Talk:List of massacres of Indigenous Australians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 List of massacres of Indigenous Australians is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
List This page is a list and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian history.
This article is supported by WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia.

Contents

[edit] Massacres of settlers by Aborigines

Should massacres of settlers by Aborigines also be included?

On 27 October 1857 11 Europeans were killed at Martha Fraser's Hornet Bank station on the Dawson River, in central Queensland. On 17th October 1861 nineteen white settlers were killed at Cullin La Ringo, the largest massacre of whites by Aborigines in Australia's history. (preceding unsigned comment by Cfitzart (talk · contribs) 22:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC))

I think massacres of non-Aboriginal people should be included too as sometimes they were connected to Aboriginal massacres. e.g probably the Wills Family massacre in about 1860.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.98 (talk • contribs) .
Suggest that you start a new entry on massacres of European settlers by indigenous inhabitants. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.200.232.245 (talk) 12:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That would be a separate article. The focus here is massacres of not massacres by. Paul foord (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What about Abo-Hunting?

I read something about the so called "Abo-Hunting". From 1816 till the 1930s about 200.000 Aborigines were killed by white settlers. I think this should be added to the list—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.151.247.118 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 10 December 2005 (UTC+10 hours)

That AH post didnt really contribute anything and used derogatory terms so I erased it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.98 (talk • contribs) .
  • Don't delete other people's comments - nobody has deleted yours even though they are repetitive, badly spelled and unsigned despite numerous requests - Oh and PS we are all volunteers--A Y Arktos\talk 09:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You are a rude thing Arktos. You need to go to manners school. Its attidues like that makes people find better to do. Also, that AH term is highly derogatory. Does wik support using derogatory terms re a culture that has suffered massive genocide? If so this is a disgusting place.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.33 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC+10 hours)

Well, the list can be added to providing that the information is adequately referenced. The history of massacres of Aboriginal people in Australia has been a hotly contested area in recent years. And the overall numbers of indigenous Australians killed in frontier conflict has been especially controversial. See for example the article Black armband view of history, which contains a rough summary of some of the debate. So it would probably be advisable for anything on this list to be referenced. Ideally, if numbers are estimates, or if the facts and numbers are disputed for particular massacres, that should be mentioned here too. --Alexxx1 13:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

The real evidence of Aboriginal massacres is the remains, especially in these days of advanced forensics. However, Australia's acid soils sooon dispose of human remains even if those remains were not burned first before burial which was one of the usual practices. I live in an area where there were several (maybe many) massacres of Aboriginal people. My family came here in the 1840s and the town still slings off about massacres though probably less then it used to. The reaction if anyone gets too close to one burial site is bizarre. If Keith Windshuttle came to this town and asked the usual places (Museum, Council, Library), where the evidence of Aboriginal massacres are - they would look at him blankly and innocently though they would know. Do townships willingly disclose secrets like this from their past especially to stangers not even from local areas? Keith Windshuttle would then go off and claim there were no massacres at this location as there is no proof of any. However, that does not negate the fact there were several massacres. Windshuttles unrealistic yardstick re proof of Aboriginal massacres isnt appropraite to the topic and its context. Those now collating this information are doing so carefully so it can't be denied again as to deny genocide is a very abyssmal thing for a nation to be doing. I was bought up to know all about the arsenic dampers left on fence posts etc and heaps worse. If an Aboriginal person then goes and borrows that damper to eat, well its his/her fault if they die - isnt it. They were not only massacred but the blame for it happening was turned around on the victim. We understand the same dynmaics these days re Family Violence where the perpetrator blames those he attacks.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.98 (talk • contribs) .

Aboriginal people share food. Food is regarded as being there for all to access, (unless cultural restrictions forbid some food types depending on moiety etc). Taking an apparently abandoned damper off a fencepost was not considered a crime in Aboriginal culture. This cultural difference about what was regarded stealing and what wasnt, was exploited by some colonials to lay baits.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.98 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Sections

Could this list be sectioned by State/territory? -- I@n ≡ talk 08:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Can bad language such as 'Abo' not be used here. That is so rude.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.128 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC+10 hours)

[edit] Name

Would this article be better named List of massacres of indigenous Australians? The current title is a bit ambigious and excludes massacres of TSI peoples (if there were any)--Peta 02:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

As there had been nobody asking not to move the article in several months I have moved it. Garrie 05:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alpha order & headings

Would anyone mind if I ordered this page in alphabetical order & headings? I think this would make it easier to read - and easier to find a particular article if you needed to? Cheers Danielle (If I don't hear anything, I'll just go ahead & do it I guess) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.237.169 (talk • contribs)

I think chronological order makes more sense, although I agree that it is not particularly clear at the moment. It could do with some reorganising, perhaps into a table? --bainer (talk) 04:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of 'indigenous' compared to 'Indigenous'

It is appropriate practice in anthropology/archaeology at all Australia's universities and amongst professional people engaged in cultural heritage practice in Oz, to use a capital when using the word 'Indigenous' as a mark of respect and good manners. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.186.56 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Alleged massacre at Coolac

An editor using a range of IP addresses generated by Telstra (203.54.*.*) insists in inserting details of an alleged massacre at Coolac, NSW. She has failed to cite sources for this massacre. Her account of the incident does not meet Wikipedia:Verifiability standards and thus it cannot remain on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not the place for original research and her insertions are in breach of all wikipedia standards. The issue was discussed extensively at Talk:Gundagai, New South Wales/Archive 1 with several editors assuming good faith and seeking sources, which they could not locate.--Golden Wattle talk 20:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel words

The word ‘massacre’ in the title is incorrect, tending towards being a weasel word. A ‘massacre’ refers specifically to “killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly”. All of the cases listed here are a reaction to specific transgressions, there is nothing ‘indiscriminate’ or particularly cruel(for the times) about the methods. I suggest the word ‘massacres’ be replaced with ‘violent reprisals’ (or something similar) for accuracy.


In some of the cases listed here, such as the Battle of Pinjarra, it is disputed that the event was a massacre. The use of the word "massacre" is biased, subjective and emotive and does not necessarily describe the incidents accurately. In the case of many of these events, they were conflicts involving Aboriginal Australians and Settled Australians which resulted in deaths of multiple numbers of Aboriginal Australians and in some cases Settled Australians as well (although they had a tactical advantage of firearms in most of these incidents). Perhaps the title should be something like "Conflicts and battles between Aboriginal Australians and Settled Australians" and perhpas with the extra addition of "resulting in multiple deaths" or similar. Perhaps there should also be a new article that describes conflicts between Aboriginal Australians themselves although much of this would be based on oral rather than written histories and much more dificult to describe. 86.134.86.93 11:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree to a large extent. Massacres/war crimes/atrocities have been a feature of many famous battles throughout history. The only real difference between those and this subject is the disparity between the forces in this case. The ABC (in its Frontier TV series several years ago), the Australian War Memorial, and many other prominent institutions generally characterise these events as "frontier conflict" rather than massacres. The latter tends to imply that indigenous people were passive "victims", rather than free peoples defeated by superior military technology. Frontier conflict is also how clashes in other countries between settlers and indigenous peoples are conceptualised. I think we need to bring our historiography up to date and rework and retitle this article to reflect its military history component and significance. Grant | Talk 03:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's the definition of "massacre"?

Er...I'm pretty sure that when two or three people die it *isn't* a massacre. A massacre is a mass killing surely?...

So what number then would you define a 'massacre'? And is that number objective? Or is a massacre not a massacre because it was committed on a group of indigenous inhabitants? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.200.232.245 (talk) 12:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kilcoy, Queensland

The Kilcoy, Queensland article notes a massacre not included here. Paul foord (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)