Could the Australian Aborigines have defeat. the British
- Thread starter Frances
- Start date
Short answer: no.
Long answer: absolutely not. They were too weak, divided, disorganised, technologically-backward and peaceful.
Long answer: absolutely not. They were too weak, divided, disorganised, technologically-backward and peaceful.
(Besides the fact that this belongs in before 1900) There is almost no way the Aboriginals could fight back against a might like Britain; too technologically backwards, too weak, too divided, too widespread and underpopulated, and had the same reaction to the western diseases that those in the Americas had; death. If there could be some for regional, warlike "state" appearing behind a strong native leader during the early days of British habitation on the continent, they could possibly storm Sydney, but even that would be extremely unlikely (given that the British would just try-and-try again). Really, the only way I could see some semblance of Aboriginal survival against the insurmountable odds like the ones they faced would be a more peaceful administration on the settlers part (similar to Arthur Phillips policy during his years as governor).
If you do this around 10,000 BC PoD, it is possible. However, the world wont look like the OTL world.
Could they have defeated the First Fleet? Most definitely, particularly if they chose to strike food supplies during the very early days of Port Jackson when food resources were at their most lean. Have the view amongst some influential indigenous leaders, like Bennelong, move from "exploit the new contact" to "fear the new contact" and take a view similar to Pemulwy. There would then be a clear motivation to attack and plunder.
Bennelong and Colby, the two most regular Indigenous visitors to early Sydney, were more interesting in convincing the Governor to ally with their peoples in an attack to annihilate the neighbouring Cammeraygal. If they have a greater understanding of potential future threat posed by the Briitsh and a non-cooperative Governor still refuses to assist them, these two decide payback has been earned, and the Governor's spearing ends up instead being the Governor's death.
If the Indigenous Australians don't deal with the settlement in the first couple of years, they are destined to be overrun.
Bennelong and Colby, the two most regular Indigenous visitors to early Sydney, were more interesting in convincing the Governor to ally with their peoples in an attack to annihilate the neighbouring Cammeraygal. If they have a greater understanding of potential future threat posed by the Briitsh and a non-cooperative Governor still refuses to assist them, these two decide payback has been earned, and the Governor's spearing ends up instead being the Governor's death.
If the Indigenous Australians don't deal with the settlement in the first couple of years, they are destined to be overrun.
The problem is that indigenous peoples lack the world view to realize that what they see isn't just another new tribal group but the tip of a huge spear.
Most tribes at first contact lack words for numbers over 100, many give up at ten or less. The concept of millions of people, more people than the stars in the sky, is beyond their imagining. Even when that isn't the case, as it was with the Maya and other Central American groups the force multiplicative effects of steel weapons, gunpowder and mounted troops aren't something that can be conceptualized.
Absolutely no way possible without going back a considerable amount of time. White Australia is invertible. Their population was too low to sustain any kind of revolt, their technology was in the Stone Age and they hadn't even got the bow and arrow yet. Unless their first contact was a state that would protect them, or just gave the aboriginals firearms and iron tools, and THAT would have worked in at least in 1600, so their military skills could develop. The aboriginals were incapable of advanced warfare and it is inevitable that they would be conquered by any colonial empire, not just the British (the Dutch, French and Portugese may of had a chance).
Das_Colonel
Banned
Peaceful? Then how do you explain the actions of resistance leaders like Jandamarra or Yagan?
I enjoy the fact you say its inevitable that Aborigines would be conquered by "any colonial empire" and proceed to only list European ones. This is AH, who is to say that an alt Majapahit couldn't do so? Really, Australia is some distance from Europe. There are a plethora of potential PODs for some other nations far closer to step in.
Not exactly what OP is asking for but we saw the fits the British were given by the Maoris in new zealand. So perhaps we have a situation where the Maori themselves landed in austrlia rather than new zealand and became the dominant ethnic group there? Which given their warrior culture was possible?
I think they would have put up quite a fight, especially assuming their pop. could grow larger than iotl new zeraland.
I think they would have put up quite a fight, especially assuming their pop. could grow larger than iotl new zeraland.
I believe that the biggest problem is that the area lacked a good temperate climate crop, a reason why the maori where less numerous on the southern island of New zealand.
Wouldn't south eastern australia be a good area for agricultural growth?
I think the fact that the Maori currently make up 15% of NZ's populaton vs the 1.5-4% that the indigenous populations make up in countries like the US, Canada and Australia is evidence for the differences in how they withstood the impact of colonization for a variety of reasons.
It depends on the kind of crops you have. The most used crops in the region (south east Asia and Oceania) were not suitable for agriculture in the temperate south east of Australia. At least that is my (admitted very limited) understanding of the situation.
Not peaceful against the invading force, but easily more humane and decent towards each other. They were simply acting in self-defence, in more or less the same way that Menelik II of Ethiopia was acting in self-defense against the invading Italians at Adwa, or that Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull and their fellow commanders were acting in self-defense against the invading Americans at Little Bighorn.
How would I (I know the question was addressed to someone else, but still...) explain Jandamarra and Yagan? Easy: They were defending their land against genocidal and racist invaders, and they weren't fighting amongst themselves on the level, but rather for their freedom to enjoy such basic human rights as being considered, well, human.
Wattleseeds, boabs and pencil yams come to mind. Here's a link that might be of interest.