Search

This paper focuses on Archibald Meston's association with Queensland Museum through a detailed analysis of the collections and the transactions with Meston over six decades. The analysis gives key insights into the nature of Meston's collecting, an aspect of his life not previously investigated. Consideration of items associated with Meston found in other collections at Queensland Museum has further allowed for a broader conceptualisation of what is the Archibald Meston collection. Meston's relationship with the Queensland Museum is explored through the lens of the collections and reveals how the interests and policies of the museum may have shaped or even influenced Meston's collecting at specific points in time. This paper further considers the history of a purportedly large collection of Aboriginal artefacts amassed by Meston that were used during performances and lectures for the Wild Australia Show tour (1892-1893). Reassembling what exactly is the Archibald Meston collection at the Queensland Museum has allowed for a reframing of our understanding of Meston the man, who, while neither serious or classic collector, nor scientist or scholar, was a self-proclaimed expert on Aboriginal 'ethnography', as well as a showman and entrepreneur. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Walter Roth ranks among the most prolific collectors of Aboriginal artefacts from North Queensland, including the Wet Tropics, as well as being one of the leading ethnographers in turn-of-the-twentieth-century Australia. He was also one of Queensland's first official Protectors of Aboriginals, appointed immediately after that colony introduced its now-infamous Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act, 1897. This paper explores Roth's twin careers as ethnographic collector and Aboriginal Protector, teasing out the connections and commonalities between the two. It was for his achievements in ethnography and collecting, as well as his medical expertise, that he was appointed to the Protectorship. He carried out both his anthropological work and his administrative duties with determination and dedication. Yet his continuing activities as an ethnographer and collector contributed substantially to his downfall as a senior figure in Aboriginal administration. The paper also positions Roth in the historical context of an evolving Australian anthropology, with particular pertinence to North Queensland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction raises issues concerning transactions involving Aboriginal artefacts of the North Queensland Wet Tropics. We highlight relationships between artefacts, persons and place, as well as the importance of understanding the nature of exchange and concepts of ownership in the creation and collection of artefacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the scientific and political background and the multiple changes in ownership of the Aboriginal artefacts from Australia collected by the German physical anthropologist Hermann Klaatsch. Originally, Klaatsch travelled to Australia in 1904 in search of the origins of humanity. However, the lack of evidence for the 'Out of Australia' theory and the requests by German Museums of Ethnology to collect artefacts for their institutions led to Klaatsch becoming a full-time collector of cultural artefacts, especially during his time in the Wet Tropics. He inscribed the artefacts and sent them to Germany in several shipments to various museums where they were later re-united, displayed and redistributed. Upon his return to Germany in 1907 Klaatsch was appointed professor of anthropology at Breslau University. He took there a portion of his artefact collection for his own teaching and study purposes. Due to political changes in central Europe after the Second World War, this collection was transferred to Warsaw, Poland, in 1953. New ownership insignia were applied while others were (partly) erased. Through these transformations the artefacts became encoded with a rich history and new meanings. A detailed study of Klaatsch's historical documents allows cross-referencing of the artefacts to the original localities and circumstances of their acquisition. Thus, more than one hundred years after first being collected, the artefact transactions and property claims can be re-assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]