Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania

Christopher Berk University of Michigan

University of Michigan Working Papers in Museum Studies Number 9 (2012) Museum Studies Program Charles H. Sawyer Center for Museum Studies University of Michigan Museum of Art 525 South State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1354

Office phone: 734-936-6678 Fax: 734-786-0064 www.ummsp.lsa.umich.edu [email protected]

© 2012 University of Michigan All rights reserved

The University of Michigan Museum Studies Program’s series of “Working Papers in Museum Studies” presents emerging research from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, all focused on the multiple concerns of the modern museum and heritage studies field. Contributions from scholars, members of the museum profession and graduate students are represented. Many of these papers have their origins in public presentations made under the auspices of the Museum Studies Program. We gratefully thank the authors published herein for their participation.

This paper is an elaboration of a talk presented as part of the University of Michigan Museum Studies Program’s “Issues in Museum Studies” lecture series on November 1, 2011. It is a product of research supported by a U-M Museum Studies Program Fellowship for Doctoral Research in Museums. Christopher Berk is a member of the 2007 cohort in the U-M Museum Studies Program and is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Michigan. Christopher can be reached at [email protected]. Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania

Christopher Berk • the Tasmanians as racially and culturally distinct University of Michigan and different from Aboriginal peoples of mainland Australia

Introduction • the Tasmanians as extinct. With the passing of Truganini in 1876, so passed the Tasmanian race In January 1931, E.J. Dicks, a sculptor hailing from Melbourne, was hard at work in a studio in Tasmania’s These three messages are interrelated and complemen- capital city of Hobart. The task-at-hand for Mr. Dicks was tary. They are not mutually exclusive, but reinforce one to build representations of (some would say surrogates another in a circular fashion. However, as this enactment of for) the “Lost Tasmanian Race.” The Hobart Mercury of Aboriginality is by its very nature perpetually in process, January 17, 1931, reports that its attempt to freeze one image/ideology was destined to fail. By focusing on a sequence of newspaper articles from Mr. Dicks [had] already completed the man for the group, and is occupied with the female The Hobart Mercury that detail the process of the group figure. It is a strange commentary on life to see exhibit’s creation, following it from disparate materials the modeler at work with his clay, and beside of plaster, wiring, and so on, to a specific interpellation of him the skeleton of the last of the true Tasmanian reality, I seek to foreground the inherent incompatibility aborigines, Truganini, while at odd intervals between this form of Tasmanian Aboriginality and the skulls peep out here and there, all contributing more heterogeneous and continuous experience of being a moiety of past life to give reality to a present Aboriginal in the Tasmanian context. figment. (The Hobart Mercury, January 17, 1931: 6) For my discussion of the enactment of difference in the Made possible by a gift of £500, the largest given to the Australian periphery, I take inspiration, if not necessarily Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery (hereafter referred methodological guidance, from core members of the school to as TMAG) to that point, the group exhibit1 sought to of thought that has become known as Science Technology give Hobartians a glimpse into the “life and habits of a Studies, Bruno Latour and Annemarie Mol in particular. vanished people” (ibid.). Void of clothing and with jet-black As Latour writes, “No science can exit from the network of skin, these three figures, designed to represent a natural its practice” (Latour 1993: 24). Annemarie Mol’s The Body familial unit, were a visual depiction of a people who had Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice (2002) exemplifies come to represent the lowest and most primitive culture2 this insight. Mol recounts her time spent at Hospital Z, a ever documented (see fig. 1). In this working paper I argue nameless teaching hospital in the Netherlands. While at that the 1931 group exhibit at TMAG sought to enact, Hospital Z, she focused her attention on atherosclerosis, consecrate, and consolidate one form of Tasmanian Aborig- a disease that leads to the hardening of the arteries in a inality by literally building surrogate representations of the person’s lower leg. By discussing the multiple departments “Lost Tasmanian Race” (who one author poetically, and within the hospital and the varying ways atherosclerosis androcentrically, describes as the “Men Who Vanished” is brought into being, she argues that depending on [Dunbabin 1935]). Drawing on social evolutionary your methods, be it with a microscope, the leg of a frameworks of cultural (and/or social) progress, I argue that deceased individual, or conversation, an atherosclerosis the three main messages that informed, and were reinforced is brought into being, only it is not necessarily the same by, the building of the bodies that comprised the group atherosclerosis. Arguing against perspectivalism, Mol exhibit, were: believes these divergent practices are not merely different ways of getting at the same object; they are all getting at a • the Tasmanians as “Paleolithic Man;” as culturally different object that is given the label “atherosclerosis.” arrested and frozen for millennia due in large part to geographical isolation; in a “culture phase” (Balfour Of great utility to this study is Mol’s conceptualiza- 1925) analogous to pre-historic European culture tion of “enactment.” She puts enactment in opposition to terms such as “construction,” for the former involves an ongoing process while the latter “suggests that material

1 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM been has and is island-state small The positive terms. in expressed frequently is sentiment this much and larger, feels often Strait Bass the via mainland the from Tasmania separate that kilometers 240 the residents, 500,000 roughly 1989 [1839]: (Darwin atown” only 328; fig. see 2). For its is acity, called be this might of latter the Sydney; that to inferior was very the place of aspect first “The commented, Darwin Charles Beagle, the aboard from of Hobart glimpse 1994:first his (Robinson upon 126). time” the Reflecting it do all Australians mainland all, overlook After Tasmania. to Australia to for visitors “It easy is states, guide travel one As provincial. and parochial of asleepy backwater; of that is Tasmania image common the Australia, Within Periphery Australian the In legacy. enduring its and exhibit group the to individual, and institutional both responses, various and culture, Aboriginal Tasmanian contemporary of adiscussion Iconclude with dioramas. of museum discussions general more within relevance its coverage and newspaper to 1931 close attention paying exhibit, group of TMAG’s unveiling and creation the namely paper, of this focus the to my attention turn then above. Iwill described messages interrelated three for the background and genealogy theoretical the discuss topic, Iwill ofcontext this historical and geographical the Ihave established Once people themselves. Aboriginal of Tasmanian the expense atthe primitivity and ideologies extinction of specific Tasmanian help perpetuate to used have been collaboration, in two, latter The exhibit. of group the reality imagined the and of remains skeletal form the in vessels, but empty beings, human breathing living, People the political not are andworld scientific by the cally Aboriginal of label same the under falling phenomena context. Tasmanian the in Aboriginalities alternative dismiss and exclude to concert in used were remains human and objects these Specifically, entrusted. were they which jobs to the and paint, and wiring plaster-of-Paris, materials, skeletal we not forget must about that insights of light these in is (Mol 2002: 33). microscopes” she never about forgets It bodies—but knowable. She maytalk tangible, audible, visible, things make that of techniques notice the takes She stubbornly are… enacted. they which in practices the from these never isolates diseases investigate out to ethnographer/praxiographer an Thus, enacted…. being is— something there, and then only and act, the in that “suggests hand, other the on 32). process, on emphasis An (Mol 2002: world by the itself” all out in goes subsequently object that an into turned put together,and assembled, is 3 What is concerning is not that there are different different are there not is that concerning is What , but that the ones given credence histori credence given ones the , but that Tasmanian Tasmanian - Imperialism during the first half of the 19th century. First First the century. half of 19th first the during Imperialism of locales British 1642,in prominent of one more was the Diemen’s by Abel named first Tasman it was Land,” as “Van creation. arelatively is recent Australia of mainland periphery the on afterthought of idea an as Tasmania The sentiments. of these presence the to attest Ican 2004, since Tasmania in research conducted who has anthropologist an As that states Horne Donald In telling. most is that a practice nation-continent, “off of map” larger left the frequently an extensive genealogy preceding even the 1851 even the preceding genealogy extensive Great an has of progress measures universal purportedly on based societies human of classifying practice how this strates 1987:(Stocking demon 183). masterfully Stocking George civilization” European to led that trunk the up higher point a to level antiquity of ground human presumed the get from evolution to of cultural ladder the used Darwinians time, of human midst the in obscured been had lowest branches its “because writes, Stocking as But, civilization. European from, contrast direct in and to, relation in described commonly were non-Western as groups comparative, wholly was placement This tree. a genealogical as presented often of along progress, aweb orladder groups cultural human all place to sought evolutionists” “social as known have become that of individuals group heterogeneous The Paleolithic Man, Stasis, and Extinction Gallery. Art and Museum Tasmanian atthe consumption for mass consecrated and reinforced was that man Paleolithic extinct of positionality discursive It the was thought. evolutionary and anthropology Victorian within Tasmanians original of position the critical the upon light sheds exhibit group 1931 the Interrogating afterthoughts. become respects, many in have both, they frameworks, broader within importance of once were central both whereas itself; of island the that of peoples parallels Tasmania Aboriginal of the story ways, the many lives. In their during shores its reach continent the to exiled of 60% convicts nearly saw famously and Australia, in outpost colonial second 1803, in colonized Van Diemen’s Britain’s Great was Land [1964]: 48) 2008 (Horne it. owns who know to want foreigners and Tasmania about little think Mainlanders ness. vindictive small-town and serenity small-town between somewhere be to said is easy…. Existence it stood Then port. whaling aroistering and colonies convict earliest of one Itthe sleep. was to went then and frontier the on life started Hobart 4

The Lucky Country Lucky The - , - 2 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations at “old” and “stone”)…. The Lower Paleolithic is London’s Crystal Palace, where the national exhibits led roughly associated with H. erectus; the Middle the visitor “along a line of progress from the Tasmanian Paleolithic with archaic H. sapiens, including the savage through the ‘barbaric’ civilizations of the East, Neandertals of Western Europe and the Middle northwest across the European continent towards an apex in East; and the Upper Paleolithic with anatomically modern humans. (Kottak 2012: 147) Great Britain” (Stocking 1987: 5). In many ways this quest to uncover humanity’s origins was a temporal matter, and This textbook, written for introductory courses in anthro- gained urgency in response to the discovery of Brixham pology at the university level, continues, “The terms Lower, Cave and its implications regarding the long history of Middle, and Upper Paleolithic are applied to stone tools humanity. It was also a geographical matter, as remoteness from Europe” (Kottak 2012: 164). I employ this text to and assumed isolation would come to be synonymous with provide just one example of the manner in which the label antiquity and savagery. Because “deep time could not be Paleolithic has been inoculated against all associations measured in 1859, some nontemporal device was needed with social evolutionary comparisons within the history of in order to explore it and classify its inhabitants. One anthropology. I also seek to foreground how the act of inter- successful strategy was to equate remote times with remote pellating the Tasmanians as Paleolithic man was inherently places—with the uttermost ends of the Earth” (Shryock, comparative in relation to a pre-historic European past; in Trautmann, and Gamble 2011: 27).5 As Tasmania’s colonial some cases Tasmanians were described as even preceding encounter took place at the same time as the Victorian anatomically modern humans. Often described as quest to understand (and explain) civilization6 in terms “a-temporal” (see Gough 2001 for one example), I instead of racial, cultural and social progress, the Tasmanians had argue that the group exhibit under examination had a very the unfortunate fate of becoming the prevailing example specific temporal location, namely circa 10,000 years ago in of remoteness and primordiality. Following their perceived Europe. extinction in 1876, they became the iconic anthropological case of savagery extinguished in the name of progress. So how did the Tasmanians seemingly maintain a culture The 1931 group exhibit at TMAG sought to reinforce and akin to that of Paleolithic Europe? Historically speaking, legitimize such ideologies, enacting an image of Aborigi- isolation and stasis have been given explanatory power in nality that erased evidence of Tasmanian Aboriginal this regard. In discussing the Tasmanians, Jared Diamond existence and heterogeneity. offers the following questions: The three messages being transmitted by the group exhibit, [W]hat would happen if people colonized, say, namely: Tasmanians as Paleolithic Man; Tasmanians as a remote island and were then cut off from all racially and culturally distinct from mainland Aboriginal contact with the outside world? Would they peoples; and Tasmanians as extinct, are all interrelated and survive? Would they remain civilized? Would mutually reinforcing. They all emerged out of late-19th they revert to ‘jungle law’ and end up killing one century social evolutionary frameworks and its foundations another? Or would they perhaps just gradually die of temporality and geographical remoteness. The placement out? There have in fact been such cases…. Indeed, of human groups as the embodiment of earlier forms of Tasmania holds the record for the longest isolation European history is the direct ancestor of what anthropolo- known in human history. One society survived gist Johannes Fabian calls the “denial of coevalness.” For there for 10,000 years until its abrupt destruction Fabian, “What makes the savage significant to the evolu- by the modern world. (Diamond 1993: 49-50) tionist’s Time is that he lives in another Time” (Fabian 1983: 27). Comparing their tool technologies with those This isolation has been used to explain the purported of pre-historic Europeans, scholars came to perceive the “rudeness” of the Tasmanians at the point of contact with Tasmanians as living “Paleolithic Man,” with its twin European peoples. messages of past-ness and stasis. The Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples represented the lowest Before interrogating the historical materials, it is useful to rung of the social evolutionary ladder for many leading discuss the manner in which “Paleolithic” is defined in the Victorian anthropologists, with Edward Burnett Tylor being current context. One recent textbook states: but one example. Tylor’s Primitive Culture (1871) expressed a commitment to the belief that all human societies could The stone-tool-making techniques that evolved out be placed within a cultural hierarchy of discernible levels of the Oldowan, or pebble tool, tradition and that of development based upon universal criteria. In addressing lasted until about 15,000 years ago are described the problem regarding whether any contemporary tribe by the term Paleolithic (from Greek roots meaning could stand as “living representatives of the early Stone

3 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM of Stone the culture the of natives illustrate Tasmania the 1900, TylorIn that clear “It now becomes state, went to on Tylortiveness, 1890 in wrote that: distinc evolutionary and anthropological their Regarding (Wood-Jones 1935:Australian” 24). of the below fell standards considerably they the arts their all of mode In life. no settled peoplewho knew nomadic low ebb, avery at even for was of Tasmanians the culture Wood-Jones, material Vanished to Race.” “The According “Tasmania’s of entitled 1935 aseries in lectures, sentiment this 1931 for the continued exhibit, informants the group 1894: 149). of one Wood-Jones, and Frederick scientist (Tylor of Australia” characteristic spear-thrower nor the arrow, of bow and the nothing knew Tasmanians “The how noting Aborigines, mainland nologies among found tech advanced more to Tasmania in found those compares (Tylor 1894: 150). Tylor of tools, stone discussion his In nature” from living their getting life, normal a healthy of asavage of condition leading people the known picture “Taken awhole… as Tasmanians, rudest the The be may rather: (Tylorof of “degeneration culture” 1894: 148), concluding For Tylor, mainlanders. no evidence was there primordial purportedly already the to prior them placed criteria, his to according that, tools ofstone Tasmanian study his on conclusion based was This of man. examples Paleolithic living as invasion, British to prior time in frozen literally Tylor almost as progress, Tasmanians the envisioned of ideals upward Enlightenment-fueled and degeneration notions of biblical between debates scientific widespread (1894). of Man” Paleolithic Representatives of midst the In as Tasmanians the “On relevant being most the papers, of176). Tylor’s anumber in explicated is position This Age,” Tylor 1987: (Stocking Tasmanians” the on “settled (Tylor, 1899 Roth to [1890]: Preface v) Man. of Paleolithic condition the represented rather implements stone of their workmanship by the out, died have just survivors last whose of Tasmania, aborigines the that it but appears times, modern into on Age have lasted Stone late the in tribes Many savages. of definition convenient most the is this indeed enough, common are life pastoral nor agriculture no knew them like who Tribes (Tylor times. 1894: modern or 149) ancient either in comparison, detailed for known sufficiently those among tribe other any than condition primitive more asomewhat in of mankind characters the have throughout stages…. They rude and simple at only of man, lowest tribes of the lines usual the on are rules, social religion, language, arts, Their - - Tylor, to according culture-phase, pre-contact perceived their of isolation, such aresult As culture. frozen supposedly for their rationale main the as served which Australia, mainland off from cut geographically were a peoplethey as that remember to it critical is Tasmanians, indigenous Tylor of the placement discussing evolutionary the In and 1900: 33). (Tylor Europe” in Period of Mammoth the Man Paleolithic of developmentAge even ataperiod below of the that included for which males physical traits, of distinctive anumber had and of mankind,” forms, or principal of types, all marked For “one was Huxley, of best “Australioid the the type” Huxley. Henry Thomas by Darwin’s himself, Bulldog in 1870 defined as of “Australioid the image the type” to contradistinction in woolly put which them and hair, skin Tasmanians’ dark the were difference of racial support in deployed commonly of pieces evidence main possible. The –becomes ofextinction Tasmanian –that message third the that stasis cultural and difference of racial discourses of scientific combination the however, through it only is More critically, difference. and distinction racial Tasmanian of message second the and man Paleolithic as Tasmanian the theof message between overlap significant is There 1931. in museum atthe enacted being Aboriginality of form specific the understanding to central is man of Paleolithic status the of within point reference inherent development. This historical own their to respect with and right own their in but not necessarily science European to relation in interest of great past, European pre-historic of fossils a living as interpellated were Tasmanians the 1925:(Balfour 1). present” the in surviving of one, past the striking a very instance, an “affords peoples Aboriginal Tasmanian the of study Balfour, the Henry Oxford’s Museum Rivers Pitt of director long-time like descendants, For intellectual his in the earlier formations may continue to live and and live to continue may formations earlier the in back far appearing first of species mollusca as just ages, prehistoric remote from even level of culture, their in unchanged comparatively remain seems, decay, on may, it bring or improvement compel extent great no to circumstances that so Lamarck, of term the use to environnant,” “mileu their within harmony in and without, from interference from isolated Apeople of civilization. problem the on it throws light the in importance small no has but relatively and absolutely slender legs. The The legs. slender absolutely and relatively but arms, and torso well-developed with stature, fair (Tylor seas. 1894: modern in 150)thrive 7 It was within such paradigms that that paradigms such It within was 8

4 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania colour of the skin is some shade of chocolate- extinction was contingent upon maintaining a strict brown; and the eyes are very dark brown, or black. separation and disconnection for the Aboriginal peoples on The hair is usually raven-black, fine and silky in the mainland going back to time immemorial.10 It follows texture; and it is never woolly, but usually wavy that if any connections between Tasmanian and Australian and tolerably long. (Huxley 1870: 404) Aboriginals, be they cultural or racial, were established and promulgated in the realm of science or museology, then Additionally, “These characters are common to all extinction, by its very definition, could not have occurred. inhabitants of Australia proper (excluding Tasmania)” Additionally, it is only through the consecration of a (ibid.). The Tasmanians, on the other hand, exemplified particular idea of Tasmanian Aboriginality, one of stasis the “Negrito” subtype within the “Negroid type” of and difference, that contemporary Tasmanian culture in humankind. Huxley writes: its many forms was denied legitimacy in both social and political milieus. The stature of the Negro is, on the average, fair, and the body and limbs are well made. The skin varies in colour, through various shades of brown Disrupted equilibrium and death-in-the-name-of-progress to what is commonly called black; and the eyes have been the standard tropes employed in support of are brown or black. The hair is usually black, the ideology of Tasmanian Aboriginal extinction for and always short and crisp or woolly…. In the over a century. As I have demonstrated, the Tasmanians Andaman Islands, in the Peninsula of Malacca, in had come to represent a Paleolithic people inhabiting an the Philippines, in the islands which stretch from arrested culture-phase and a racially distinct population Wallace’s line eastward and southward, nearly from the mainland. These ideologies were still quite strong parallel with the east coast of Australia, to New through the 1930s and helped inform the group exhibit Caledonia, and finally, in Tasmania, men with under discussion. For example, in 1935 Thomas Dunbabin dark skins and woolly hair occur who constitute matter-of-factly wrote that “In Tasmania, there was, when a special modification of the Negroid type—the the white men arrived, only the one primitive people, Negritos. (Huxley 1870: 405-406; emphasis added) differing completely from the Aborigines of Australia” (Dunbabin 1935: 259). After extended periods of frontier 11 E.B. Tylor combines these ideologies of racial distinction conflict (referred to as The Black War, 1824-1832 ) (in relation to mainland Australia) and cultural primor- following British settlement in 1803, official policy towards diality when he refers to the Tasmanians as a “branch of Tasmania’s indigenous peoples turned to removing what the Negroid race illustrating the condition of man near his were believed to be the 123 remaining full-blooded lowest known level of culture” (Tylor, Preface to Roth 1899 individuals to Flinders Island in the Bass Strait. Darwin, [1890]: v). writing in his journal aboard the Beagle in February 1836, commented that: For the latter part of the 19th and the first half of the 20th All the aborigines have been removed to an island centuries there were widespread debates concerning how in Bass’s Straits, so that Van Diemen’s Land enjoys a racially different Tasmanian population first inhabited the great advantage of being free from a native its island home. These debates maintained ideologies population…. Thirty years is a short period, in of the Tasmanians as Paleolithic peoples and provided which to have banished the last aboriginal from his numerous hypotheses for how they had arrived there with native island, —and that island nearly as large as their different racial “stock” intact. Today we have long Ireland. I do not know a more striking instance of known that the Tasmanians traveled to the island via a land the comparative rate of increase of a civilized over bridge from mainland Australia. As the sea levels rose at a savage people. (Darwin 1989 [1839]: 329) the conclusion of the last Ice Age, between 8-12,000 years ago, this connective body of land was replaced by the Bass Led by George Augustus Robinson, the “Conciliator” Strait. This conclusion was first proffered by A.W. Howitt, of the Tasmanian “natives,” this settlement on Flinders who believed that “one of the fundamental principles to Island, known as Wybalenna (“Black Man’s House”), was be adopted in discussing the origin of those savages must centered on civilizing and Christianizing frameworks be, that they reached Tasmania at a time when there was directed towards pulling them up and out of their perceived a land communication between it and Australia” (Howitt savagery.12 In 1847 this mission was officially closed, 1996 [1904]: 9). Despite such breakthroughs, the ideologies and the remaining forty-seven people, who had survived of extreme primitivity and racial distinction continued to rampant disease and hardship, were returned to mainland mutually reinforce one another, and in tandem provided Tasmania to “live out their days” at Oyster Cove, south of the foundational science for the third and final message in Hobart. our analysis: Tasmanian extinction. In essence, Tasmanian

5 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM in Tasmanians, ‘extinct’ the particularly and Aborigines, of Australian the importance the “Given writes, Urry James As for actions. such rationale the as given frequently was grave-robbing. like means illegal not through than often more universities, and royal societies, institutions, by cultural remains Aboriginal of Tasmanian collection the was of extinction myth the reinforced that practice One race. adead be to thought were people Aboriginal Tasmanian the of Truganini passing of Tasmania, government the to unique from far was race adying were of peoples Tasmania indigenous the that view the While members. community by led Aboriginal programs of education number alarge with helped Ialso Brown. Tony curator, its and Department Cultures Indigenous the fieldworkin 2010-2011. of majority my The was for work of my dissertation workpart as volunteer performed and 2008 in internship athree-month Icompleted that 1889in al., et 2007: (Hughes 4). institution It this at was Gallery Art and Museum the became Tasmanian officially of of Royal Tasmania the collection Society the as 1848, in serving institution an as existence into It came galleries. museum-and-art remaining three of country’s the one and River, Australia’s is TMAG oldest museum second Derwent the overlooking Hobart downtown in Located TMAG and the 1931 Group Exhibit exhibit. by TMAG’s effectively were silenced extinction, group and difference, of notions primitivity, through informed those with incompatible ones of Aboriginality, Divergent forms for public consumption. circulated and consecrated were ideologies such which of Aboriginality Tasmanian through amajor were forum Museums had. already Tasmanians of the science realms the in of public and the minds the in disappear, to destined were people Aboriginal the that belief by the fueled was mainland public the on policy while point; acrucial is This Tasmanian. authentically being as status denied thereby and orhalf-breeds, mixed as locales,central being Island Flinders extent alesser to and Island Barren Cape with Islands, Strait Bass the on communities larger orin Tasmania mainland on either descent, Aboriginal People of groups. parental both from separate therefore and hybrid racially as classified were heritage of mixed people as of race, 1876 her death in discursive the signaled Truganini’s death person, Aboriginal Tasmanian blooded full- last the Believed be peoples. to Aboriginal mainland from type” “racial aseparate as viewed been historically have peoples Aboriginal Tasmanian the differentiation, cultural and isolation geographic perceived their to Due 15 the important point is that following the following the that is point important the 13 were governmentally and socially defined defined socially and governmentally were 16 Their purported valuefor science purported Their 14 and and remains. The article states that: states article The remains. relative valueof museum’s the of Tasmanian collection J. the on Wunderly,physical anthropologist, commented 1932, from avisiting article anewspaper In discussion. under exhibit group the with tandem in displayed point one at were remains her paper, of this excerpt opening the in 1903put 1947. from public on display to and mounted were which of Truganini’s remains, skeletal form jewel the proverbial crown in the with up it ended as 1989: practices these 12). in (Urry not innocent was TMAG for time” some continued remains of robbing their grave and snatching body the that pology, it not is surprising anthro century of Nineteenth speculations evolutionary the the Westthe being to of areaction was amuseum,” depths the in years dozen rotfor to several left it was “after II of Ramses mummy of the mobilization the For Baudrillard, Baudrillard. Jean by described playfully as II, of Ramses of mummy the that is progress of evolutionary ideas social and displays museum between interplay deft of example this illustrative of evolution. social An paradigms within groups cultural of separation inherent the and accumulation, and progress ideologies of of maintaining task the with commissioned was atTMAG exhibit group the remains, human with 1989: (Haraway 54). praxis” social concert In through atechnology as ‘fact,’ in is, constructed “Nature which through “meaning-machines,” are Haraway, dioramas 1989: (Haraway 29). forfamily” home and Fora hearth nature, in garden uspoiled an asidestage, altar, as itself “presents exhibit Haraway, group the by Donna ricized histo and deconstructed expertly as History, of Natural Museum American the at dioramas Akeley the to Akin exhibit. group the comprising materials the in consolidated was and materials cultural additional and remains of use human the through enacted was message This message. core the being non-existence with ideologies of Aboriginality, Tasmanian of prevailing the many reinforced TMAG materials, cultural non-human and human of both curation and practices collecting its Through conserve for forty centuries, but out of sight and of out and but sight centuries, for forty conserve able to been had order symbolic the save what to able of being not thought the at panic with seized the Tasmanian aborigines. ( aborigines. Tasmanian the race, extinct and interesting very of that bones other and skulls the It comprises States. United the in and Britain, in mainland, the on of museums control in of those envy the is which of specimens acollection is there Hobart at Museum Tasmanian the of Tasmania’sIn relics said: race, lost by mortal Mr. surrounded Wunderly, was who January 14, 1932:January 11; 1938) Wunderly also see The Hobart Mercury Hobart The 17 As described described As , - - 6 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania far from the light of day. Ramses does not signify instead of in the purely conventional and isolated manner anything for us, only the mummy is of an inestimable of the glass case containing an array having small relation worth because it is what guarantees that accumula- to ideas” (The Hobart Mercury, January 17, 1931: 6). tion has meaning. Our entire linear and accumulative Regarding its thematic focus, it is useful to turn to the culture collapses if we cannot stockpile the past in work of Lynette Russell, who has conducted research on plain view. To this end the pharaohs must be brought dioramas and museum displays of Australian Aboriginal out of their tomb and the mummies out of their silence. To this end they must be exhumed and given military peoples. According to Russell, all the Aboriginal dioramas honors. They are prey to both science and worms. she examined were “focused on economic pursuits; they are (Baudrillard 1994 [1981]: 9-10; emphasis added) centred around the preparation of food. Women are usually shown undertaking grinding, or other cooking preparations, Within this context it is important to not only remember and childcare. Most of the dioramas showed men returning that the Tasmanians were described as the rudest culture to camp with game draped over their shoulders” (Russell ever recorded, as the living embodiment of Paleolithic Man, 1999: 38). The TMAG group exhibit had a very similar but also that the perceived need for the group exhibit was arrangement to those described by Russell. Over a series of informed by an essential lack, namely that it was scien- articles, The Hobart Mercury describes the subject of the tifically necessary to provide an image of the Tasmanian exhibit as: Aboriginal people because they no longer existed. As a result, the modeled figures of the group, in collaboration a Tasmanian aboriginal camp, and an old kitchen with human remains, formed a “moiety of past life to give midden and the figures will be shown as illustrating the life and habits of the vanished people. The reality to a present figment” (The Hobart Mercury, January foreground of the group will be built, and given 17, 1931: 6). actual form, so as to portray conditions of actuality. (The Hobart Mercury, January 17, 1931: 6)

The Enactment of Difference at the Museum The figures of the male, female, and child represen- We now turn our attention to the group exhibit itself. In tatives of the aboriginal inhabitants of Tasmania are grouped on a beach with Mount Wellington and following the process of its creation, and the concomitant the river as a background, which is carved to give enactment of a particular version of Tasmanian Aborigi- stereoscopic effect. (The Hobart Mercury, May 23, nality (one that is informed by and reinforces the messages 1931: 10) of Tasmanians as Paleolithic Man; Tasmanians as racially distinct from mainland Aboriginal peoples; and Tasmanians In the centre of the scene is a fire, beside which the as extinct), it becomes clear that the exhibit was designed woman is sitting, tending the roasting of several to act as a surrogate for the Tasmanian race. By creating a crayfish. Just behind her is the child, watching version of “near-reality,” the museum sought to provide an anxiously the cooking operations and to the right idealized, romantic image of the Tasmanian peoples, one is the man, carrying a strip of gum-bark for the that was fundamentally incompatible with the historical building of the hut, the beginning of which is reality. shown. (ibid.)

Returning to Mol (2002), we will follow the ways in which When completed, this exhibit would allow later generations the group exhibit, falling under the label “Tasmanian to see by a “glance at almost reality, the kind of people Aboriginal,” was enacted at TMAG in 1931. In the process, who once fished, played, and fought, where now stands I will focus on three main aspects of the group exhibit: 1) Hobart” (ibid.). I argue that it would help later generations the stated purpose of the exhibit and what, specifically, was understand a certain type of Aboriginality in the Tasmanian to be depicted; 2) the process of its creation, namely the context, one that was frozen in time in the realm of science, “building of bodies”; and 3) its official unveiling and insti- if not reality. Heavily influenced by social evolutionary tutional framing for public consumption. thought, this idealized image of the nuclear family, albeit a nuclear family with jet-black skin and without clothing, in In contrast to older styles of ethnographic display, the group effect silenced alternative Tasmanian Aboriginal realities, exhibit sought to be more amenable to what Haraway calls the very existence of which conveyed the underlying “eye-nature”18 and in effect, be more truthful. Expressing messages of extinction and loss. similar sentiments, The Hobart Mercury describes the museum’s rationale for such an approach in the following In examining the newspaper account of the exhibit’s excerpt: “In these days, group exhibits are looked upon creation, a number of leitmotifs emerge that are woven by scientists generally, as the proper way to show objects, throughout its description, paradoxically central and peripheral. One such theme is that of a near-reality; a

7 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM is statue the which in casting, the comes of figures the moulding and Following framing the which on revolving platform a describes article of work. The such nature macabre the upon foment above, to reflection but also mentioned and messages of subtle the presence the only not foreground to Ido, Iseek that extent the to them quoting In Mr. Dicks. aforementioned by the undertaken of building of process the account exhaustive an is there 1931 22, of January the edition In useful. be will of statues” the coverage of “making the newspaper the from excerpts several Here, entrusted. are they which to tasks the and themselves, materials work the on done the to pay attention to it critical is creation, its analyzing it. In informed ideologies that and discourses the to relation in maintained and created world by itself,” all butinstead is the out in goes subsequently “object an that from far is Mol to (2002), this Returning irreversible. and complete is extinction that viewer the reminds reality not quite remains it that fact possible, but the of Aboriginal-ness Tasmanian image real most and best the offers exhibit a whole, this Taken incomplete. as inherently is surrogacy their but that people, Aboriginal Tasmanian for the surrogates life-like are figures these that statement underlying the foreground to serve motifs these concert, In (or resuscitation. racial) cultural and of one is near-regeneration theme second January 22, 1931: 22, January added) 3; emphasis ( yet now areality. a breath, than less brain, his in slept had that idea the action. living, its a in like almost him, before stands there last at till life, checked appears life, movement, thought, expression, moulds modeler result halted the the end fingers moving delicate and touch subtle With the suddenly at of until piece form living seen….is body of the form general the and muscles, outlined showing legs and arms attenuated appears, head askull-like Gradually size. in decrease clay used of pieces the increases, structure basic the as but arms, and head legs, the statue, of the body the in fill to used are of clay masses than more little first At work begins. actual and angle, required the to bent are extensions arm the position, correct the in frame his disposed neck…. and Having head support to other, the round bent one piping, lead of pieces of two consists head-frame the and legs, the to stays iron arms, the to stability gives piping body. of the Lead length the carry to upright the as clamp-frame of the standard iron the using wood, and piping of lead frame-work his builds [Dicks] It is now that out of dead clay emerges emerges clay dead of out that now is It The Hobart Mercury Hobart The The Hobart Mercury Hobart The leitmotifs leitmotifs , , After these steps comes the penultimate stage in which the the which in stage penultimate the comes steps these After “Building Bodies.” This piece emphasizes piece Bodies.” This “Building 1931, February from titled aptly article abrief in described is task This peoples. Aboriginal of Tasmanian the tations represen living not quite the form to combined are pieces newspaper article commented that: that: commented article newspaper One accuracy. for perceived its lauded was exhibit group on Friday, May 22, museology.opening 1931, Officially the and science both to respect with framed itwhich was in manner the and unveiling formal its to attention our we shift of creation, its process the addressed Having together. (ibid.) together. joined be to ready is parts several in statue the skill—and requiring task off—a knocked is mould the hard, set has plaster the avoidto When bubbles. necessary being care great in, poured plaster liquid and greased are mould of the hollow parts The by rivets. body the to joined cast the and separately, cast then are legs the sometimes and arms, head, The again…. for use up broken then is which clay of statue, the form the with hollow coinciding the hollow inside, of plaster, lump ashapeless is there done is this When again. clay, assembled and the from detached numbered, then are sections The finished. are all until cast, and in walled section next the and sticking, prevent to greased mould of the edges the of clay removed, wall is the set, is this When cream. of thick consistency the to mixed of Paris, plaster poured is made so receptacle the into and acontainer, as act it to round built of clay awall then has section Each more. or seven, or six perhaps sections, in off marked the exception of the head the of exception the plaster, in now cast group, the of figure male The Museum. Tasmanian for the group aboriginal of the modeling the in engaged is limb by together, puts he as sculptor of the delight The been done with such accuracy of detail, based on the the on based of detail, accuracy such with done been have setting and groupings The fact. living not and exhibit, an only it is that realise of to ashock effect the almost it has that lifelike and natural so It all is added) Mercury Hobart ( appearance. patchy asomewhat moment the at presents and colour, satisfactory most the discover to tinted of being process in is hair stringy table, The natural. most and looks finality, to almost artist’s the on brought been has face for the colour The colouring. neck its to regard it with upon out carried are upon experiments sits figure cast. been already has head and its completion nearing is figure female of the , the products of his mind and hands, who who hands, and mind of his products , the , February 7, 1931:, February 6; emphasis , while the clay model clay model the , while stands complete with with complete stands The head of the male male the of head The The The while while limb limb - 8 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania most authoritative historical evidence, that the effect 1997 artwork, Folklore, is a direct response to the group is one of reality… its naturalness and charm… give exhibit under discussion. Gough writes: one so vividly to realise the life in this island all those centuries before the dawn of civilisation. (The The diorama is an inescapably bizarre and totally 19 Hobart Mercury, May 23, 1931: 10) constructed fabrication of Tasmanian Aborigines. Intended as an education tool, it is a totally The group exhibit itself “occupies the whole of one end of invented version; a kind of historic folklore. It tells the large room on the right of the main entrance,” and along much more about its makers than its purported the sloping base of the containing case “there are bas-reliefs subject. It portrays the myth of the Tasmanian of William Lanne20 and Truganini, the last male and Aboriginal nuclear family clustered around a female Tasmanian aborigines, with a series of illustrated solitary campfire, rather than typically within descriptive tablets, showing on one side the history of the a large extended family or band of people. The figures are based on Truganini and Woorrady race, and on the other the general characteristics of the with a child which Truganini, who was physically original Tasmanians” (The Hobart Mercury, May 23, 1931: maltreated by Europeans, was unlikely to have 10). W.L. Crowther, scientist and collector of Aboriginal ever had…. The people represented were not remains, remarked at its unveiling that “in designing from the region painted as their backdrop. The the group they had sought to strike the imagination of diorama invents its own time and place. Not only children. For long they had desired to have a picture of are other people missing from the picture, but by paleolithic man, in order that the children growing up in this time in their lives (in real time) Truganini and the community should realise clearly the nature and habits Woorrady were familiar with and using European of the aboriginals of Tasmania” (ibid.). In essence, what materials: axes, dogs and guns – none of which this exhibit sought to do was to provide an embodiment are depicted…. The scene freezes Aboriginal of Aboriginal Tasmania, one comprised of plaster, wiring, Tasmanians into ‘no-time’; into an unknowable distancing space. In this it both justifies and and paint, rather than flesh and blood. By foregrounding an illustrates the story of genocide, rather than image of the Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples based on their dispelling it as a myth. (Gough 2001: 36-37) position within the social evolutionary schema, the museum enacted a Tasmanian Aboriginality that was more myth Despite being familiar with the critiques offered by Dr. than reality. Additionally, it enacted a form of Tasmanian Gough, I can personally attest to the power of the visual, Aboriginality that was incompatible with the lived, and what Haraway has called “eye-nature,” in relation to the living, realities of Aboriginal existence in the Tasmanian group exhibit at TMAG. During my first visit to Hobart in context. 2004, I made a number of trips to TMAG, and despite my best efforts, the image of the Aboriginal nuclear family Concluding Remarks was burned into my mind. At that point the Tasmanian Aboriginal gallery had become a conceptual mish-mash, Up to this point in this paper, the living Aboriginal peoples with text from numerous eras, often in direct contrast with themselves have been mostly conspicuous by their absence. one another, occupying the same exhibition space. Despite This was intentional, as it accurately reflected mainstream more recent text discussing the contemporary community, ignorance of their continued existence and a concomitant the messages of extinction, primitivity, and fundamental lack of their involvement in any form of cultural represen- difference embodied in the plaster figures themselves were tation for mass consumption. Over the past few decades, difficult to ignore. Tony Brown, the Curator of Indigenous however, things have shifted dramatically, and with Cultures at the museum and an Aboriginal man from interesting results. Historian Klaus Neumann wrote in Cape Barren Island (as well as someone with whom I have 1992 that “Descendants of the original inhabitants and worked with for a number of years) was openly hostile rightful custodians of Tasmania have survived, and so has a towards the group exhibit, but pessimistic regarding his distinct culture and history. Against all odds—even though ability to make any alterations. In a 2004 conversation with its distinctiveness may lie in the way in which elements this author, he said: of non-Aboriginal culture are appropriated” (Neumann 1992: 291-292). I believe there is some truth to this I’d like to basically get it out, throw it away, chuck sentiment in relation to the concrete and concerted efforts it in the river if I had my way. But that will never of many Tasmanian Aboriginal peoples to (re)articulate happen, because it’s probably one of the most talked about, most viewed exhibits in the museum. their culture, and to what it means to be Aboriginal in the People from the mainland, as well as overseas, Tasmanian context through material culture production, come and look at the diorama and look at those both re-vitalized and re-energized. One example of note is figures, and get their idea of what Aboriginal that of Tasmanian Aboriginal artist, Julie Gough, whose people looked like.

9 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM present. its re-construct and history its reclaim to return extinct, as exhibited and dead declared once acommunity, see to is aperson, as but also anthropologist an me,as to thing exhilarating most The anthropology. of Victorian-era valuing hierarchical the from free terms, own their valueon cultural their express to have sought (to but afew) name writers and designers, weavers, artists, Aboriginal Tasmanian which ways in the is interesting most is What examples. but two being shell-stringing and fiber-work with community, Aboriginal the within practice and knowledge of cultural propagation and/or revitalization the on centered programs and exhibitions many have been there design; museum of community-based but instance one narrative. reclamation a broader Tunapry, by Ningenneh replaced and included, exhibit group down, taken was old the gallery 2007 In context. Tasmanian the in over control self-representation and power relations in shifts of broader indicative are that changes museum; at the however, major point, changes have been that there Since 21 a concerted community effort that exemplified exemplified that effort community aconcerted 22 Ningenneh Tunapry is is Tunapry Ningenneh 23

10 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania

Figure 1. Aboriginal Group Exhibit at the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. Permission of the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. Collection: Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. (Photo taken by museum)

Figure 2. Hobart and surrounds from Mount Wellington. (Photo taken by author)

11 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM described maybe which culture-phase arrested an in times recent quite into remained they that confidence with said peopleof be only probably whom it the can are Tasmanians “The that state to passage 7. same the in on goes Balfour (1968: Stocking George 69-90). ago by of decades anumber problematized was notion This courses). for introductory used textbooks contemporary many in reiterated fact (a culture of definition consolidated first the providing with TylorE.B. credited frequently is capitalized. often and singular being both with pologists, foranthro early interchangeable tion” commonly were “civiliza and “culture” ilk, his and Boas Franz to 6. Prior 1802. in Tasmania society.’” of human cradle surveyed the for Baudin him are he reaches that islands unknown of age. Those an passage the is he makes step every past; the exploring he is time; in traveling fact in is of earth, the ends the to traveler, sailing philosophical The processes. two these between relations the on and development and of language, formation the on of ideas, generation and origin the on experiments secure up able be set to we shall history; own of our periods first the to back ‘We away taken be in shall return. never to Pacific, South the to France from before sail he set Baudin explorer Nicolas Pacific the to Degerando’s memorandum Joseph-Marie is example often-cited An investigations. pre-Adamite in well-used already was for time, distance substituted which device, “This continues: excerpt 5. This Tanzania). (i.e. Africa no, not is in Tasmania and of Australia, part fact in is Tasmania yes, that of saying consist usually answers my short, In Tasmania. about questions countless answered Ihave seven years past of the “foreigners.” Over ignorance the Horne’s to regarding attest points certainly 4. Ican (Mol 2002: 35).simultaneously” realized be cannot they atleast: incompatible, are exigencies These microscope. the visible under artery the of section across requires second the legs. And his in pain about complains who patient a requires first The another. exclude atherosclerosis one pathological and atherosclerosis clinical of enacting practices “The 3. Mol writes, this author. by supported nor not are shared reflects usage such views The anthropology. century 20th early 19th and in term this of currency common the reflective is of usage This 2. consistency. of purposes for the exhibit.”“group Iemploy latter the of label it coverage gives the a newspaper original the adiorama, as to referred commonly is exhibit this 1. While Notes - - eight (Agassiz), eleven (Pickering), fifteen (Bory St (Bory (Agassiz),eight fifteen eleven (Pickering), (Kant), five(Blumenbach),(Buffon), (Hunter), seven six (Jacquinot), four as (Virey),three two as oras or race, species asingle as classed hebe should whether judges capable amongst possible diversity greatest the is there yet and animal, other any than carefully more Man, studied of Descent new. nothing is In This shifting. constantly and fluid notoriously are classifications and categories These beyond. and Linnaeus to of back goes which heritage the typologies, of science racial the with line in was 8. This of both.” advantage the to of sciences blending happy archaeology, to a ahand offering of ethnology present, the in surviving of one, past the striking avery instance, an affords It record. prehistoric the in some gaps the of fill to helping of is valuein culture stone-age rudimentary their of study the as people, inasmuch ‘unrisen’ this in interest awider is there To indeed, archaeologist. the latter, and the ethnologist for the both interest intrinsic have ahigh nians Tasma the such, As conditions. of primitive persistence strictly as Blending of Two Cultures at the Colonial Sea Frontier Frontier Sea Colonial the outside 14. England. of Royal Society first The at Cultures Two (2011). of Blending Cameron’s Patsy see Islanders, the on text historical recent 13. and For in-depth amore (1892) Pratt See 1973. Prucha in PA Carlisle, School acentury. in half byBoarding almost Pratt’s Indian Henry Richard It predated also Australia. in mission first the as positioned often is 12. Wybalenna point. starting alternative an as 1828 Lawin serving of Martial declaration the with historian, to historian from 11. vary dates These Taylor Rebe 10. point. this on Ithank for conversation her (Wood-Jones 1935: Australian” the from 5). characters, racial his all in distinct, quite he was that and orother sort of anegroid was some Tasmanian the that agreement in were century of nineteenth the anthropologists great the Topinard, Flower, all Garson, Turner and New Caledonia. of inhabitants the in representatives living nearest their he found and of Negroids the branch orMelanesian Eastern 1870 In the among of Tasmanians. the them he classed affinities racial the who defined clearly of one first was the 9. Wood-Jones also See 1935. For Wood-Jones, “Huxley Mongoloid and types. Xanthochroic, Negroid, Australioid, the namely of mankind, forms [1879]:2004 4principal 203). proposed himself Huxley (Darwin Burke” to according sixty-three, oras (Crawfurd), sixty (Morton), twenty-two (Desmoulins), Vincent), sixteen Paleolithic Charles Darwin writes “Man has been been has “Man writes Darwin Charles —a very remarkable instance of the instance remarkable very —a Grease and Ochre: The The Ochre: and Grease The The - 12 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania 15. As such beliefs were unquestioned doxa for the govern- ing bodies of Australia, the United States, and Canada, to name but a few. 16. See Plomley 1961 for a fine overview of Tasmanian human materials in institutional collections. 17. Truganini’s remains were repatriated to the Tasmanian Aboriginal people in 1976 and her ashes were laid to rest. 18. Haraway believes that “A diorama is eminently a story, a part of natural history. The story is told in the pages of nature, read by the naked eye. The animals in the habitat groups are captured in a photographer’s and sculptor’s vision. They are actors in a morality play on the stage of nature, and the eye is the critical organ” (Haraway 1989: 29). 19. The Hobart Mercury, May 23, 1931: 10. The article continues: “The wallaby just killed, as may be judged by the trickle of blood on the ground, from the nose, empty oyster, scallop, and mutton fish shells scattered about, the spears leaning against the she-oak, the fibre fish-bag, flints, anvil-stones, throwing-stick, all are so much part of the whole, that the first glance scarcely observes them, so truly do they belong to it. There is even a bag on the ground containing the red ochre beloved of the aboriginals, with which the man’s hair is plentifully smeared.” 20. Historically believed to be the last Tasmanian Aboriginal man. Lanne passed away in 1869. 21. In English, “To Give Knowledge and Understanding.” 22. The center-piece of this exhibition was the first Aboriginally-made bark canoe in around 170 years. 23. I thank Andrew Shryock for helping me put these sentiments into words.

13 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012) Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9(2012) Number Studies, Museum in Papers Working UM Mercury Hobart The Mercury Hobart The Mercury Hobart The Mercury Hobart The (1989)Haraway, Donna “Teddy Patriarchy: Bear (2001) Julie Gough, (1983)Fabian, Johannes (1935) Thomas Vanished: Sidelights Dunbabin, Who “Men (1993) Jared Diamond, “TenYears of Thousand Solitude.” Charles Darwin, (1989) Charles Darwin, [1839] (2011) Patsy Cameron, (1994) Jean [1981]Baudrillard, of (1925) Tasmanians the Status Balfour, Henry “The Bibliography General’s Speech.” 10, Pp. May 23, 1931. Hobart Ceremony. Unveiling Group. Attorney Museum 7, 1931.Bodies.” February 6, Pp. Hobart 1931. 22, Exhibit.” 3, Pp. Group January Hobart AWorker Task. At of Statues. His the Museum Making 17, Exhibit.” January 6, Pp. Group 1931. Hobart Citizen’s of Erection for Generosity. Museum Fund Science Modern of Routledge London: and World the in 1908-36,” in New York of Eden, Garden the City, in Taxidermy Pasts Contentious of of Tasmania University Disclosure Object Its Makes University Press Anthropology Race.” Tasmanian Lost the on Discover Sex to Relation in Selection Books Penguin London: Frontier. Sea Colonial the at Pty. Ltd. Bookshop Fullers Launceston: Cultures Two of Press of Michigan University Arbor: Ann Anglia East of Society Prehistoric Stone-Age Peoples.” the among 14(3):48-57 Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature Nature and Race, Gender, Visions: Primate (2004) [1879] Transforming Histories: The Visual Visual The Histories: Transforming ( ( (1931) “ANONYMOUS GIFT. Hobart ( 1931) “Aborigines’ Tasmanian Camp. 1931) of Day. the “Notes Building 1931) “Art of Sculptor. The the Grease and Ochre: The Blending Blending The Ochre: and Grease Time and the Other: How How Other: the and Time Voyage of the Beagle the of Voyage . London: Penguin Books Penguin . London: The Descent of Man, and and Man, of Descent The Simulacra and Simulation. and Simulacra Mankind . New York: Columbia . Burnie, Australia: Australia: . Burnie, . Pp. 26-58.. Pp. New York Proceedings of the the of Proceedings 5:1-15 1(11):258-260

.

Shryock, Andrew, Thomas R. Trautmann, and Clive and Trautmann, R. Thomas Andrew, Shryock, Kottak, Conrad Phillip (2012) Phillip Conrad Kottak, Huxley, T. of H. (1870) Distribution Geographical the “On P.J.,Hughes, (2007) al., et eds. A.W.Howitt, (1996) of The [1904] Origin the “On (2008) Donald [1964]Horne, Mercury Hobart The Russell, Lynette (1999) Lynette Russell, “‘Wellnigh Describe’: to Impossible (1994) Carl Robinson, H. (1973) Richard of Mingling Pratt, Advantages “The Plomley, N.J.B (1961) in Material Aboriginal “Tasmanian (1992) Klaus “ANeumann, of Writing Postcolonial (2002) Mol, Annemarie (1993) Bruno Latour, 1999(2):35-45 Ethnological Society of London of Society Ethnological Mankind.” of Modifications Chief the Gallery. Art and Museum Gallery. Australia Press Studies Aboriginal South-East of Tribes in of Australia,” and Tasmania Aborigines Penguin of World Museums.” 11, Pp. 14, 1932. January Hobart Envy The Investigation. Scientific ofRace. Lost Skulls Australian Aborigines.” Aborigines.” Australian of Representations the and Displays Dioramas, Lincolnwood: Press University Harvard Indians Ireland in Whites” with Indians and Britain Great of Institute 91(2):221-227 Anthropological Europe.” in Collections History.” Aboriginal University Press Practice Medical Press University Harvard Cambridge: Anthropology to McGraw-Hill Introduction Concise . F. 260-271. Pp. P. ed. Cambridge: Prucha, Collection. Hobart, Tasmania: Tasmanian Tasmanian Tasmania: Hobart, Collection. Passport Books Passport . Durham and London: Duke Duke London: and . Durham ( We Have Never Been Modern Been Never Have We 1932) “EXTINCT TASMANIANS. 1932) TASMANIANS. “EXTINCT Australia: Island Continent Island Australia: The Body Multiple: Ontology in in Ontology Multiple: Body The Meanjin The Journal of the Royal Royal the of Journal The Australian Aboriginal Studies Aboriginal Australian Americanizing the American American the Americanizing The Lucky Country. Lucky The Window on Humanity: A A Humanity: on Window Tasmanian Museum and Art Art and Museum Tasmanian 32(2):277-298 . Pp. 1-33.. Pp. Canberra: 2(4):404-412 . New York: The Journal of the the of Journal The The Native Native The . Victoria: Victoria: .

14 Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania Gamble (2011) “Imagining the Human in Deep Time,” in Deep History: The Architecture of Past and Present. Andrew Shryock and Daniel Lord Smail, ed. Pp. 21-54. Berkeley: University of California Press

Stocking Jr., George (1968) “Matthew Arnold, E.B. Tylor, and the Uses of Invention,” in Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology. Pp. 69-90. New York: The Free Press

Stocking Jr., George (1987) Victorian Anthropology. New York: The Free Press

Tylor, Sir Edward B. (1871) Primitive Culture: Researches Into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art, and Custom, Volume 1. London: Brad bury, Evans, and Co.

Tylor, Sir Edward B. (1894) “On the Tasmanians as Representatives of Paleolithic Man.” The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 23:141-152

Tylor, Sir Edward B. (1899) [1890] “Preface to the First Edition,” in The Aborigines of Tasmania. H.L. Roth, ed. Halifax: F. King & Sons

Tylor, Sir Edward B. (1900) “On the Stone Age in Tasmania, as Related to the History of Civilization.” The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 30:33-34

Urry, James (1989) “Headhunters and Body-Snatchers.” Anthropology Today 5(5):11-13

Wood-Jones, Frederic (1935) “Tasmania’s Vanished Race.” Sydney: The Australian Broadcasting Commission

Wunderly, J. (1938) “The Origin of the Tasmanian Race.” Man 38:198-203

15 UM Working Papers in Museum Studies, Number 9 (2012)