Introduction

LEARNING INTENTIONS

To understand that when we study ancient Australia we are engaging in a different type of history called Deep History.

To appreciate the complexities of using the terms 'civilised' and 'civilisation' when it comes to the study of ancient societies.

NOTETAKING

Copy down the learning intentions.

As we go through the information on this webpage in class - take notes on the key points raised and answer the questions asked.

The Aboriginal people inhabiting ancient Australia were part of a rich eco-system and even richer culture, producing impressive artwork, complex religious and communal systems governing relations, in addition to technological innovations far beyond those of their pre-historic European and Asian cousins.

Why study Ancient Australia?

Read this extract from an article written by Darren Curnoe and then write a response to the question - why study ancient Australia?

Each year tourists flock to our nation from around the world to experience the richness of Indigenous culture and the remarkably ancient sites and landscapes the country has.

Yet, so many of us at home place too little value on the history and heritage of our nation, as well as the central place Indigenous Australians hold in the common evolutionary story of our species.

At the core of this choice is the value we place as a predominantly Anglocentric nation on the heritage and history of ‘others’. In this case, our fellow (Indigenous) Australians.

We continue to put more value on the places of pilgrimage of our Anglo and Western heritage – places like Stonehenge, the Roman Colosseum or the Greek Parthenon – than we do those of cultural and even evolutionary significance in our own backyard.

By doing so, we are the poorer for it as a nation, and miss the chance celebrate key milestones in the origin of humankind that played out right here, in Australia.

Quick Quiz - True or False?

Australian Aboriginal people undertook the first human sea crossing.
Aboriginal Australians have created some of the oldest rock art in the world.
Aboriginal Australians created the first known depiction of a human face.
The largest rock art gallery in the world is in Australia.
Aboriginal Australians were the first people to develop the technique of seed and pigment processing.
Aboriginal Australians were the first people to use edge-ground axes.
Apart from Africa (where humans came from), some of the oldest remains of anatomically modern human skeletons have come from Australia.
Australia has the earliest evidence of cremation in the world.

All True!!!!

65,000 years ago the first human sea crossing was made by Aboriginal people.
Rock art at Murujuga is dated to be 40,000 years old. It is the largest rock art gallery in the world and contains the first known depiction of a human face (35,000 years old).
The archaeological site of Madjebebe has evidence of seed and pigment processing and the use of edge-ground axes dating back 60,000 years.
Mungo Man and Mungo Lady represent some of the oldest anatomically modern human skeletons outside of Africa.
Mungo Lady is also evidence for the earliest evidence of cremation in the world - 40,000 - 42,000 years ago.

How to study Ancient Australia

Australian Aboriginal culture is tens of thousands of years older than many of the other ancient civilisations that are revered around the world, such as:

Mesopotamia (dating back as early as 3500 BCE)
Egypt (3100 BCE)
Greece (2700 BCE)
Maya (2600 BCE)
China (1600 BCE)

This means that when we study Ancient Australia we need to engage with DEEP HISTORY.

Deep history encompasses a history that is more inclusive of epochs of time, places, people and perspectives.

Epochs of time

The unique history of ancient Australia takes place throughout the Pleistocene and Holocene.

Anthropocene

The Anthropocene Epoch is an unofficial unit of geologic time, used to describe the most recent period in Earth’s history when human activity started to have a significant impact on the planet’s climate and ecosystems.

Deep History needs collaboration from many fields of study.

Various fields of study have specialised in learning about deep time. Archaeologists meticulously unearth ancient occupation sites, developing expertise in the analysis of various kinds of evidence. They frequently work in collaborative teams with geological, genomic, chemical, and other scientists to determine dates, theories of origin, migration patterns, diet and more.

Aboriginal and other indigenous people around the world also play a key role in understanding deep history.

A new kind of history

The great span of history beyond 4,000 years ago has rarely been included in historical accounts because it was thought to be the realm of evolutionary scientists and while life was definitely different than today - people (even very ancient people) share many of the same kinds of experiences.

People who lived 40,000 years ago still had bodies like ours, and this necessitated their lives being experienced along similar pathways of people today.

They enjoyed food, got hungry and thirsty, they made things, they shared knowledge, had sex, loved, gave birth to children, nurtured and taught them, enjoyed companionship, interacted with their environment, with animals and plants, and practised art, song, dance and storytelling. Their lives were lived through history; they invented things, they created knowledge and arts, and they made history too. And they were interested in how things came to be are they are.

Professor Ann McGrath, School of History, Australian National University

Stereotypes about race and civilisation

Another factor that led to the exclusion of Indigenous people from history was the naivety of European race assumptions. Aboriginal civilisations were underestimated, as if they awaited the coming of Europeans before they could 'make history' and approach modernity. Aboriginal culture was limited to being seen as a primitive, hunter-gatherer society and deemed to offer little worthwhile knowledge for historians wanting to understand ancient civilisations. Aboriginal culture has often been stereotyped as primitive and nomadic,with a lack complex laws and social organisation.

Primitive and unintelligent or civilised?

1. Cover page from Australian magazine PIX Vol.1, no.21 June 18, 1938.

2 - Newspaper heading in 1932. This article was published in South Australia’s The Advertiser and shows the common stereotype of the time that Aboriginal people were thought to be less intelligent.

Questions to ponder

Look at these two definitions below - what are key characteristics of a civilisation?

Civilization refers to the complex social, cultural, and technological developments of human societies that have led to advanced forms of organization and progress. It is often characterized by features such as cities, writing systems, government, economic systems, art, and science. Civilization can also refer to a particular society or group of societies that share common cultural and historical characteristics. In general, civilization represents a high level of cultural and social development, as well as the ability to create and maintain complex systems of organization and innovation.

Civilization (from the Latin civis=citizen and civitas=city) is a term applied to any society which has developed a writing system, government, production of surplus food, division of labor, and urbanization. The term is difficult to define because not all 'civilizations' include every one of the above facets. The term is often used, therefore, to suggest a highly developed culture.

Why do we use writing, housing stability and economic trading in food as key markers of a civilised society?

Can a hunter and gatherer society with no writing be civilised?

The concept of "civilization" is often subjective and varies depending on cultural and historical contexts. However, ancient hunter-gatherer societies are generally considered to be the earliest form of human society, and while they may not fit the modern definition of civilization, they have complex social structures and technologies that enabled them to thrive in their environments.

Hunter-gatherer societies are often characterized by their mobility, egalitarian social structure, and reliance on natural resources for survival. They have sophisticated knowledge of their environment, including animal and plant behavior and weather patterns, and they have developed complex systems of knowledge transmission through oral traditions.

While they may not have the same level of technological development or urbanization as modern civilizations, hunter-gatherer societies demonstrate an intricate understanding of their environment, sophisticated social structures, and complex systems of knowledge transmission. Therefore, whether they are considered "civilized" or not may depend on the criteria and definitions used to assess civilizations.

It is important to note that the terms "civilised" and "civilisation" can be problematic when used to compare ancient societies.

Firstly, these terms are often used to imply that some societies are superior to others, based on their level of technological advancement, cultural norms, or social organization. This can lead to a biased view of history that ignores the complex and diverse nature of ancient societies.

Secondly, the criteria used to define "civilisation" can be subjective and reflect the biases of the person making the comparison. For example, some might consider a society "civilised" if it has a written language, while others might focus on the development of agriculture or the presence of complex religious beliefs.

Finally, the terms "civilised" and "civilisation" can also imply a linear progression of human history, with some societies advancing from primitive to advanced stages over time. This view ignores the fact that different societies can develop in unique ways, and that the concept of progress is not always applicable to all societies.

In summary, while the terms "civilised" and "civilisation" can be used to compare ancient societies, it is important to be aware of their potential biases and limitations. It is better to use more neutral and descriptive language when comparing different societies, focusing on specific aspects of their culture, technology, and social organization.

What are the issues raised in the source above when we use the concepts of 'civilised' and 'civilisation' when comparing ancient societies?

Using a geological dating system

According to this source - why should non-indigenous archaeologists use the geological dating system to describe Australian archaeological sites and artefacts?

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse