In
1788 the indigenous people got the shock of their lives. This shock lasts, and
is still present today, and this tension originates because a native conception of the land and an English
conception cannot co-exist. Property rights for Aborigines are based on
spiritual links to the land, and ancestry. The white conception of land has
been based on economics. In our anglo-centric culture, we have a clear
delineation between religion and law. In aboriginal culture this dichotomy does
not exist. Their right stems from religion and tribal law, which are
inseparable. It is a spiritual link.
That’s
not to say that the relationship between aboriginal and the land is esoteric.
However it was more flexible. Claims to land were based on complicated patterns
of kinship, and the land never belonged to one person, but to the whole tribe.
The basic structure was patri-lineal, that is to say inheritance came from
father to son, but a lesser form of inheritance came from the mothers side, and
also from other relatives. This resulted in a complex pattern of relationships
with land, few of which were exclusive, and most of which were custodial.
When
I talk about exclusive ownership I don’t mean that exclusive ownership in the
traditional sense, but that if another person wanted to perform a ceremony at a
sacred site on someone else’s land they had to ask permission, and include the
tribal owners in the ceremony.
Aborigines
when walking through their land would recall the natural landscape from songs.
For example they might have believed, in more than a symbolic way, that a crest
or mountain was part of the shoulderblade of one of their ancestors. It took on
particular significance, and fitted into the songs and myths of the tribe. The
land was a living reminder of their link to their forefathers, and their
creators. As such they didn’t view the land from up above, but from below,
through the soil,