European settlers and explorers reacted to the boomerang with a mixture of profound scientific curiosity and, often, comical frustration. 

Roderick J. Flannagan, in The Aborigines of Australia, provided a “minute description of its construction and properties,” including a geometric diagram and a detailed explanation of its flight, noting that its rotation “acts constantly in opposition to its line of flight.”

According to Richard Sadlier, Sir Thomas Mitchell, upon examining the weapon, exclaimed, “The savage who invented this, in whatever time, was gifted by the Creator with a knowledge which He has withheld from civilized man.” Richard Sadleir further recorded Mitchell’s observation that the boomerang’s rotary motion, acting as a screw, allowed it to be sustained in the air and return to the thrower.

Carl Lumholtz, in Among Cannibals, also expressed admiration, stating that the natives’ “matchless skill invariably commanded my admiration.” He meticulously described the throwing technique and the elliptical flight path, concluding that “Dexterity rather than strength is needed to throw the boomerang with success.”

Lady Barker, in Letters to Guy, captured the awe of watching its flight: “No description can possibly give you the least idea of this wonderful performance… the ease with which the kylie can be thrown, the height to which it will soar, nor the wide and varying circles it describes.”

Mark Kershaw describes his frustrating experience with a boomerang, saying: “If the troubles it has caused me, and the troubles it has in store for me, do not bring me to an early grave, I have the intention of passing this specimen of aboriginal workmanship on to some fellow I don’t like.” His first challenge was transporting the large boomerang, which caused the most trouble in Brisbane. His second was getting it to return. He explains: “At first I only threw it two or three feet; but as I gained courage I threw it farther—first edgeways, then sideways, flatways, pointways, straightways, upwards, downwards, obliquely forwards, backwards, upwards, outwards, and in some fifty or sixty other manners and directions, but invariably with the result that I had to walk after the confounded thing and bring it back.”

 

According to Fison and Howitt, Carl Lumholtz, Lucas, John Morgan, and Spencer and Gillen, the Aboriginal boomerang served primarily as a weapon for fighting. Its use, however, was not limited to warfare. Carl Lumholtz and William Kingston, for instance, document its role in hunting game. The boomerang also featured in systems of justice and punishment. Fison and Howitt, along with Gideon Lang, describe its use in elopement punishments, where the offending man “had to stand as a target for the spears, boomerangs, and kulluks of her near kinsmen.”

Beyond its practical applications, the boomerang held deep cultural and symbolic significance. Albert F. Calvert, as well as Spencer and Gillen, record that it was a symbol of manhood and a constant companion for hunters and warriors. Its role in marking the transition to adulthood was particularly important. Richard Sadleir and Spencer and Gillen note its presence as a key part of initiation rites, a point elaborated by Spencer and Gillen in The Native Tribes of Central Australia, where it is described as a key object in the rituals marking a boy’s transition to manhood.

Furthermore, the boomerang served a variety of other functions within Aboriginal society. Spencer and Gillen document its use as a musical instrument. They also explain that it functioned as a valuable item in social contracts, particularly in the context of marriage.

There is a consistent and crucial distinction between two fundamental types of boomerangs, each designed for a specific purpose.

• The Returning Boomerang
• The Non-Returning Boomerang

The returning boomerang is the weapon that most fascinated European observers due to its unique aerodynamic properties. Its primary use was not for lethal combat, but for hunting birds and for amusement.

According to Carl Lumholtz, the warped boomerang that returns is “as a rule, used only as a toy.” He also observed that it was thrown into flocks of pigeons and ducks on rivers and lakes. William Kingston described its use as a sport while Barker noted that it was thrown in “friendly rivalry” and would soar high into the air before wheeling back to where the sender predicts that it would fall.

In contrast, the non-returning boomerang was a heavier, deadlier instrument designed for serious combat and hunting.

Lorimer Fison and A.W. Howitt in Kamilaroi and Kurnai explicitly states, “The boomerang was the fighting boomerang, which does not return to the thrower.” Carl Lumholtz confirms this for Western Queensland, noting that non-twisted boomerangs “are only for war and hunting” and “do not return when thrown.” William Buckley nearly lost his life to one, recalling it “split my shield in two” during a skirmish.

This type was a formidable weapon. Lucas described it as “longer and heavier” than the returning kind, noting “the wounds it inflicts are very severe.” John Morgan, recounting Buckley’s story, says they hurled it “with great force… spinning against the enemy.”

Baldwin Spencer and F. J. Gillen in The Native Tribes of Central Australia wrote, “The Central Australian native does not appear to have hit upon this contrivance [the returning boomerang]… his boomerang has a widely open curve, and the flat blade lies wholly in one plane.” They further clarify that the ornate, large boomerangs used for close-quarters fighting in the Centre are all of this non-returning type.

The general form was “something like a half-moon” (John Morgan) or “shaped like a young moon” (Mark Kershaw). Roderick J. Flannagan provided a minute description of its construction: “about three-eighths of an inch thick in the middle, gradually tapering off towards the extremities, and rounded on each side from the centre until brought to an edge.” 

He further specified its dimensions using a geometric diagram: “the chord AD E = 18 inches; the perpendicular, B D = 17 inches; the width, BC=5 inches.” According to Carl Lumholtz, “it is twisted so that the ends are bent in opposite directions.

 

Adapted from The Aborigines of Australia by Roderick J. Flanagan

The final step often involved decoration. Spencer and Gillen in The Native Tribes of Central Australia stated that “as a general rule the boomerangs are coated with red ochre,” and might be further ornamented with “a few rings of white kaolin or yellow ochre.” Some, particularly those traded from Queensland, featured intricate “incised patterns shaped like the figure 8 laid on its side.”

According to Roderick J. Flannagan, the boomerang was formed from “any tough, heavy piece of wood”. The best woods were specified by Carl Lumholtz as Brigalow (Acacia excelsa) or Myall (Acacia pendula), with the latter also noted by William Woolls as a dark, fragrant wood used by natives for this purpose.