Historians

It is the job of any historian to present a series of facts and an interpretation of them as a comment or summary of past issues. [Compiling this collection of facts and my opinions is not my day-job, and I am no historian.]

When it comes to the topic of how Aboriginals have been treated by a succession of early Governments, perhaps the most widely read author is Henry Reynolds. He is nothing if not diligent in his pursuit of the unpleasant truth. Reynolds and other historians of the ‘it was shabby’ school are referred to by those who disbelieve them as “Black Armband” historians.

One of Reynold’s earlier books discusses the curriculum in Tasmania during his school years, and I think the title Why Weren’t We Told is a fairly good clue about its content and main argument. Having learnt even less than Reynolds about Aboriginals when I was at school – and having gone to school in Victoria – there is nothing in the book I am inclined to disagree with.

Another of his many books, Nowhere People, provides extensive coverage of the theories on race – and especially theories about half-castes – prevalent in the west in the 19^th and 20^th Centuries. Reynolds traces some of the history of ideas about race, right up to the corruption of Darwin's theories about survival of the fittest. He also explores the idea that half-castes were thought "worse" than full bloods because they have the worst characteristics of both races: cunning and intelligence. (I'll let you try and guess which trait came from which race.)