Strategy and Tactics In Australian Wars

COMBATANTS

COMPOSITION AND SIZE

Settler combatants

Many frontier war incidents involved no more than 2-12 armed pastoralists/ prospectors/ timber-getters/ fishers/ bullockies/ explorers engaging in a ‘skirmish’ with a group of warriors. It was almost always settler parties of this small size, accompanied with horses and (sometimes) stock who conducted the first forays into ‘unsettled’ lands. These were civilians, although explorers often included personnel of military/ naval rank.

Native Mounted Police corps comprised an officer or two, overseeing a body of 8-10 Indigenous troopers. These were highly mobile units. Many officers had formerly held military posts.

Armed forces were also involved in the Australian Wars. Detachments and squads from military regiments – mostly foot soldiers - participated. These could include persons of various ranks but usually numbered 12-30 per unit.

In some engagements, a number of NMP corps or military units were combined or simultaneously employed across a given region, meaning that in a few cases there might be scores or even hundreds of soldiers or police involved, albeit usually widely dispersed.

Another very common mode of activity was punitive expeditions. These tended to involve larger numbers: 30-70 armed men. In some rare cases a hundred and more men were deployed for a single skirmish. Punitive expeditions were typically mixed: a few ranked police, army officers or persons with previous military/ naval experience leading numerous armed civilians.

First Nations combatants

Squads conducting ‘payback’ (vengeance) expeditions and defensive reconnaissance were the usual units employed in resistance activities. They were generally small (3, 7 or a dozen warriors) but there were cases of scores of warriors being involved. The squads were composed of ritually prepared warriors led by a chief avenger or henchman, who was usually related to the person being avenged. They usually had forward scouts.

For larger confrontations, kin-related allies would be mustered. This could swell numbers being fielded to 200-300 warriors or in some cases, even 700-1,000 warriors.

Such numbers were often recorded during skirmishes with settlers. First Nations groups relied strongly on bluff. They were aware that they held a numeric advantage, so they often rallied in large numbers to any engagement, to intimidate and frighten away settlers.

ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

Settler forces

From 1789 until about 1849, detachments from military regiments and their officers were sporadically employed in campaigns against First Nations peoples. This was subsidiary to their main duty of guarding convicts.

Beginning in the late 1830s, small, mobile paramilitary units (corps) such as the Border Police and Native Mounted Police were developed. By the 1850s-1890s, most skirmishing with Indigenous groups was conducted by these bodies.

The other major force were squads of armed civilians. These vigilantes were usually landholders and squatter-pastoralists living along the edge of areas newly ‘settled’ districts, but included staff such as overseers, stockmen and shepherds.

Between the 1890s and 1900s, Native Mounted Police forces were disbanded. Thereafter (into the 1940s), warfare became part of general policing, sometimes backed up with vigilante settler-squads. However, in many cases, persons chosen to police the frontiers at this time had a military background.

First Nations forces

Pinya – payback squads – acted under the instruction of the council of elders, especially the ceremony bosses and medicine men/ women. They were a democratic unit, except that they took their inspiration from the main avenger or henchman who directed them. Some pinya were very wide-ranging. These were directly under the authority of a medicine-man, who sometimes participated in the attacks. Such squads moved between tribal groups to enforce tribal Law, relying on totemic affiliation to ensure safe passage.

Organising larger confrontations similarly relied on the sanction of major ceremony bosses/ medicine men/women across a region, although they were conducted through a key headman/ headwoman ‘umpire’. Under the neutral ‘umpire’ were ‘section heads’ – the uncles or elder brothers of small units of warriors representing various clans. Additionally, there were various specialists: champion or ‘boss’ spearmen, trap-setters, messengers etc who were employed at various phases of a campaign.

Many tribes formed larger alliances for mutual protection and joint activities. If large numbers were required for a fight with settlers, ceremony bosses and ‘umpire-heads’ would send out messengers to call in these allies to assist.

WEAPONRY AND DEFENCES

Settler weapons/ defences

Settlers employed muskets and cutlasses until the 1850s-1860s, when repeating rifles such as Sniders came into use. Repeating rifles greatly improved the capacity of settlers to kill many people.

Civilians were heavily armed with several rifles and pistols each when operating on the frontiers. Their staff in some cases lacked arms and used repurposed farm tools, iron bars etc.

Most settler fighting was done from horseback (mounted) - which afforded a distinct advantage. In some cases, flocks or herds were driven into Aboriginal camps as a type of weapon.

Most settler defences were rudimentary and makeshift – for instance, windowless huts with loopholes (slots for shooting), but these seem to have been very common. In some cases, military and penal forts were used against First Nations people.

Native Mounted Police barracks and camps were generally unfortified, although some had loopholed walls. Areas around barracks were cleared to allow maximum visibility. NMP camps and barracks were placed strategically overlooking major Indigenous pathways and camps. They were constantly moved in step with the edge of the frontier.

First Nations weapons/ defences

The spear was the main Indigenous weapon. War spears were distinct from hunting spears and could be tossed accurately and silently over vast distances, making them quite lethal – especially as men carried a dozen each, and could hurl these quicker than muskets could be reloaded. Woomeras extended their range.

First Nations also employed a variety of throwing clubs, throwing axes, ‘killer’ boomerangs and throwing sticks. ‘Killer’ boomerangs could take unexpected trajectories, hitting victims even behind trees and boulders. Many of these weapons were stockpiled to create ready arsenals.

First Nations’ people widely used fire as a weapon – burning grasses over broad fronts to drive away enemies.

From scrap metal and broken bottles, First Nations people crafted and traded iron-headed and glass-headed spears and throwing tomahawks to fight settlers. In some cases, they also obtained guns and horses to use against settlers. A few resistance fighters even moulded their own bullets.

Defences consisted of shields, boulders, trees and hideouts. The latter were natural refuges such as islands, caves, dense forests, hills, swamp and rocky terrain. Against or within these sites, Aboriginal people maintained hidden camps. In some cases, camps were also defended with brush walls, or by the watch of posted sentry-guards.

GENERAL NATURE OF ENGAGEMENTS

TACTICS USED BY BOTH SIDES

Small Wars/ Guerilla Warfare

Virtually all the Australian Wars can be considered ‘Small (Guerilla) Wars’ because they employed only a portion of the populations involved and were conducted as a series of small skirmishes and affrays, and rarely as large-scale battles. Moreover, both Indigenous and settler tactics were of the usual varieties seen in guerilla warfare: hit-and-run; raiding; extensive use of refuges; and the lack of distinction between civilian and military ranks.

Pitched (open) battles

Both in traditional European and Aboriginal society, a pitched (open) battle involving large numbers of people and many rules and protocols was the norm. However, First Nations people quickly discovered this was never a ‘fair fight’ if firearms or horses (cavalry) were involved. Therefore, they only resorted to pitched battles in initial confrontations, or if the odds seemed likely to be in their favour due to their numbers or the terrain.

Indigenous pitched battle with settlers saw rows of warriors hurl numerous projectiles (spears, throwing clubs etc) in simultaneous volleys. In many cases, they employed ‘stockyarding’ – a tactic whereby ‘wings’ of warriors encircled, corralled and engulfed the settler combatants.

Property damage and impeding communication/ transportation

Both settlers and First Nations people frequently engaged in extensive theft and destruction of each other’s property - especially game, weaponry, food stores and homes. This served to intimidate or disable their enemy.

Native Mounted Police disrupted smoke-signalling networks and apprehended messengers (runners) to break efforts at resistance. Pathways were frequently usurped.

Likewise, First Nations people are recorded blocking roads with logs, killing mailmen, dispersing or killing horses, removing riding gear, destroying beacons, frightening or attacking all settler travellers off their traditional pathways, or constantly attacking ‘road trains’ (convoys of drays). This impeded settler communication/supply chains and helped maintain control of ancient routes and songlines. Along the northern coasts, First Nations people also often hijacked settlers’ boats.

Psychological warfare: harassment, mockery and vandalism

Both settlers and First Nations groups employed this tactic. Settlers created loud sounds, effigies and masks that they attributed to evil spirits, as a means of terrorising First Nations groups, and often they deliberately defaced sacred places or belittled elders and ceremony bosses in front of youths. Others mounted cannons or guns at their homesteads, to scare off Aboriginal parties through frequent ‘warning shots.’ Bluff was a major element of Indigenous warfare. It included magic art to hex invaders, ridicule of settlers, name-calling, threats, ‘warning shots’ (spears thrown very near), and frightening displays of aggression (war dances). It sometimes extended to deliberate uprooting or destruction of graves, fences and property.

TACTICS SPECIFIC TO SETTLERS

Punitive expeditions: dawn raids, camp battles and massacres

Soon after a triggering incident such as Indigenous spearing of shepherds or the killing or removal of cattle or sheep, a message would be sent out riders to homesteads, inns, outstations, telegraph stations, or mining and timber getting camps within a certain radius. Civilian vigilantes - male overseers and staff of these places - would elect to engage in an armed punitive campaign to track down the purported offenders and either take vengeance or apprehend the accused group or their supposed ringleader(s).

In some instances, this activity was organised or led by military or policing officers. Certain punitive expeditions traversed very large areas, employing several parties. Many were unsuccessful in locating or interacting with the accused. Others randomly shot at any First Nations persons they happened to encounter.

For many of these expeditions, settlers rode to a major base camp or inter-tribal gathering, as this would ensure a greater concentration of would be present in one location. Often vigilantes struck at dawn or pre-dawn when there was less likelihood of being detected, surrounding the camp and shooting into it.

At other times, a forward party was sent to apprehend the key suspect(s) whilst other settlers waited nearby. This often erupted into a violent confrontation with other First Nations people coming to the defence of the accused, which resulted in settler ‘back up forces’ entering the affray.

Depending on the agenda of the vigilantes, they would either frighten and drive away the camp residents or slaughter (massacre) as many as possible either in their huts or as they fled. As there was often a spirited resistance (able-bodied warriors forming a wall of defence to enable the rest of the tribe to flee), this often became a ‘camp battle’, with the settler vigilantes destroying as much as they could of the camp’s huts and weaponry, and warriors trying to prevent this or retaliate. Sometimes the vigilantes would be evicted from the camp once the warriors reassembled.

Military and policing patrols: intimidation and dispersals

The Border Police, Native Mounted Police, armed forces and similar bodies often conducted their activities in the same manner as vigilante squads: storming camps through dawn raids. However, as their presence was also meant to intimidate, they frequently engaged in armed demonstrations and lengthy patrols as a ‘show of force.’ Their patrols often saw no engagements but nevertheless served to keep First Nations groups wary and distant.

Native Mounted Police were instructed to ‘disperse’ any large Indigenous gatherings. This consisted in frightening off Aboriginal persons or (more often) wounding and killing large numbers, either when encountered in passing, or wherever they assembled in large bodies.

Stealth poisonings

Baiting flour, bread or water with arsenic and other poisons and leaving these in stores or places where they would be consumed by First Nations people was sometimes employed by civilians as a means of reducing local Indigenous populations. Likewise, diseased blankets were sometimes distributed with this goal.

TACTICS SPECIFIC TO FIRST NATIONS

Vengeance raids: ambush executions and ‘spot killings’

Most Indigenous resistance consisted of ‘payback’ expeditions. These were campaigns that specifically avenged the breaking of tribal law and especially the death of one of your people.

The payback squad would be ritually prepared and would doggedly track the accused often far from home. They could wait months or even decades to strike, counting strongly on the element of surprise to deliver a definitive ambush ‘execution.’

Such expeditions were conducted continuously and over very broad areas, which added an element of terror as they occurred anywhere and often completely unexpected. Most Indigenous actions consisted of such surprise ‘spot killings’, resulting in 1-3 deaths per attack. These could become so numerous that over months and years, hundreds of people were slain.

Economic sabotage and usurping rural industries

Economic sabotage (‘white war’) was the second most common means of resistance. First Nations people called it “starving out.” It entailed dispersing, maiming/ damaging, raiding or destroying the economic base of the settlers: sheep, cattle, horses, pigs, seal pelts, food crops etc. It sometimes extended to destroying stockpiles and food stores; sacking convoys of fleece-filled drays (wagons); and destroying (burning) the pastures on which livestock relied. Such destruction was sometimes conducted on a vast scale across many properties simultaneously.

This was a highly successful tactic, used all over Australia. It often resulted in settlers abandoning or selling their holdings for months to years, due to being economically unsustainable.

A variation of this practice was ‘usurping pastoralism’ - the theft of large quantities of flocks, herds and horses and placing them under Indigenous management. Livestock were driven tens to hundreds of kilometres away from pastoral holdings. Once here, Indigenous pastoralists would move them around various grazing areas, killing some when needed, much like settler pastoralists.

These First Nations livestock-minders used natural enclosures (e.g. between a campsite and cliffs, bodies of water, or gorges) or otherwise made ‘bush pens’ of brush or rock whenever they needed to box up the livestock.

Many frontier war incidents consisted of the arduous quest of settlers hunting for stolen flocks and herds. Warrior squads would deliberately lead these searchers astray or into traps. When settlers finally located the hidden livestock, there were violent affrays as both sides tried to assert their ownership.

Continual harassment

A defining style of Indigenous warfare was a campaign of constant interference: daily thefts, spearing, displays of aggression, vandalism etc carried out with great frequency, regularity and persistence sometimes day and night for months and years. Although these acts were in themselves minor, in combination, they ‘wore out’ settler incursions and forced withdrawal from newly settled areas.

Sieges and confinement

A commonly recorded tactic was the siege of a homestead, outstation or (sometimes) a small hamlet. This entailed some spies or decoys being sent out for surveillance to discern an opportune moment and keeping a party of warriors in hiding ready to surround the hut/ homestead/hamlet. These pounce into action to make it impossible for the occupants to leave the site.

The purpose of this action was varied. In some cases, warriors sought to contain and extinguish the occupants and their dwellings. In other cases, the aim was harassment to the point that the occupants ran out of ammunition and food and fled the buildings, which were then destroyed. In still other cases, it was a delaying tactic, enabling other groups of combatants to raid stores or shift a flock or herd to a distant location whilst the settlers were confined.

Withdrawal and noncompliance

This was largely passive resistance: ‘walkouts’ where First Nations people would simply remove themselves from missions and homesteads, would refuse to assist or engage with settlers or would withdraw to refuge areas. Apart from the psychological effect of widespread animosity and distrust, this tactic crippled many isolated settlers and economically ruined some stations, as many places relied on Indigenous labour and Indigenous know-how and guides.

Sources

• Berndt, Ronald M., Catherine H. Berndt and John E. Stanton, 1993, A World That Was: The Yaraldi of the Murray River and the Lakes, South Australia, Melbourne: Miegunyah/Melbourne University Press.
• Berndt, Ronald M. and Catherine H. Berndt, 1992, The World of the First Australians: Past and Present, 5th edition Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
• Blandowski, William, 2010 [1860], Harry Allen, ed., Australia: William Blandowski’s Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Aboriginal Australia, Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
• Duncan-Kemp, Alice M., 1968, Where Strange Gods Call, Brisbane: W R Smith & Patterson.
• Gray, W.J.B., 1902, ‘The early days – pioneers and pioneering on the Darling Downs’, Collection of Mrs J. Pollard.
• Kennedy, Edward B., 1904, The Black Police of Queensland: Reminiscences of Official Work and Personal Adventures in the Early Days of the Colony, London: J. Murray.
• Lumholtz, Carl, 1890, ‘A strange tournament’, Southern Argus (Port Elliot), 17 July 1890, p.6.
• MacKenzie, Willie (Gaiarbau), 1982, ‘Some original views around Kilcoy: The Aboriginal perspective’, Gerry Langevad, ed., Queensland Ethnohistory Transcripts, Vol.1:1, St. Lucia: University of Queensland (Archaeology Branch).
• MacKnight, David, 2005, Of Marriage, Violence and Sorcery: The Quest for Power in Northern Queensland, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
• Petrie, C. C., 1904, Tom Petrie’s Reminiscences of Early Queensland (Brisbane: Watson & Ferguson.
• Roth, W. E., 1910, North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin No. 8, Sydney: Australian Museum.
• Venbrux, Eric, 1995, A Death in the Tiwi Islands: Conflict, Ritual and Social Life in an Australian Aboriginal Community, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Warner, William Lloyd, 1964, A Black Civilization: A Social Study of an Australian Tribe, Chicago: Harper & Row.

Contributor: Ray Kerkhove, 2025