scholarly journals From Illustration to Evidence: Centring Historical Photographs in Native Land Claims

Kronos ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Aird
Keyword(s):  
Land Claims ◽  
Native Land ◽  
Historical Photographs

Native ‘land claims’, Russian style

2001 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 545-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
GAIL FONDAHL ◽  
OLGA LAZEBNIK ◽  
GREG POELZER ◽  
VASILY ROBBEK
Keyword(s):  
Land Claims ◽  
Native Land

Official reaction to native land claims in the plantation of Munster

1983 ◽  
Vol 23 (92) ◽  
pp. 297-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Sheehan
Keyword(s):  
Full Scale ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Native Population ◽  
Native Land ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

The historiography of the Munster plantation has not been extensive; in the ninety-five years since Robert Dunlop published the first proper study of the greatest of all the Tudor settlements in Ireland, only D. B. Quinn has treated the subject in any detail. In the absence therefore, of any full-scale study of the plantation, it is fair to say that it has usually been characterised as the process of driving the native Irish off their lands and settling them with English colonists. In this scenario, the administrations, both in England and Ireland, are seen as backing the settlers judicially and extra-judicially, and the natives come off distinctly the worst; as Quinn puts it, the native population greatly resented the ‘presence and domination of the planters who were felt to twist the law in favour of a minority’. Yet, a study of the extant evidence does not support this simple stereotyping; rather, both the privy council (to which many of the native land claims were directed) and the government commission of 1592 were quite willing to consider cases against the undertakers and their tenants and to rule in favour of the native claimant. For instance, Hugh Cuffe, who had originally been granted a seignory of 12,000 acres in Cork, lost most of it to appeals by Ellen Fitzedmund Gibbon and James MacShane to the privy council in 1591, and had to make do with a new grant of a mere 1,953 acres in the same area.

scholarly journals Native Land Rights and Northern Development

1974 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Peter A. Cumming
Keyword(s):  
Land Ownership ◽  
Main Stream ◽  
Canadian Society ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
James Bay ◽  
Suggested Approach ◽  
Native Land ◽  
Native Culture ◽  
Legislative Action ◽  
Rapid Changes

In this article, the author continues his discussion of the question of native rights previously dealt with in (1973) 11 Alta. L. Rev. 238. He first discusses court developments, in the field of native rights since May, 1972. He pays particular attention' to the Nishga Case, the James Bay Development Case, and the Caveat Case in the Northwest Territories. He points out the effect that these decisions on the question of native title will have on Canadian society and urges that legislative action be taken to solve the problem. In the second part of his paper, the author deals with what he considers to be the main issues to be considered in any native land claims settlement. With view to the rapid changes taking place in Northern Canada and their effect on native culture and society, he suggests the approach to be followed in land claims settlement. The settlement he stresses must both allow some native retention of land ownership while at the same time providing com pensation for lands taken and an opportunity for the natives to participate in the management of the "New North". He insists that compromise satis factory to both the interests of natives and non-natives is possible and sets forth proposal which, in his opinion, meets his criteria. Only through an approach resembling the suggested approach can the natives both preserve their culture and identity and at the same time integrate into the main stream of Canadian society.

Postcards and Frontier Mythologies: Sustaining Views of the Kimberley as Timeless

10.1068/d269t ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Waitt ◽  
Lesley Head
Keyword(s):  
Ritual Practice ◽  
Land Claims ◽  
Native Land ◽  
The Public ◽  
Popular Art ◽  
Pristine Environment ◽  
Primitive People ◽  
Cultural Artefact

In this paper we examine the role of postcards in disseminating and circulating Australian frontier myths. Cultural geographers have generally overlooked this mode of tourist communication. Yet, the postcard is an example par excellence of both a genre of popular art and an ephemeral cultural artefact. The ritual practice of selecting, writing, and sending a postcard is explored within the themes of souvenir, testimony, and anticipation. A report is provided of methods designed to reveal how individual tourists interpret these postcards as semiotic texts. Results suggest that postcards seem to perpetuate, almost unchallenged, experiences associated with Australian frontier mythologies. The Kimberley is experienced as a remnant of a former pristine environment and a place uninhabited or, at best, inhabited by ‘primitive’ people. This version of the Kimberley relies upon many of the categorical binaries between society and nature; human and animal; civilised and wild. The silences and priorities created by such textual imagery in the public geographical imaginary are argued to be far from trivial in a place subject to native land claims and proposed extensions to irrigation schemes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document