered this country’. It is this that is recognised throughout all levels of education across Australia today.

)