Letter to the editor

Acknowledging Pyrmont’s history

How did Pyrmont acquire its name? Sydney Gazette (1806) describes a rosy gathering of “select party of ladies and gentlemen” who went to the peninsula for a picnic, at which a participant remarked that the area is similar to a spa in Bad Pyrmont, in Germany. This remark was all that was needed for John Macarthur, who owned land in the area, to make the name official on the map.

The area, however, had been inhabited for thousands of years by its traditional owners, the Gadigal tribe. Indigenous sources refer to the area as Kameagang.

In an article related to Pyrmont’s naming (City News, October 7 2010), Simon Black mentions that the Aboriginal presence in the area vanished around 1830, a time well after the picnic party which linked their land to a spot in Germany. This means that there was sufficient time to consider the traditional owners’ presence and names they used to identify the area.

With the development of Pyrmont, Lend Lease took the task of investigating the historical roots of the area. It seems, however, that there is no mention of the original name of the area, no park allocated, or a plaque dedicated to Kameagang. There is of course nothing wrong with that 1806 picnic party which brought the current name. While Pyrmont’s name will stay in use, however, acknowledging the origin of the area and its human presence would strengthen the value of respect to the truth and to broadminded acceptance of our history.

Safwan Zabalawi

Pyrmont resident of 20 years