Theories on the Didgeridoo’s Origins

The question of whether the didgeridoo is a “later comer” to the Australian musical scene is raised directly within the historical texts, pointing to a fascinating debate about its distribution and antiquity.

The evidence suggests that while the instrument was widespread in Arnhem Land, its presence elsewhere was more sporadic. The phrase “later comer” itself comes from an analysis of Sir Baldwin Spencer’s 1912 recordings, which proposed that the “wooden trumpet accompaniment to aboriginal singing is a later comer to the Australian musical scene” compared to the universal use of percussion sticks.

The theory proposed in that analysis is that the instrument, or the idea of it, likely “entered the continent here from the north, possibly as a wooden imitation of the shell trumpet.” Once adopted, it was “highly favoured in song and dance ceremonies” and consequently “spread east through the Gulf country (Roth), west to the Kimberleys and south as far as the MacDonnell ranges.” 

This theory of northern origin is supported by fragmented accounts from other regions:

Central Australia: Spencer and Gillen described the ilpirra, a “rudimentary trumpet” used in love-magic ceremonies, which they called the “only other musical instrument” beside the bull-roarer, implying its limited use and distinctness from northern trumpets.

Queensland: Walter Roth documented the yiki-yiki, a wooden trumpet used in areas of Cape York Peninsula (Museums Victoria article, referencing Roth 1902).

A Skeptical View: N. W. Thomas held a more extreme view, stating that musical instruments were absent in Australia “save in the extreme north, where they are probably due to foreign influence.” He argued the Port Essington trumpet could “hardly be put down as a native invention” given the “strong Malay influence.” 

Therefore, the “later comer” theory hinges on the idea that the didgeridoo may not be an ancient, pan-continental instrument but rather a technology that spread relatively recently from a northern point of origin. The mystery of its origins remains hinted at in old recordings and the journals of early observers.

Conclusion

From its first documentation by colonial observers—who heard it as a warning trumpet, a “droning noise” like bagpipes, or the lazy afternoon crooning of station “boys”—the didgeridoo was often misunderstood by the European ear. Early accounts labeled it a “rudimentary trumpet” or a “conch,” failing to grasp the complexity beneath its seemingly monotonous drone.

Yet, as the ethnographic record deepened, so did the understanding. It was revealed as an instrument of profound cultural significance, central to the sacred ceremonies of initiation and storytelling, its sound believed to be the very voice of ancestral beings. The skills of the individual player were, and are, highly valued; a virtuoso is complimented for his “good throat” or “good head,” a symbol of “individuality and originality.”

The instrument has demonstrated incredible resilience. It has transitioned from a ceremonial object to a global symbol of Aboriginal Australia.