The ‘Old Register’: Illuminating Early Colonial NSW

March 27, 2026|10:30 AM AEST

The recent publication of the 'Old Register' exposes the legal mechanisms that enabled rapid land appropriation in early colonial NSW precisely when national debates on dispossession and reconciliation demand greater historical clarity.

Key takeaways

  • Nine volumes spanning 1794-1824 record land transactions and legal agreements that formalized settler property claims amid frequent disputes, starting with mandatory registration in 1802 under Governor King.
  • Their newly published status by Museum of History NSW improves access to primary evidence of how colonial land systems were built on unceded Indigenous territory.
  • Vague boundary details in the records create persistent challenges for heritage protection, archaeological interpretation, and some contemporary land-related claims.

Revived Records of Dispossession

The 'Old Register', formally the Registers of Assignments and Other Legal Instruments, captures the earliest systematic recording of private land dealings in New South Wales. Established in response to mounting disputes over informal grants, Governor Philip Gidley King mandated in 1802 that assignments be registered at the Judge Advocate’s Office to gain legal standing.

These nine volumes document not only land transfers but also affidavits, agreements, guardianship appointments, marriage contracts, and separations, painting a detailed picture of emerging settler society—including interactions among convicts, emancipists, military officers, and free immigrants.

The timing of renewed scholarly and public attention aligns with broader Australian efforts to confront colonial legacies. Following the 2023 referendum on Indigenous constitutional recognition, discussions on truth-telling, sovereignty, and the absence of treaties have intensified. These records provide concrete evidence of how land was alienated from First Nations peoples through unilateral colonial processes.

Less noticed are the records' practical shortcomings: imprecise land descriptions often render early transactions untraceable today, complicating heritage assessments, native title research, and property history. This vagueness reflects the improvisational nature of early colonial governance in a remote penal outpost.

While no immediate deadlines or financial stakes attach directly, inaction on wider historical reckoning risks perpetuating incomplete national narratives.

We use cookies to measure site usage. Privacy Policy