Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

In this paper, I explore how cognatic descent is being used by anthropologists in native title connection research and examine the social and political consequences on the lives of claimants. Some of the most confronting and contentious schisms among native title claimant groups are in community meetings, in which ‘who’s in and who’s out?’ is being determined by anthropologists.

Paper long abstract:

It has been popular in recent decades to criticize anthropologists’ preoccupation with Aboriginal pasts however, while there has been much change, there are some people whose lives remain informed by long lasting traditions which anthropologists are no longer trained to understand. In the context of native title, simplistic models of kinship are illustrative of the ‘throwing out of the baby with the bath water’. It is well recognized that the legal system which underpins native title poses problems in relation to the onus of proof of ‘belonging to country’ being placed on Aboriginal people. Rather than the recognition of Aboriginal law and its intricacies, native title claims are often shaped by the necessity to adapt to legally palatable models. Native title anthropology has adopted the term ‘cognatic descent’, as a common tool whereby connection to country is established. This strategy has collapsed a sophisticated and multi layered system of relatedness into a form of descent that is not reflected in ethnographic accounts of Australia. In this paper, I explore how cognatic descent is being used by anthropologists in native title connection research and examine the social and political consequences of this collapsing on the lives of claimants who understand their kin and country relation in country terms. Some of the most confronting and contentious schisms among native title claimant groups are in community meetings, in which ‘who’s in and who’s out?’ is being determined by anthropologists wielding family trees.