Evolving access solutions – repatriation of records
to indigenous communities
Helen
Onopko[i],
Records & Archive Services
Introduction
The western view of records tends to see the records
of aboriginal Australia as static, as something that can be used as legal
and historical proof. The indigenous people of Australia did not keep ‘archives’; they had no need to prove
their culture through documentation. Instead they rely on a complex system of
oral transmission and customary law. This clash of views leaves indigenous
people caught in a dilemma. Stuck between a traditional view of fluidity of
culture and heritage, an oral, living history; and the need to validate their
views by maintaining a static collection of documents and records of their
history and culture.
We
in the recordkeeping community need to review our understandings of the role of
archives, to evaluate how best our collections can be structured so that they
are not depositories of the past, but are also living places which are shaped
by the nature of the culture they document.
Issues
that I would like to cover include the following:
· Indigenous ways of understanding “archive” and the problematic
relationships between oral cultures and eurocentric notions of the archive, which
privilege written pasts
· Intellectual and cultural property rights in black law
· Examples where records are being repatriated to the
communities
What
we must consider in recognizing indigenous understandings of “archive” are:
§
location of
communities in relation to location of the records
§
financial
resources of researchers in getting to archives
§
the intimidating
alien environment of archives
§
research skills
of people looking for information
§
language barrier
- complex subject specific terms and formats utilised by professionals such as
anthropologists, governments, archaeologists
§
publications
& catalogues of records that are available, and the availability of these
indexes - if you don’t know what's there, how can you know what to ask for
§
the damaging
nature of many records - not wanting to make public things they did in the past
or opinions that were held in the past …… this fear can lad to 'conspiracy
theories', where in actual fact it is often just disorganisation and lack of
funds or time which make records inaccessible.
The late Fabian Hutchinson, said of central
Australian records:
"The
argument has been used that central Australia is one vast dustbowl where all archives would
automatically be 'at risk' as a 'reason' for perpetuating 'centralised' control
over records of research or policy value. This negative outlook denies the
actuality of local research requirements for records, and fails to consider
community values"
Intellectual
property and indigenous heritage
Celine
McInerney is an intellectual property lawyer for South Australian legal firm,
Norman Waterhouse. She has done
considerable work on Indigenous Heritage Rights in the context of Intellectual
Property under white Australian law and I have consulted her knowledge for this
paper.
The
concept of ‘Ownership’ is a key issue in clarifying the different ways that
indigenous and non-indigenous communities view the role of records and
archives. In changing our view of the role of archives, we need to give up the
concept of ownership, and of superiority in the correct use and interpretation
and our collections.
Indigenous
Heritage includes:
§
All items of
moveable cultural property including burial artefacts
§
Indigenous
ancestral remains
§
Indigenous human
genetic material (including DNA and tissues)
§
Documentation of
Indigenous peoples heritage in all forms of media (including scientific,
ethnographic research reports, papers and books, films, sound recordings).
§
Under Indigenous Law:
§
Cultural
heritage is collectively owned by the relevant clan, through individual
custodians of the stories, the dreams and so on;
§
Notions of
ownership, in the sense white people think of them, don’t apply;
§
The result of
this is that white laws don’t recognise many rights indigenous people believe are
important for the continuation of their culture.
Richard Robins pointed out in a 1996 discussion paper on the
changing role of Museums in Aboriginal Cultural Management :
Museums
need to recognise Aboriginal interests in their culture and that they have
primary rights over that cultural material.
…It may also require the museums to acknowledge that relationships, not
objects, have primacy.
Existing
archives legislation does not stipulate who can access a particular
institution’s records. This lack of enforced regulation gives no protection to
records which may contain personal and culturally sensitive information. In
addition to this, Museum legislation tends to focus on anthropological and
scientific issues, and not on the cultural and spiritual value to Indigenous
peoples of institutions’ collections. We are still in a situation where
Indigenous cultural material can be destroyed or willfully distorted with no
recourse. Cultural material can be misrepresented, and sacred and secret
materials can be accessed and used by anyone the current legal 'owners' of
these items see fit.
On
the one hand free accessibility to this heritage is needed so that Aboriginal
people can trace their genealogies, find their tribal identity, their ancestral
lands, and trace their relatives. On the other hand 'free' access can go
against traditional methods of control over the flow of cultural sacred
information. As recordkeeping professionals we can appreciate that here is a
special circumstance where context is as important as content.
In
July 1978, photographs by a powerful collector of aboriginal records were
printed in Stern Magazine showing sacred sites and secret rites of indigenous
groups. He was very upset when the
photographs were then sold to People Magazine.
Stern subsequently apologised. The whole controversy about whether the
photographs should or should not have been published caused a great deal of
moral anguish. He said that he had every
right to permit use of the photographs because the subjects in the photographs
had passed away.
In
some Aboriginal communities, seeing the names and photographs of the deceased
may cause sadness and distress, particularly to relatives of those people.
It
is admittedly very difficult to write history without including such names. On
the Ara Irititja website, cautions are
provided to users, so that choices can be made prior to record access.
This
was placed at the beginning of the website and the warning has to be accepted
by all users to enter the site.
Example
of an initial access page (interface) within the Archive
(Images courtesy- John
Dallwitz, Ara Irititja Archive Project Manager)
The
closest we have come to providing indigenous Australia protection of their cultural heritage is the ATSI
Protocols for Libraries, archives and information services established in 1994
/ 1995.
Remember,
these collections may include sensitive material which must be respected and
treated specially. In order to respond
appropriately, organisations should make reference to the published protocols.
Protocol
4: Description and classification of
materials
What
must we do? We must
§
Develop, implement and use a national thesaurus for
describing documentation relating to Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples and issues.
§
Develop and use subject headings and guidelines for
archival description which are sensitive to Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples and which promote effective
retrieval.
Mick
Dodson in 1993 said:
We
have been referred to and catalogued as 'savages' or 'primitive' while Western
industrial peoples are referred to as advanced and complex.
Protocol
11: Copying and Repatriation of
Records to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities. Archives and libraries often hold original records
which were created by, or about, or with the input of particular Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander communities. Some records may have been taken from the
control of the community or created by theft or deception.
What
must we do? We must
§
Respond sympathetically and cooperatively to any
request from an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
community for copies of records of specific relevance to the community for its
use and retention.
§
to the repatriation of original records to Aboriginal
and Islander communities when it can be established that the records have been
taken from the control of the community or created by theft or deception. ;
§
Seek permission to hold copies of repatriated records
but refrain from copying such records should permission be denied.
§
Assist Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander communities in planning, providing and
maintaining suitable keeping places for repatriated records
Keeping
places
Libraries,
archives, central filing places, museums and galleries are usually given
distinct and separate roles. One approach to the situation where a community
wants to reclaim its history, is for items from all of these places to be
brought together in one place of reference. In addition to this it is important
that such places are close to the communities whose people are the subjects of
the records. Issues of access can be made more difficult by the fact that
records are often housed in locations which are great distances from the communities.
In
Indigenous communities in Australia the term ‘keeping place’ has begun to be used to
refer to these multipurpose places.
‘Keeping places’ are:
§
libraries, in
that they house information which is a resource for the community
§
archives in that
they file, protect and maintain precious records,
§
museums and
galleries in that they hold items of archaeological and anthropological
interest and often have exhibits demonstrating the context from which these
items were created.
§
retail outlets
and businesses running cultural tours or art classes.
Current repatriation projects
Following the ATSI protocol, many communities and
archival institutions are cooperating to establish repatriation
arrangements. There will always be
resistance through interpretation. The
common statement we have encountered is …
We do not have any records created by
indigenous communities, only those about them, so there are no
issues of repatriation for us to consider.
§
So, what is
happening around Australia. A sample –
but certainly not an exhaustive list -
of repatriation projects follows:
§
Karratha Library
§
The Victorian Koorie Records Taskforce
§
Tibooburra Keeping Place, NSW
§
Djomi Museum (Bawinga Aboriginal
Corporation, Maningrida, NT)
§
Quirindi and District Historical Society, NSW
§
State Library - SA
§
NT Archives
§
Lutheran Archives - SA
§
Kimberly Communities
§
Ara Irititja Archival Project, South Australia
Karratha
Library
The
Library & Information Services Division, Western Australia contacted the Karratha Library to advise that
records on microfilm in their collection were being heavily accessed by
researchers from that area looking for family history information. They
suggested that the Karratha Library purchase a copy of the microfilm, making
the records immediately available to the community (along with a reader!)
The
Victorian Koorie Records Taskforce
The
Victorian Koorie Records Taskforce has released its report of the “Finding Your
Story Community Forums 2002”. The
purpose of the forums is to inform the community about what records are kept
and how they can be accessed. It is also
an opportunity for the community to raise any issues they may have about access
to their records.
Tibooburra Keeping Place, NSW
Opened
this year by the Local Aboriginal Land Council, the Tibooburra Keeping Place contains a collection of artefacts found in the
local area. The Australian Museum assisted in the creation of the keeping place, supplying support,
skills and knowledge. The impetus behind the creation of the keeping place was
the wish to preserve and protect those relics and artefacts unique to the
Tibooburra area.
Djomi Museum (Bawinga Aboriginal Corporation, Maningrida, NT)
The
Djomi Museum serves as a community keeping place. The museum’s collection
includes about 1000 photographs. In 1995 the Bawinga Aboriginal Corporation
was awarded a community heritage grant from the National Library of Australia
to digitise the photographic collection.
Quirindi
and District Historical Society, NSW
Quirindi
and District Historical Society has established a keeping place which includes
an archives, a newspaper microfilm collection, and artefacts from the local
indigenous community as well as the local non-indigenous community. The McLean
Phillips Collection contains aboriginal artefacts, artworks, photographs,
ceremonial items.
State
Library - SA
The
State Library in South
Australia is
taking a pro-active approach to making their records accessible to the
community. Repatriation of items is not considered to be of high importance as
the records at the library give reference to aboriginal communities, but
are not the actual records of those communities. Our Library adheres to
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Protocols for Libraries, Archives and
Information Services. As such they are attempting to make their collection as
accessible as possible to Indigenous people.
NT Archives
Northern Territory Archives have a Protocol for Access to NT
Government Records by Aboriginal People Researching their Families and the
National Archives, Territory Office, has a similar Memorandum of
Understanding. These formal agreements
include commitments by the Government Archives to provide storage for
aboriginal community records and to repatriate copies of records to
communities.
Currently,
the NT Library & Information Service is sponsoring a strategy of creating
knowledge centres in Aboriginal communities.
Part of this strategy is to include in the knowledge centre a place for
keeping the records/archives/memories.
Lutheran
Archives- SA
The
South Australian Lutheran Archives gained a Government grant from the Cultural
Ministers Council to write a guide to the indigenous records in their archives.
The grant was made possible as part of the governments response to the
‘Bringing them Home’ report.
The
guide, published in 1999, is an index of names of people mentioned in the
archives. It acts as an initial place for people to search. Once records have
been found, people are permitted to photocopy the information, such as entries
in books. Unfortunately most people in the photographs which date back to the
1880’s are not identified.
Kimberly
Communities
The
community in the Kimberly has begun their repatriation process, mostly of
material images, historical documents and paintings. Theirs is a very different
view of an archive. The land is an archive. They are very concerned about
heritage protection of objects on land that they have recently reoccupied.
[See slide presentation: slide #11]
The
community has also started organising and indexing for storage, and working out
presentation and some access issues. At the end of last year (2001) their
archivist Jenny Bolton began developing a classification system and with a
consultant, a database.
Currently
Jenny is waiting on approval to get a server which will link up the Land
Council’s five regional offices to the database. The Land Council is also
investing in the training of an indigenous library trainee, who will be able to
maintain the collection into the future.
Ara
Irititja Archival Project, South Australia
The
Ara Irititja Archival Project identifies, copies and electronically
records historical materials about Anangu
(Pitjantjatjara/Yankunytjatjara people). A private community project, the Ara
Irititja Archives were conceived by and are now managed by the Pitjantjatjara
Council. The SA Museum hosts the
project, supplying a place for the ‘hardcopies’ and ‘originals’ of the
materials to be safely housed. This
material was previously held in museums, libraries and private collections. John Dallwitz, Manager of the Project, explained that once people knew their
records would be safe and secure, they were happy to lend them.
The
software utilized by the project is culturally sensitive in that it regulates
access to private, sensitive and offensive materials. Added to this is the
capacity for Anangu to utilize a dynamic database such that when viewing
records they can add, expand, or correct data and historical details. Anangu
people who are in remote communities are encouraged to access the project
through mobile workstations equipped with computer, projector, printer and an
uninterruptible power supply.
[See slide
presentation: slide #12]
These
workstations are brought to remote communities and have also been installed in
several central locations such as Alice Springs and Adelaide. These stations run the archive as a self contained
unit. As such they don’t rely on telephone lines or an outside power source
(each unit has a 240v battery backup).
Since
its establishment in 1994, the archive has accumulated over 26,000 records. The
focus of the project on retrieving and securing records for the benefit of Anangu
and the broader Australian community means that the collection will continue to
grow.
[See slide
presentation: slide #13]
Granddaughter
and grandmother check existing archival records (Images
courtesy- John
Dallwitz, Ara Irititja Archive Project Manager)
Many
indigenous communities and individuals have contacted the Ara Irititja project
team regarding setting up their own such archives. However most are unable to
access the funds required.
[See slide presentation: slide #14]
Students print out photographic records on
the printer located inside the mobile workstation (Images
courtesy- John
Dallwitz, Ara Irititja Archive Project Manager)
One
success story is the Sisters of St John of God in Broome, who have purchased the projects software to begin a
project of digitising their collection of around 7000 photographs.
Conclusion
It
is a cruel twist of fate for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
that the records generated by the Government regime that tore their lives apart
are now in many cases the key to rebuilding their lives and identities.
Our
dilemmas:
Power
of destiny –v- unintended disclosure
Physical
access –v- intellectual access
White
interpretations –v- black knowledge
In
conclusion, there are differing views as to the merits of returning records to
indigenous communities. On the one hand people have argued that "an
informed aboriginal population will have a much greater feeling of power over
its own destiny". On the other hand, people have argued that in handing
over records there is a high possibility that the wrong people will be given
information. In such a situation, an existing oral tradition could be destroyed.
Handing
the records over may increase physical access, but what about intellectual
access. Indigenous communities will still be dependent on specialists
(often non-aboriginal) in the interpretation of these records. In the past, we have described the records
for our purposes, not theirs. This might undermine their roles as
history-tellers.
And
what about observations which researchers recorded. In most cases these
researchers were not aboriginal. They may have mixed with communities for up to
several decades, yet they are still outsiders. Their view is always going to be
based on this.
In
short, G K Chesterton summed it up well:
The culture of the conquered can be
injured and extinguished simply because it can be explained by the conqueror.
