{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03369905956112853, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009404388714733543, 'mean_word_length': 4.8577981651376145, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Indigenous and other Australians since 1901: A conversation between Professor Tim Rowse and Dr Miranda Johnson

Tim Rowse's book, 'Indigenous and Other Australians Since 1901' (2017), raises timely questions about the writing of Aboriginal history, as well as offering insights into contemporary political debates. In this conversation, conducted via email, we examine some of the book's arguments, the evidence drawn on to make them and why these interventions are necessary today. In the introduction to the book, Rowse draws attention to W.E.H. Stanner's hope for telling the 'the story ... of the unacknowledged relations between two racial groups within a single field of life'. He shows why this was and continues to be so difficult in terms of identity, territorial control and jurisdictional practice. In Australia, indigeneity does not mean one thing, and its meaning has changed and become increasingly plural over time; for much of the twentieth century there were really two Australias - north and south - that were represented and governed differently; and two sovereignties - one kin-based, the other state-based - that have posed considerable challenges to each other, right up to the present. This argument serves as the jumping-off point for the conversation.