>> Go Back - page - >> List of Entriess
In July 1895, having welcomed his comissionary J M Bogner, Strehlow took leave, travelled to Adelaide and
married his fiancée Friederike (Frieda) Johanna Henriette Keyser, then returned to Hermannsburg in November.
The years that lay ahead were to be hard and with mixed blessings. Happiness came for the couple with the birth
of five boys and one girl, namely Friedrich, Martha, Karl, Rudolf, Hermann and Theodor. Theodor, born in 1908,
was the youngest by three years and was destined to become a notable linguist, writer and a very controversial
figure.
As the years passed the highly directive role, necessary when Strehlow first arrived and had the task of putting
the mission in order, began to cause problems. If strong will and determination resulted in control of workmen,
direction to co-missionaries, firmness in dealings with both visiting white Australians and Aborigines, increased
church attendance and an increasing number of converts, it also resulted in a blinkered view. In addition, a highly
directive role almost inherently has a touch of arrogance about it, and the missionary role of the era was similar,
clearly stating that the beliefs and customs of the Aborigines were wrong and implying, in fact, that all people were
morally askew if they did not follow the Hermannsburg way.
In 1905 the explorer-surveyor Captain Barclay wrote a brief, critical comment about the mission and
missionaries on the basis of information he had received from Central Australian residents. He mentioned that
‘unpaid native labour’ had contributed to the missionaries’ ‘comfortable homesteads with productive gardens’.
Strehlow leapt to his own and the mission’s defence but, while answering the specific questions reasonably
well, added his own comment on Barclay’s broader observations about the Aborigines as a ‘bold, active, intelligent
people’ who showed ‘invariable kindness to children’. In so doing, he made a comment about himself as much
as he did about the Aranda people of the mission. This aggressive defensiveness was of the kind that had, before
Strehlow’s time, resulted in clashes between the missionaries and the population at large. Constructive criticism
was undermined by biased comment on both sides. The same forces and pressures were at work in 1910, when
Strehlow took leave to allow his ill wife to recuperate and the family as a whole to enjoy the world beyond the
mission.
Strehlow, his wife and the children travelled to Germany, visiting relatives and friends. They arranged for all of
the children except Theodor, the youngest, to attend school in Germany—understandable given the family support
available in Germany and the limited educational opportunities at Hermannsburg. However, the decision was to
have repercussions during the First World War and, as a result of long separation, on the family as a whole.
While the Strehlow family was overseas, Hermannsburg went through a trying period. Strehlow’s replacement,
Missionary G Liebler (who was accompanied by Pastor Kaibel), was a ‘new chum’ determined to do things his
way, but his abrasive manner caused key white workers to leave and he ignored those Aborigines who could have
assisted. By sheer chance at this same time, Captain Barclay was, during the course of further travels, surveying
the conditions of the Aborigines in northern South Australia and the Northern Territory for the federal government.
His reports were critical of the situation at Oodnadatta and elsewhere, but Hermannsburg also received a very
tarnished image as a result of his investigations. Pastor Kaibel was able to deflect some of the criticisms but, as
Barclay had actually been to Hermannsburg on this occasion, he had been able to see at first hand the problems
and had, in fact, been assisted by Liebler; the report was an indictment of the mission. Despite the fact that Liebler
was to be blamed by later Hermannsburg historians for the situation, Strehlow could not escape the criticism, for
the Hermannsburg that Barclay investigated in 1911 was very largely his creation.
As a result of Barclay’s strong criticisms and Kaibel’s ability to indicate that some were the result of incorrect
information given by Liebler, a further investigation was made. Constable Robert Stott, as the result of a study
early in 1912, gave a much more favourable report than had Barclay so that, by the time Strehlow returned in
April 1912, the dust had settled. Strehlow was able to reassert himself and, dogmatic though his perceptions might
have been, he gave a sense of direction and stability—people knew where they stood with the man. When Liebler
left late in 1913 a troubled and troublesome element was removed.
At this time in his life, Strehlow was in the midst of his major linguistic studies. Very shortly after his
arrival, he had mastered Aranda sufficiently to be able to conduct hymns, sermons and services in the Aboriginal
language. Now, in his forties, he applied his undoubted intellect to the task of writing major works about and
for the Aborigines. The culture of the Aranda and Luritja people was detailed in Die Aranda—und Loritja—
Stamme in Zentral-Australien, the volumes appearing between 1907 and 1920. Although this major study received
considerable critical acclaim, it was flawed in that, as a missionary, Strehlow had refused to attend what he
considered pagan rituals and thus had to rely on hearsay descriptions for his accounts. His religious views had
also at times clouded his vision but, in the final analysis, the work did not receive wider acclaim mainly because
it was not written in English. His other works, which he considered more important on the basis of his role as a
missionary, were an Aranda service book Galtjindinjamea-Pepa Aranda–Wolambarinjaka (1904) and translation
of the New Testament that, with revisions, took from 1913 to 1921. Strehlow felt that he had done a good job
with this last major work and in many ways he had. However, there had been a degree of dissipation of energy
for a co-missionary, Pastor N Wettengel, had also been translating the work and relationships were so tense that
Wettengel accused him of doctrinal fabrication. A commission of the church’s disciplinary committee rejected
Wettengel’s charge but the episode suggests that, able and effective as Strehlow was when able to dominate a
situation, at times his relationships with others were prickly.
Although Carl and Frieda Strehlow retained strong ties with Germany, they had also forged strong links with
their adopted country and had become naturalised citizens prior to the First World War. Despite criticisms against
the mission and its missionaries, some of which were undoubtedly warranted, there were those who gave strong
and independent support. Constable Stott had been one and in August 1914—at the very outbreak of the War—
J R B Love was another. He viewed Strehlow and his fellow Lutherans as ‘gentlemen, as devoted missionaries,