What if the Australian Aboriginals fought off the First Fleet?

In 1788, the British Empire formally planted their flag in Botany Bay as the First Fleet, consisting of settlers and convicts, landed on the Australian continent in order to turn the far-flung desert-sprawling continent into a penal colony.

But what if the Australian Aboriginals were able to fight against the First Fleet and do some critical damage, if not destroy their attempts to settle in their lands?

For this particular scenario, I will make mention of the fact that smaller populations have a reputation of fighting back successfully against invading forces, such as the rebels in the Haitian Revolution or the North Vietnamese against the Americans during the Vietnam War.
 
Quite likely the British would try again if they can assemble a force before Napoleon starts annoying Europe. This would obviously lead to a much more brutal colonisation process.

- BNC
 
In 1788, the British Empire formally planted their flag in Botany Bay as the First Fleet, consisting of settlers and convicts, landed on the Australian continent in order to turn the far-flung desert-sprawling continent into a penal colony.

But what if the Australian Aboriginals were able to fight against the First Fleet and do some critical damage, if not destroy their attempts to settle in their lands?

Then they would be very different from the OTL natives of Australia. Those were stone-age primitives, with no organization above small tribal groups, no weapons beyond clubs, spears, and boomerangs, and a sparse population.
For this particular scenario, I will make mention of the fact that smaller populations have a reputation of fighting back successfully against invading forces, such as the rebels in the Haitian Revolution or the North Vietnamese against the Americans during the Vietnam War.

Neither of which are even remotely relevant. That's leaving aside the facts that the U.S. did not invade North Vietnam, and defeated all North Vietnamese attempts to invade South Vietnam, until the U.S. public was persuaded to abandon the war.
 
Last edited:
Then they would be very different from the OTL natives of Australia. Those were stone-age primitives, with no organization above small tribal groups, no weapons beyond clubs, spears, and boomerangs, and a sparse population.
Don't call people primitive and aboriginal society varied by place and land capacity.
 
Australia being a pretty large place, I imagine the colonists would have simply moved elsewhere if they found the natives overly hostile in that location.
 
OK, how about "technologically challenged?"
Or you can just say what they are specifically like "lithic culture"

Every group doesn't have the chance of having Neolithic middle eastern people give them everything from genetics, language, live stock, boating tradition, writing, and religion like Europeans.
 
Or you can just say what they are specifically like "lithic culture"

Every group doesn't have the chance of having Neolithic middle eastern people give them everything from genetics, language, live stock, boating tradition, writing, and religion like Europeans.

Copy, fake, overtake! The rest of the world would be better off if they followed our lead.
 
If the Eora attacked the first fleet the Royal Marine guards would defeat them in battle. Pemulwy fought a guerrilla campaign a bit later on but the British colonists kept coming so the Eora were screwed.
 
Don't call people primitive and aboriginal society varied by place and land capacity.

Almeida, Magellan, some Zulu battles...

Stone age people have a tendency to be quite effective against disorganized, disrientated, and sick opponents. It's not really an ASB scenario
 
The Pueblo Rebellion of 1680 was the only successful revolt against Europeans in North America. It might be a good TL. A bad relief of Pope, the leader of the revolt is one of the two that New Mexico has in the US Capitol. The other is Dennis Chavez, the only Hispanic-American in the assemblage
 
Almeida, Magellan, some Zulu battles...

Stone age people have a tendency to be quite effective against disorganized, disrientated, and sick opponents. It's not really an ASB scenario
I don't know what's worse, your blatant trolling or your inability to recognize iron forging Zulu were not in fact stone age.
 
I don't know what's worse, your blatant trolling or your inability to recognize iron forging Zulu were not in fact stone age.
Was not trolling, should not have used the term stone age babout Zulus, my bad!

My point is that, even if the soldiers are well trained and have superior weapons, it does not mean they are invincible. No reason the aboriginals couldn't defeat the settlers
 
even if the soldiers are well trained and have superior weapons, it does not mean they are invincible. No reason the aboriginals couldn't defeat the settlers

But that's not the case in Sydney in 1788, the First Fleet had 245 Marines and the HMS Supply with 4 x 3-pdrs, 4 x 12-pdr and HMS Sirius with 4 × 6pdrs, 6 × 18pdr, not to mention another 1100 people in the colony. I think that if the Eora were interested enough to get upset they would struggle to defeat this armed force and then wipe out a population that most likely exceeded theirs.
 
In 1788, the British Empire formally planted their flag in Botany Bay as the First Fleet, consisting of settlers and convicts, landed on the Australian continent in order to turn the far-flung desert-sprawling continent into a penal colony.

But what if the Australian Aboriginals were able to fight against the First Fleet and do some critical damage, if not destroy their attempts to settle in their lands?

For this particular scenario, I will make mention of the fact that smaller populations have a reputation of fighting back successfully against invading forces, such as the rebels in the Haitian Revolution or the North Vietnamese against the Americans during the Vietnam War.
Let's assume that the local Indigenous Australians, the Eora IIRC, are somehow in a position to do so. Presuming that the British do not abandon their plans to colonise Australia, they'll simply do what they did every time the Indigenous Australians tried to push them back and pick a new spot to put down sticks and then shoot them until they stop being a problem. The problem is that the British are unlikely to be dissuaded by a relatively minor setback such as this and that the Indigenous Australians aren't in a position to resist a determined opponent, they lack the cohesion and the technology to successfully resist something like the British Empire at this point in time.
 
But that's not the case in Sydney in 1788, the First Fleet had 245 Marines and the HMS Supply with 4 x 3-pdrs, 4 x 12-pdr and HMS Sirius with 4 × 6pdrs, 6 × 18pdr, not to mention another 1100 people in the colony. I think that if the Eora were interested enough to get upset they would struggle to defeat this armed force and then wipe out a population that most likely exceeded theirs.

I could be very wrong on this but, due to the nature of their society, wouldn't the aborigines struggle to concentrate anything close to parity with these numbers?
 
they lack the cohesion

This is the major difference between the Aussies and Maori, 500 languages and tribes compared to the Maori 12 tribes with the same language and culture.

I could be very wrong on this but, due to the nature of their society, wouldn't the aborigines struggle to concentrate anything close to parity with these numbers?

Yes, they were a very marginal society, when the convicts stole their fish gigs it was a massive deal because they were so hard to make and crucial to survival.
 
It would take something to make the Aborigines of Botany Bay more initially aggressive against the invaders. While they seem to have threatened Cook's men with spears, once Cook's expedition landed they basically ignored the British. A less competent commander (or a grumpier Cook) could have led to British sailors massacring the indigenous people of Botany Bay, and make them decide to act more aggressively against future invaders. Alternatively, a fight with a neighboring tribe or perhaps a raid by Maori (discussed in a recent thread) could put the people of Botany Bay on edge and have them attack the First Fleet.

I don't know if one massacre would be enough to end the plan to sail convicts to Australia, but I think there would be a delay in follow up attempts. In this time, any number of politicians, conmen, and fantasists could propose an alternative location for the convicts-maybe settle them in Patagonia or some such place (this is outside my area of expertise, so any Australian or Georgian England experts feel free to correct me).

Having Cook's expedition die when they sail north and crash into the Great Barrier Reef will delay colonization of Australia, as well as the Pacific in general, though it's not quite what you were asking for OP.
 
Top