What do you think?
Rate this book
Australian History in Seven Questions
‘If there are genuine questions about Australian history, there is something to puzzle over. The history ceases to be predictable— and dull.’
From the author of The Shortest History of Europe, acclaimed historian John Hirst, comes this fresh and stimulating approach to understanding Australia’s past and present.
Hirst asks and answers questions that get to the heart of Australia’s history:
• Why did Aborigines not take up farming?
• How did a penal colony change peacefully into a democratic society?
• Why was Australia so prosperous so early? • Why did the colonies federate?
• What effect did convict origins have on national character?
• Why was the postwar migration programme such a success?
• Why is Australia not a republic?
Engaging and enjoyable, and written for the novice and the expert alike, Australian History in Seven Questions explains how we became the nation we are today.
“one of the nation’s most independent and original historians” – Geoffrey Blainey
“John Hirst is the gadfly of Australian history, stinging and provocative” – Stuart Macintyre
From the author of The Shortest History of Europe, acclaimed historian John Hirst, comes this fresh and stimulating approach to understanding Australia’s past and present.
Hirst asks and answers questions that get to the heart of Australia’s history:
• Why did Aborigines not take up farming?
• How did a penal colony change peacefully into a democratic society?
• Why was Australia so prosperous so early? • Why did the colonies federate?
• What effect did convict origins have on national character?
• Why was the postwar migration programme such a success?
• Why is Australia not a republic?
Engaging and enjoyable, and written for the novice and the expert alike, Australian History in Seven Questions explains how we became the nation we are today.
“one of the nation’s most independent and original historians” – Geoffrey Blainey
“John Hirst is the gadfly of Australian history, stinging and provocative” – Stuart Macintyre
224 pages, Paperback
First published June 25, 2014
31 people are currently reading
267 people want to read
About the author
John Hirst
38 books71 followersJohn Bradley Hirst, FASSA (9 July 1942 – 3 February 2016) was an Australian historian and social commentator. He taught at La Trobe University from 1968 until his retirement in 2006, edited Historical Studies—Australia's leading historical journal—from 1977 to 1980, and also served on the boards of Film Australia and the National Museum of Australia. He has been described as an "historian, public intellectual, and active citizen". He wrote widely on Australian history and society, publishing two well-received books about colonial New South Wales. Hirst also frequently published opinion pieces in the media.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
Currently reading
July 31, 2015THIS book IS, yes, IS a very light treatment of Australian History...
...AND WHY ?????????????????????????
...because THAT is exactly what John Hirst, probably one of the BEST Historians Australia has ever had, intended it to be.
This is a 'fish hook' book, conversational in style, short and sweet, often a bit simplified,
BUT challenging, nonetheless, because the author's intent is SERIOUS!!
ie., to get Aussies to read and learn about their Past History...and he knows that this is very difficult to do because so many Aussies are racist, hedonistic, sexist, taking-for-granted, sports-mad, anti-intellectual, grog-swilling, self-doubting, fragile Folk. Often misguided but usually well-intentioned!!
THIS is a Self-Help book...a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.This 'lolly' of a book is meant to get you hooked so that you will follow-up perhaps on other LARGER more detailed Historians, one of whom might just be Mr Hirst himself !
One of Hirst's TOMES is his 512 page "Freedom on the Fatal Shore : Australia's First Colony" which will expand on and go into absorbing detail about aspects of the fish hook's Question 2. How Did a Penal Colony Change Peacefully into a Democracy?
So,if you still want MORE, he has already provided it, because you can't toss off a book like "Australian History in 7 Questions" if you haven't already done a huge amount of research, written various articles for History Journals to promote your research, thrown it out in lectures delivered to your students, argued with yourself, your colleagues, your critics as you have attempted to make them 'SEE" what Australian History IS !!!And so Hirst has written what might well be regarded as Text Books...serious tomes for the serious reader.
Once hooked you will be able to read further, wider, deeper and better informed but not unquestioning.
The 434 page tome "The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia" by Bill Gummadge, which addresses Hirst's Question 1."Why Did Aborigines Not Become Farmers ?" may be another book you might try.
Often Hirst may appear to take sides and for example appear racist.But you'll feel Hirst's Absolute Enjoyment when all Aussie Women get the vote because of a small technicality and the Sexists are trounced so easily. It is often difficult to see what IS his viewpoint because he WILL write from another's perspective criticising someone HE actually approves of.
I've just done a browse of the asylum seekers...
Hirst pushes the line that boat people offend the Aussie sense of egaliterianism by sneaking in the back door and not taking their proper line in 'queue'.
'The Queue' represents a typical Liberal Party tampering with words. People in terror and desperation and fear of death NEVER get into an orderly queue, but they might get into a....BOAT for a quick flight to safety. To suggest they would do otherwise is defying the Historical Record.To suggest they would get into an orderly queue defies human Psychology.For Hirst to use 'the queue' to praise an Australian virtue and sense of the "egalitarian' is laughable. Having spent my whole working life in education and health working on behalf of migrants and refugees, I'm well aware of our strong racial fears and prejudices. Hirst needs to do more research on this one !!!
Strange how so many baulk at labelling Australians as 'racists'.
It is a very natural reaction to fear and ignorance of the Unknown.
Very understandable. If there is no intervention, prejudice soon follows.
Enjoy your journey into Australia's History
...Hirst doesn't include the Geological which is fascinating
and there are no humans to bugger it up !!!!
May meet you on the track!!
April 12, 2019
Actual rating: 2.5 stars.
I actually enjoyed Hirst's The Shortest History of Europe far more than this one. Australian History in Seven Questions seemed to be a bit too political for my tastes and I preferred some questions over others. If you asked me any of these seven questions I don't think I could eloquently answer any of them.
I actually enjoyed Hirst's The Shortest History of Europe far more than this one. Australian History in Seven Questions seemed to be a bit too political for my tastes and I preferred some questions over others. If you asked me any of these seven questions I don't think I could eloquently answer any of them.
February 28, 2019
Every time I read the blurb of this book since it first came out I was like, those are interesting questions! The answers are compelling, but not because they're unexpected, more because I realised that asking questions like that can be a new way to enter the same history through a different door.
The answers were for the most part fairly standard Australian history, which is boring compared to the history of, say, America, but also that's kind of the point? Hirst's entire theory around our national character is to repeatedly say "the birth of the nation was Federation in 1901 and everyone immediately forgot about it because they were bored". And look - we have free healthcare and no guns, so I guess boring wins. I know which I'd prefer, anyway.
I did learn a few new things, including some intriguing angles on Aboriginal history, and that East Coast bias is not confined to sporting endeavours (seriously, I think Hirst forgot Western Australia existed for most of this book and only occasionally recalled when we contributed something to the causes that were consuming Sydney and Melbourne).
Unfortunately this makes me slightly dubious about his sweeping generalisations, as it's a bit rich (geddit) to say that after the 1880s "Australia" never again experienced economic prosperity, when what he clearly means is "the heavily populated South-East of Australia where all the politicking goes on but not where all the unbelievably lucrative mineral booms have gone on basically ever since 1890".
I guess that's a bit of a mouthful, but come on. In WA schoolchildren ride to school on gold-plated jetskis. What's that if not economic prosperity, Johnno.
Kidding aside, this was interesting and it flew by as an audio. Recommended.
The answers were for the most part fairly standard Australian history, which is boring compared to the history of, say, America, but also that's kind of the point? Hirst's entire theory around our national character is to repeatedly say "the birth of the nation was Federation in 1901 and everyone immediately forgot about it because they were bored". And look - we have free healthcare and no guns, so I guess boring wins. I know which I'd prefer, anyway.
I did learn a few new things, including some intriguing angles on Aboriginal history, and that East Coast bias is not confined to sporting endeavours (seriously, I think Hirst forgot Western Australia existed for most of this book and only occasionally recalled when we contributed something to the causes that were consuming Sydney and Melbourne).
Unfortunately this makes me slightly dubious about his sweeping generalisations, as it's a bit rich (geddit) to say that after the 1880s "Australia" never again experienced economic prosperity, when what he clearly means is "the heavily populated South-East of Australia where all the politicking goes on but not where all the unbelievably lucrative mineral booms have gone on basically ever since 1890".
I guess that's a bit of a mouthful, but come on. In WA schoolchildren ride to school on gold-plated jetskis. What's that if not economic prosperity, Johnno.
Kidding aside, this was interesting and it flew by as an audio. Recommended.
January 14, 2015
‘I know that many people find Australian history dull and predictable.’
And in this slender book, John Hirst, an Australian historian, takes a different approach to Australian history. His seven questions (each corresponding to a chapter) are:
Q1 Why did Aborigines not become farmers?
Q2 How did a penal colony change peacefully to a democracy?
Q3 Why was Australia so prosperous so early?
Q4 Why did the Australian colonies federate?
Q5 What effect did convict origins have on national character?
Q6 Why was the postwar Migration Programme a success?
Q7 Why is Australia not a republic?
And his discussion of them makes for interesting reading. I’ve never really thought about why Aborigines didn’t become farmers, but reading this chapter reminded me that not all connections to land are the same. In answer to the second question, it hadn’t occurred to me that convicts had more legal rights in Australian penal colonies than they had back in the UK. I was intrigued to read that:
‘The first case in the criminal court concerned a convict who had stolen another convict’s bread ration.’
I particularly enjoyed this answer in relation to Question 3:
‘The short answer to the question of why the standard of living was so high in convict Sydney is this: the officers who wanted to make a pile and the convicts who would work only for rum had contrived to make the British taxpayer support their lifestyle.’
But:
‘The 1880s was the last decade of prosperity. From around 1890 the economy crashed into depression, which was made worse by a long drought - known as the Federation Drought - that began in 1895/ Australia never again enjoyed the highest living standards in the world.’
While I’m aware of much of the background, I found the discussion about federation (Question 4) absorbing. I spent my childhood in Tasmania: many of us considered ourselves Tasmanians rather than Australians. Of course, that was back in the 1960s, but state rivalry is still alive and flourishing. It’s a tribute, really, to those involved in the drive for federation (which certainly didn’t happen overnight) that the Commonwealth of Australia was formed. I especially liked reading how, at federation:
‘South Australian women already had the vote; if the Commonwealth was too have a uniform law, then the South Australian practice would have to become the Australian practice.’
This was because although the Commonwealth could make its own electoral law after the first Commonwealth election, it could not disenfranchise anyone entitled to vote at that first election.
It’s worth being reminded, too, that the Migration Programme has resulted in Australia ‘having the highest proportion of its people born outside the country of all nations on earth except Israel.’ I think this helps to explain some of both our strengths and weaknesses, tolerances and biases.
‘The disadvantage of drawing migrants from many countries was that old-world enmities were imported.’
This is a book of questions, not a book of answers. Some of these questions can be viewed as more historic than current. But not Questions 6 and 7. Those questions, perhaps in slightly different forms, need to be considered further. Those questions are about our future.
I enjoyed reading this book. I hope that Australian history is studied in more detail now than it was when I was in school in the third quarter of the last century.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
And in this slender book, John Hirst, an Australian historian, takes a different approach to Australian history. His seven questions (each corresponding to a chapter) are:
Q1 Why did Aborigines not become farmers?
Q2 How did a penal colony change peacefully to a democracy?
Q3 Why was Australia so prosperous so early?
Q4 Why did the Australian colonies federate?
Q5 What effect did convict origins have on national character?
Q6 Why was the postwar Migration Programme a success?
Q7 Why is Australia not a republic?
And his discussion of them makes for interesting reading. I’ve never really thought about why Aborigines didn’t become farmers, but reading this chapter reminded me that not all connections to land are the same. In answer to the second question, it hadn’t occurred to me that convicts had more legal rights in Australian penal colonies than they had back in the UK. I was intrigued to read that:
‘The first case in the criminal court concerned a convict who had stolen another convict’s bread ration.’
I particularly enjoyed this answer in relation to Question 3:
‘The short answer to the question of why the standard of living was so high in convict Sydney is this: the officers who wanted to make a pile and the convicts who would work only for rum had contrived to make the British taxpayer support their lifestyle.’
But:
‘The 1880s was the last decade of prosperity. From around 1890 the economy crashed into depression, which was made worse by a long drought - known as the Federation Drought - that began in 1895/ Australia never again enjoyed the highest living standards in the world.’
While I’m aware of much of the background, I found the discussion about federation (Question 4) absorbing. I spent my childhood in Tasmania: many of us considered ourselves Tasmanians rather than Australians. Of course, that was back in the 1960s, but state rivalry is still alive and flourishing. It’s a tribute, really, to those involved in the drive for federation (which certainly didn’t happen overnight) that the Commonwealth of Australia was formed. I especially liked reading how, at federation:
‘South Australian women already had the vote; if the Commonwealth was too have a uniform law, then the South Australian practice would have to become the Australian practice.’
This was because although the Commonwealth could make its own electoral law after the first Commonwealth election, it could not disenfranchise anyone entitled to vote at that first election.
It’s worth being reminded, too, that the Migration Programme has resulted in Australia ‘having the highest proportion of its people born outside the country of all nations on earth except Israel.’ I think this helps to explain some of both our strengths and weaknesses, tolerances and biases.
‘The disadvantage of drawing migrants from many countries was that old-world enmities were imported.’
This is a book of questions, not a book of answers. Some of these questions can be viewed as more historic than current. But not Questions 6 and 7. Those questions, perhaps in slightly different forms, need to be considered further. Those questions are about our future.
I enjoyed reading this book. I hope that Australian history is studied in more detail now than it was when I was in school in the third quarter of the last century.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
April 15, 2015
some okay moments but pretty whitebread overall
January 19, 2016
This book gave a brief and easy to understand run down of Australian history and how we came to be the country we are today.
August 20, 2017
At times, Hirst does an awful job of perpetuating myths that undermine entire parts of the Australian population. Most glaringly, his characterisation of asylum seekers as queue jumpers and his colonialism apologist perspective on aboriginal people are inaccurate and offensive.
Hirst's answers to the first question, ""Why did the Aborigines not become farmers?" are pretty flawed according to more recent research. Interesting that he references Bill Gammage and his research in this area but considers himself more of an expert and disregards what Gammage says. Contrary to Hirst's opinions, Indigenous Australians were farmers, perhaps not in an English idea of farming, but they deliberately cultivated the land to control and increase production. They replenished what they took and grew plants such as grain in large quantities that was then ground and stored to make bread. They were the first fish farmers, creating a complicated system of water ways to manage eels (and at the same location, built stone huts for housing, knocking another misconception about Aboriginal people on the head).
Hirst's introduction states that he doesn't know much about indigenous history and had to get others to read over this chapter, but frankly this is not good enough.
From Gammage's own book:
"The first Australians worked a complex system of land management, with fire their biggest ally, and drew on the life cycles of plants and the natural flow of water to ensure plentiful wildlife and plant foods throughout the year. They managed, he says, the biggest estate on Earth....The Aborigines farmed as an activity rather than a lifestyle. They grew crops of tubers such as yams, grain such as native millet, macadamia nuts, fruits and berries. People reared dingoes, possums, emus and cassowaries, moved caterpillars to new breeding areas and carried fish stock across country.
They knew that kangaroos preferred short grass, native bees preferred desert bloodwood, koalas tall eucalypts and rock wallabies thick growth. The Aborigines set templates to suit land, plants and animals. Explorers such as Eyre, Mitchell and Leichhardt noted how indigenous Australians fired grass to bring on short green pick to attract kangaroos and other animals. To do this they had to make sure the grass was nutritious and to provide shelter so that the kangaroos would not feel vulnerable."
Bill Gammage.
http://treatyrepublic.net/node/867
I wouldn't recommend the book as it perpetuates so much racist white man history. Still looking for a better alternative, though.
Hirst's answers to the first question, ""Why did the Aborigines not become farmers?" are pretty flawed according to more recent research. Interesting that he references Bill Gammage and his research in this area but considers himself more of an expert and disregards what Gammage says. Contrary to Hirst's opinions, Indigenous Australians were farmers, perhaps not in an English idea of farming, but they deliberately cultivated the land to control and increase production. They replenished what they took and grew plants such as grain in large quantities that was then ground and stored to make bread. They were the first fish farmers, creating a complicated system of water ways to manage eels (and at the same location, built stone huts for housing, knocking another misconception about Aboriginal people on the head).
Hirst's introduction states that he doesn't know much about indigenous history and had to get others to read over this chapter, but frankly this is not good enough.
From Gammage's own book:
"The first Australians worked a complex system of land management, with fire their biggest ally, and drew on the life cycles of plants and the natural flow of water to ensure plentiful wildlife and plant foods throughout the year. They managed, he says, the biggest estate on Earth....The Aborigines farmed as an activity rather than a lifestyle. They grew crops of tubers such as yams, grain such as native millet, macadamia nuts, fruits and berries. People reared dingoes, possums, emus and cassowaries, moved caterpillars to new breeding areas and carried fish stock across country.
They knew that kangaroos preferred short grass, native bees preferred desert bloodwood, koalas tall eucalypts and rock wallabies thick growth. The Aborigines set templates to suit land, plants and animals. Explorers such as Eyre, Mitchell and Leichhardt noted how indigenous Australians fired grass to bring on short green pick to attract kangaroos and other animals. To do this they had to make sure the grass was nutritious and to provide shelter so that the kangaroos would not feel vulnerable."
Bill Gammage.
http://treatyrepublic.net/node/867
I wouldn't recommend the book as it perpetuates so much racist white man history. Still looking for a better alternative, though.
February 15, 2018
Would have given 5 stars if not for the first of the seven essays, "Why did Aborigines not become farmers?" , which seems underdone and even glib at times. The author admits in the introduction that the subject of that first essay is "new territory for me" and it shows. Having just read Bruce Pascoe’s "Dark Emu, Black Seeds: Agriculture our Accident?", it seems that the question of agriculture and Australia’s first peoples is a lot more nuanced and geographically varied than Hirst’s essay would have the reader believe.
Nonetheless, the following six essays each address their topic with a surprising level of complexity, given the short space in which to cover the big questions posed. Australian colonial history is clearly the author’s expertise and each essay left me wanting to delve deeper. Fortunately chapter end notes give the reader reading suggestions for deeper exploration of the topic. The inclusion of an index is greatly appreciated too, as the author does refer to previous arguments made in earlier chapters.
This is a good book that not only encourages Australians to further explore their history but reminds them of just how unique our national history and character is, offering some lines of enquiry as to what makes us the way we are. On a final note, the author’s style is very readable, his observations lively and at times cutting and to the point. Would definitely read his other works.
Nonetheless, the following six essays each address their topic with a surprising level of complexity, given the short space in which to cover the big questions posed. Australian colonial history is clearly the author’s expertise and each essay left me wanting to delve deeper. Fortunately chapter end notes give the reader reading suggestions for deeper exploration of the topic. The inclusion of an index is greatly appreciated too, as the author does refer to previous arguments made in earlier chapters.
This is a good book that not only encourages Australians to further explore their history but reminds them of just how unique our national history and character is, offering some lines of enquiry as to what makes us the way we are. On a final note, the author’s style is very readable, his observations lively and at times cutting and to the point. Would definitely read his other works.
May 19, 2017
As an Australian, my country's history has always remained murky, fuzzy and boring - not worth digging into.
John Hirst believes that if there are "genuine questions to puzzle over" it can't truly be that boring.
He's partly correct - and it seemed like a clever frame to filter some of Australia's big events and topics (federation, gold rush, relationship with Britain.)
But I found myself struggling to get excited - this was still a chore. If Bill Bryson couldn't (the average "down under") i don't have faith in many other authors.
John Hirst believes that if there are "genuine questions to puzzle over" it can't truly be that boring.
He's partly correct - and it seemed like a clever frame to filter some of Australia's big events and topics (federation, gold rush, relationship with Britain.)
But I found myself struggling to get excited - this was still a chore. If Bill Bryson couldn't (the average "down under") i don't have faith in many other authors.
October 28, 2019
I picked this up on a recent trip down under, and found it an intriguing thought companion for the journey. As an American without much experience of Aussie culture and history, this book helped me understand a few things better, and helped lay out some of the political/historical issues that hover over the country these days. Definitely not intended (or shouldn't be) as the last word on any of these questions, it's a fun way to take a dip into a fascinating history.
August 17, 2017
Good, highly readable, short introduction to Australian history and its themes. While not as full of facts or personalities as a regular narrative history, the ongoing themes of Australian history and culture are much more prominent as a result. As an introduction, it is better than Blainey's 'Short History'.
December 15, 2019
As an American currently exploring Australia, I found this quick read helpful in understanding how Australians think about themselves. It's a brief read so it doesn't go into too much detail about every aspect of Australian history, but it creates some foundation for further exploration into Australian federation and the shameful White Australia policies.
September 2, 2018
Learnt some especially, first world war and Japan being on our side. Aboriginal viewpoint not accurate, but book great for view point of our outlook changing from Virginal lands to War Hero lands.
The larrikin is based on working class Englishman, convincingly argued.
The larrikin is based on working class Englishman, convincingly argued.
July 2, 2019
A nice book to get to know a little about Australia. I do not believe it is possible to resume centuries of history in just 7 simple questions. Then, consider that as a starter... order for the main course after that!
November 28, 2021
An incredibly interesting book which really made me reconsider the unique quirks of Australia. In particular, the questions he poses about the Republican Movement and Aboriginal Australians were interesting since it made me think about things which I never really gave thought to.
November 30, 2023
Australian history is generally dull and boring, and Hirst even says so in the opening of this book. So how can you make it interesting? Answer seven interesting questions about Australia, and Hirst has done a marvelous job at making Australian history actually quite interesting!
June 21, 2017
Some interesting insights. Hirst's take on Australia's contemporary approach to immigration is a little heartless.
May 8, 2018
Another addition to learning and worth the read.
July 8, 2018
A fascinating, 21st century look into Australian history, culture, politics and character
May 25, 2016
This was a refreshing little book on History. The "Seven Questions" were concise but the answers are a lot more nuanced and complex. The thing I liked most about these explanations and answers was the sense of 'context' that was provided around some of the mythic historical events in Australian history (like why Gallipoli was so important to the Australian sense of national identity and actual Federation seems less important)
August 13, 2016
A thematic treatment of Australian history in Hirst's unique style. Light, insightful, conversational. An easy read.
The questions:
Why did Aborigines not become farmers?
How did a penal colony change peacefully to a democracy?
Why was Australia so prosperous so early?
Why did the Australian colonies federate?
What effect did convict origins have on national character?
Why was the postwar migration programme a success?
Why is Australia not a republic?
The questions:
Why did Aborigines not become farmers?
How did a penal colony change peacefully to a democracy?
Why was Australia so prosperous so early?
Why did the Australian colonies federate?
What effect did convict origins have on national character?
Why was the postwar migration programme a success?
Why is Australia not a republic?
February 27, 2025
John Hirst's highly readable History of Australia in Seven Questions is a must read for every Australian - and anyone else interested in Australian history. Hirst has authored a 'light' history written in an engaging and enjoyable way and it will encourage readers to delve more deeply as they discover things they weren't taught in school.
This book should be a set text for all Australian high school students studying history.
Highly recommended.
This book should be a set text for all Australian high school students studying history.
Highly recommended.
July 9, 2016
I particularly enjoyed the last two questions answered by this book. the others were a little harder for me to follow as a very weak history buff.
August 9, 2025
It's okay. Basically explores Australian history through the affore-mentioned 7 questions, but as a result, it's surface-level. Like I said, it's okay.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews