Aboriginal Australian Homes
The Australian native is commonly represented as possessing no permanent habitation, hardly anything, in fact, which can be called a hut. This is not even true of Victoria, still less…
Location: Australia
Note: This article has been excerpted from a larger work in the public domain and shared here due to its historical value. It may contain outdated ideas and language that do not reflect TOTA’s opinions and beliefs.
From Natives of Australia by Northcote W. Thomas.
The Australian native is commonly represented as possessing no permanent habitation, hardly anything, in fact, which can be called a hut. This is not even true of Victoria, still less of the natives of more northerly districts, who found themselves in need of protection against the rain more than the natives in the south needed shelter from the cold of winter.
The prevailing type in the south is or was the bark hut, or rather breakwind, formed by sheets of bark arched over, or by boughs or both. This afforded little shelter, but the open side was turned round so that it was away from the wind, thus sheltering the fire, which stood on the same side, and allowing the wind to drive the smoke away. In Queensland they are of leaves (PI. xiil.).
In West Australia the huts were constructed in less than half an hour by a couple of women. They are usually of grass-tree (Xanthorrhcea arborea), but paper-bark (Melaleuca) was also used. On arriving on the camping-ground, the women set to work to collect bundles of dead flowering stems, six or seven feet long, from the grass-trees in the neighbourhood. Then making holes in the ground with their yam-sticks, they planted the stems in them to a depth of some eight inches; the holes were larger at the bottom than at the top, and ten inches apart, in the form of a horse-shoe, the heel being the doorway.
The stems were made to converge, and on them were placed withered, curled grass-tree rushes, which were held in position by the hard-pointed seed-vessels of the stems. The framework was now ready, and the women proceeded to gather bundles of green, straight grass-tree rushes; holding them under the left arm they threw them with the right hand at an angle of 45°, so that when the sharp points stuck among the covering of dead rushes, the weight of the green stems caused them to bend down and remain in their places.
The thatching was begun at the ground and continued up to the top, where a second layer was put on, to render the roof water-tight. When the heat of the sun had been on it for a few hours, the roof settled down and became smooth; a third coating of rushes was then put on, and the roof was good for many months, only the top requiring to be renewed. Although the huts were so substantially built, the natives never returned to them, after once going away.
On the Hutt River Grey found more substantial dwellings still, evidently intended for permanent habitation, for in the neighbourhood were large yam grounds; this was one of the few areas in which anything like real cultivation of the ground was found among the aborigines. The huts were larger and plastered over with clay and sods.
In the direction of Hanover Bay Grey found an even better type; it was built of logs of wood, in shape like a beehive, about four feet high and nine feet in diameter. Probably the huts found by Peron at Shark’s Bay were of this type; they were sixteen feet long and carpeted with seaweed; in the walls were recesses for storing implements; the entrances were about three feet high.
Somewhat similar huts were in use in Victoria. Eyre found a village of thirteen huts near Mount Napier; they were cupola-shaped, made of a strong wood frame covered with thick turf, the grassy sides inwards; some were semicircular, some had two entrances; one was ten feet by fifteen, and so strong that a man could ride over it.
At Port Fairy similar erections were found, some large enough for twelve people, and higher than most of the native huts; they were six feet high, and had a door of bark. In the roof was an aperture nine inches in diameter for the smoke to escape, which in wet weather was covered with a sod. Were it not that this information was received from an early settler, it would be probable that the natives had profited by European example; as it is, the type is not so far removed from those already described that a foreign origin must necessarily be ascribed to these Port Fairy huts.
The highest type of all, the native character being, however, uncertain, was found by King at Careening Bay. It was situated on a hill, and formed of two walls of stone, three feet high, with saplings across at each end, thatched with bark and grass; but we cannot be certain that it was not built by Europeans or Malays. Other authors, however, describe circular stone erections in North-West Australia.
Of a different type from the Port Fairy huts, but equally permanent, were those seen by Eyre at White Lake in latitude 36° 40'. These were circular, made of straight rods meeting at a central, upright pole; the outside was first covered with bark and grass, then coated with clay. The fire was in the centre, and the smoke hole was made in the roof. On the Gwydir Mitchell saw another type of a slighter construction, but remarkable for having a conical roof with a portico on one side supported on two sticks.
Collins describes a hut at Shoal Bay made of vine tendrils crossing each other, lashed with wiry grass. The walls were of Melaleuca bark, and the hut was weather proof; it was eight feet in diameter, and four and a half feet high; the entrance was by a small avenue with a turn in it, and fires were lighted inside. One was large enough for fifteen persons.
Image from text.
These large huts were, of course, intended for more than one family, or were for the accommodation of the unmarried youths and men. Eyre says that on the Lower Murray there were huts for eight or ten families, and a bachelors’ hut for eight or ten persons.
At Moreton Bay another type was found, formed of three sticks meeting at the top, which were covered with Melaleuca bark. It was only large enough for one family, and they slept in a semicircular position on bark, covering themselves with skins. Somewhat similar are the Boulia district huts described by Roth.
Bent saplings are fixed in the earth, and the tops interlocked at a height of four feet or more; against these lean secondary sticks, and the interstices are filled with light bushes and grass; over this comes another layer of bushes; they are circular and sometimes have two entrances. From the Lynd River is described a two-storied hut (cf. PI. XIV.). Four large poles were rammed into the ground, and on them were placed cross poles; on the top of the poles was a layer of bark, and over this again was an arched layer of stringy bark. The upper part was intended for use in the rainy season.
At Cape York Jukes found an inferior type, formed of bark arched over a frame of sticks, fifteen feet long, four feet wide, and three feet high in the middle. Shorter constructions of the same sort were in use at Port Essington.
The Bathurst Island huts were gigantic compared with those of the south of Australia. Stout poles, fourteen to sixteen feet high, were brought together at the top; over them came a stout thatching of dried grass. Near the Roper River the huts are said to have small openings as windows.
The camps were arranged on well-understood principles. In Victoria, when several tribes met, the huts were grouped according to the tribe of the builders, each hut five or six yards from its neighbour, and the groups twenty yards apart. The Bangerang built their huts twenty feet apart; and at Snodgrass Lagoon Mitchell found the village disposed round one large hut—perhaps the chief’s—in the shape of a semi-circle. The Central Australian tribes camp phratry-wise; the southern men also camp to the south, and the northern to the north. The arrangement of the
camp according to phratries and classes is important, because ceremonial rules regulate the access of the various classes to each other, and these could not be carried out if the huts were disposed irregularly.
In South-East Australia the positions of the huts were determined by regular rules, which varied in different tribes. In the Wurunjerri a man camped with his wife and child on the east; just north of him was his brother; some distance to the west his father and mother; twice as far away in the same direction were his wife’s father and mother; and forming a triangle with the two latter was the young men’s camp; visitors camped south-west of the first family, equidistant from them and the third pair.
Among the Kurnai, however, a man and his wife were on the west; five paces north-north-east from them was his married son; ten paces south-east, close together, his wife’s married brother, and his father’s sister, if she were married; twice as far away north-east were his father and mother and his married brother, only a short distance apart; nearly a hundred yards away were the wife’s father and mother, and her married brother.
In some parts all the huts faced in the same direction away from the wind; on the Herbert River they were arranged so that each commanded a view of an entrance to the camp.
It has already been mentioned that there was a bachelors’ camp. Some tribes had also a spinsters’ camp; the old women undertook the duty of supervision.
Curious customs of greeting prevail in most parts of Australia. We have already seen that boughs are waved as a sign of peaceable intentions; the reception of messengers has also been described.
When an ordinary man reached home in West Australia he proceeded straight to the hut of some relative or intimate friend, bestowing not even a glance on others which he passed. When he got there he sat down at the fire; his wives, if any accompanied him, crouching behind, keeping their eyes fixed on the ground. In about ten minutes the nearest blood relation of any one who had died during the wanderer’s absence advanced and seated himself cross-legged on his thighs, pressing his breast to that of the newcomer. After a few minutes he retires, having kept perfect silence the whole time; then the nearest female relative approached and threw herself on her knees before him; she embraced his knees with her left arm, and with her right hand scratched her cheek till blood came; this she repeated with his wife, and they both cried and wailed. This done, the returned wanderer was at liberty to speak, and one of the men in camp related to him the events which had happened since he left.
In other cases there was less formality; but strangers were required to sit down outside until they were requested to come nearer. Probably many Europeans met their death in the early days from neglecting to observe native rules of politeness.
Thomas, Northcote W. Natives of Australia. Archibald Constable and Company, 1906.
About TOTA
TOTA.world provides cultural information and sharing across the world to help you explore your Family’s Cultural History and create deep connections with the lives and cultures of your ancestors.
