An Alternative View to the Finding of Melbourne

Melbourne was supposedly founded in June 1835 by the Tasmanian pastoralist, John Batman. At the site which was to become the city of Melbourne there was nothing other than a few hundred aborigines, wandering about going about their hunter gathering existence.

This article is not about the supposed truth which has been written down. Rather it is about what has not been written down; that which has been deliberately left out.

A comprehensive narrative about early Melbourne can be found in “The Chronicles of Early Melbourne, 1835-1852” by Edmund Finn(alias: Garryowen). This 1,000 page tome is in two volumes and can be viewed on line. There is no mention of any other culture, people or buildings. For the reason why this has been left out we need to go back in history.

Captain James Cook first sighted the Australian east coast in 1770, on his first of three voyages around the southern oceans. He landed, made contact with the aborigines and claimed the new place for Colonial Britain under the concept “Terra Nullius”; land is uninhabited. It took over 200 years for this concept to be annulled by the high court of Australia in  the 1992 “Native Title Claim”.

The fact that other maritime nations such as the French, Dutch, Spanish and Portuguese had all “discovered” Australia hundreds of years earlier was conveniently ignored by Britain.

Terra Nullius is central to the way our history has been wrongly written. I believe all the Australian capital cities as well as several regional cities all show evidence of occupation by another culture living in harmony with the aborigines.

Something doesn’t quite add up in the story of Melbourne’s start. Why was Melbourne started in 1835 some 47 years after Sydney? An attempt was made in 1803 and a penal settlement was established at Sullivan Bay near Sorento just inside Port Phillip Heads the entrance to Port Phillip Bay. This only lasted a few months and was abandoned due to a lack of fresh water. That explanation is believable on the surface. A closer examination of the situation raises some questions.

While at Sorento, Port Phillip Bay was surveyed the length and breadth. The survey team would have found, surrounding this 30 by 40 mile area of protected water, some of the best pastoral land in the world along with several sources of fresh perennial water. Unlike today the aborigines did not pollute their rivers and creeks. They also looked after the land for future generations.

The drawing shows the real reason Sorento was abandoned and they left for Van Diemen’s land; later Tasmania.

The place was already occupied.

Here is another drawing from 1837. Although more difficult to see, there are clearly 2 and 3 story buildings in the background.

The one combative ship could not have taken over. Compare with the first fleet in Sydney; 11 ships and 1,500 people.

So what changed between 1803 and 1835 that enabled Batman as well as John Fawkner to “found” Melbourne. This is also not taught in our education establishments.

In 1812 or thereabouts there was a worldwide cataclysmic event that decimated populations, destroyed buildings or sunk them into the liquefied earth, wiped out existing cultures and changed the face of the earth geographically. This event is known by various names: Mud-flood event, New Madrid Earthquake Line along the Mississippi river amongst others. It was also why Napoleon lost an army of 700,000 men. Napoleon also said: “History is a Set of Lies Agreed Upon”. Nothing could be closer to the truth.

It is often asked: Why do the elite controllers who rule us, not want us to know of these cataclysmic events, which incidentally, recur on a scale and frequency far greater than we think?

Before I answer that, it should be noted that the motive for telling a lie has nothing to do with something being a lie or not. A lie is judged to be so or not based on the interpretation of the facts based on observations. Whether we went to the moon or not has nothing to do with NASA’s motives for telling us that we did or a conspiracy theorist telling us we did not.

The controllers don’t want us to know the truth because if we did know, the whole system would breakdown. To know the future you must know the past. If you control history you control  the future.

Back to our intrepid Tasmanian pastoralists. Their main intention was to gain as much free land as possible to run sheep on. They had run out of room in Tasmania. There was no government requirement of their actions. Melbourne was ruled from Sydney until 1852. Even though there was eventual government control, land sales favoured existing squatters.

What of the existing buildings? Simple. Walk in take over. Dig them out of the mud if needed. Build on top of them. Modern day archaeologists  are giving us a false narrative about discovering ruins under existing buildings.

What of any surviving people? Simple. Commit genocide on them just like the aborigines.

How do we explain all these buildings to new settlers? Simple. Wait 15 years then invent a gold rush to provide the wealth creation necessary for “Marvellous Melbourne”. Gold had been mined in Australia for as far back as the Phoneticians, 3,000 years ago.

What of the recollections of the aborigines? Their culture was an oral one with regard to the past. Besides, they are known to be reticent to share any stories with those they don’t trust. We hardly did much to gain their confidence.






One Reply to “An Alternative View to the Finding of Melbourne”

Comments are closed.