Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian Museums - EMZ

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian Museumster were obtained from Aboriginal communities in the past fifty-odd years, and usuallyrepresent weapons, (children's) drawings and art inspired by traditional designsand methods of manufacture. My research interest lay primarily in identifying theorigins and the current status of the first group of objects.All Aboriginal material also falls into one of the four categories: ethnographic,archaeological, "secret/sacred" and osteological collections. While the first twogroups are open to the public, access to the "secret/sacred" and osteological collectionsis restricted to varying degrees. This division of Aboriginal material into socalledsecular (that is, non-restricted) and so-called secret/sacred (and thereforerestricted) material has gained prominence in the last decade. The former includesthe majority of items used in everyday life, while the latter comprises private andceremonial objects such as churingas, bullroarers and carved trees. 7There are three categories of restricted (including "secret/sacred") objects withregard to who and under what conditions can view them. The first category ofobjects (e.g. carved trees) can be viewed by Aboriginal people in general as well asby non-Aboriginal people who obtained special permission from the relevantAboriginal community (including museum staff). The objects falling into the secondcategory (e.g. human skeletal remains) cannot be viewed by anyone exceptAboriginal people directly related to them and the relevant museum staff. Finally,the third group of objects consists of items such as churingas which were traditionallyaccessible only to the selected few (e.g. fully initiated men/women, or "clevermen/women"), and there are either no living members of the community to lookafter such material, or the community has given the right of permanent custodyover such material to the museum in question; these objects have been permanentlysealed and cannot be viewed by anyone at all, not even by the museum director.an inscription "King (or Queen) of [such and such a place]" and the stereotypical images ofkangaroo and emu, today official emblems of Australia. Breastplates are discussed as shamefulcolonial representations of Aboriginality by both scholars and Aboriginal intelligentsia.See, for instance, Cleary, T. (c.1993) Poignant Regalia: 19th Century Aboriginal Breastplatesand Images: A catalogue of Aboriginal breastplates held in public, regional and private collectionsin New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland, South Australia, WesternAustralia and the Australian National Territory, Glebe, NSW, Historic Houses Trust of NSW,and Healy, C. (2001) Chained to their signs: Remembering breastplates, in: Creed, B. &Hoorn, J. (eds) Body Trade: Captivity, Cannibalism and Colonialism in the Pacific, pp. 24-35, Routledge in association with Pluto Press & University of Otago Press.7Carved trees or dendroglyphs are objects unique to the Aboriginal nations of Wiradjuri andGamaroi, central and northern New South Wales, and their immediate neighbours. Twotypes of dendroglyphs are distinguished: teleteglyphs (initiation trees) and taphoglyphs(burial trees). They were used for ceremonial purposes, and constitute a major group of culturallysensitive material in the state museums of south-east Australia. In the case ofteleteglyphs, this is owing to the fact that their viewing was originally restricted to fully initiatedmen, and the breaking of this taboo resulted in a death sentence. Taphoglyphs areconsidered private items. Dendroglyphs can be viewed only by members of the respectiveAboriginal communities or with written permission of their local Aboriginal Land Councils.145

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesState and university museums (Fig. 1) have the largest collections of Aboriginalmaterial, while local Aboriginal galleries and keeping places (Fig. 2) store a limitednumber of items, either of local origin or manufacture, or (rarely) returned to thelocal community by one of the state museums. At a local level, an institution such asan astronomical observatory may sometimes unexpectedly house some locally founditems (Fig. 3).The cultural institutions that hold Aboriginal artefacts also include libraries,archives, the National Parks and Wildlife Service (with its separate branches in eachstate) and various governmental departments. These institutions house newspapers,manuscripts and rare books, photographs, films, audio and video tapes, 8 andarchaeological material. The branches of the National Parks and Wildlife Service arealso responsible for maintaining and supervising Aboriginal sites and objects in situ.Besides these institutional sources, a significant amount of information can beobtained from (amateur) local historians, anthropologists and linguists as well asfrom Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs) and Aboriginal individuals. The lattermay supply stories and oral histories, and give one permission to access significantsites and restricted material in state and local museums, and to obtain familygenealogies. 9The Sound and Pictorial Collections at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Studies in Canberra store audio-tapes and photographs, thelatter of which were taken in the second half of the nineteenth century, but withoutsufficient (if any) details about the people they document and the exact date whenthey were taken. I have encountered the same situation at the New South WalesState Archives in Sydney. It is a distressing experience to flip over one microformphotograph after another showing rows of Aboriginal people without personalnames and cultural association as well as a number of governmental missions andreserves that contributed to this cultural dispossession. The obvious lack of attributionof photographs is also present in the Pictorial Collection at the National Libraryof Australia in Canberra.State museums store skeletal remains of different Aboriginal groups, primarily withthe aim of determining their background, that is, the geographical area and languageassociation, age and conditions of the deceased reflecting the climatic, economicand other conditions of life in the area, and so on. The South AustralianMuseum Human Biology Division stores a considerable amount of this material.8The video production, although of a recent date, is nevertheless an invaluable source ofinformation, as old Aboriginal people die and there is often no one to preserve and pass ontheir cultural heritage. In 1999, for instance, the New South Wales National Parks andWildlife Service produced a documentary Inard Oongali: Women's Journey, the first comprehensivevideo on Gamaroi "women's business", featuring seven senior Gamaroi women. Oneof the women died several months after its release.9The copies of the genealogies thus obtained were then sent to the people who gave me permissionto view them in the first place. Other material found its way into my PhD thesis, tobe used as source of reference for the communities.146

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian MuseumsThe Australian Museum in Sydney stores some osteological items. The QueenslandMuseum has de-accessioned most of its skeletal material and repatriated it back tothe communities for reburial. I did not have the opportunity to view any of thismaterial, nor was I enthusiastic to do so. Like so called secret/sacred material, osteologicalmaterial is regularly restricted in access and can be viewed only by bloodrelationsand the representatives of the Aboriginal community in question.The majority of these collections, however, suffer from the same disadvantage: evenwhere the artefacts are coming from a certain region, they are of uncertain languageaffiliation. This reflects the random processes of selection behind the creation ofearly collections responsible for the classification labels which often indicate only awider geographical location as the provenance of the objects.Let us now deal in a more systematic way with the basic issues which confront anyoneinterested in Aboriginal material in Australian cultural institutions: the acquisitionof artefacts; the classification and documentation of artefacts; the storage ofartefacts; and the museum policies on Aboriginal material in their collections.Acquisition of ArtefactsThe primary objective of Australian museums, as that of any other, was to preserveAustralian Aboriginal and other material objects from destruction by time, weatherand "unprofessional" handling. Besides this, Australian museums also had anotheraim: to gather as much cultural material and as representative as possible of differentorigin, manufacture and, to a lesser extent, significance for the original owners,in order to create a coherent museum collection. It seems, however, that, evaluatingwhat has been left of the original collections, Australian museums have failed in bothobjectives.Firstly, the issue of preservation is today (especially in case of indigenous knowledgesand cultures) a contested ground on which indigenous claims play a significantrole and point to important questions, such as these: Can we call "preservation"what from today's perspective seems to have been ruthless plunder and dispossessionby individuals and institutions? For instance, can (and do) the carved treesremoved from the sacred Gamaroi and Wiradjuri initiation grounds in any way representthe culture that is non-existent today? Devoid of their cultural context andgeographical location, can they ever be seen by either Aboriginal or non-Aboriginalaudiences as monuments surviving time and destruction by weather? What aboutthe destruction inherent in the very act of their removal? This is not to mention theshameful flipping of a coin which determined the fate of some of these trees regardingtheir future storage under the auspices of two state museums (the then NationalMuseum of Victoria in Melbourne and the South Australian Museum in Adelaide). 1010For more detail, see below.147

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesThe acquisition of Aboriginal artefacts in the early days of museums dependedlargely on curators' knowledge and skills, not only about the material but also aboutthe ways in which to acquire it. As the first curators of Australian museums regularlylacked both (some of them being completely untrained in anthropology or relateddisciplines, a trend which continued well into the twentieth century), it wouldhave seemed quite a miracle that Australian museums are still reputed for theirAboriginal collections had it not been for the three directors in the last decade of thenineteenth and the first three decades of the twentieth century: Sir Edward Stirling(South Australian Museum, Adelaide; 1889-1913, an honorary ethnologist 1914-1919), Robert Etheridge, Jr. (Australian Museum, Sydney; 1895-1920, pioneeringwork 1889-1918) and Sir W. Baldwin Spencer (Museum of Victoria, Melbourne;1899-1928, a trustee 1895-1899).These directors introduced far-reaching changes in museums' policies and duringtheir era the museums under their supervision reached an amazing increase in theacquisition of Aboriginal artefacts. They also worked diligently, not only on supplyingtheir collections with items acquired in Australia, but exchanged them with overseasmuseums and purchased items at international exhibitions. Many irreplaceableAboriginal artefacts were thus shipped overseas and lost to Australia. 11Prior to this period, Australian museums suffered a low rate of acquisitions, especiallyso before 1853 through to 1860 and from 1860 to 1874, which reflected anoverall lack of awareness and non-recognition of Aboriginal culture in Australia'snewly established colonies. Museums faced an important political issue in theirsearch for Aboriginal objects and were seriously disadvantaged by the fact that earlysettlers' practices more often than not conflicted with those directed towards thepreservation of Aboriginal heritage: authentic Aboriginal objects were increasinglymore difficult to find under the surveillance of Aborigines-hostile settlers and pastoralists.The 342 Aboriginal specimens acquired by the Australian Museum and stored in theGarden Palace in Sydney after the 1879 International Exhibition caught fire in1882, thus forever erasing a valuable source of knowledge for the generations tocome. Within the next five years, the Museum's curator Dr E.P. Ramsey would morethan triple the number of ethnological artefacts (including non-Australian) thatoriginally existed in the collection. No attempts had been made, however, to createa museum catalogue which would list the inventory of state museums, except for SirBaldwin Spencer's catalogue of the National Museum of Victoria (1901-1922), ofwhich I have been able to consult only the 1918 and 1922 editions.To sum up, the earlier acquisitions had been affected by the following issues: 1 anoverall unawareness and non-recognition of Aboriginal culture(s); 2 conflicting11cf. McCarthy, F.D. (1982) Anthropology in the museums of Australia, in: McCall, G. (ed.)Anthropology in Australia: Essays to Honour 50 Years of "Mankind", Sydney,Anthropological Society of NSW, pp. 24-5.148

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian Museumsinterests: curators vs settlers and pastoralists; 3 untrained curators and museumstaff; and 4 non-existence of (appropriate) museum catalogues and inventory lists.A noticeable exception to the collecting passion of museum curators were objectsmade and used by Aboriginal women and children who are clearly underrepresentedin the collections. The main reason is the fact that the museum staff were male,Anglo-Saxon "experts" who saw nothing special or valuable in "women's business",even when they were allowed by Aboriginal people to observe the more everydayaspects of it. As Anderson and Reeves observed: "The absence of women fromdepartments of ethnography has had long-term implications for the gender balanceof Aboriginal collections. A recent survey of the Aboriginal collections of the majorstate and federal museums revealed that between 75% and 80% of all objects relateto the material culture of men rather than of women." 12The artefacts in today's museums' possession have been acquired in several differentways: a) on so-called "museum expeditions", gathered by the museum staff; b)by purchase, mainly from individual collectors and, to a lesser extent, from auctions;c) by exchange; d) by donation; e) unknown.a) The term "museum expedition" 13 , refers to the museum staff visit to an area of,in this case, anthropological interest, and acquiring specimens from either an individualor a group of people or simply taking (sometimes literally uprooting) itemsconsidered to be valuable to science, some of which would otherwise soon perishdue to age, atmospheric conditions and, only recently recognized, vandalism. In thepast, this decision often rested with only an "anthropologist" or two. With the exceptionof most recent acquisitions, I have not encountered a single documented exampleof the museum staff consulting and obtaining consent of the concerned localgroups or individuals prior to (or even after) the removal of either "profane" or"sacred" objects from the locality of their manufacture/existence.In the case of Gamaroi material, the "museum expeditions" refer to the early20th century expeditions undertaken by Robert Etheridge, Jr. and Edmund O.Milne, both curators of the Australian Museum, who supplied the Museum withsome eighty carved trees by visiting old initiation and burial grounds in northcentral New South Wales.The 1938-39 Harvard-Adelaide Expedition, conducted by Norman B. Tindaleand Joseph B. Birdsell and documented by Tindale in his Journal, 14 cut acrosssouth, southeast and northeast Australia. During the expedition, valuable12Anderson, M. & Reeves, A. (1994) Contested identities: Museums and the nation inAustralia, in: Kaplan, F. (ed.) Museums and the Making of 'Ourselves': The Role of Objectsin National Identity, London & New York, Leicester University Press, p. 108.13As employed in the computer listing of Gamaroi artefacts at the Museum of Victoria, July1997.14Tindale, N. B. [1938-39] The Harvard-Adelaide Universities Anthropological Expedition,Australia, 1938-39: Journal and Notes, MS 1, pp. 1-758, Adelaide, Division of Ethnography,South Australian Museum.149

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researchesarchaeological material was collected, including millstones, choppers, hammerstones,hatchet heads, adze flakes, scrapers, cylcons, shells used as food and otherstone implements from north central New South Wales. Among the wealth ofnon-archaeological material, a water-craft (canoe) from the Macintyre River andseven canoe-wedges from Boggabilla, also on the Macintyre River, wereobtained. A large number of genealogies were also collected.In 1949 a joint "museum expedition" visited the Collymongle Bora (Gamaroimale initiation) grounds near Collarenebri, led by Norman B. Tindale of theSouth Australian Museum (Adelaide) and Donald Tugby of the NationalMuseum (Melbourne) and "inspired" by Lindsay Black of the town of Leeton,NSW. These men cut down fifty-two carved trees and, after dividing them intotwo lots by flicking a coin, transported them to the state museums in Adelaideand Melbourne. 15 The Museum of Victoria Ethnographic Catalogue 16 lists twenty-threeof these trees as having been collected by Lindsay Black, the collectiondate unknown. The accession date of 31 January 1950, however, points to the1949 "museum expedition". Freda Young's article 17 on the removal of carvedtrees from the Collymongle Bora grounds states that there were fifty-two treesremoved, of which twenty-five were sent to each of the two state museums andthe remaining two to the Queensland Museum in Brisbane. It appears, however,that the Queensland Museum does not hold any carved trees from that location.What has happened to them and the other two from the Museum ofVictoria? Have they been classified incorrectly, sent unregistered to (an)othermuseum/s which still keep them, destroyed in the process of adjustment to a newenvironment or due to handling, or did the author of this article present to thepublic an inconsistent or even wrong piece of information? I have not been ableto find answers to any of these questions.b) Some museum items have been purchased from individual, independent dealers,including travellers. Again, there is no evidence to support what today can be onlyconjectures: Were these items exchanged for material goods, bought for money,stolen, or simply given by people who maybe recognized in pale-skinned people thespirits of their ancestors or simply well-intentioned passers-by (sometimes in questof knowledge and/or a material proof of its existence), willing or even alert to hearAboriginal stories? It is highly probable that they were obtained in all of these ways,depending on people and circumstances. The naturalist Charles Daley appears tobe one of the few independent "professional" collectors of New South Wales items,in the sense that he probably made his living out of supplying museums withAboriginal artefacts. The Australian Museum is the only institution which has a writtenrecord of purchase at auctions, all of a recent date.15A part of the proceedings was documented visually by H.R. Balfour (National Museum,Melbourne). A copy of the film existing at the South Australian Museum has, according toan officer at that museum, been sent to a local Aboriginal organisation in New South Wales.16Computer print-out, July 1997.17Young, F. (1949) Scientists save sacred trees..., Australian Women's Weekly, [pp. 20-1].150

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian Museumsc) There is no special record of Australian museums exchanging particular items withother Australian or overseas museums, except for the Australian Museum, Sydney.A glimpse at overseas museums' lists of artefacts from Australia reveals, however,that a huge number of Aboriginal objects must have been either exchanged forother items from overseas museums' collections, or sold to the latter. 18In a few instances, it is clear that there has been some form of exchange or transactionbetween some Australian museums, since items that were at some point in timelisted as part of the inventory of one museum or institution suddenly appear not tobe there any more, but at a different location. Such is the case with the two carvedtrees which were first deposited at the Australian Institute of Anatomy in Canberra,from which they were later transferred to one of the museums. Sometimes it is difficultto trace the inter-museum movements of some items.d) Donated items came from the private collections of individual people, who laterdecided to give them to museums without any costs or prices involved. Oftenthese were members of the museum staff, usually curators or researchers.Sometimes donations were made by missionaries or travellers as well as by stationowners and local people.Sir William Macleay's collections (which included natural history specimens aswell as Australian anthropological and archaeological material) were formed inthe 1860s and the 1870s, and were subsequently bequeathed by Macleay to whatis now known as the Macleay Museum at the University of Sydney.e) For a number of artefacts the current curators are unable to determine acquisitiondetails, that is, the name of the person/institution from whom or which theyhad been originally acquired or the date of the transaction. These bear the label"unknown" for these designations.There are several reasons for this: the lack of adequate training, knowledge andskills of previous curators; insufficient information on and documentation ofobjects at the time of their acquisition; and finally, one should search for reasonsoutside museum institutions, related to who and how originally obtained theseobjects. As I already pointed out, today it is next to impossible to track down allthe factors and links in the chain of the shaping of today's museums' collections.The South Australian Museum Archaeological Collection Database neatly lists howand from whom the artefacts were acquired, although in some cases without theyear of the transactions. The three volumes of the guide to the main Aboriginal collection,however, regularly lack significant acquisition details, except for the artefactsobtained during Tindale and Birdsell's 1938-39 Harvard-Adelaide Expedition.The National Museum of Australia (Canberra) has a well-documented databaseof Aboriginal objects coming from New South Wales. The only drawback of thisMuseum's computer catalogue system, in my opinion, is the absence of an acquisitiondate for all but the few artefacts.18cf. Cooper, op.cit.151

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesClassification and documentation of artefactsThe main problem regarding the classification of Aboriginal artefacts is their multifunctionalnature. One and the same object can have, or contextually obtain, a fewif not many "different" meanings and functions. The use and significance it has (had)for an Aboriginal person of yesterday and today vary as much as the use and significanceit has for the twenty-first century non-Aboriginal person. It is thereforeextremely difficult to classify Aboriginal objects according to any of the factorsinvolved.For instance, a carved tree in its original geographical and cultural location, for aGamaroi of the pre-invasion period, probably (for we can only speculate and conjectureabout what was) had a whole range of meanings and significant practical aswell as spiritual functions (Fig. 4).Of course, all of these meanings and functions would together be incorporated intoa singular holistic body of culturally important knowledge, although they mighthave had only a limited significance for individual members of Gamaroi society.In the museum context, Aboriginal, and, we may well argue, any other objects, havebeen decontextualized (through the very act of their removal from their place of origin)and recontexualized (in the sense that, by being in a museum, they haveacquired a facet of new meanings). 19 One should bear in mind that museums arepresenting to the public a material culture in a reconstructed "traditional" context,that is, the museums' version (or rather versions as museum policies and consequentlydisplays change) of the past and present. In addition, each and every oneof the objects on a public display undergoes a process of further recontextualizationby the viewer, through the viewer's perception and the pre-existing knowledge(which may or may not exist) of the "authentic" socio-historical context.The classification of objects has a double significance for museums: it is importantfor the organization of both storage and documentation systems which are closelylinked anyway. A "classification" implies arranging or ordering material in a certainway, according to certain parameters. It enables the museum staff to allocate to certainobjects certain places in a store-room and place their descriptions under a certainfile name on a computer system. There is hardly a need to mention that it is aWestern concept and as such does not relate well, if it relates at all, to Aboriginalconcepts of time and space.Aboriginal artefacts have been classified by the museum staff according to basicallyonly two parameters: first, geographical location, and second, use. In order to classifythem in this way, the staff relied on additional sub-classifications according to19See, for instance, Lumley, R. (1988) The Museum Time-Machine: Putting Cultures onDisplay, London & New York, Routledge, and Russell, L. (1995) (Re)presented pasts:Historical and contemporary constructions of Australian Aborigines, unpublished PhD thesis,Melbourne, University of Melbourne.152

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesThis division is unsatisfactory as it does not take into account a possible multi-functionalityof Aboriginal objects. Some of these objects had more than one use: a spear,for example, was used as both a hunting implement and a fighting weapon. 23Bolton states that objects in museums' collections are "selected on the basis of theirmateriality and their portability". 24 This poses additional problems when it comes tostoring and presenting Aboriginal objects in museums. "Materiality" implies thatonly objects that are tangible and can be physically handled find their way into collections;what about other forms of Aboriginal knowledge such as story-telling andspirit-dwelling? Only very recently have Australian museums become aware of theseissues. Bolton mentions a meeting of Pacific museum curators in Vanuatu in July1995, during which the participants addressed the issue of spirits inhabiting indigenousobjects in museum collections and their concern about the possible repercussionsregarding the curators' safety as well as their responsibility for the places thusrepresented. 25 This was clearly an attempt to deal with indigenous rather thanexclusively Western concepts in the museum practice.In recent years Australian museums have seen a number of attempts to presentAboriginal knowledges in more "Aboriginal" contexts. Tape recordings, video andinteractive computer presentation are becoming increasingly popular. Yet, this creationof "Aboriginal" contexts is achieved largely by Western means: a tape-recorder,video or touch-screen rather than a real person or a group. 26"Portability" implies that only those objects that can be physically transferred fromtheir place of origin to a museum become museum artefacts. In the case of Gamaroimaterial, the museum staff often downplayed this principle, notably by literally cuttingdown carved trees off the Bora grounds and transporting them by trucks to twostate capitals.23In The Traditional Mode of Production of the Australian Aborigines (1987), North Ryde,NSW, Australia & London, UK, Angus & Robertson, p. 67, F.G.G. Rose acknowledges that"[t]he boundary between whether an instrument was used as a fighting weapon or as ahunting or collecting instrument was frequently not clearly defined."24Bolton, op.cit., p. 20.25ibid., p. 31.26I can recall an Aboriginal exhibition at the Australian Museum in Sydney in May-June 1997where two tape-recorded stories told by Aboriginal people of northern New South Waleswere presented to the Australian public. The recording would set off every time a visitorstepped into a designated place (the recontruction of a cave with stencilled hand-prints). Anexception to this practice is the inclusion of Aboriginal guides by the new MelbourneMuseum to address visitors' questions.154

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian MuseumsStorage of artefactsAboriginal artefacts in museum collections are regularly stored in four different ways:1 In the open, on long metal shelves: medium-sized objects made of harder materialand therefore not liable to easy damage, e.g. weapons and hunting implements,toys; occasionally, carved and scarred trees are also stored in this way;2 In long, flat drawers, laid upon or wrapped into large, thin sheets of paper: smalland medium-sized objects in need of more careful handling and sensitive to dust,e.g. clothing, wooden weapons;3 In smaller cardboard boxes, wrapped into several layers of thin paper: smallobjects sensitive both physically and culturally, e.g. mourning caps made of gypsum,cylcons made of softer stone; sets of small objects of the same type found onthe same location, e.g. archaeological material;4 In the open, in a special niche or cabin: individual or groups of large objects ofthe same type, e.g. canoes; sometimes objects culturally sensitive and restrictedin access, e.g. carved trees. Sometimes, these objects are bound together in a verticalposition with a metal chain or placed on an individual basis within a moreprotective cabin in the store-room. Occasionally, they are stored horizontally onopen shelves, or installed on separate stands and covered with light fabric. Onlyin one instance were carved trees stored in individually sized boxes, thus fullyprotected from both dust and repeated handling. As carved trees are consideredculturally sensitive material, they are normally stored separately, in a restrictedaccess area.In a store-room, the shelves normally occupy a central place, with drawers and cabinsoccupying lateral positions. The shelves and drawers are classified and labelledaccording to the general provenance of the objects they store. Thus, all objects comingfrom north-central New South Wales and southern Queensland will be stored inone place, depending yet again on the type.The method of storage of particular items depends largely on curators' skills, knowledgeand inclinations. One and the same type of object can be stored in two (rarelymore) different ways. For instance, some curators may perceive wooden weapons asenvironmentally-sensitive and place them into a drawer lined with paper, while othersmay simply store them on an open shelf.Trying to find an Aboriginal object described in a collection catalogue on a shelf orin a drawer is often a tedious process, even for the curators themselves. The difficultylies in the fact that all Aboriginal objects from throughout Australia aredeposited in the same storage area (usually only one room for the main, publiclyaccessible Aboriginal collection), which is subdivided according to the type and territory,hardly ever according to a particular language group. In addition, the oldtypecard catalogues, such as the one that still exists at the Australian Museum inSydney, again classify Aboriginal material according to its type, and not according toits provenance. The researcher inevitably finds him/herself spending a good few155

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researchesdays making notes about the objects he/she wishes to see (if possible), an additionalfew days (if not weeks) negotiating the time of visit to the repository with the curatorresponsible for that section and/or public relations and, once in the repository,spending at least another day locating the objects on the premises. Finally, theobjects viewed/ photographed have to be matched with their descriptions in the catalogue,which can easily be a nerve-racking experience if researchers do not have attheir disposal the actual image of the object (either a museum photograph or visualdocumentation from published material).Today most museums use computer cataloguing and transfer old, typed card cataloguesto the computer database. This enables the staff and researchers to access theexisting (often scraps of) information faster and more efficiently, as well as to carryout a particular search according to a certain principle, such as geographical locationor the collector. The Australian Museum is the only exception to the rule as itstill largely operates on the old card catalogue system.The catalogue of Aboriginal objects normally contains information on a series ofdetails, not all of which are usually known. This information has often been extractedand compiled from a number of older records (registers and catalogues), and is(for all the aforementioned reasons) more often than not incomplete. Figure 5shows catalogue details of Aboriginal artefacts in museum collections. 27Museum Policies on Aboriginal MaterialFollowing an intense debate on Aboriginal cultural heritage in Australian institutionsin the 1980s and the 1990s, 28 museums, libraries and other repositories ofAboriginal material were compelled to take a different stand and draft new policiesin relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander material. As museum "ownership"of indigenous objects (and knowledges) was contested by numerous scholarlystudies, the new concept of custodianship emerged. 29 In the span of over twenty years,museums and other cultural institutions have produced a number of legislative documentswhich (re)define their position in relation to this material. Today, Australianstate museums do not act as owners, but as custodians of Aboriginal objects in their27The list includes all categories I have encountered in museum catalogues, whereas, of course,most museums will not have all of them, or some categories may be interchangeable.28See Attwood, B. & Arnold, J. (eds) (1992) Power, Knowledge and Aborigines, Bundoora,Vic, La Trobe University Press; Healy, C. (1994) Histories and collecting: Museums, objectsand memories, in: Darian-Smith, K. & Hamilton, P. (eds) Memory and History inTwentieth-Century Australia, pp. 33-54, Melbourne, Oxford University Press; McBryde, I.(ed.) (1985) Who Owns the Past?, Melbourne, Oxford University Press; and Rigg, V. (1994)Curators of the colonial idea: The museum and the exhibition as agents of bourgeois ideologyin 19th century NSW, in: Public History Review, Vol. 3, pp. 188-203.29See, for instance, Mulvaney, D.J. (1989) Aboriginal Australia: Custodianship or ownership?A reflection on the National Estate, in: Heritage News, Vol. 11, No. 4.156

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian Museumscollections on behalf of Aboriginal communities. On the national level, this role ofmuseums and other federal institutions has been regulated and sanctioned by aseries of Commonwealth acts, including the National Parks and WildlifeConservation Act (1975), the Museum of Australia Act (1980), the Aboriginal andTorres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act (1984), and the Previous Possessions,New Obligations 30 document of the Council of Australian Museums Association. Eachstate also has its own legislation regarding indigenous material. In addition, individualstate museums have developed their own policies, consistent with the above. 31These policies have resulted in concrete changes in the museum practice. The"secret/sacred" and osteological collections are generally closed to new acquisitions,except where this is requested by Aboriginal communities. Some material has beende-accessioned and returned to communities according to approved repatriationclaims. The latter involve mainly human remains.A general dissatisfaction with the narrow, one-discipline approach to indigenousmaterial has resulted in its giving ground to the pressures for a variety of interdisciplinaryand indigenous-friendly perspectives. In the presentation of Aboriginalmaterial, museums have recently endeavoured to promote indigenous perspectivesby providing more environmentally-friendly exhibition space, employingAboriginal staff as guides and interpreters of exhibitions, and increasingly engagingin consultation with Aboriginal communities. Independent or affiliated professionalshave played an important role in advocating and furthering indigenous rights,and the guidelines of social research ethics have been extended to collection, display,management and promotion of indigenous material. 32 Old-fashioned museumsections such as the Pacific Cultures Gallery at the South Australian Museum inAdelaide have earned the ambiguously honorific title museum within a museum, 33 asnew, postcolonial readings of multicultural spaces create new social and museumlandscapes.30Previous Possessions, New Obligations: A Plain English Summary of Policies for Museumsin Australia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, [1993], North Fitzroy, Vic,Museums Australia Inc.31For instance, the Australian Museum has developed Policies and procedures for theAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander collections and related issues, [n.d.], Sydney,Australian Museum.32See Parrott (1990) Legislating to protect Australia's material cultural heritage - guidelinesfor cultural resources professionals, in: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 31, pp. 75-82; Stanton,J., et al. (1990) Positions and policies of museums in Australia on human skeletal remains,in: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 31, pp. 52-60; and Davidson, I. (1991) Notes for a code ofethics for Australian archaeologists working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage,in: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 32, pp. 61-63. Further information on Aboriginal culturaland intellectual property rights can be found on: http://icip.lawnet.com.au.33cf. Fergie, D. (1998) Unsettled history: Common sense, cannibalism and cultural displays, paperpresented at the Cultural Studies Association of Australia conference "Postcoloniality/CulturalStudies: Representing difference", Adelaide, University of South Australia.157

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesDespite such far-reaching changes and negotiation with indigenous communities,museums are still (and perhaps increasingly) seen as gatekeepers 34 exercising controlover indigenous material on their own terms: by restricting access to it by the selfimposedmechanisms of control, by disseminating selected information on their collections,and by reaping profits in the form of research fees and publication.Although it is state museum policy to inform Aboriginal communities about thematerial coming from a particular area, it appears that Aboriginal people, apartfrom the LALCs, are not fully aware of the existence of their material culture inmuseums. For most Aboriginal people the poor living conditions in rural areas andunfamiliarity with legal procedures are often enough to preclude their travelling inorder to track down their family histories and other sources locked up in "big" institutions.35 The local Aboriginal keeping places (Fig. 6), established and run byAboriginal staff, sometimes as private collections with some items returned by statemuseums, 36 provide an acceptable (and often desired) alternative.While federal and state museums and archives normally require that legal proceduresbe observed for accessing material or obtaining copies of photographs (sometimesat unreasonable prices), local keeping places often generously supply all theinformation needed, relying on moral rather than legal parameters. The investigationof the extent to which Aboriginal people are familiar with the plight of theirown culture remains to be carried out in further research. Only a few have thus farlifted the veil of dust and neglect fallen over the Aboriginal material in almost twohundred years of hidden and silenced history.34cf. Gostin, O. (1995) Accessing the Dreaming: Heritage, Conservation and Tourism atMungo National Park, Adelaide, University of South Australia, p. 107.35 See, for instance, Fourmile, H. (1989) Who owns the past? Aborigines as captives of thearchives, in: Aboriginal History, Vol. 13, Pt 1, pp. 1-8, Canberra, Australian Institute ofAboriginal Studies.36E.g. the Brewarrina Aboriginal Cultural Museum, and the "Goondee" Aboriginal KeepingPlace in Lightning Ridge, run by Roy and June Barker. The latter has a collection of archaeologicalobjects repatriated by the Australian Museum.158

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian MuseumsLiteratureAnderson, M. & Reeves, A. (1994) Contested identities: Museums and the nation inAustralia, in: Kaplan, F.E.S. (ed.) Museums and the Making of 'Ourselves': The Roleof Objects in National Identity, pp. 79-124, London & New York, LeicesterUniversity Press.Attwood, B. & Arnold, J. (eds) (1992) Power, Knowledge and Aborigines, Bundoora, Vic,La Trobe University Press.Bolton, L. (1997) A place containing many places: Museums and the use of objectsto represent place in Melanesia, in: Australian Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 8, No. 1,pp. 18-34.Cleary, T. (c.1993) Poignant Regalia: 19th Century Aboriginal Breastplates and Images: Acatalogue of Aboriginal breastplates held in public, regional and private collections in NewSouth Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and theAustralian National Territory, Glebe, NSW, Historic Houses Trust of NSW.Cooper, C. (1989) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Collections in Overseas Museums,The Institute Report Series, Canberra, Aboriginal Studies Press for AustralianInstitute of Aboriginal Studies.Davidson, I. (1991) Notes for a code of ethics for Australian archaeologists workingwith Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage, in: Australian Archaeology,Vol. 32, pp. 61-63.Fergie, D. (1998) Unsettled history: Common sense, cannibalism and cultural displays,paper presented at the Cultural Studies Association of Australia conference"Postcoloniality/ Cultural Studies: Representing difference", Adelaide,University of South Australia.Fourmile, H. (1989) Who owns the past? Aborigines as captives of the archives, in:Aboriginal History, Vol. 13, Pt 1, pp. 1-8, Canberra, Australian Institute ofAboriginal Studies.Gostin, O. (1995) Accessing the Dreaming: Heritage, Conservation and Tourism at MungoNational Park, Adelaide, University of South Australia.Harris, J. (1994) One Blood: 200 Years of Aboriginal Encounter with Christianity: A Storyof Hope, Melbourne, Oxford University Press.Healy, C. (1994) Histories and collecting: Museums, objects and memories, in:Darian-Smith, K. & Hamilton, P. (eds) Memory and History in Twentieth-CenturyAustralia, pp. 33-54, Melbourne, Oxford University Press.Healy, C. (2001) Chained to their signs: Remembering breastplates, in: Creed, B. &Hoorn, J. (eds) Body Trade: Captivity, Cannibalism and Colonialism in the Pacific, pp.24-35, Routledge in association with Pluto Press & University of Otago Press.Hugh-Jones, S. (1992) Yesterday's luxuries, tomorrow's necessities: Business andbarter in Northwest Amazonia, in: Humphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S. (eds) Barter,159

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesExchange and Value: An Anthropological Approach, pp. 42-74, Cambridge,Cambridge University Press.Humphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S. (1992) Introduction, in: Humphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S. (eds) Barter, Exchange and Value: An Anthropological Approach, pp. 1-20,Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Inard Oongali: Women's Journey [videorecording] (1999) New South Wales NationalParks and Wildlife Service.Kova~i}, L. (2001) Cataloguing culture: In search of the origins of written records,material culture and oral histories of the Gamaroi, northern New South Wales,unpublished PhD thesis, Melbourne, University of Melbourne.Lumley, R. (1988) The Museum Time-Machine: Putting Cultures on Display, London &New York, Routledge.McBryde, I. (ed.) (1985) Who Owns the Past?, Melbourne, Oxford University Press.McCarthy, F.D. (1939) 'Trade' in Aboriginal Australia and 'trade' relationships withTorres Strait, New Guinea and Malaya, in: Oceania, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 405-38; Vol.10, No. 1, pp. 80-104; Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 171-95.McCarthy, F.D. (1982) Anthropology in the museums of Australia, in: McCall, G.(ed.) Anthropology in Australia: Essays to Honour 50 Years of "Mankind", pp. 24-5,Sydney, Anthropological Society of NSW.Meehan, B. & Bona, J. (1986) National Inventory of Aboriginal Artefacts, AustralianMuseum, Sydney, Aboriginal Arts Board & Australian Institute of AboriginalStudies.Monaghan, D. (1991) The body snatchers, in: Bulletin, pp. 30-8.Mulvaney, D.J. (1989) Aboriginal Australia: Custodianship or ownership? A reflectionon the National Estate, in: Heritage News, Vol. 11, No. 4.Our Culture, Our Future: Indigenous Cultural & Intellectual Property Rights (1998)Michael Frankel & Company & Terri Janke, http://icip.lawnet.com.au, 17.07.02.Parrott (1990) Legislating to protect Australia's material cultural heritage - guidelinesfor cultural resources professionals, in: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 31, pp. 75-82.Policies and procedures for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander collections andrelated issues, [n.d.], Sydney, Australian Museum.Previous Possessions, New Obligations: A Plain English Summary of Policies for Museums inAustralia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, [1993], North Fitzroy, Vic,Museums Australia Inc.Rigg, V. (1994) Curators of the colonial idea: The museum and the exhibition asagents of bourgeois ideology in 19th century NSW, in: Public History Review, Vol.3, pp. 188-203.Rose, F.G.G. (1987) The Traditional Mode of Production of the Australian Aborigines,North Ryde, NSW, Australia & London, UK, Angus & Robertson.160

L. Kova~i}, Aboriginal Material Culture in Australian MuseumsRussell, L. (1995) (Re)presented pasts: Historical and contemporary constructionsof Australian Aborigines, unpublished PhD thesis, Melbourne, University ofMelbourne.Stanton, J., Meehan, B., Attenbrow, V., Mian, A.H., Reynolds B., Robins, R.,Wishart, E., Anderson, C., Clark, J. & Watt, R.J. (1990) Positions and policies ofmuseums in Australia on human skeletal remains, in: Australian Archaeology, Vol.31, pp. 52-60.Thomas, N. (1992) Politicised values: The cultural dynamics of peripheralexchange, in: Humphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S. (eds) Barter, Exchange and Value:An Anthropological Approach, pp. 21-41, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Tindale, N. B. [1938-39] The Harvard-Adelaide Universities AnthropologicalExpedition, Australia, 1938-39: Journal and Notes, MS 1, pp. 1-758, Adelaide,Division of Ethnography, South Australian Museum.Turnbull, P. (1991) Science, National Identity and Aboriginal Body-Snatching in NineteenthCentury Australia, London, Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, University ofLondon.Young, F. (1949) Scientists save sacred trees..., Australian Women's Weekly, [pp. 20-1].Fig. 6.05 List of museum catalogue detailsID:Registration number:Accession number:Name: / Object (Type):Subject:Restricted:Status:Hazard:Country:State/Province: / Area: / District: / Region:(Specific) Locality:History: / How Acquired:Date Acquired:Acquired From:Collector:Collection Date:Collection No:Date Registered: / Accession Date:Cultural/Language Group:Department:(Permanent) Location: / Unit: + Shelf: + Lot:Temporary Location:161

162Collection (Name):Admin File No:Previous Control No: / Old Reg No:Dimensions: / Measurements: / Size:Usual Store: Object Part:Usual Store:Current Location: Object Part:Status:Location:(Brief) description:Interpretation:Production Details: Method:Person: / Maker: + Gender:Role:Place:Date:Association Details: Person:Date:Place:Notes:Subject Details: Type:Documentation (Details):Sources: / Primary:Secondary:Documentation Files:Reference to Other Objects:Copyright Status:Owner:Exhibition:Conservation: Object Barcode:Store Barcode:Images:Entered By: Date:Edited By: Date:Remarks:References: / Reference to Papers:Photograph(s):

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaFig. 6.04 Carved tree: Possible meanings and functions163

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researches6.01 A6.01 B6.02 A6.02 B6.02 C6.036.06 A6.06 B164

Leonarda Kova~i}Sveu~ili{te u MelbourneuAustralijagamaroiºhotmail.comUDK 069(94).02:39069.01(94)994(=811.72):069Izvorni znanstveni rad/Original scientific paperPrimljeno/Recieved: 03.10.2002.Aborid`inskamaterijalna kultura uaustralskim muzejimaPorijeklo aborid`inskih zbirki u Australiji i izvan nje nedavno jepostalo predmetom brojnih studija. Kolonijalni muzeji su se po~eliusko povezivati s kolonijalnim praksama otu|ivanja i prisvajanja,a muzejske interpretacije povijesti autohtonih naroda pomno sepreispituju. U ovom ~lanku istra`uje se tradicija sakupljanja,klasificiranja, dokumentiranja, pohranjivanja, izlaganja i za{titeaborid`inske materijalne kulture u australskim muzejima i drugimustanovama. Ta tradicija, koja se razvila iz kolonijalnog diskursadevetnaestog stolje}a, predstavlja kontinuiran izazov i za kustosei za aborid`inske zajednice. Kao mjesta susreta europskih i autohtonihkultura, muzeji ostaju va`na upori{ta u povijesti autohtonihnaroda i kulturnog institucionalizma.Klju~ne rije~i: muzejske zbirke, Aborid`ini (Australija),kolonijalni muzeji, muzejska etika, muzejska praksa, nabavamuzejskih predmeta, dokumentacija zbirki, klasifikacijazbirkiUvodUistra`ivanju i naknadnoj analizi aborid`inskih predmetau australskim muzejima, dolazi se do neminovnogzaklju~ka da je ono {to danas postoji u njihovim depoima i na povremenimizlo`bama tek bijedan odraz samo nekoliko aspekata aborid`inskoga svakodnevnog`ivota i duhovnosti. Iako su brojni razlozi tomu, u ovom }u ~lanku razmotriti samonajo~itije.165

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesProces otkrivanja aborid`inske materijalne kulture u australskim ustanovamamukotrpan je zadatak. Usredoto~enost na materijalnu kulturu jedne aborid`inskeskupine ~ini ga jo{ izazovnijim, budu}i da su njihovi kulturni ostaci ~esto rasijani pocijelom kontinentu pa su potrebna duga razdoblja putovanja da bi se prikupili ianalizirali podaci. Muzejsko istra`ivanje bilo je tek jedna komponenta mog projektakoji je bio usredoto~en na tradicijske prakse samo jedne aborid`inske skupine(Gamaroi) iz sjevernog New South Walesa. 1 Iako je ova ~injenica ograni~ila opseg idomet mog istra`ivanja, njegovi su rezultati primjenjivi na aborid`insku Australijuop}enito. Ne postoji aborid`inska zajednica koja, u odre|enom trenutku, nije iskusilaneki oblik kulturnoga genocida. Praksa sakupljanja odigrala je klju~nu ulogu utom procesu. U ovom ~lanku istra`ujem metode nabave, klasifikacije, dokumentacije,pohrane i izlaganja aborid`inske gra|e, koje su pridonijele otu|ivanju kultureaborid`inskih naroda.Podizanje vela pra{ineKao {to je pokazala Carol Cooper u izvje{taju Aborid`inske i oto~ke zbirke u prekomorskimmuzejima, uobi~ajena praksa australskih muzeja prije dvadesetog stolje}a bila je slanjenekih od nabavljenih aborid`inskih predmeta u britanske i druge europske muzeje,bilo kao izraz pa`nje ili u znak dobre volje prema britanskoj kruni ili pak u razmjenuza druge predmete. 2 Moje istra`ivanje bilo je, me|utim, usredoto~eno nasadr`aj australskih saveznih, sveu~ili{nih i nekih lokalnih aborid`inskih muzeja,galerija i pri~uvnih centara u jugoisto~noj Australiji.Podaci o broju, vrsti, stanju i javnoj/istra`iva~koj dostupnosti aborid`inskih predmetau australskim muzejima prikupljeni su u Melbourneu (srpanj 1997.), nastru~nim putovanjima u Sydneyu (svibanj-lipanj 1997., rujan 1998., prosinac 1999.),Canberri (kolovoz 1997.), Adelaidei (travanj-svibanj 1998.) i Brisbaneu (listopad1998.), za vrijeme terenskog istra`ivanja u sjevernom New South Walesu (srpanjrujan1999.) i, u manjoj mjeri, dopisivanjem i preko javnih medija, uklju~uju}iinternet. Opisana situacija mo`da }e se u narednim godinama promijeniti s obziromi na ~injenicu da su neke od ovih ustanova bile (i jo{ uvijek su) u delikatnom procesukontinuiranog pregovaranja s aborid`inskim zajednicama, naro~ito u vezi s repatrijacijomkulturno osjetljivog materijala.^esto je pisani materijal usmjeravao moju potragu, osobito onaj objavljen izme|u1850-ih i 1920-ih godina, to jest, u razdoblju od dvostrukog zna~aja za o~uvanje kul-1Projekt je ostvaren kao glavna komponenta mog doktorata na Sveu~ili{tu u Melbourneu, odvelja~e 1997. do listopada 2001. Druga dva podru~ja mog istra`ivanja bili su povijesni zapisii usmena tradicija Gamaroi naroda.2Cooper, C. (1989) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Collections in Overseas Museums, TheInstitute Report Series, Canberra, Aboriginal Studies Press for Australian Institute ofAboriginal Studies. "Oto~ki" se odnosi na narode Torresovog tjesnaca, sjeveroisto~no od australskogkontinenta (nap. prev.).166

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimature ve}ine aborid`inskih skupina unutra{njeg New South Walesa i Queenslanda. Uprvom redu, ovo razdoblje po~inje neposredno nakon po~etka kolonizacije, kada sulokalne aborid`inske skupine jo{ uvijek (i, rekla bih, u znatnoj mjeri) odr`avale svojtradicionalni identitet, koji je osiguravao da glavnina njihovog znanja ostaneuglavnom netaknuta. Kao drugo, ta je situacija omogu}ila, te uistinu i nadahnula,odre|eni broj amaterskih, a kasnije i profesionalnih antropologa (ili, primjerenijeonom vremenu, etnologa) da pro{ire i modificiraju postoje}a naga|anja i vjerovanjasvojih suvremenika, uklju~uju}i i javnost op}enito, o australskim "plemenitimdivljacima". Dok je sve ve}i broj pojedinaca lutao prostranim ravnicama unutra{njeAustralije u potrazi za znanjem i materijalnim predmetima, kako se tada op}enitovjerovalo, "brzo izumiru}ih Aborid`ina", direktori i kustosi australskih muzejaodu{evljavali su se izgledima za oboga}enjem svojih zbirki, po svoj prilici, zadnjimostacima kulture "na rubu izumiranja". 3 Ta je situacija vrlo vjerojatno doprinijeladaljnjem, toga puta i kulturno ozakonjenom, iskorjenjivanju svetih aborid`inskihobi~aja. S jedne strane, poticala je Europljane da odlaze na teren i nabavljaju, ~estopod sumnjivim okolnostima, predmete aborid`inskih skupina koji su se koristili usvakodnevnom `ivotu i u odre|enim ceremonijalnim prigodama. S druge pakstrane, postupno je odvra}ala Aborid`ine od proizvodnje predmeta poput {titova ibumeranga isklju~ivo za svoje vlastite potrebe i, umjesto toga, poticala ih daproizvode predmete s karakteristikama koje su se svi|ale europskoj "publici". To jerazlog za{to na nekim predmetima iz tog razdoblja otkrivamo cijeli niz uzoraka,npr., izrezbarena srca, cvije}e i druge neaborid`inske motive, koji su o~igledno ukorporiraniu aborid`inski funkcionalni predmet i tako pretvoreni u aborid`inskoumjetni~ko djelo namijenjeno razmjeni ili prodaji.Me|utim, ne mo`emo ignorirati niti ~injenicu da su i Aborid`ini, kroz nedostataksvijesti ili {utnju, pridonijeli kona~nim tragi~nim posljedicama. Nema sumnje da suu nekim, iako vjerojatno dosta rijetkim slu~ajevima, Aborid`ini imali koristi (baremekonomske) od europskog zanimanja za njihovu kulturu. Kao {to daju naslutiti brojnakolonijalna iskustva, kada se sretnu dvije razli~ite kulture, obi~no dolazi dorazmjene dobara ili trgovine. 4 Radi li se o razmjeni starosjedila~kog oru`ja za duhan,staklene perle ili novac nebitno je tako dugo dok su obje strane zadovoljne (iakoopseg takvih ugovora ~esto nije bio jasno definiran).3Zanimljivo je da su Aborid`ini na "rubu izumiranja" ve} tako dugo da bismo trebali biti iznena|enida ih jo{ uop}e ima, te da neki jo{ odr`avaju tradicionalne obi~aje. Za podrobnijuraspravu povijesnog diskursa koji je stvorio i podupirao ovakav stav, vidjeti Peto poglavlje u:Kova~i}, L. (2001) Cataloguing culture: In search of the origins of written records, materialculture and oral histories of the Gamaroi, northern New South Wales, unpublished PhDthesis, Melbourne, University of Melbourne.4Zna~aj robne razmjene izme|u autohtonih naroda i kolonizatora op{irno su razmatraliHumphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S. (1992) Introduction, u: Humphrey, C. & Hugh-Jones, S.(eds) Barter, Exchange and Value: An Anthropological Approach, str. 1-20, Cambridge,Cambridge University Press. Dvosmjerna priroda robne razmjene obja{njena je ovako: "Uosnovi, robnu razmjenu odre|uje interes koji svaka strana ima za predmet one druge,interes koji se zadovoljava transakcijom."; ibid., str. 7. U: Politicised values: The cultural167

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesRazlog zbog kojeg ovo i dan-danas previ|a ve}ina istra`iva~a jest ~injenica da sunedjela i masakri koje su po~inili europski do{ljaci (pojedinci i ustanove) nadAborid`inima u~inili bespredmetnima takve, ne tako zna~ajne (mada nipo{tobezna~ajne), pojedinosti. Europa i njezini kolonijalni teritoriji do`ivjeli su u devetnaestomstolje}u uspon fizi~ke antropologije kojoj je bila potrebna "svje`a"istra`iva~ka gra|a u obliku ljudskih lubanja, kostiju i drugog osteolo{kog materijala."Otimanje tijela" ubrzo je postalo najbrutalnijim (i najunosnijim) oblikom muzejske"trgovine". Bila je to, u devetnaestom stolje}u, uobi~ajena metoda za snabdijevanjeprekomorskih i kolonijalnih muzeja aborid`inskim osteolo{kim materijalom, dokazi~ega su jo{ opipljivi u ve}ini takvih ustanova. 5Novi vlasnici, nove pozicijeAborid`inske zbirke u australskim federalnim i saveznim muzejima mogu se grubopodijeliti u dvije skupine: prvu ~ine takozvani tradicionalni predmeti nabavljeni uranom kolonijalnom razdoblju, a drugu predmeti nabavljeni u postkolonijalnoj eri.Prvi su proizvedeni prije ili neposredno nakon po~etka kolonizacije, a obuhva}ajubumerange, toljage, sjekire, {titove, koplja, dje~je igra~ke, torbe, izrezbarena iizbrazdana stabla, pogrebna pokrivala za glavu, kanue itd., kao i raznu arheolo{kugra|u i predmete koje su Aborid`inima dale kolonijalne vlasti, poput plo~a za prsa. 6Potonji su nabavljeni od aborid`inskih zajednica u pro{lih pedesetak godina, iobi~no predstavljaju oru`je, (dje~je) crte`e i umjetnost inspiriranu tradicionalnimstilovima i metodama proizvodnje. Mene je kao istra`iva~a ponajprije zanimalo daidentificiram porijeklo i sada{nji status prve skupine predmeta.dynamics of peripheral exchange, u: ibid., str. 21-41, Nicholas Thomas navodi brojne opiserazmjene izme|u Poline`ana, Inuita i pacifi~kih Oto~ana, te zapadnih do{ljaka. Transakcijesu se u osnovi zasnivale na nejednakosti: "Ovdje, autohtoni stanovnici gotovo smjesta prepoznajusvoju tehnolo{ku inferiornost i u njima se javlja velika i neuta`iva `elja za europskomrobom."; ibid., str. 22. U: Yesterday's luxuries, tomorrow's necessities: Business andbarter in Northwest Amazonia, u: ibid., str. 42-74, Stephen Hugh-Jones pokazuje kakav jeu~inak europska roba imala na narode Amazonije, i sli~no ukazuje na privla~nost te robe injezinu ulogu u `ivotima autohtonih stanovnika: "Zapadna roba pru`ala je nove i pove}anemogu}nosti i za tehnolo{ku i za simboli~ku inovaciju."; ibid., str. 59. U svojoj knjizi One Blood:200 Years of Aboriginal Encounter with Christianity: A Story of Hope (1994), Melbourne, OxfordUniversity Press, str. 240, John Harris nakratko spominje "krajnju eksploataciju od stranedoseljenika" potaknutu "privremenom iluzijom Aborid`ina o tome da su europski predmetiizuzetno po`eljno bogatstvo. ... Suo~eni s ne~im {to im se moralo ~initi kao nevjerojatnobogatstvo, neki mu{karci bili su voljni podvoditi svoje `ena za europske artikle."5Kao {to razmatraju Monaghan, D. (1991) The body snatchers, u: Bulletin, str. 30-8, iTurnbull, P. (1991) Science, National Identity and Aboriginal Body-Snatching in Nineteenth CenturyAustralia, London, Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, University of London.6Mjedene plo~e za prsa ~esto su davane Aborid`inima koji su posredovali izme|u kolonijalnihvlasti i lokalnog aborid`inskog stanovni{tva. Tipi~na plo~a sadr`i natpis "Kralj (iliKraljica) [tog i tog mjesta]" i stereotipne prikaze klokana i emua, danas slu`benih amblema168

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaSva aborid`inska gra|a tako|er spada u jednu od ~etiri kategorije: u etnografske,arheolo{ke, "svete/tajne" ili osteolo{ke zbirke. Dok su prve dvije otvorene javnosti,pristup "svetim/tajnim" i osteolo{kim zbirkama ograni~en je u razli~itoj mjeri. Ovapodjela aborid`inske gra|e na takozvani svjetovni (to jest, u pristupu neograni~en)i "sveti/tajni" materijal kojemu je pristup bio ograni~en, do{la je do izra`aja uposljednjem desetlje}u. Prvi obuhva}a ve}inu predmeta kori{tenih u svakodnevnom`ivotu, dok se drugi sastoji od privatnih i ceremonijalnih predmeta kao {to suchuringe (zuja~e da{~ice) i dendroglifi. 7Postoje tri kategorije predmeta s ograni~enim pristupom (uklju~uju}i i "svete/tajne")s obzirom na to tko ih i pod kakvim uvjetima mo`e vidjeti. Prvu kategoriju predmeta(npr., dendroglife) mogu vidjeti Aborid`ini op}enito kao i ne-Aborid`ini(uklju~uju}i i muzejsko osoblje) koji dobiju posebno dopu{tenje od relevantneaborid`inske zajednice. Predmete koji spadaju u drugu kategoriju (npr., ljudskiposmrtni ostaci) ne mo`e vidjeti nitko osim Aborid`ina u izravnom krvnom srodstvui relevantnog muzejskog osoblja. Napokon, tre}a skupina sastoji se od predmetapoput churingi koji su tradicionalno bili dostupni samo odabranoj nekolicini (npr.,potpuno iniciranim mu{karcima/`enama, ili ljudima od znanja). Budu}i da danasvi{e nema `ivih ~lanova zajednice koji bi mogli nadzirati takav materijal, zajednicamo`e dati pravo trajnog nadzora nad njime odre|enome muzeju u kojem sepohranjuju trajno zape~a}eni predmeti koje ne mo`e vidjeti apsolutno nitko, ~akniti direktor muzeja.Savezni i sveu~ili{ni muzeji imaju najve}e zbirke aborid`inske gra|e, dok lokalneaborid`inske galerije i pri~uvni centri pohranjuju ograni~en broj predmeta lokalnogporijekla ili proizvodnje te one rijetke koje su savezni muzeji vratili lokalnoj zajednici.Na lokalnoj razini, ustanova poput astronomskog opservatorija mo`e ponekadneo~ekivano pohranjivati neke lokalno na|ene predmete.Australije. O plo~ama za prsa raspravljaju i stru~njaci i aborid`inska inteligencija kao osramotnim kolonijalnim reprezentacijama "aborid`inskosti". Vidi, na primjer, Cleary, T.(c.1993) Poignant Regalia: 19th Century Aboriginal Breastplates and Images: A catalogue ofAboriginal breastplates held in public, regional and private collections in New South Wales, Victoria,Tasmania, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and the Australian National Territory,Glebe, NSW, Historic Houses Trust of NSW, i Healy, C. (2001) Chained to their signs:Remembering breastplates, u: Creed, B. & Hoorn, J. (eds) Body Trade: Captivity, Cannibalismand Colonialism in the Pacific, str. 24-35, Routledge in association with Pluto Press &University of Otago Press.7Izrezbarena stabla ili dendroglifi jedinstveni su predmeti za aborid`inske narode Wiradjurii Gamaroi, iz centralnog i sjevernog New South Walesa, i za njihove neposredne susjede.Razlikuju se dvije vrste dendroglifa: teleteglifi (inicijacijska stabla) i tafoglifi (pogrebna stabla).Kori{teni su u ceremonijalne svrhe i predstavljaju glavnu skupinu kulturno osjetljivegra|e u saveznim muzejima jugoisto~ne Australije. Teleteglifima je pristup prvotno bioograni~en na potpuno inicirane mu{karce, a prekr{aj ovog tabua povla~io je smrtnu kaznu.Tafoglifi se smatraju privatnim predmetima. Dendroglife mogu vidjeti samo ~lanovidoti~nih aborid`inskih zajednica ili su dostupni uz pismeno dopu{tenje lokalnihaborid`inskih zemaljskih vije}a.169

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesKulturne ustanove koje pohranjuju aborid`inske predmete uklju~uju tako|erknji`nice, arhive, Upravu za nacionalne parkove i za{titu prirode (s ograncima usvakoj saveznoj dr`avi) i razne vladine urede. Ove ustanove pohranjuju novine,rukopise i rijetke knjige, fotografije, filmove, audio- i video-vrpce 8 te arheolo{kugra|u. Ogranci Uprave za nacionalne parkove i za{titu prirode tako|er su odgovorniza odr`avanje i nadzor aborid`inskih mjesta i objekata in situ. Pored ovih institucijskihizvora, zna~ajna koli~ina podataka mo`e se dobiti od lokalnih povjesni~ara,antropologa i lingvista (amatera), kao i od lokalnih aborid`inskih zemaljskih vije}a ipojedinaca. Potonji vas mogu obdariti pri~ama i usmenom predajom, dopustiti daposjetite zna~ajna mjesta, pomo}i da do|ete do gra|e s ograni~enim pristupom usaveznim i lokalnim muzejima, te nabavite obiteljska rodoslovlja. 9Zvu~ne i slikovne zbirke pri Australskom institutu aborid`inskih i oto~kih studija uCanberri pohranjuju audio-vrpce i fotografije, od kojih su potonje snimljene u drugojpolovici devetnaestog stolje}a, no bez dostatnih (ako ikakvih) pojedinosti oosobama koje prikazuju i bez to~nog datuma kada su snimljene. Na istu sam situacijunai{la i u Arhivu New South Walesa u Sydneyu. Potresno je iskustvo pregledavanjefotografija koje prikazuju niz Aborid`ina bez osobnih imena i kulturne pripadnosti,kao i vladine misije i rezervate koji su pridonijeli tom kulturnom otu|ivanju.Nedostatak atribucije na fotografijama prisutan je i u Slikovnoj zbirci Nacionalneknji`nice Australije u Canberri.Savezni muzeji pohranjuju posmrtne ostatke razli~itih aborid`inskih skupina, ponajprijes ciljem odre|ivanja njihovog porijekla, to jest, geografskog podru~ja ijezi~ne pripadnosti, starosti i stanja pokojnika koji odra`avaju klimatske, ekonomskei druge uvjete `ivota na tom podru~ju itd. Odsjek za ljudsku biologiju Muzeja Ju`neAustralije pohranjuje znatnu koli~inu ove gra|e. Australski muzej u Sydneyupohranjuje ne{to osteolo{kog materijala. Muzej Queenslanda otpisao je ve}inu osteolo{kegra|e i repatrirao je zajednicama za ponovnu sahranu. Nisam imala prilikevidjeti ovaj materijal, niti bi me to veselilo. Poput "svetog/tajnog" materijala, pristuposteolo{koj gra|i redovno je ograni~en i mogu je vidjeti samo krvni srodnici i predstavnicidoti~ne aborid`inske zajednice.Ve}ina ovih zbirki, me|utim, trpi od istog nedostatka: ~ak i gdje predmeti dolaze izodre|ene regije, njihova je jezi~na pripadnost neizvjesna. To odra`ava proizvoljneprocese odabira pri stvaranju ranih zbirki, koji su odgovorni za klasifikacijske etiketekoje ~esto indiciraju tek {iru geografsku lokaciju kao mjesto porijekla predmeta.8Video-produkcija je, iako nedavnog datuma, svejedno neprocjenjiv izvor informacija budu}ida stari Aborid`ini umiru i ~esto ne postoji nitko tko bi o~uvao i proslijedio njihovu kulturnuba{tinu. Godine 1999., na primjer, Uprava za nacionalne parkove i za{titu prirode NewSouth Walesa snimila je dokumentarni film Inard Oongali: Women's Journey, prvi opse`nijivideo o "`enskim stvarima" Gamaroi `ena, sa sedam glavnih starijih Gamaroi `ena. Jedna od`ena umrla je nekoliko mjeseci nakon njegovog objavljivanja.9Kopije genealogija do kojih sam tako do{la poslane su zatim ljudima koji su mi dopustili daih vidim. Ostatak materijala na{ao je put do moje disertacije, kako bi ga zajednice moglekoristiti kao izvor priru~nih informacija.170

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaSada }emo se sustavnije pozabaviti osnovnim problemima s kojima se susre}e svatkokoga zanima aborid`inska gra|a u australskim kulturnim ustanovama. To su: nabavapredmeta; klasifikacija i dokumentacija predmeta; pohrana predmeta; i politikamuzeja prema aborid`inskoj gra|i u njihovim zbirkama.Nabava predmetaPrimarni cilj australskih muzeja, kao i svih drugih, bilo je o~uvanje australskihaborid`inskih i drugih materijalnih predmeta od propasti uslijed zuba vremena,vremenskih nepogoda i "nestru~nog" rukovanja. Pored ovoga, australski muzejiimali su i drugi cilj: da sakupe {to je mogu}e vi{e kulturne gra|e {to reprezentativnijegporijekla, proizvodnje i, u manjoj mjeri, zna~aja za izvorne vlasnike, kako bi stvorilicjelovitu muzejsku zbirku. Me|utim, sude}i po onome {to je preostalo odizvornih zbirki, ~ini se da su australski muzeji podbacili u oba slu~aja.Kao prvo, pitanje o~uvanja danas je (osobito u slu~aju autohtonih znanja i kultura)sporno podru~je u kojem autohtona prava igraju zna~ajnu ulogu i ukazuju na va`napitanja poput sljede}ih: Mo`emo li nazivati "o~uvanjem" ono {to iz dana{nje perspektiveizgleda kao nemilosrdno plja~kanje i kra|a od strane pojedinaca i institucija?Na primjer, mogu li dendroglifi preseljeni sa svetih Gamaroi i Wiradjuri inicijacijskihmjesta na bilo koji na~in predstavljati kulturu koja vi{e ne postoji? Li{enisvoga kulturnog konteksta i geografske lokacije, mo`e li ih ikada aborid`inska ilineaborid`inska publika vidjeti kao spomenike koji su pre`ivjeli zub vremena ipropast uslijed vremenskih nepogoda? A {to je s propa{}u koja je inherentna usamom ~inu njihovog preseljenja? A da ne spominjem sramotno bacanje nov~i}akoje je odredilo sudbinu nekih od ovih stabala u odnosu na njihovu budu}upohranu u okrilju dvaju saveznih muzeja (tada Nacionalnog muzeja Victorije uMelbourneu i Muzeja Ju`ne Australije u Adelaidei). 10Nabava aborid`inskih predmeta u ranim danima muzeja ovisila je uvelike o znanjui vje{tini kustosa, ne samo o gra|i, nego i o na~inima njene nabave. Budu}i da jeprvim kustosima australskih muzeja redovno nedostajalo oboje (neki od njih nisuimali nikakvu obuku u antropologiji ili srodnim disciplinama, i taj se trend dobranonastavio u dvadesetom stolje}u), ~inilo bi se pravim ~udom da su australski muzeji idalje na glasu zbog svojih aborid`inskih zbirki da nije bilo tri direktora u posljednjemdesetlje}u devetnaestog i u prva tri desetlje}a dvadesetog stolje}a: SiraEdwarda Stirlinga (Muzej Ju`ne Australije, Adelaide; 1889.-1913., po~asni etnolog1914.-1919.), Roberta Etheridgea, mla|eg (Australski muzej, Sydney; 1895.-1920.,pionirski rad 1889.-1918.), i Sira W. Baldwina Spencera (Muzej Victorije,Melbourne; 1899.-1928., ~lan upravnog odbora 1895.-1899.).Ovi su direktori uveli dalekose`ne promjene u politici svojih muzeja. Za njihovaupravljanja, nabava aborid`inskih predmeta dosegla je nevjerojatan porast.10Za dodatne pojedinosti, vidjeti dalje u tekstu.171

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesMarljivo su radili, ne samo na snabdijevanju vlastitih zbirki predmetima nabavljenimu Australiji, ve} su ih i razmjenjivali s prekomorskim muzejima te kupovali name|unarodnim izlo`bama. Tako su mnogi nezamjenjivi aborid`inski predmetitransportirani preko mora i Australija je ostala bez njih. 11Prije toga, australski su muzeji nabavljali malo, osobito u razdobljima od 1853. do1860. te od 1860. do 1874., {to je bio odraz op}eg nedostatka svijesti i nepriznavanjaaborid`inske kulture u australskim novoosnovanim kolonijama. Muzeji su sesuo~avali s va`nim politi~kim pitanjem u svojoj potrazi za aborid`inskim predmetimai bili su u vrlo nepovoljnom polo`aju zbog postupaka ranih doseljenika koji suse vrlo ~esto kosili s onima usmjerenim ka o~uvanju aborid`inskog naslje|a: autenti~neaborid`inske predmete bilo je sve te`e na}i pod prismotrom doseljenika ifarmera neprijateljski raspolo`enih prema Aborid`inima.Godine 1882. zauvijek je izbrisan dragocjen izvor znanja za budu}e nara{taje kadasu se zapalila 342 aborid`inska primjerka koje je Australski muzej nabavio ipohranio u Vrtnoj pala~i u Sydneyu nakon Me|unarodne izlo`be 1879. U sljede}ihpet godina, kustos Muzeja dr. E. P. Ramsey vi{e je nego utrostru~io broj etnolo{kihpredmeta (uklju~uju}i i neaustralske) u zbirci. Nije, me|utim, bilo poku{aja da sestvori muzejski katalog koji bi sadr`avao popis inventara saveznih muzeja, izuzevkataloga Sira Baldwina Spencera za Nacionalni muzej Victorije (1901-1922), odkojih sam uspjela konzultirati samo izdanja iz 1918. i 1922. godine.Da rezimiramo, na ranije nabavke utjecali su sljede}i problemi:1. op}i nedostatak svijesti i nepriznavanje aborid`inskih kultura;2. sukobljavaju}i interesi: kustosi naspram doseljenika i farmera;3. neosposobljeni kustosi i muzejsko osoblje; i4. nepostojanje (primjerenih) muzejskih kataloga i popisa inventara.Zamjetljiv izuzetak u sabira~koj strasti muzejskih kustosa bili su predmeti koje suizradile i koristile aborid`inske `ene i djeca. Glavni razlog njihovoj vidljivo slaboj zastupljenostiu zbirkama jest ~injenica {to su muzejsko osoblje sa~injavali mu{karci,anglosaski "stru~njaci" koji u "`enskim stvarima" nisu vidjeli ni{ta posebno ili vrijedno,~ak kada im je i bilo dopu{teno da promatraju njihovu svakodnevniju stranu. Otome govore i Anderson i Reeves: "Odsutnost `ena u odsjecima za etnografiju ostavilaje dugoro~ne posljedice na rodnu ravnote`u aborid`inskih zbirki. Nedavnoistra`ivanje aborid`inskih zbirki glavnih saveznih i federalnih muzeja pokazalo je dase izme|u 75% i 80% svih predmeta odnosi na materijalnu kulturu mu{karaca prijenego `ena." 1211Usp. McCarthy, F.D. (1982) Anthropology in the museums of Australia, u: McCall, G. (ed.)Anthropology in Australia: Essays to Honour 50 Years of "Mankind", Sydney, AnthropologicalSociety of NSW, str. 24 - 25.12Anderson, M. & Reeves, A. (1994) Contested identities: Museums and the nation inAustralia, u: Kaplan, F. (ed.) Museums and the Making of 'Ourselves': The Role of Objects inNational Identity, London & New York, Leicester University Press, str. 108.172

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaPredmeti u vlasni{tvu dana{njih muzeja nabavljeni su na nekoliko razli~itih na~ina:a) sakupljanjem u takozvanim "muzejskim ekspedicijama" koje je poduzimalo muzejskoosoblje; b) otkupom, uglavnom od pojedinih sabira~a i, u manjoj mjeri, nadra`bama; c) razmjenom; d) donacijom; e) na nepoznat na~in.a) Termin "muzejska ekspedicija" 13 odnosi se na odlazak muzejskog osoblja na terenod, u ovom slu~aju, antropolo{kog interesa, i nabavljanje primjeraka od pojedinacaili skupine ljudi, ili naprosto uzimanje (ponekad doslovno otimanje) predmetakoji su se smatrali znanstveno dragocjenima, od kojih bi ina~e neki ubrzonestali uslijed starosti, atmosferskih uvjeta i, tek nedavno priznatog, vandalizma.U pro{losti, ova je odluka ~esto ovisila o jednom ili dva "antropologa". Sizuzetkom najrecentnijih nabavki, nisam nai{la ni na jedan dokumentirani primjeru kojem bi se muzejsko osoblje posavjetovalo i dobilo odobrenje od doti~nihlokalnih skupina ili pojedinaca prije (ili barem nakon) preseljenja bilo "profanih"bilo "svetih" predmeta s mjesta njihove proizvodnje ili nalazi{ta.Kada se radi o Gamaroi gra|i, "muzejske ekspedicije" poduzimali su po~etkom20. stolje}a Robert Etheridge, mla|i i Edmund O. Milne, obojica kustosiAustralskog muzeja, koji su za Muzej nabavili osamdesetak dendroglifa sa starihinicijacijskih i pogrebnih mjesta u sjeverno-centralnom New South Walesu.Harvardsko-adelaidska ekspedicija iz 1938.-1939., koju su predvodili Norman B.Tindale i Joseph B. Birdsell i koju je Tindale dokumentirao u svom Dnevniku, 14sjekla je preko ju`ne, jugoisto~ne i sjeveroisto~ne Australije. Za vrijeme ekspedicije,sakupljena je dragocjena arheolo{ka gra|a, koja je uklju~ivala `rvnjeve,sje~iva, nakovnje, vrhove sjekira, krhotine sjekirica, strugala, cilkone 15 , {koljke zaishranu i druga kamena oru|a iz sjeverno-centralnog New South Walesa.Unutar bogate nearheolo{ke gra|e, nabavljena je i splav (kanu) s rijekeMacintyre te sedam dijelova kanua iz Boggabille, tako|er na rijeci Macintyre.Sakupljen je i velik broj genealogija.Godine 1949. zdru`ena "muzejska ekspedicija", predvo|ena Normanom B.Tindaleom iz Muzeja Ju`ne Australije (Adelaide) i Donaldom Tugbyjem izNacionalnog muzeja (Melbourne), a "nadahnuta" Lindsayom Blackom iz gradi}aLeetona, NSW, posjetila je Boru Collymongle (mu{ko inicijacijsko mjestoGamaroi naroda) blizu Collarenebrija. Oni su posjekli pedeset dva dendroglifa i,podijeliv{i ih u dvije hrpe bacanjem nov~i}a, transportirali do saveznih muzeja uAdelaidei i Melbourneu. 16 Etnografski katalog Muzeja Victorije 17 navodi da je13Primijenjen u ra~unalnom ispisu Gamaroi predmeta u Muzeju Victorije, od srpnja 1997.14Tindale, N. B. [1938-39] The Harvard-Adelaide Universities Anthropological Expedition,Australia, 1938-39: Journal and Notes, MS 1, str. 1-758, Adelaide, Division of Ethnography,South Australian Museum.15Orig. cylcons: cilindri~no-koni~ni kamenovi koji su se koristili u ceremonijalne svrhe(op.prev.).16Dio doga|aja vizualno je dokumentirao H. R. Balfour (Nacionalni Muzej, Melbourne).Kopija filma koji se nalazi u Muzeju Ju`ne Australije, prema slu`benici Muzeja, poslan jelokalnoj aborid`inskoj organizaciji u New South Walesu.17Ra~unalni ispis od srpnja 1997.173

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researchesdvadeset tri od ovih stabala sakupio Lindsay Black, a datum je sabiranja nepoznat.Datum dostupnosti od 31. sije~nja 1950., me|utim, ukazuje na "muzejskuekspediciju" iz 1949. ^lanak Frede Young 18 o uklanjanju dendroglifa s BoreCollymongle navodi da su uklonjena pedeset dva stabla, od ~ega je po dvadesetpet poslano u dva savezna muzeja, a preostala dva u Muzej Queenslanda uBrisbaneu. Pokazalo se, me|utim, da Muzej Queenslanda ne posjeduje nijedandendroglif s te lokacije. [to se dogodilo s njima, a {to s druga dva iz MuzejaVictorije? Jesu li nepravilno klasificirani, poslani neregistrirani u neki drugimuzej koji ih jo{ uvijek pohranjuje, uni{teni u procesu prilagodbe na novu sredinuili na~inom rukovanja, ili je autorica ovog ~lanka javnosti dala nedosljednuili ~ak pogre{nu informaciju? Ja nisam uspjela prona}i odgovore na ova pitanja.b) Neki muzejski predmeti otkupljeni su od pojedinih nezavisnih trgovaca/preprodava~a,uklju~uju}i putnike. Ni tu ne postoje dokazi koji bi podr`ali ono {todanas mogu biti tek naga|anja: Jesu li ovi predmeti razmjenjivani za materijalnadobra, otkupljeni novcem, ukradeni, ili jednostavno darovani ljudima koji suzbog svijetle puti mo`da prepoznati kao duhovi predaka ili naprosto kao dobrohotniputnici-namjernici (ponekad u potrazi za znanjem i/ili fizi~kim dokazomnjegova postojanja), voljni ili ~ak `eljni slu{ati aborid`inske pri~e? Vrlo je vjerojatnoda su nabavljeni na sve ove na~ine, ovisno o ljudima i okolnostima.Prirodoslovac Charles Daley pojavljuje se kao jedan od nekoliko nezavisnih "profesionalnih"sabira~a iz New South Walesa, koji je vjerojatno `ivio od prihodadobivenih snabdijevanjem muzeja aborid`inskim predmetima.Australski muzej jedina je ustanova koja ima podatke o kupovinama nadra`bama, sve novijega datuma.c) Ne postoji posebna dokumentacija o razmjeni pojedinih predmeta iz australskihmuzeja s drugim australskim ili prekomorskim muzejima, osim u slu~ajuAustralskog muzeja u Sydneyu. Letimi~an pregled popisa predmeta iz Australijeu prekomorskim muzejima otkriva, me|utim, da ogroman broj aborid`inskihpredmeta mora da je ili razmijenjen za druge predmete iz njihovih zbirki, ilikupljen. 19U nekoliko slu~ajeva jasno je da je postojao neki oblik razmjene ili transakcijeizme|u nekih australskih muzeja, jer predmeti koji su svojedobno bili navedenikao dio inventara jednog muzeja ili neke druge ustanove odjednom vi{e nisutamo nego na nekoj drugoj lokaciji. To je slu~aj s dva dendroglifa koji su prvobili pohranjeni u Australskom institutu za anatomiju u Canberri, odakle su kasnijepreba~eni u jedan od muzeja. Ponekad je te{ko pratiti kretanje nekih predmetaod jednog muzeja do drugog.d) Donirani predmeti dolaze iz privatnih zbirki pojedinaca. To su ~esto ~lanovimuzejskog osoblja, obi~no kustosi ili istra`iva~i. Ponekad su donacije davalimisionari ili putnici, kao i vlasnici farmi i lokalni stanovnici.Zbirke Sira Williama Macleaya, koje su sadr`avale prirodoslovne primjerke, kaoi australsku antropolo{ku i arheolo{ku gra|u, sabirane su u 1860-ima i 1870-ima,18Young, F. (1949) Scientists save sacred trees..., Australian Women's Weekly, [str. 20-21].19Usp. Cooper, op.cit.174

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaa potom darovane dana{njem Muzeju Macleay pri Sveu~ili{tu u Sydneyu.e) Za odre|eni broj predmeta dana{nji kustosi ne mogu ustanoviti pojedinosti njihovenabave, to jest, ime osobe ili naziv ustanove od koje su prvotno nabavljeniili datum transakcije. Umjesto tih podataka, oni nose oznaku "nepoznato".Za to postoji nekoliko razloga: nedostatak primjerene obuke, znanja i vje{tinaprethodnih kustosa; nedovoljni podaci i dokumentacija predmeta u vrijeme njihovenabave; i kona~no, odgovore treba potra`iti izvan muzejskih ustanova, sobzirom na to tko je i kako prvotno nabavio ove predmete. Kao {to sam ve}istaknula, gotovo je nemogu}e otkriti sve ~initelje i karike u lancu oblikovanjadana{njih muzejskih zbirki.Baza podataka Arheolo{ke zbirke Muzeja Ju`ne Australije uredno predo~avakako i od koga su predmeti nabavljeni, iako u nekim slu~ajevima bez godinetransakcije. Tri sveska vodi~a kroz glavnu aborid`insku zbirku, me|utim,redovno trpe od nedostatka zna~ajnih pojedinosti o nabavi, s izuzetkom predmetanabavljenih za vrijeme Harvardsko-adelaidske ekspedicije Tindalea iBirdsella 1938.-1939. godine.Nacionalni muzej Australije (Canberra) ima dobro dokumentiranu bazu podatakao aborid`inskim predmetima iz New South Walesa. Po mojemu mi{ljenju,jedini je nedostatak ra~unalnog katalo`nog sustava ovog Muzeja {to postoje datumizaprimanja samo za nekolicinu, a ne za sve predmete.Klasifikacija i dokumentacija predmetaGlavni je problem klasifikacije aborid`inskih predmeta njihova multifunkcionalnapriroda. Jedan te isti predmet ima, ili kontekstualno dobiva, nekoliko, ako nemnogo, "razli~itih" zna~enja i funkcija. Upotreba i zna~aj koji je neki predmet imao iliima za osobu aborid`inskog porijekla ju~er odnosno danas variraju jednako kao iupotreba i zna~aj koji on ima za neaborid`insku osobu dvadeset prvog stolje}a. Stogaje izuzetno te{ko klasificirati aborid`inske predmete prema bilo kakvim kriterijima.Na primjer, izrezbareno drvo u svom autenti~nom i kulturnom ambijentu, za pripadnikaGamaroia iz pretkolonizacijskog razdoblja vjerojatno je (jer mo`emo samonaga|ati o onome {to je bilo) imalo cijeli niz zna~enja i va`nih prakti~nih, kao iduhovnih funkcija. Naravno, sva ova zna~enja i funkcije zajedno su tvorile jedinstvenoholisti~ko tijelo kulturalno va`nog znanja, iako su mo`da bili od ograni~enogzna~aja za pojedine ~lanove Gamaroi dru{tva.U muzejskom su kontekstu aborid`inski, a mo`emo zaklju~iti, i svi drugi predmeti,dekontekstualizirani (kroz sam ~in preseljenja s mjesta njihova porijekla) i rekontekstualizirani(zadobiv{i svojim bivanjem u muzeju lepezu novih zna~enja). 20 Valja20Vidjeti, na primjer, Lumley, R. (1988) The Museum Time-Machine: Putting Cultures on Display,London & New York, Routledge, i Russell, L. (1995) (Re)presented pasts: Historical andcontemporary constructions of Australian Aborigines, unpublished PhD thesis, Melbourne,University of Melbourne.175

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researchesimati na umu da muzeji javnosti prezentiraju materijalnu kulturu u rekonstruiranom"tradicionalnom" kontekstu, to jest, muzejsku verziju ili, prije, verzije pro{losti isada{njosti budu}i da se politike muzeja, a time i postavi mijenjaju. K tome, svakipojedini predmet na javnoj izlo`bi prolazi kroz proces daljnje rekontekstualizacijekroz gledateljevu percepciju i prethodno znanje (koje mo`e ili ne mora postojati) o"autenti~nom" dru{tveno-povijesnom kontekstu.Klasifikacija predmeta od dvostrukog je zna~aja za muzeje: va`na je za organizacijusustava pohrane i dokumentacije koji su i ina~e usko povezani. "Klasifikacija"podrazumijeva svrstavanje ili organizaciju gra|e na odre|en na~in, premaodre|enim kriterijima. Ona omogu}ava muzejskom osoblju da dodijeli odre|enimpredmetima odre|eno mjesto u depou i evidentira njihove opise u ra~unalnom sustavu.Gotovo je i nepotrebno spominjati da je to zapadni koncept koji se ne uklapadobro, ako ikako, u aborid`inske predod`be o vremenu i prostoru.Osoblje muzeja klasificiralo je aborid`inske predmete prema, u osnovi, samo dvakriterija: prvo, prema geografskoj lokaciji, i drugo, prema upotrebi. Da bi ih ovakoklasificiralo, osoblje se oslanjalo na dodatne potklasifikacije prema obliku, stilu, i(ponekad) materijalu. [to kustos ima vi{e znanja i sposobnosti da prepozna odre|enoblik, stil i materijal, to je vjerojatnije da }e predmet ispravno klasificirati, ponajprijezato {to se pokazuje da je kriterij geografske lokacije jednako nepouzdan kao iostali, iako ga je muzejsko osoblje odabralo kao najpouzdaniji (ili barem najprepoznatljiviji).1. Klasifikacija aborid`inskih predmeta prema geografskoj lokaciji/nalazi{tu stara jei dobro utvr|ena praksa australskih muzeja. Za to postoje tri razloga:a) Gra|a nabavljena u ranim fazama razvoja muzeja nije bila dovoljno dokumentirana,zato {to su nezavisni preprodava~i nerado otkrivali od koga su jenabavili.b) Kao {to Bolton upozorava, "[r]azlike izme|u skupina ~esto je mnogo te`eustanoviti nego razlike izme|u mjesta: jezici klize s jednoga dijalektalnogpodru~ja na drugo, skupine se same klasificiraju na drugoj osnovi nego {to to~ine njihovi susjedi i administratori, i mijenjaju se prema tome kako obi~antok ljudskog `ivota - brak, smrt, neprijateljstvo i pomirba - modificiraju njihovestrukture i saveze." 21Ovo je osobito to~no u slu~aju velikih konfederacija poput Gamaroi naroda,koji se sastojao od vi{e manjih skupina, {to se odrazilo na jezike i dijalekte njihovogteritorija.c) Osoba ili skupina koja je neki predmet izradila mo`e, ali i ne mora biti istaosoba ili skupina koja taj predmet koristi, razmjenjuje, prodaje ili daje sakuplja~ubilo na tom istome mjestu ili negdje drugdje. ^esto trgovanje susjednih21Bolton, L. (1997) A place containing many places: Museums and the use of objects to representplace in Melanesia, u: Australian Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 8, No. 1, str. 21.176

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaaborid`inskih skupina koje opisuje McCarthy 22 navodi na zaklju~ak da danasnipo{to ne mo`emo biti sigurni da su predmet izradili ~lanovi odre|eneskupine, a ne njihovi susjedi. Zbog toga su muzejski predmeti klasificiraniprema mjestu na kojem su na|eni, a ne prema mjestu njihovog porijekla.2. Kada govorimo o razli~itim upotrebama za koje su predmeti bili izra|eni, opetse bavimo zapadnim pojmovima i percepcijama. Aborid`inskim predmetimaredovno se pripisuje jedna od sljede}ih etiketa: 23 oru`je: toljaga, {tit, bumerang,koplje, baca~ koplja ... kameno oru|e: sjekira, sjekirica, cilkon ... odje}a: pokriva~od oposumove ko`e ... pribor za skupljanje i pripremu hrane: torba, {tap zakopanje, `rvanj, posuda ... pribor za lov i ribolov: kanu, ribarska mre`a ...igra~ka: weet weet ... dekorativni predmet: ukras za glavu, ogrlica, plo~a za prsa... ritualni predmet: dendroglif, pogrebno pokrivalo za glavu ...Ova je podjela nezadovoljavaju}a jer ne uzima u obzir mogu}u multifunkcionalnostaborid`inskih predmeta. Neki od ovih predmeta imali su vi{e od jedne upotrebe:koplje se, na primjer, koristilo i kao pribor za lov i kao oru`je za borbu. 24Bolton navodi da se predmeti u muzejskim zbirkama "odabiru na temelju njihovematerijalnosti i njihove prenosivosti". 25 To name}e dodatne probleme kada se radi opohranjivanju i prezentaciji aborid`inskih predmeta u muzejima. "Materijalnost"podrazumijeva da samo predmeti koji su opipljivi i kojima se mo`e fizi~ki rukovatinalaze put do zbirki. A {to je s drugim oblicima aborid`inskog znanja kao {to supripovijedanje i nastanjenost predmeta duhovima? Tek nedavno su australskimuzeji postali svjesni ovih pitanja. Bolton spominje sastanak pacifi~kih muzejskihkustosa u Vanuatuu u srpnju 1995., na kojem su sudionici razmatrali pitanje duhovakoji nastavaju predmete autohtonih naroda u muzejskim zbirkama i njihovuzabrinutost za mogu}e posljedice po sigurnost kustosa, kao i njihovu odgovornost zatako reprezentirana mjesta. 26 To je o~igledno bio poku{aj bavljenja autohtonim, a neisklju~ivo zapadnim pristupima u muzejskoj praksi.Posljednjih godina australski su muzeji bili svjedocima poku{aja da se aborid`inskaznanja prezentiraju u vi{e "aborid`inskim" kontekstima. Audio-zapisi, video- i interaktivnara~unalna prezentacija postaju sve popularniji. Pa ipak, ovo stvaranje22McCarthy, F.D. (1939) 'Trade' in Aboriginal Australia and 'trade' relationships with TorresStrait, New Guinea and Malaya, u: Oceania, Vol. 9, No. 4, str. 405-38. Vol. 10, No. 1, str. 80-104. Vol. 10, No. 2, str. 171-95.23Usporedi. Meehan, B. & Bona, J. (1986) National Inventory of Aboriginal Artefacts, AustralianMuseum, Sydney, Aboriginal Arts Board & Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.24U The Traditional Mode of Production of the Australian Aborigines (1987), North Ryde, NSW,Australia & London, UK, Angus & Robertson, str. 67, F.G.G. Rose potvr|uje da "[g]ranicaizme|u toga je li se predmet koristio kao oru`je za borbu ili kao pribor za lov ili sakupljanjehrane ~esto nije bila jasno definirana."25Bolton, op.cit., str. 20.26Ibid., str. 31.177

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researches"aborid`inskih" konteksta posti`e se uglavnom zapadnim sredstvima: magnetofonom,videom ili touch-screenom umjesto stvarnom osobom ili skupinom ljudi. 27"Prenosivost" podrazumijeva da samo oni predmeti koji se mogu fizi~ki prenijeti odmjesta svog porijekla do muzeja postaju muzejskim predmetima. U slu~aju Gamaroigra|e, muzejsko je osoblje ~esto zanemarivalo ovo na~elo, osobito doslovnom sje~omizrezbarenih stabala s mu{kih inicijacijskih mjesta i njihovim kamionskim transportomdo glavnih gradova dviju saveznih dr`ava.Pohranjivanje predmetaAborid`inski predmeti u muzejskim zbirkama redovno su pohranjeni na ~etirirazli~ita na~ina:1. Na otvorenom, na dugim metalnim policama: predmeti srednje veli~ine odtvr|eg materijala koji nisu lako podlo`ni o{te}ivanju, npr., oru`je i pribor za lov,igra~ke; povremeno se ovako pohranjuju i izrezbarena i izbrazdana debla;2. U dugim, ravnim ladicama, polo`eni na ili umotani u velike, tanke komadepapira: mali i predmeti srednje veli~ine koji zahtijevaju pa`ljivo rukovanje iosjetljivi su na pra{inu, npr., odje}a, drveno oru`je;3. U manjim kartonskim kutijama, umotani u nekoliko slojeva tankog papira: malipredmeti osjetljivi i fizi~ki i kulturno, npr., pogrebna pokrivala za glavu napravljenaod gipsa, cilkoni od mek{eg kamena; skupine malih predmeta iste vrstena|eni na istoj lokaciji, npr., arheolo{ka gra|a;4. Na otvorenom, u posebnoj ni{i ili odjeljku: pojedini predmeti ili skupine velikihpredmeta iste vrste, npr., kanui; ponekad kulturno osjetljivi predmeti kojimaje pristup ograni~en, npr., dendroglifi. Ponekad su ovi predmeti zajedno vezaniu okomitom polo`aju pomo}u metalnog lanca ili stavljeni pojedina~no uza{ti}eniji odjeljak u depou. Povremeno su pohranjeni vodoravno na otvorenimpolicama, ili pri~vr{}eni na posebne stalke i prekriveni lakom tkaninom. Samo suu jednom slu~aju dendroglifi bili pohranjeni u kutijama pojedina~noprilago|ene veli~ine, ~ime se u potpunosti {tite od pra{ine i opetovana rukovanja.Kako se dendroglifi smatraju kulturno osjetljivom gra|om, obi~no se pohranjujuodvojeno, u podru~ju kojem je pristup ograni~en.U depou, police obi~no zauzimaju sredi{nje mjesto, s ladicama i odjeljcimapolo`enim bo~no. Police i ladice klasificirane su i etiketirane prema op}em porijeklupredmeta u njima. Tako su svi predmeti iz sjeverno-centralnog New South27Sje}am se aborid`inske izlo`be u Australskom muzeju u Sydneyu u svibnju-lipnju 1997.godine, na kojoj su australskoj publici prezentirane dvije pri~e u kazivanju aborid`inskihosoba iz sjevernog New South Walesa, zabilje`ene na magnetofonsku vrpcu. Snimka bi seaktivirala svaki put kad bi posjetitelj stao na odre|eno mjesto (rekonstrukciju spilje s otiscimaruku). Izuzetak u ovoj praksi uvo|enje je aborid`inskih vodi~a koji odgovaraju na pitanjaposjetitelja u novome melburn{kom muzeju.178

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaWalesa i ju`nog Queenslanda pohranjeni na jednom mjestu, {to i opet ovisi o njihovojvrsti.Metoda pohrane pojedinih predmeta ovisi uvelike o kustosovoj vje{tini, znanju isklonostima. Jedna te ista vrsta predmeta mo`e biti pohranjena na dva (rje|e vi{e)razli~itih na~ina. Na primjer, neki kustosi do`ivljavaju drveno oru`je kao osjetljivona vanjske utjecaje i stavljaju ga u ladicu oblo`enu papirom, dok ga drugi naprostopohranjuju na otvorenoj polici.Poku{aj da se aborid`inski predmet opisan u katalogu zbirke prona|e na polici ili uladici ~esto je mukotrpan proces, ~ak i za same kustose. Te{ko}a le`i u ~injenici dasu svi aborid`inski predmeti iz cijele Australije pohranjeni u istom prostoru (obi~nou samo jednoj prostoriji za glavnu, javnosti dostupnu, aborid`insku zbirku), koji jedalje podijeljen prema vrsti predmeta i teritoriju, gotovo nikad prema pojedinimjezi~nim skupinama. K tome, katalozi na karticama, poput onoga koji jo{ postoji uAustralskom muzeju u Sydneyu, i opet klasificiraju aborid`insku gra|u premanjenoj vrsti, a ne prema njenom porijeklu. Istra`iva~ neminovno provodi nekolikodana rade}i bilje{ke o predmetima koje `eli vidjeti (ako je to mogu}e), dodatnihnekoliko dana (ako ne tjedana) ugovaraju}i vrijeme posjete depou s kustosomodgovornim za taj odsjek i/ili odnose s javno{}u i, kad se kona~no na|e u depou,potreban mu je jo{ barem jedan dan da prona|e predmete na licu mjesta. Kona~no,vi|ene/fotografirane predmete treba usporediti s njihovim opisima u katalogu, {tolako mo`e biti pogubno za `ivce ako istra`iva~i nemaju na raspolaganju slikudoti~nog predmeta (bilo muzejsku fotografiju bilo slikovnu dokumentaciju iz objavljenogmaterijala).Danas ve}ina muzeja koristi ra~unalno katalogiziranje i prenosi podatke sa starih,tipkanih katalo`nih kartica u ra~unalne baze podataka. To omogu}ava osoblju iistra`iva~ima da do|u do postoje}ih (~esto mizernih) podataka br`e i u~inkovitije,kao i da ih sami pretra`uju prema odre|enom kriteriju, kao {to su geografskalokacija ili sakuplja~. Australski muzej jedini je izuzetak od tog pravila, jer se jo{ uvijekuvelike oslanja na stari sustav kataloga na karticama.Katalog aborid`inskih predmeta obi~no sadr`i podatke o nizu pojedinosti, od kojihobi~no nisu sve poznate. Ti su podaci ~esto izva|eni i kompilirani sa starijih dokumenata(registara i kataloga) i, zbog svih prethodno navedenih razloga, naj~e{}enepotpuni. prikazuje katalo{ke podatke o aborid`inskim predmetima u muzejskimzbirkama. 2828Popis uklju~uje sve kategorije koje sam susrela u muzejskim katalozima, dok, naravno, uve}ini muzeja ne}e sve postojati, ili }e neke biti me|usobno zamjenjive.179

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesPolitika muzeja prema aborid`inskoj gra|iNakon vatrenih rasprava o aborid`inskoj kulturnoj ba{tini u australskim ustanovama1980-ih i 1990-ih, 29 muzeji, knji`nice i druge riznice aborid`inske gra|e bili suprisiljeni zauzeti druk~ije stajali{te i donijeti smjernice za novu politiku u odnosu naaborid`insku i oto~ku gra|u. Kako su brojne stru~ne studije osporavale "vlasni{tvo"muzeja nad autohtonim predmetima (i znanjima), pojavio se novi pojam skrbljenja. 30Kroz vi{e od dvadeset godina, muzeji i druge kulturne ustanove proizvele su pove}ibroj zakonskih dokumenata koji (re)definiraju njihovu poziciju u odnosu na ovugra|u. Danas australski savezni muzeji ne djeluju kao vlasnici, ve} kao skrbnici nadaborid`inskim predmetima u svojim zbirkama u ime aborid`inskih zajednica. Nafederalnoj razini, ovu ulogu muzeja i ostalih federalnih ustanova regulira isankcionira niz zakona Commonwealtha, uklju~uju}i Zakon o za{titi nacionalnih parkovai prirode (1975.), Zakon o australskim muzejima (1980.), Zakon o za{titi aborid`inske ioto~ke ba{tine (1984.) i dokument Previous Possessions, New Obligations 31 Udru`enja odboraaustralskih muzeja. Svaka savezna dr`ava tako|er ima vlastite zakone o autohtonojgra|i. Povrh toga, pojedini savezni muzeji razvili su svoje vlastite protokole,u skladu s navedenim. 32Ovakva politika rezultirala je konkretnim promjenama u muzejskoj praksi. Zbirke"svete/tajne" i osteolo{ke gra|e op}enito su zatvorene za nove nabavke, osim gdje tone zahtijevaju aborid`inske zajednice. Ne{to je gra|e otpisano i vra}eno zajednicamau skladu s odobrenim zahtjevima za repatrijaciju. To se odnosi uglavnom naljudske posmrtne ostatke.Op}e nezadovoljstvo uskim, jednostranim pristupom autohtonoj gra|i rezultiralo jenjegovim povla~enjem pred pritiscima za raznoliko{}u interdisciplinarnih stajali{tabliskih autohtonim narodima. U prezentaciji aborid`inske gra|e, muzeji odnedavno~ine napore za promicanje autohtona stanovi{ta osiguravaju}i izlo`beni prostor uskladu sa zahtjevima okoli{a, zapo{ljavaju}i aborid`insko osoblje kao vodi~e i tuma~eizlo`bi, i upu{taju}i se ~e{}e u konzultaciju s aborid`inskim zajednicama. Samostalni29Vidi Attwood, B. & Arnold, J. (eds) (1992) Power, Knowledge and Aborigines, Bundoora, Vic,La Trobe University Press; Healy, C. (1994) Histories and collecting: Museums, objects andmemories, u: Darian-Smith, K. & Hamilton, P. (eds) Memory and History in Twentieth-CenturyAustralia, str. 33-54, Melbourne, Oxford University Press; McBryde, I. (ed.) (1985) WhoOwns the Past?, Melbourne, Oxford University Press; i Rigg, V. (1994) Curators of the colonialidea: The museum and the exhibition as agents of bourgeois ideology in 19th centuryNSW, u: Public History Review, Vol. 3, str. 188-203.30Vidjeti, na primjer, Mulvaney, D.J. (1989) Aboriginal Australia: Custodianship or ownership?A reflection on the National Estate, u: Heritage News, Vol. 11, No. 4.31Previous Possessions, New Obligations: A Plain English Summary of Policies for Museumsin Australia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, [1993], North Fitzroy, Vic,Museums Australia Inc.32Australski je muzej, na primjer, razradio Politiku i procedure za aborid`inske i oto~ke zbirkei srodna pitanja, [n.d.], Sydney, Australian Museum.180

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimai nesamostalni stru~njaci odigrali su va`nu ulogu u zagovaranju i promicanju pravaautohtonih naroda, a eti~ke smjernice dru{tvenih istra`ivanja pro{irene su i na sakupljanje,izlaganje, upravljanje i promicanje autohtone gra|e. 33 Staromodni dijelovi muzeja,poput Galerije pacifi~kih kultura pri Muzeju Ju`ne Australije u Adelaidei, stekli sudvosmislen po~asni naslov muzej unutar muzeja, 34 dok nova, postkolonijalna i{~itavanjamultikulturalnih prostora stvaraju nove dru{tvene i muzejske krajobraze.Unato~ takvim dalekose`nim promjenama i suradnji s autohtonim zajednicama,muzeji se i dalje (i mo`da sve vi{e) do`ivljavaju kao gatekeepers 35 koji provode kontrolunad autohtonom gra|om prema vlastitim kriterijima: ograni~avaju}i pristupsamonametnutim mehanizmima kontrole, distribucijom selekcioniranih podataka osvojim zbirkama, i ubiru}i profite u obliku naplate za istra`ivanje i publiciranje. Iakoje politika saveznih muzeja da aborid`inske zajednice obavje{tavaju o gra|i kojadolazi iz odre|enog podru~ja, ispada da Aborid`ini, izuzev lokalnih aborid`inskihzemaljskih vije}a, nisu u potpunosti svjesni postojanja svoje materijalne kulture umuzejima. Za ve}inu Aborid`ina, siroma{ni uvjeti `ivota u ruralnim krajevima inepoznavanje zakonskih procedura ~esto su dovoljni da ih sprije~e u putovanjukako bi istra`ivali povijest svojih obitelji i druge izvore zaklju~ane u "velikim"ustanovama. 36 Lokalni aborid`inski pri~uvni centri koje je pokrenulo i koje vodiaborid`insko osoblje, ponekad kao privatne zbirke s nekolicinom predmeta koje suvratili savezni muzeji, 37 predstavljaju prihvatljivu (i ~esto pri`eljkivanu) opciju.Dok federalni i savezni muzeji i arhivi obi~no zahtijevaju da se po{tuju zakonskeprocedure za pristup gra|i ili za nabavu kopija fotografija (ponekad po nerazumnimcijenama), lokalni pri~uvni centri ~esto velikodu{no pru`aju sve potrebnepodatke, oslanjaju}i se na moralne prije nego na zakonske kriterije. Ispitivanje o33Vidjeti Parrott (1990) Legislating to protect Australia's material cultural heritage - guidelinesfor cultural resources professionals, u: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 31, str. 75-82;Stanton, J., et al. (1990) Positions and policies of museums in Australia on human skeletalremains, u: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 31, str. 52-60; i Davidson, I. (1991) Notes for a codeof ethics for Australian archaeologists working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanderheritage, u: Australian Archaeology, Vol. 32, str. 61-63. Dodatne informacije o pravima naaborid`insko kulturno i intelektualno vlasni{tvo dostupne su na: http://icip.lawnet.com.au.34Usp. Fergie, D. (1998) Unsettled history: Common sense, cannibalism and cultural displays,paper presented at the Cultural Studies Association of Australia conference"Postcoloniality/Cultural Studies: Representing difference", Adelaide, University of SouthAustralia.35Usp. Gostin, O. (1995) Accessing the Dreaming: Heritage, Conservation and Tourism atMungo National Park, Adelaide, University of South Australia, str. 107.36Vidjeti, na primjer, Fourmile, H. (1989) Who owns the past? Aborigines as captives of thearchives, u: Aboriginal History, Vol. 13, Pt 1, str. 1-8, Canberra, Australian Institute ofAboriginal Studies.37Npr., Muzej aborid`inske kulture u Brewarrini i "Goondee", Aborid`inski pri~uvni centar,u Lightning Ridgeu, koji vode Roy i June Barker. Potonji ima zbirku arheolo{kih predmetakoje je vratio Australski muzej.181

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological Researchesmjeri u kojoj su Aborid`ini upoznati sa sudbinom vlastite kulture, preostaje da seizvede u daljnjem istra`ivanju. Samo je nekolicina dosad podigla veo pra{ine i zanemarenostikojim je aborid`inska gra|a bila prekrivena u gotovo dvije stotine godinaskrivene i u{utkane povijesti.Prilog 6.05 Popis muzejskih katalo`nih podatakaIdentifikacijski broj:Registracijski broj:Naziv / predmet (vrsta):Predmet:Ograni~en:Status:O{te}enje:Zemlja:Savezna dr`ava / pokrajina / podru~je / okrug / regija:(Specifi~no) podru~je:Povijest / na~in nabave:Datum nabave:Nabavljen od:Sakuplja~:Datum sakupljanja:Br. zbirke sakuplja~a:Datum registracije / datum ulaska u inventar:Kulturna / jezi~na skupina:Odsjek:(Trajna) lokacija/ jedinica + polica + dio:Privremena lokacija:Zbirka (naziv):Evidencijski br.:Prethodni kontrolni br.: / stari reg. br.:Dimenzije / mjere / veli~ina:Uobi~ajena pohrana: dio predmeta:Uobi~ajena pohrana:Trenutna lokacija: dio predmeta:Status:Lokacija:(Kratki) opis:Interpretacija:182

L. Kova~i}, Aborid`inska materijalna kultura u australskim muzejimaPojedinosti proizvodnje: metoda:Osoba / izra|iva~ + spol:Uloga:Mjesto:Datum:Popratne pojedinosti: osoba:Datum:Mjesto:Bilje{ke:Pojedinosti o predmetu: vrsta:Dokumentacija (pojedinosti):izvori / primarni:sekundarni:Dokumentacijska evidencija:Veza s drugim predmetima:Status copyrighta:Vlasnik:Izlo`ba:Restauriranje: znak predmeta:Znak spremi{ta:Slike:Unio: datum:Uredio: datum:Napomene:Reference / Reference u literaturi:Fotografije:183

Etnolo{ka istra`ivanja / Ethnological ResearchesPrilog 6.04 Dendroglif: mogu}a zna~enja i funkcijePrevela: Leonarda Kova~i}184