{"title":"Economics and the dreamtime revisited: Creating a truly Australian economic history?","authors":"Boyd Hunter","doi":"10.1111/aehr.12279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>The Economics and the Dreamtime</i> was a landmark in Australian Economic History where Noel Butlin elevated awareness of the central importance of Indigenous economic history. It was a sprawling inter-disciplinary work that used economic tools to understand Indigenous society before first contact and in the early colonial period. This article revisits that book to provide a critical evaluation of the major contributions of Butlin's research on Indigenous Australians. His primary contribution was to make Indigenous people more visible in the Australian economy in the early colonial period. He created a unique backcasting methodology that allowed Indigenous population to be estimated in the first six decades of the colony based on depopulation from disease, resource loss and frontier violence. I argue that the two main shortcomings of Butlin's research is that his method used colonial estimates of the population and that the population estimates are not sufficiently geographically differentiated. The main criticism of Butlin's research in the literature is that it is too speculative. However, his methodological innovation allows considerable transparency in the assumptions used and can create a range of plausible estimates that give us a sense of the unreliability of the existing population estimates. Alternative methodologies based on estimating population densities in 1788 from anthropological evidence are historically point estimates, which do not provide a sense of how uncertain the estimates might be. The way forward for this debate is to combine Butlin's demographic backcast methodology with population density estimates that take into account the selective mortality from disease and frontier violence. Finally, in order to create a truly Australian Economic History, it is necessary to also augment the methodology to incorporate Indigenous perspectives into the analysis and to utilise a local geography that acknowledges the diversity of Indigenous Australia.</p>","PeriodicalId":100132,"journal":{"name":"Asia‐Pacific Economic History Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aehr.12279","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia‐Pacific Economic History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aehr.12279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The Economics and the Dreamtime was a landmark in Australian Economic History where Noel Butlin elevated awareness of the central importance of Indigenous economic history. It was a sprawling inter-disciplinary work that used economic tools to understand Indigenous society before first contact and in the early colonial period. This article revisits that book to provide a critical evaluation of the major contributions of Butlin's research on Indigenous Australians. His primary contribution was to make Indigenous people more visible in the Australian economy in the early colonial period. He created a unique backcasting methodology that allowed Indigenous population to be estimated in the first six decades of the colony based on depopulation from disease, resource loss and frontier violence. I argue that the two main shortcomings of Butlin's research is that his method used colonial estimates of the population and that the population estimates are not sufficiently geographically differentiated. The main criticism of Butlin's research in the literature is that it is too speculative. However, his methodological innovation allows considerable transparency in the assumptions used and can create a range of plausible estimates that give us a sense of the unreliability of the existing population estimates. Alternative methodologies based on estimating population densities in 1788 from anthropological evidence are historically point estimates, which do not provide a sense of how uncertain the estimates might be. The way forward for this debate is to combine Butlin's demographic backcast methodology with population density estimates that take into account the selective mortality from disease and frontier violence. Finally, in order to create a truly Australian Economic History, it is necessary to also augment the methodology to incorporate Indigenous perspectives into the analysis and to utilise a local geography that acknowledges the diversity of Indigenous Australia.