<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xml:lang="fr"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">episciences.org</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="issn" specific-use="electronic">2557-9959</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Sociétés plurielles</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>SOCIETES-PLURIELLES</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn specific-use="electronic">2557-9959</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Presses de l’Inalco</publisher-name><publisher-loc>                                            Paris, France                                        <email>support@episciences.org</email>                    <uri>https://www.episciences.org</uri>                    <uri>https://societes-plurielles.episciences.org</uri>                </publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.46298/societes-plurielles.2023.11296</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="hal">hal-04080821</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">http://societes-plurielles.episciences.org/11296</article-id><article-catgories><series-text content-type="text">Articles</series-text></article-catgories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Farmers or hunter-gatherers? The Dark Emu debate</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="fr"><trans-title>Agriculteurs ou chasseurs-cueilleurs ? Le débat autour de Dark Emu</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Sutton</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Walshe</surname><given-names>Keryn</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-9666-5204</contrib-id><name><surname>Darmangeat</surname><given-names>Christophe</given-names></name><institution-wrap><institution><institution_id type="ror">https://ror.org/045r56524</institution_id><institution_name>Laboratoire Dynamiques Sociales et Recomposition des Espaces</institution_name></institution><institution><institution_id type="ror">https://ror.org/04pfm5x27</institution_id><institution_name>Travaux et recherches archéologiques sur les cultures, les espaces et les sociétés</institution_name></institution></institution-wrap></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>10</day><month>05</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>Identity versus science? Science at the service of identity?</volume><uri specific-use="for-review">http://societes-plurielles.episciences.org/11296/pdf</uri><self-uri>http://societes-plurielles.episciences.org/11296</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="fr"><p>Pour une publication sur Épisciences.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Dark Emu (2014), a book written by Bruce Pascoe, argues for a drastic revision of the vision of Aboriginal peoples at the time of the colonisation of Australia. Traditionally presented as nomadic hunter-gatherers, they were in fact for the most part villagers who applied some forms of agriculture and fish farming, all of which were concealed by those who wanted to appropriate their lands, thus forging a false version perpetuated by anthropological tradition. This provocative thesis has had a huge impact in Australia, where it has been the subject of much controversy. Peter Sutton and Keryn Walshe’s book is the first rebuttal by academic specialists–who are also deeply involved in the defence of the rights of Aboriginal communities.</p></trans-abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="fr"><p>Le livre Dark Emu (2014), écrit par Bruce Pascoe, plaide pour une révision drastique de la vision des peuples aborigènes au moment de la colonisation de l’Australie. Traditionnellement présentés comme des chasseurs-cueilleurs nomades, ceux-ci auraient en réalité été pour une bonne part des villageois pratiquant certaines formes d’agriculture et de pisciculture, autant d’éléments dissimulés par ceux qui voulaient s’approprier leurs terres, forgeant ainsi une version mensongère perpétuée par la tradition anthropologique. Cette thèse provocatrice a connu un immense retentissement en Australie, où elle a suscité de très âpres polémiques. Le livre de Peter Sutton et Keryn Walshe en constitue la première réfutation émanant de spécialistes académiques –  par ailleurs, profondément impliqués dans la défense des droits des communautés aborigènes.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group kwd-group-type="author" xml:lang="fr"><kwd>Australia</kwd><kwd>Aborigines</kwd><kwd>agriculture</kwd><kwd>sedentariness</kwd><kwd>colonialism</kwd><kwd>land rights</kwd><kwd>Australie</kwd><kwd>Aborigènes</kwd><kwd>agriculture</kwd><kwd>sédentarité</kwd><kwd>colonialisme</kwd><kwd>droits fonciers</kwd><kwd>[SHS.ANTHRO-SE]Humanities and Social Sciences/Social Anthropology and ethnology</kwd><kwd>[SHS.HISPHILSO]Humanities and Social Sciences/History, Philosophy and Sociology of Sciences</kwd></kwd-group><permissions><copyright-year>2023</copyright-year><copyright-holder>The Author(s)</copyright-holder><license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0"/></permissions><counts><page-count count="13"/></counts></article-meta></front><body/></article>