I'll admit that I found the style a little off-putting. Maybe too folksy for me? Or perhaps because I don't read much oral history, I was not ready for the authors' approach. And this way, of introducing the settings for the discussions the authors had with their interviewees, well I can see why they did it. But as I said, for me, jarring.
Anyway I will spill one of their observations here, which makes this work memorable. They reckon that oral histories can be as accurate as the written record. And then they drop the perfect example. What it is? I'll leave that for future readers to discover. I'll just say that I have already seen the revision in an article in The Conversation. And perhaps, not too far away, it will be a common usage.
Anyways, on another plus side, there are footnotes, pages of them! Which is welcome after a certain European history I reviewed recently which had none. Apparently standards are still maintained down here.
In short, this is a compendium of oral histories handed down regarding the first European contact along Australia's east coast. Those of us raised in the west know that this contact came over 100 years after similar contact in the west. But this one was pivotal. And this book pulls the lid a little further back on 1769. Which is worth it.