Frontier or History Wars:

Early settlement of Australia was for generations historically interpreted as a triumph of the British colonizers who came to an unknown land and ultimately created the nation of Australia.  The traditional Australian interpretation of its early pastoral history saw many tribute and recognize the early squatters and farmers who gradually harnessed the harsh Australian bush through illegal squatting and use of government land grants.  This view of Australia’s past casually ignored the Australian Aboriginals who had established themselves thousands of years prior to white settlement across the entire Australian continent.  This Australian narrative was popularized in Australian culture by poets and writers such as Henry Lawson and Banjo Paterson.   The Bulletin, a popular magazine in Australian society by the turn of the nineteenth century, carved out what became the Bushman Legend and cemented the story in Australian society for generations.  As with the more conservative pioneer legend, the bushman legend ignored the Aboriginals who were as much a part of the Australian frontier as the early settlers.

This painting by S.T. Gill, entitled 'Bushman's Hut' from 1864 shows a typical scene from early Australian colonial life.  This image demonstrates the view of the bushman legend or pioneer legend and another of white superiority.  (Source: State Library of Victoria)

Not only did the bushman and pioneer legends overlook the Aboriginals but they failed to acknowledge the violence which existed across much of the Australian frontier.  This hostility was a conflict fought between Aboriginals and white settlers.  Historian Reynolds argues the violence accounted for over 2,000 white deaths and approximately 20,000 Aboriginal deaths.  The battles were well known to the people at the time, with newspapers such as the Sydney Morning Herald reporting skirmishes on the outskirts of Sydney.  Likewise, conflict was depicted in artworks by prominent colonial painters such as S.T. Gill.  Such was the threat posed to early settlers, historian Broom notes that some huts were built with slits in the walls so riffles could be fired from them in the event of an ambush.  However, despite this early recognition much of the violence was ignored by early Australian historians.

The reason for this neglect was primarily because it tarnished the achievements of the colonial settlers.  Early themes of mateship and determination which permeated throughout the works of Lawson and Patterson, and was a hallmark of the Bulletin would have been overshadowed by atrocities which occurred on the frontier. 

It was this national identity of Australia and its people that was challenged in Reynolds’ book ‘the other side of the frontier’.   Reynolds’ made it clear in his work that many in Australian culture wished to forget the wrongs of the past and were ashamed of the actions of colonial Australians.  A notable example was former Prime Minister John Howard who wished history was taught the way it used to be, with the achievements, rather than wrongs celebrated.  He went further and described how Australia today was filled with black armband history as revisionist histories such as those by Henry Reynolds, condemned early achievements of pioneers.  This interpretation of the past, by historians such as Reynolds challenged what many had been taught for generations in school and at university.   It was this backlash by some groups in Australian society that was feared by many earlier historians and was hence part of the reason for a previous lack of acknowledgment of these events.

Debate today still exists over the nature of the conflict on the frontier.  Assessing the level of violence remains a constant element of historical dispute.  Some historians such as Windschuttle, argue the figures presented by Reynolds cannot be considered accurate as there are no historical records of the number of Aboriginals killed.  Similarly, it is often disputed as to who should be held responsible for the killings and the historical injustice that took place.  In many cases, violence was not authorized by colonial governments but was the response of settlers to Aboriginal vandalism of property which included the killing of sheep and other livestock.  Likewise, a case could be argued that atrocities were committed on both sides of the frontier with instances of Aboriginals ambushing, and killing white settlers.  Ultimately, it can be concluded that injustices were committed by both Europeans and Aboriginals.  Historical debates on this issue, have led to some, such as Reynolds, to conclude the conflict be added to the Australian War Memorial.  

This photograph taken in 1900 shows a Victorian battallion prior to departure for the Boer War.  It is only official wars fought under the banner of Australia which can be included in the Australian War Memorial. (Source: State Library of Victoria)