Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Are the Australians Dutch?

  1. #1 Are the Australians Dutch? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    652
    Well, obviously the bulk of their European heritage is from Great Britain and Ireland- but Europeans from the mainland may have preceded the arrival of the First Fleet.

    First Europeans in Australia | History Today


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,627
    No, per your linked article
    Of course there is a difference between an accidental discovery and actually settling the continent. The tiny Dutch nation can boast of a host of great seamen who made major contributions to charting the Southern Land in the wake of theDuyfken's voyage, men like Willem de Vlamingh and Abel Tasman. The continent still carries their names, or the names of their ships, in places such as Tasmania, Arnhem Land, or Dirk Hartog Island (named after the man who surveyed the western Australian coastline in 1616). But the Dutch failed to settle the inhospitable, dry continent and the real history of Europeans in Australia began with Captain Cook arriving in Botany Bay and the founding of the first British settlement there in 1788. At least, that is what we used to believe.


    Thus while the Dutch are the correct group for the European discovery of the continent, the british are correct European settlers, and Polynesians (adilady correct me if I have this last part wrong) are the correct original colonizers.


    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    652
    Agreed. I toyed with the idea of putting this in Health and Medicine category due to the use of the genetic disorder to trace ancestry.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Thus while the Dutch are the correct group for the European discovery of the continent, the british are correct European settlers, and Polynesians (adilady correct me if I have this last part wrong) are the correct original colonizers.
    So this would make the Poles the correct plumbers?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New York State
    Posts
    857
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    No, per your linked article
    Of course there is a difference between an accidental discovery and actually settling the continent. The tiny Dutch nation can boast of a host of great seamen who made major contributions to charting the Southern Land in the wake of theDuyfken's voyage, men like Willem de Vlamingh and Abel Tasman. The continent still carries their names, or the names of their ships, in places such as Tasmania, Arnhem Land, or Dirk Hartog Island (named after the man who surveyed the western Australian coastline in 1616). But the Dutch failed to settle the inhospitable, dry continent and the real history of Europeans in Australia began with Captain Cook arriving in Botany Bay and the founding of the first British settlement there in 1788. At least, that is what we used to believe.


    Thus while the Dutch are the correct group for the European discovery of the continent, the british are correct European settlers, and Polynesians (adilady correct me if I have this last part wrong) are the correct original colonizers.
    The indigenous people of Australia are not Polynesians (in contrast to New Zealand). They were there many thousands of years before Polynesians came into being.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,627
    I stand corrected, and at 45000-50000 of continuous inhabitation of the continent, they are the original Australians.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    Too right, paleoichneum.

    Polynesians are very much Johnny-come-latelys compared to indigenous Australians.

    Though if you're looking for a Dutch connection, I recall reading long ago somewhere that any Dutch lineage would long ago have been incorporated into the indigenous groups of the far north west. Because a couple of Dutch ships were lost there and any surviving crew would have nowhere to go except into the communities already there.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •