Quantcast
Channel: Aboriginal and Dual Names – Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre
Viewing all 28 articles
Browse latest View live

Dual Names 2013

0
0

Dual Names now in use 2013

Dual_name_areas2013_v2

The first six Aboriginal Names and Dual Names to be assigned under the Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012 came into use in late 2013.

They are:

kunanyi / Mount Wellington. Dual name for the mountain.

kanamaluka /River Tamar. Dual name for the river from its source in Launceston to its mouth at Low Head.

truwana/ Cape Barren Island. Dual name for the island as a geographical feature.

takayna/Tarkine. The dual name will apply to the Unbounded Locality already named Tarkine.

An unbounded locality is an area which does not have any clear or definite boundaries. It is marked on maps by showing the name somewhere roughly in the middle of the area. Unbounded localities can also have a stand alone Aboriginal name, instead of being dual named. So:

putalina applies to an unbounded Locality covering the cove at Oyster Cove, the Aboriginal property “Oyster Cove”and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined.

larapuna applies to an Unbounded Locality extending roughly from Eddystone Point to Grants Points, the water of the Bay of Fires between the two points, and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined. This is generally the whole Bay of Fires area, which the name larapuna is specifically for.

The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy can be seen at www. dpac.tas.gov.au, and the gazettal notice is on the Nomenclature Board’s Web Page at www.dpipwe.tas.gov.au/gazettal

You can hear how to say the names here:

kunanyi / Mount Wellington. Dual name for the mountain.

 

kanamaluka /River Tamar. Dual name for the river from its source in Launceston to its mouth at Low Head.

 

truwana/ Cape Barren Island. Dual name for the island as a geographical feature.

 

takayna/Tarkine. The dual name will apply to the Unbounded Locality already named Tarkine.

 

putalina applies to an unbounded Locality covering the cove at Oyster Cove, the Aboriginal property “Oyster Cove”and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined.

 

larapuna applies to an Unbounded Locality extending roughly from Eddystone Point to Grants Points, the water of the Bay of Fires between the two points, and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined.


Proposals for Dual Naming of More Places in Tasmania

0
0

Support Tasmania’s new Aboriginal and Dual Names

Eight new Dual Names 2015_v2

In March we submitted another 8 names to the Nomenclature Board for Aboriginal and Dual Naming.

Broad support from the general public and particularly from people living in those areas is needed for the Board to accept the names. Aboriginal community support is also vital.   The Board also takes account of any objections received, which contributed to the 12 month delay in having the first 6 names accepted, and so lots of support is crucial for these eight names to be successful.

So we urge everyone who cares about seeing authentic Aboriginal names reassigned to various locations around Tasmania to support our proposals in as public and practical way you can.

You could write direct to the Nomenclature Board, or to us and we can pass it on, and write to Premier Will Hodgman (also the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs), Minister Jeremy Rockliff, Minister for Primary Industry (which administers the Nomenclature Board), and Letters to the Editors.

Did you know that Tasmania was the last state or territory to adopt any Aboriginal or Dual Naming policies or practices. In 2011, the percentage of places with an Aboriginal name within each state or territory was by far the lowest in Tasmania, with 3.9%.   Percentages in the other states range from 23.9% (ACT)  to 33.1% (SA).  [June 2011 PlaceNames Australia,  newsletter of the Australian National PlaceNames Survey.]

The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy was adopted by the State Government to redress that imbalance, but with only 6 Aboriginal Names gazetted since, the percentage has barely risen.

It won’t happen without your support.

If you would like more information or have any questions, please contact palawa kani Language Program at language@tacinc.com.au or call 03 63 323 800

Below is the latest list we have submitted for dual naming:

Mt. William in the North East to have the dual name of wukalina.

 

Great Lake to have the dual name of yingina

 

Rocky Cape in the North West to have the dual name of pinmatik.

 

Trefoil Island in the North West, returned to Aboriginal ownership in 2011, to have the dual name of titima.

 

Sundown Point in the West to have the dual name of laraturunawn.

 

Green Point in the West to have the dual name of taypalaka.

 

West Point in the West to have the dual name of nungu.

 

Triabunna in the South East to have the dual name of trayapana; or, alternatively, for the name “Triabunna” to be replaced with the spelling “trayapana”.  Triabunna is one of only a few places in Tasmania which still bears its original name, albeit in a Europeanised form

7 Dual Names now Official!

0
0

Great news – Minister Jeremy Rockcliff signed off  on the Nomenclature Board’s recommendation from its 10th December 2015 meeting that the 7 dual names be assigned.

ABC NEWS –  Tasmania’s Aboriginal heritage recognised with more dual place names announced

The Mercury – Dual names for more geographical locations in Tasmania

They will be added to signage and maps etc over the coming months. Please send us photos if you sight any.

Aboriginal and Dual Names 2016

 

See all Official Aboriginal and Dual Names.

 

 

 

The newly recognised names are:

laraturunawn / Sundown Point (NW)

 

nungu / West Point       (NW)

 

pinmatik / Rocky Cape  (NW)  

           

taypalaka / Green Point  (NW)

 

titima / Trefoil Island       (NW)

 

wukalina / Mt William    (NE)

 

yingina / Great Lake    (Central Highlands)

 

The eighth name we had proposed: trayapana (to replace Triabunna)  has been deferred to allow the Glamorgan Spring Bay Council time to consider the proposal and consult with residents.

Official Aboriginal and Dual Names

0
0

Aboriginal and Dual Names 2016

There are 13 officially-recognised Aboriginal or Dual names in lutruwita. These places names are accepted under the Aboriginal and Dual naming policy, which was adopted in 2012 after many years of lobbying. According to the policy, these names are to be shown on all official signage, maps and all official documents and publications, (which is steadily occurring).

The names were proposed in separate submissions, with each list reviewed and put out for comment by the nomenclature board. The first list of six accepted names were gazetted in 2013, while another seven were gazetted in 2016.

The 13 official names are:

kanamaluka /River Tamar. Dual name for the river from its source in Launceston to its mouth at Low Head.

 

kunanyi / Mount Wellington. Dual name for the mountain.

 

larapuna is an Aboriginal name which covers an Unbounded Locality extending roughly from Eddystone Point to Grants Points, the water of the Bay of Fires between the two points, and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined.  An unbounded locality is an area which does not have any clear or definite boundaries. It is marked on maps by showing the name somewhere roughly in the middle of the area. Unbounded localities can also have a stand alone Aboriginal name, instead of being dual named.

 

laraturunawn / Sundown Point (NW)

 

nungu / West Point (NW)

 

pinmatik / Rocky Cape (NW)

 

putalina is an Aboriginal name for an unbounded locality covering the cove at Oyster Cove, the Aboriginal property previously known as “Oyster Cove”and adjacent lands with boundaries undefined.

 

takayna/Tarkine.  The dual name will apply to the Unbounded Locality already named Tarkine.

 

taypalaka / Green Point (NW)

 

titima / Trefoil Island (NW)

 

truwana/ Cape Barren Island. Dual name for the island as a geographical feature.

 

wukalina / Mt William (NE)

 

yingina / Great Lake (Central Highlands)

 

 

Tasmanian Aboriginal place names

0
0

Tasmanian Aboriginal place names

There are no living speakers of the original Tasmanian languages. Spoken records of the original sounds are limited to a few sounds that can only just be heard when Fanny Cochrane Smith spoke on the records of her songs in 1899. So to attempt to recover the original sounds and meanings, we have to start from written records made by early Europeans of the sounds they heard, and the meanings they thought they understood when they heard our ancestors speak.

Those Europeans are the recorders of our original Tasmanian languages, and there are over 20 of them, including convict labourers, published scientists, sailors, soldiers, farmers, doctors, writers and clergymen. They were Scottish, Polish, French, Danish and mostly Englishmen, from different regions and social classes. Each one of them used the familiar spelling of their own language to write down something that approximated to the unfamiliar sounds they were hearing in our Aboriginal languages.

Their spellings are what we call ‘recordings’ and ‘spelling variants’. Different recorders give different spellings for the same word, and one recorder can even give several different spellings for the same word, if he heard it on different occasions and from different people.

Those spellings of words made by the recorders, which have become familiar through repeated use in publications by Plomley, Ryan, and other historians and writers, are not Aboriginal words. They are part of the smorgasbord of recordings from European scribes of many nationalities, writing down what they heard spoken by Aborigines, and attempting to capture unfamiliar Aboriginal sounds in their own European spellings.

We are fortunate to have so many different recorders of the original languages because this allows us to compare spellings and meanings. Using linguistic analysis and phonetics we derive statistically common sounds from this comparison of the different spellings of the one word. We already know from earlier analysis what sounds existed in our languages, and we represent the sounds we recover with the alphabet system we have developed.

We can then work out the most likely authentic sounds for a word from all the possible sounds. This is what reconstruction is – retrieving the authentic original sounds and meanings as closely as possible from the evidence in the recordings, based on the principles described in the palawa kani Sounds and Spelling Book 1998. These principles were developed by Gaye Brown and have been applied since by Theresa Sainty; both were trained by and worked with linguists engaged by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre.

Before we began any reconstructions, we also determined who were the most accurate, hence most reliable, recorders of the sounds and meanings. This also helped us to identify the strengths and weaknesses of individual recorders. These factors are taken into account with every word.

Historical and biographical research and, where possible, knowledge still held within today’s Aboriginal community, assist in checking the meanings of words.

Retrieving place names

The factors taken into account when determining which is the most authentic names for a place are:

  1. A number of spelling variants from the same language region for the word, and
  2. Which are preferably from more than one reliable recorder
  3. The Aboriginal speaker/s who told the word to the recorder/s is named.
  4. The Aboriginal speaker/s of the word comes from the area of the place, or nearby.
  5. The word is recorded from the language of the place or people of that place even if the speaker of the word is not named.

There are only two recorders of Tasmanian place names.

George Augustus Robinson, 1829 – 1839

Most of the Aboriginal names for places within Tasmania were recorded by George Augustus Robinson. He was one of the first Europeans to travel widely in Tasmania Between 1829 and 1834 Robinson was engaged by the colonial government to directly contact all Aborigines in Tasmania and persuade them to relocate to offshore islands. During those years he recorded (wrote down) a lot of cultural information both from the Aborigines who travelled with him as guides and also from Aborigines he met who were still on their own country. From 1835 till 1839 he was commandant of Wybalenna on Flinders Island, where he continued to record small amounts of language from the Aborigines interned there. In his journals and other notebooks devoted specifically to lists of words, Robinson compiled the most extensive of the records made of the Aboriginal languages while they were still fluently spoken. His is the only compilation which covers a wide range of tribes and regions. He wrote down over 500 recordings of words for places, although many of them are simply different spellings of the one word. A few other recordings made before 1831 came from Robinson’s clerk, Sterling, but these seem mostly to be simply slightly different copies of Robinson’s own recordings.

Joseph Milligan, 1844 – 1847

67 other names for places were recorded by Joseph Milligan between 10 to 15 years later, between 1844 and 1847 when he was surgeon-superintendent at Wybalenna. By this time the surviving people from different tribes had been living together for over 10 years and a mixed language was being used, with basic words mainly from north eastern languages. Very few, if any, of the words for places were told to Milligan in the actual place. Also, he did not know all the people very well; he does not name the person who told him words but only occasionally the tribes he thought they were from. Like Robinson, he recorded other language words as well, and many of his translations are very suspect (as NJB Plomley also noted when he compiled his Wordlist of the Tasmanian Aboriginal Languages 1976). So Milligan is a less reliable recorder than Robinson. He is however good at recording sounds, and is the only recorder who told us what sounds his spellings represent.

Assessment:

So the preferred choice for a name is a word recorded by Robinson. It is very useful to have spellings for a word from both Robinson and Milligan, to get a better idea of the sounds.

In some cases however there may only be a word recorded by Milligan for a place, so we have to use that;

  1. the only recording of a name for the Jordan River is kutalayna, from Milligan.

 

Recordings/spelling variants

To have the best chance of working out the original sounds of a word, it’s best to have a number of spelling variants from the same language region and preferably from a number of different and reliable recorders. With place names there are only the two recorders; but often Robinson has has made several recordings of one word on different occasions – eg. he recorded 15 spelling variants of takayna.

Sometimes there is only one recording (spelling variant) for a word and so that has to do. For instance, larapuna has only the one recording, from Robinson.

Translations of the words

Where words are said by their recorders to refer to more than one place, it is preferred to reconstruct the one for which only one translation was given. This also then allows the other word/s to be used to name the other place/s. This is the case with lutruwita and truwana.

‘Meanings’ of the words

Geographic features in the Tasmanian landscape, on both land and sea, had Aboriginal names until they were supplanted by Europeans in the 19th century.

The names formed complex interlinked networks in which place, their names and attributes, reflected the relationship between the people and the land. The names were not arbitrary but integral to the places to which they were attached, and derived from the activities of ancestral beings who formed the landscape as they moved through it.

While European names mark individual places and individual memories of parcels of history and generally have no particular connection to each other, each standing in its own right, the meaning of many Aboriginal names can only be understood through their connection to other names and places. They also describe the land physically and identify its resources. Therefore many words translated by recorders as the “name” for a specific place are also the same words as those for geographical features or their characteristics, or can include parts of those other words.

The daily use of the names meant history was always present, always available. But this use stopped with the destruction of our ancestors’ society, and the decimation of our culture and language, and most of that knowledge behind the names of places has tragically been lost. While we are able to retrieve the sounds of the names and re-establish their connection to the places they refer to, we cannot today decipher the original ‘meaning’ of many of our words for places.

Nonetheless, the names still form a unique element of our heritage, and carry irreplaceable cultural values of vital significance to our identity, sense of belonging, and emotional and psychological wellbeing. They also embody the history of their near loss and eventual retrieval. Through their current and future use by modern Aborigines, our place names will continue to accrue further layers of meaning and association.

 

PDF version:  Tasmanian Aboriginal place names

Submission on Place Names Act Issues Paper

0
0

TAC Submission on Place Names Act Issues Paper

11 January 2016

PDF Version: Submission on Place Names Act Issues Paper

  1. The Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre Inc. (TAC) is a non-profit community based organisation established in 1973 providing legal, health, educational, cultural and welfare services to Aborigines throughout Tasmania. The organisation is committed to developing the social, political, economic and cultural independence of all Aborigines. Reclamation and protection of Aboriginal land, heritage and culture is one of the most significant of the Centre’s functions.  Since 1992, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre has undertaken the retrieval and revival of palawa kani, Tasmanian Aboriginal language, throughout Tasmania. This program has been funded wholly by the Australian government.
  1. palawa kani is the name of the revived Tasmanian Aboriginal language. Its standardised spelling system has been derived by linguistic methods from phonetic evidence from the original languages and used by Tasmanian Aborigines since 1998. The Nomenclature Board of Tasmania’s Rules for Place Names in Tasmania 2013 stipulates (12.1) “Official Aboriginal place- names must be in palawa kani language..“ and “The Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre is the recognised representative Aboriginal language organisation.” This reflects Principle 2.8 of the Tasmanian Government’s Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012.
  2. We welcome the objectives of the Place Names Act Issues paper “to modernise the legislation to clarify the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in the official naming process, further streamline the underpinning administrative processes and enhance opportunities for compliance with national standards.” We acknowledge that standardization of names, their representation in written and, increasingly, digitised form, and efficient processes and procedures for their allocation are all important functions of Tasmania’s statutory naming authority. The Issues paper addresses these concerns and deals comprehensively with related technical and administrative matters.
  3. However, digitising of spatial data and modernised administrative arrangements are not the only new elements affecting place naming since the Survey Coordination Act 1944 was enacted. Major shifts have also occurred in mainstream attitudes and practical responses to the histories, values and rights of indigenous people. Since 1992, the Committee for Geographical Names of Australasia (CGNA), a standing committee of the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM), has encouraged naming authorities in all Australian states and territories to acknowledge the continuing importance of the original Aboriginal place names, to adopt more frequent official use of these names, from both languages still spoken and languages no longer spoken, and to undertake community education programs to increase awareness of Aboriginal culture and Aboriginal place names. [Guidelines for the Consistent Use of Place Names in Australia. Appendix A. Guidelines for Use of Aboriginal and TSI Place Names. 1992;2009;2015]
  4. CGNA coordinates all naming authorities within Australia. It is guided by and reports to the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Name (UNGEGN), the official international body tasked with providing technical recommendations on standardizing geographical names at national and international levels from its successive Conferences on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN). Since the 1970s UNCSGN have recommended and monitored the development and implementation of principles and guidelines for countries to adopt for the promotion and use of minority and indigenous place names. These are in response to various United Nations initiatives and international instruments aiming to protect and develop indigenous peoples’ cultures and rights.

6. Key points from the international and national principles and standards (outlined in 7-10 below) are:

* Increasing the number of official Aboriginal and dual names is a key aim for naming bodies

* All geographical names and specifically those of indigenous people are a significant part of a country’s cultural heritage

* Recognition and promotion of indigenous place names are important aspects of the work of the standardization of geographical names

* Promotion of this work benefits the geographical names authorities and provides valuable information for the community in general

* It is the role of the naming body to increase its members’ awareness and understanding of Aboriginal language and culture and of all relevant international, national and local principles and policies

* It is the role of the naming body to educate the general public on the use of officially recognised place names; promote a greater community awareness of geographical names; support initiatives for appropriate use and preservation of geographical names, and for the recognition of their heritage and cultural importance

* State and Federal governments to provide funding as needed for these initiatives

* At least one Australian state (South Australia) has written dual naming into legislation. (Amendments made in 1999 to the 1991 Geographical Names Act enabled dual naming for many features in the Flinders Ranges. There are now more than 300 dual named features in SA, including the River Torrens/Karrawirra Parri and Kati Thanda/ Lake Eyre.)

7. International standards

Resolutions from United Nations Conferences on the Standardization of Geographical Names (UNCSGN) which set principles specifically for minority and indigenous place names are:

* Resolution 11/36 (2nd UNCSGN, 1972) on Problems of minority languages: recognising that geographical names in minority languages are often spelt in diverse ways, recommends that countries, in consultation with native speakers of the minority language, adopt and use a common standard spelling system for place names in the minority language.

* Resolution 22 (5th UNCSGN, 1987) on Aboriginal/native geographical names: wherever possible and appropriate, the geographical names of indigenous people be adopted for official use by the country in which they live, in recognition that “the geographical names of these groups are a significant part of the toponymic traditions of every area or country in which they live”.

* Resolution VIII/1 (8th UNCSGN, 2002) dealt specifically with the Promotion of minority group and indigenous geographical names: noting that “… the preservation of minority and indigenous group culture is recognized as being an important aspect of the work of the standardization of geographical names … there are many agencies throughout the world actively pursuing the retention/revitalization of minority and indigenous group culture through the recording, recognition and promotion of the toponyms representing such groups; the promotion of this work will benefit the geographical names authorities and the United Nations, as well as provide valuable information for the community in general..”; Australia offered to assist to compile a summary report on this work from geographical names authorities to be presented at 2007 UNCSGN.

* Resolution IX/5 (9th UNCSGN, 2007) on Promotion of the recording and use of indigenous, minority and regional language group geographical names: noted that “… the promotion of the recording and use of such names is a valuable aid to the recognition, retention and revitalization of indigenous, minority and regional language group heritage”; recommended the continuing updating of the summary report and development of “a range of models (particularly with regard to legislation, policies and research procedures) for the promotion of the recording and use of indigenous, minority and regional language group geographical names. “

Other relevant resolutions emphasise the cultural heritage values of all place names:

* Resolution V111/9 (8th UNCSGN, 2002) on Geographical names as cultural heritage: recognised “the importance of geographical names as part of a nation’s historical and cultural heritage”, and urged

“countries… to undertake … the promotion of a greater understanding among the wider public of the significance of inherited geographical names with respect to local, regional and national heritage and identity.”

* Resolution IX/4 (9th UNCSGN, 2007) on Geographical names as intangible cultural heritage:

“Recognizing that toponyms are indeed part of the intangible cultural heritage, and “under a variety of threats,” encouraged official naming bodies to implement programs “to safeguard and develop” use of place names, which provide a sense of identity and of continuity, in accordance with the UNESCO Convention for Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage 2003.

8. Self determination and United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) to which Australia is signatory since 2009 specifies practical applications of self determination, several of which are relevant to place naming.

Article 13: “ 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalise, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.

  1. States shall take reasonable measures to ensure this right is protected…”

Article 15. States are also to ensure that “1. Indigenous peoples’ cultures and traditions, histories and

aspirations are to be appropriately reflected in education and public information.”

Article 31. “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions…They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.

  1. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.”

Article 18. “ Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions.”

Article 19. “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.”

9. National standards – CGNA Guidelines

The CGNA Guidelines for the Consistent Use of Place Names in Australia, incl. Guidelines for use of Aboriginal and TSI Names in its successive versions from 1992 to March 2015 outlines national standards which derive directly from UNGEGN principles and resolutions and states that the principle of self-determination for Aboriginal people is to underpin all place naming issues. (Appendix A. 4.1. b) CGNA reports to each UNCSGN on the progress of Australian naming authorities against these national standards.

The Guidelines stipulate that

“(4.2) Authorities and agencies with naming rights should give due recognition to: principles developed under international treaties and agreements; policies and principles developed by the CGNA; and policies and principles developed in their own area of responsibility.”

The Terms of Reference include:

“ (1) Promote a greater community awareness of geographical names …

(5) Support initiatives for the appropriate use and preservation of geographical names, and for the recognition of their heritage and cultural importance

(6) Support UNGEGN and its initiatives.”

The Main Objective of Appendix A: Guidelines for the Use of Aboriginal and TSI Place Names is:

“To ensure that Aboriginal…place names are recognized by all Australians as being part of Australian heritage and need to be preserved. “

To assist in meeting that objective, Secondary Objectives include:

“(3.2.e) Nomenclature authorities to undertake when possible to educate the general community in the use and pronunciation of Aboriginal … place names. (This can be started by the use of authorised names on maps, wide distribution of policies, taking opportunities to speak to appropriate and interested groups, various media releases etc., all of which can be very beneficial without the need to be involved in costly programs.)

(3.2 f) Nomenclature authorities be committed to continuing development of appropriate procedures to facilitate the recording and use of Aboriginal and TSI place names and State and Federal governments recognise the need to provide funding.”

Section 4.4 highlights Education “ as a crucial factor for increasing the awareness, knowledge, and correct pronunciation of names of Aboriginal and TSI origin, and in educating the wider community about the importance of place names to these cultures”, and lists “rules ..to assist nomenclature authorities in dealing with these issues.” These include:

“(a) to undertake, where possible, an educative role in popularising correct spelling and pronunciation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander place names;

(b) to undertake, with the Committee for Geographical Names in Australia (CGNA), an educative role to develop positive international perspectives of the use of indigenous names in Australia;

(c) to import a realisation that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander place names represent gifts from those cultures, the sharing of which imposes ethical obligations on the users. (This covers such areas as respect for restrictions, acknowledgement of sources, authorisation for use of names, etc);…..

(f) to educate nomenclature authority support staff in appropriate consultative mechanisms;

(g). to create an increased awareness among nomenclature authority staff of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander language and culture.”

10. National standards CGNA Reports of Australia

The most recent CGNA Report of Australia to the 10th UNCSGN, 2012 cites as one achievement since the 2007 Conference, the “continued promotion of dual naming of features with indigenous and introduced place names”. Key initiatives for the next 5 years include:

* “Communicating with indigenous communities to seek opportunities to recognise and use traditional indigenous place names…

*Increasing the representation of traditional indigenous names in gazetteers..

* Educating relevant industries and the general public on the use of officially recognised place names”. (pp6-7)

CGNA’s second report to the 2012 UNCSGN, on Australian Indigenous Names Projects, notes in the same vein that: “Progress is still being made to ensure that Indigenous Place names are becoming progressively better represented in the general geographic nomenclature of Australia”; and

“the increased use of [Indigenous place] names either as stand-alone names or dual named…will assist in:

*Emphasising the existence of the languages, even those that are considered extinct.

* Supporting the use of Indigenous languages in the general community.

* Retaining aspects of Indigenous heritage.

* Providing windows into Indigenous heritage for the rest of the Australian community.” (pp 2,3)

The Report cites as examples of this progress that South Australia has “legislated the ability to institute dual names for a feature, with an Aboriginal name and another name” and NSW has begun a process to “legislate preference for traditional Aboriginal place names to be used” (p4).

11. Land Tasmania Place Names Act Issues paper, September 2015

None of these objectives or initiatives to progress the restoration of Aboriginal place names are mentioned in the Place Names Act Issues paper. No acknowledgment is made of the resolutions and guidelines of CGNA and UNGEGN that all geographical names are important tools used to identify culture, heritage and landscape, signifying deep held values, and that Aboriginal names in particular should be promoted and supported.

While noting the introduction of the Tasmanian Government’s Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012 among a list of “significant advancements” (p3), the Issues paper does not suggest any provision within the new Act to enable the increased use of Aboriginal names within the state nor for the educative role which UNGEGN and CGNA both assign to a naming authority.

12. Provision for Aboriginal place names within new Place Names Act

For new legislation to truly “reflect contemporary standards” and “enhance … compliance with national standards”, which the Issues Paper states as aims, it must include measures enabling the naming body to:

* adopt increased numbers of palawa kani names,

* give preferential status to palawa kani dual names as well as feature names,

* develop more streamlined procedures for assigning Aboriginal names

* facilitate the process by promotion and education for its own members and the general public.

13. The effects of the social and cultural values of place names on naming processes

Place names indisputably function as “critically important reference points” and “the most common way that people identify geographical locations”(Issues Paper p1). Equally significantly, they hold

“… irreplaceable cultural values of vital significance to people’s sense of well-being. They are an important part of local identity and contribute to a sense of belonging. Geographical names constitute a part of the collective memory and heritage and so function as social identifiers.” [UNGEGN Media Kit 2: Geographical Names Part of our Social and Cultural Values]

The way that place names act as repositories of personal or community identity through use, memory and association is discussed in Australia’s Report to 2007 UNCSGN on Restoration of lndigenous Toponyms: Recognition of Attachment, Identity and Dependence. Using the dual naming of Gariwerd/Grampians National Park in Victoria in 1989/90 as a case study, the report considers the emotional and psychological attachments people form with place names, which emerged as expressions of opposition by sections of the mainstream community to the proposed dual name. The report concludes that a preparatory process of public education undertaken by the naming authority about Aboriginal culture and the importance of place names to that culture, in line with UNGEGN and CGNA resolutions and policies, could have forestalled many negative community reactions, and led in turn to a more positive experience of community engagement and a speedier reassignment of the Aboriginal name. The Report lists other benefits from “Proactive leadership in the area of Indigenous place name restoration (and dual-naming)…. such as furthering reconciliation processes, preserving cultural heritage (both Indigenous and non-Indigenous), and avoiding the issues associated with cultural practices which place Indigenous heritages on the peripheries of mainstream societies.”

14. Aboriginal community expectation

A new Act needs not only to comply with international and national standards, and enact the intention of the Policy, but also strive to meet the expectations of the Tasmanian Aboriginal community. CGNA Guidelines include the need for “Recognition of Aboriginal and TSI cultural expectation, particularly in respect of methods of community contact, community structures, and respect for community wishes” (Appendix A. 4.1.h). Tasmania was last of all states and territories to adopt any Aboriginal naming initiatives; its Policy was approved in late 2012. This followed more than a decade of discussion within the Aboriginal community throughout the state on our desire to see our language place names reinstated, including a long period of almost 8 years (2005 – 2011) in which successive governments were lobbied to adopt a policy. It is the general expectation of Aborigines now the Policy is finally in place that it will act as a vehicle for expeditious and uncomplicated reassignment of Aboriginal names which the State, through the Policy, has acknowledged as necessary for justice and reconciliation. To date only six names have been restored after a convoluted process starting in April 2013, with those names not confirmed by the Minister until February 2014. The length of this process suggests the names were not received with complete enthusiasm by the Board nor were any measures in place to expedite their restoration if so desired. Seven more names submitted to the Board in March 2015 have not yet been approved.

As a Policy is only a guide to intent and is always subject to the will of the prevailing naming authority and/or Minister, the restoration of Aboriginal names can only be securely assured if provisions to enable that are included in legislation.

15. Recommendations on Place Names Act Issues Paper

Issue 1: Governance

We agree the composition of the naming body’s Board or Advisory Committee should be changed from that specified in the Survey Coordination Act 1944. Composition should be skill based and more closely represent the diversity of Tasmanian society. Members should be nominated and/or elected from their respective interest groups, not appointed by Ministers or government agencies. Among others, it could include a representative from the Aboriginal community; a representative or nominee of, the State Librarian; and a representative of the Multicultural Council of Tasmania.

The length of term of members of the group should be at least two years, with the opportunity to be reappointed. Incoming members should undertake an induction process which should include education on Aboriginal culture and relevant international, national and local guiding principles, policies and procedures.

Recommend: an Aboriginal representative to be included on the Board/Advisory Committee or any new naming body. This person is to be nominated by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre as the organisation confirmed in the Policy as the recognised representative body on Aboriginal language matters and community consultation. In the same way, the NSW Geographical Names Board includes one member nominated by the NSW Aboriginal Land Council, as the primary and largest Aboriginal organisation of longest-standing within the State.

Issue 2: Guidelines and Standards.

We agree that guidelines published under new Place Names legislation should mandate conformity with national standards rules and guidelines on dual and Aboriginal naming, specifically the CGNA Guidelines Appendix A, and their current reflection in the Rules for Place Names in Tasmania 2013 Sect 12. Aboriginal place names.

As the representative Aboriginal organisation, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre is be given opportunity to comment on any sections dealing with Aboriginal and dual naming in any proposed guidelines or other regulations. [UNDRIP Article 19]

Issue 3: Ambiguity about ‘place’

Recommend: that any new definition of “place” shall include the category of “cultural landscapes specific to Aboriginal people and defined by them”, which may encompass and/or overlap several different geographical features.

Issue 4: Assignment of names to public thoroughfares

Recommend : Ensure that assigning of Aboriginal names by any other authority (such as road management authority or local government authorities) remains subject to the control and approval of the Aboriginal community through the representative organisation, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre. [Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2.10]

Issue 5: Assignment, approval and consultation processes.

New ways to expedite the approval process are to be welcomed. They need however to take account of relevant principles and policies. The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy clearly states a preference for Aboriginal names for unnamed geographical features, and international and national principles clearly encourage naming authorities to take positive measures to ensure increased numbers of both stand-alone and dual Aboriginal names are restored. The proposals for assignment make no provision for this. On the contrary, the proposals are very reactive to anticipated “potentially contentious” naming submissions, for which one might read “Aboriginal naming” submissions, as a handful of objections were received for both sets of Aboriginal names submitted to date. What criteria will establish whether a proposal is contentious or likely to generate concern or not? Who will decide? What measures will be applied to resolve or dismiss this contention?

None of the proposals are very concrete, and they leave a lot of leeway for ministerial discretion. Drafts of the new Act should specify more precisely the proposed options the Minister may call upon when varying processes, and allow for further comment on those proposed processes.

Consultation processes and education

Neither the term nor the methods of “community consultation processes” are defined. While appearing to satisfy requirements of public involvement, transparency etc, such processes in themselves are not necessarily effective, unless well planned and managed.

The need for community acceptance of a name is crucial and inarguable and canvassing community opinion is a necessary step to comply with national standards. Once received however, those opinions then have to be managed and resolved and it can be difficult and sometimes impossible to achieve the desired outcomes. Complaints processes and considerations by advisory committees are inadequate measures to effectively handle resistant and uninformed reactions from members and sectors of the public. However, as was seen in the Gariwerd/Grampians National Park situation, an introductory comprehensive program of public education by the naming body would have better prepared the local community and the Victorian people in general, as well as fulfilling the objectives of UNGEGN and CGNA. “UNGEGN and CGNA resolutions and policies acknowledge that part of the restoration processes need to involve ‘the education of the wider community about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and the importance of place names to that culture’”.. [Report of Australia 2012; Resolution 22, 5th UNCSGN 1987; CGNA Guidelines. Appendix A. 3.2.e; UNDRIP Article 15]

To be effective, any community consultation processes should be preceded by – or even replaced by – a well planned public education campaign by the naming body to build awareness and understanding both of general naming issues and also Aboriginal cultural heritage so a specific proposed name can be seen in those contexts. It is necessary to remember that Tasmania was the last Australian state to adopt any Aboriginal naming initiatives and many sectors of the public still need to be informed, if not persuaded, of the reasoning behind this move as a first step in the naming restoration process. Information on UNGEGN and CGNA principles can develop understanding in the Tasmanian community of many aspects of place names and in particular of the importance of Aboriginal names not only to Aborigines but as a unique element in the fabric of Australian society. Such an information package would give valuable context to the whole concept of Aboriginal naming, and can include some background to the names being proposed, although not information restricted and controlled by the Aboriginal community. [CGNA Guidelines. Appendix A. 4. (g) + (h)]

Conducting such an awareness campaign need not be costly, as methods suggested in CGNA Guidelines Appendix A. 3.2.e. show. UNCSGN papers and the Reports of Australia and other countries contain much useful information which can be summarised. The UNGEGN Media kits are a good framework. Material already on the ICSM website can be used – for example, the Ernie Dingo ‘What’s in a Name” video and its accompanying Geographical Names Internet Teaching Package DVD; information on Aboriginal culture and history can be sourced from the Aboriginal Education Services agency of the Tasmanian Education Department and through Cultural Competency courses offered by the TAC. The information could be added to the Place Naming web site, included in new Guidelines, promoted at public events and venues (eg food and music festivals, museums and art galleries etc), through government, local government and private sector networks, in schools and other institutions, and so on.

Such community education campaigns would not only forestall objections deriving from lack of knowledge and understanding but also help to create a more positive environment for, and more informed discussion about, Aboriginal naming issues. They also would promote the work of the naming authority itself.

To perform this role requires that all naming body members and staff are themselves well informed on both Aboriginal history and culture and all relevant UNGEGN and CGNA principles.

Recommend: that members of the naming body, its staff and any advisers, consultants etc undertake Aboriginal Cultural Competency courses or sessions as a necessary procedure. Such courses are conducted through TAC’s nationally accredited Registered Training Organisation either as part of a relevant VET Certificate III-IV qualification, or as a shorter packages tailored to the needs of the client. Participants have included personnel of Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Premier and Cabinet, and Department of Health and Human Services, among other government and private service providers who strive to ensure a culturally competent service.

Recommend: that members of the naming body, its staff and any advisers, consultants etc attend open Aboriginal community events where possible. Such events are promoted on TAC website and Facebook pages and often advertised in newspapers and include NAIDOC events, putalina (Oyster Cove) Festival, Risdon Cove Land Return Celebrations, Invasion Day and other rallies, and occasional public meetings for specific purposes.

Assigning names

Developing new legislation gives the naming body the opportunity to support and promote the intent of the state government’s Aboriginal and Dual-Naming Policy – that Aboriginal names are to be given preferential status. In most cases, there are no alternate names to create “contention”. Any “contention” usually derives from the perception of a complainant that Aboriginal names are not legitimate or not preferred by them to European names. Community education programs can address these perceptions. Leadership from the naming body in applying the international and national principles in concrete ways will have positive influence on social attitudes within Tasmania.

Recommend: that the new Act mandates a process to assign Aboriginal names to unnamed natural features in which an initial period of community education, including opportunity to comment, is undertaken by the naming body; after which period the name is assigned without need for reference group/advisory committee consideration or public gazettal processes. (Just as Proposal 5.3 proposes “non-contentious names” be assigned to man-made features without reference group or public gazettal processes.)

This enacts the intention of the Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy, which is supported by the CGNA Guidelines (3.2), and Resolution 22 (5th UNCSGN, 1987).

Recommend: that the new Act mandates a process to assign dual names (palawa kani/English) in which an initial period of community education, including opportunity to comment, is undertaken by the naming body; after which period the name is assigned without need for reference group/advisory committee consideration or public gazettal processes. (Just as Proposal 5.3 proposes “noncontentious names” be assigned to man-made features without reference group or public gazettal processes.)

  1. We thank you for the opportunity to have made our comments and recommendations and we look forward to the progress of the new Place Names Act. We look forward also to the opportunity to make further comment in later stages of this process, and on any draft legislation.

11 January 2016

References and Reading

Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy – A Policy for the naming of Tasmanian geographic features, DPAC Tasmanian Government, 2012

Australian Indigenous Names Projects, to 10th UNCSGN, 2012, submitted by Bill Watt, Chair Committee for Geographical Names of Australasia

Guidelines for the Consistent Use of Place Names in Australia, incl. Guidelines for the Use of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Place Names and Dual Naming Depiction Guidelines. Committee for Geographical Names of Australasia, Intergovernmental Committee on Survey & Mapping. March 2015

Guidelines for Dialogue with Indigenous Communities (Australia and New Zealand). Working Group on the Promotion of the Recording and Use of Indigenous, Minority and Regional Language Group Geographical Names. UNGEGN Working Paper No 77. Sept 2010 presented to 26th UNGEGN May 2011

Helleland, Botolv: “The Social and Cultural Values of Geographical Names,” in Manual for the National Standardisation of Geographical Names, ed. United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (New York: United Nations, 2006), p123

Manual for the National Standardisation of Geographical Names, ed. United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (New York: United Nations, 2006)

palawa kani Sounds and Spelling, Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, Hobart, 1998

Report of Australia, to 10th UNCSGN, 2012, submitted by Bill Watt, Chair Committee for Geographical Names of Australasia

Restoration of lndigenous Toponyms: Recognition of Attachment, Identity and Dependence – Australia’s Report to 9th UNCSGN, 2007. Prepared by Laura Kostanski, University of Ballarat

Resolutions adopted at the 9 UN conferences on the Standardization of Geographical names 1967, 1972, 1977, 1987, 1992, 1998, 2002, 2007. UN Economic + Social Council July 2012: 35-38.

Rules for Place Names in Tasmania 2013, Nomenclature Board of Tasmania

waranta tangara takariliya ngini, krakapaka pilri-ta – In honour of our ancestors and in memory of their loss of life and lands, we will shortly be proposing to the Tasmanian Place Names Board that offensively racist names in that region be replaced with the original Aboriginal names, and that other places are assigned dual names. In the case of three places which do not have European names, we propose the reinstatement of the original names. All these proposals are in line with the Tasmanian Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012.

0
0

waranta tangara takariliya ngini, krakapaka pilri-ta.

We mourn our ancestral dead, murdered at Cape Grim on this day, 10 February 1828.

From the earliest years of the invasion and settlement of north-western Tasmania, dreadful atrocities were committed against Aboriginal people. These led to the massacre at Cape Grim on 10 February 1828.

 6 Aboriginal women recounted some of these brutalities to George Augustus Robinson when he visited the camp they lived in with sealers on the NW coast directly opposite Robbins Island:   “The aboriginal females said that the Company’s shepherds had got the native women into their hut and wanted to take liberties with them, that the men resented it and speared one man in the thigh; that they then shot one man dead, supposed the chief; that subsequently some natives killed some of the Company’s sheep and drove them off the rocks, and sometime after they took by surprise a whole tribe which had come for a supply of mutton birds at the Doughboys, massacred thirty of them and threw them off a cliff two hundred feet in altitude. Since the destruction of those people the natives call the white people at Cape Grim NOW.HUM.MOE, devil, and when they hear the report of a gun they say the NOW.HUM.MOE have shot another tribe of natives.”  [GA Robinson journal 21 June 1830]

See the TAC website for more information on the atrocities and massacre at pilri.

In honour of our ancestors and in memory of their loss of life and lands, we will shortly be proposing to the Tasmanian Place Names Board that offensively racist names in that region be replaced with the original Aboriginal names, and that other places are assigned dual names. In the case of three places which do not have European names, we propose the reinstatement of the original names. All these proposals are in line with the Tasmanian Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012.

The names are:

luwuka to replace ‘Suicide Bay’

 

timuk to replace ‘Victory Hill’

 

karanutung to replace ‘Niggerhead Rock’

Dual names:

pilri/Cape Grim

 

layrimanuk/Woolnorth Point  

 

ruwalayn/ Stack Island

 

Aboriginal place names for geographic features which do not already have an existing official name:

taynayuwa   : the cliff where the people were shot (location of the Cape Grim massacre

 

nakali            : cave opposite Doughboys                   (where the people were gathered before the massacre

 

ranapim   taynamun:   point opposite Victory Hill

We will be posting more on these names soon, and welcome your feedback and support.

 

waranta tangara takariliya ngini, krakapaka pilri-ta (more details).

0
0

 waranta tangara takariliya ngini, krakapaka pilri-ta.

We mourn our ancestral dead, murdered at Cape Grim on this day, 10 February 1828.

From the earliest years of the invasion and settlement of north western Tasmania, dreadful atrocities were committed against Aboriginal people. These led to the massacre at Cape Grim on 10 February 1828.

6 Aboriginal women recounted some of these brutalities to George Augustus Robinson when he visited the camp they lived in with sealers on the NW coast directly opposite Robbins Island:

The aboriginal females said that the Company’s shepherds had got the native women into their hut and wanted to take liberties with them, that the men resented it and speared one man in the thigh; that they then shot one man dead, supposed the chief; that subsequently some natives killed some of the Company’s sheep and drove them off the rocks, and sometime after they took by surprise a whole tribe which had come for a supply of mutton birds at the Doughboys, massacred thirty of them and threw them off a cliff two hundred feet in altitude. Since the destruction of those people the natives call the white people at Cape Grim NOW.HUM.MOE, devil, and when they hear the report of a gun they say the NOW.HUM.MOE have shot another tribe of natives.”  [GA Robinson journal 21 June 1830]

From about 1810, women were abducted by sealers.

“McKay told me of nine men who were going asealing and who surrounded a tribe of natives

                between Cape Grim and Mount Cameron and got them hemmed in. The men resisted and some               were shot. They then sent out the women, finding this was the nature of their business; and they        picked out seven of the finest and departed.”   [GA Robinson journal 1 July 1830]

In 1820 a group of sealers hid in a cave at the Doughboys near Cape Grim to ambush a  group of women collecting mutton-birds and shellfish. As the women swam ashore the sealers rushed out with muskets, pushed fourteen women into an angle off the cliff,  bound them with cords, and carried them off to Kangaroo Island. Three sealers were later clubbed to death in retaliation.

Observed the cavern near the Doughboys; this excavation runs through the rock, PENDEROIN exclaimed on seeing it, ‘that’s where the white men hid themselves when they forced away the black women.’ PENDEROIN was one of those blacks I got at the time of my visit two years ago and he told me he was present on the occasion. [He] Said the two small islands near the cave was resorted to by the natives for mutton birds. This circumstance was known to those individuals who were sealers, an abandoned race. On this occasion they walked over from the north to the west side of the cape where those two islands were situated. This journey they performed at night. They then secreted themselves in the cave and when the people swum on shore they rushed out upon them with muskets and drove them into an angle of the high cliff , where they bound them with cords. The men were at this time away hunting for kangaroo. A few of the old men and all the children were there. These men also seized all the mutton birds which those poor creatures had been getting, the labour of many days. They carried away those poor creatures to Kangaroo Island on the coast of New Holland in a sealing vessel. There were twelve or fourteen women carried off on this occasion…. This account I have had before from others, PENDEROIN told me that the natives afterwards killed three men with waddies. PENDEROIN said the soldiers from Macquarie Harbour shot at the natives (probably prisoners             from Macquarie Harbour).” [GA Robinson journal 20 February 1834]

In 1826 the Van Diemen’s Land Company occupied key Aboriginal kangaroo hunting grounds at Circular Head and Cape Grim.

In November 1827 the West Point tribe visited Cape Grim for mutton-bird eggs and seals and found shepherds tending a large flock of sheep. The shepherds tried to entice some women into a hut, and, when the men objected, in the resulting skirmish one of the shepherds was speared in the thigh and several West Point men including a chief were shot.

In retribution on 31 December Aborigines returned to Cape Grim and destroyed 118 ewes from the company’s stock, spearing some and driving the remainder into the sea.

A month later, in January 1828, Richard Frederick, master of the VDL Co. sloop, Fanny, told Mrs Hare, wife of the captain of the Caroline, that he and four shepherds of VDL – Charles Chamberlain, William Gunshannon, Richard Nicholson and John Weavis – had searched for the camp of the Aborigines at night and killed twelve before retreating to their ship. Mrs Hare recorded the incident in her diary on January 19. The manager of the Company in a report to his superiors in London on January 14 acknowledged the attack but claimed there were no casualties because “the guns mis-fired.” [Lee 1927:41; AOT VDL 5/1 No.2]

A few days later, on 10 February 1828 the same four shepherds surprised and trapped a large group of  men, women and children at what is now called Suicide Bay as they were feasting on mutton-birds that the women had caught at the nearby Doughboy Islands. Many were killed. This was the Cape Grim massacre.

 There is no definite record of which tribe or tribes the Aboriginal men, women and children killed there were from; given the season and trading and travelling patterns, they are mostly likely to be from more than one of the several tribes who owned and occupied these north western lands.

 

luwuka (“Suicide Bay” with the two Doughboys at left and tip of titima (Trefoil Island) at top right.

“..went through the forest to view the rocks where the natives had been massacred ….came to a point of rock opposite the Doughboys. My informant pointed out the spot, which was a point of land which runs into the sea opposite these two islands – on one side was a perpendicular cliff of not less than two hundred feet in altitude and the base washed with the sea; the other side was a rapid declivity. About two hundred yards from this cliff a steep path led down to the rocks at its base. At the bottom of the path was a beautiful spring of water … at which the natives used to quench their thirst and procure their water when they were wont to go to the [Doughboys] islands to get mutton birds. Two hundred yards further along the rocks was a large cave which had often served as a shelter for the natives during a storm. On the occasion of the massacre a tribe of natives, consisting principally of women and children, had come to the islands. Providence had favoured them with fine weather, for it is only  in fine weather that they can get to the islands, as a heavy sea rolls in between them. They swim across, leaving their children at the rocks in the care of the elderly people. They had prepared their supply of birds, had tied them with grass, had towed them on shore, and the whole tribe was seated round their fires partaking of their hard-earned fare, when down rushed the band of fierce barbarians thirsting for the blood of these unprotected and unoffending people. They fled, leavingtheir provision. Some rushed into the sea, others scrambled round the cliff and what remained the monsters put to death. Those poor creatures who had sought shelter in the cleft of the rock they forced to the brink of an awful precipice, massacred them all and threw their bodies down the precipice, many of them perhaps but slightly wounded… I was shewed a point of rock where an old man who was endeavouring to conceal himself, was shot through the head by one of the murderers-who mentioned these circumstances as deeds of heroism. I went to the foot of the cliff where the bodies had been thrown down and saw several human bones, some of which I brought with me, and a piece of the bloody cliff… Returned past Mount Victory.  Passed a number of huts in these walks.” [GA Robinson journal 24 June 1830]

Accounts from 2 of the killers:

Robinson “Interrogated a man of the name of Chamberlain, one of the four men who shot the natives. ‘How many natives do you suppose there was killed?’-‘Thirty’. ‘There appears to be some difference respecting the numbers’.-‘Yes, it was so. We was afraid and thought at the time the Governor would hear of it and we should get into trouble, but thirty was about the number’. ‘What did you do with the bodies?’-‘We threw them down the rocks where they had thrown the sheep’. ‘Was there anymore females shot?’-‘No, the women all laid down; they were most of them men’. ‘How many was there in your party?’-‘There was four of us’. ‘What had they done to you?’-‘They had some time before that attacked us in a hut and had speared one man in the thigh. Several blacks was shot on that occasion. Subsequently thirty sheep had been driven over the rocks’. ‘Don’t you know that these people are under the protection of the British law? Their killing the sheep would not justify you or any other person in shooting them. If they had done an outrage of this kind you should have acquainted your master with the circumstance. He would have taken proper measures and would have advised you. You are not justified in using any arms except your life is in danger. These people are without the pale of the martial law. How could you tell that these were the black people? Are they not all black alike? I have been much amongst them and I could find it difficult to distinguish them at a distance. Besides, these people was not then disturbing you. They had been to the rocks to obtain food and you took advantage of them when they did not expect it. You got them on a point of the rocks where they could not get away and massacred them in cool blood’. This man related this atrocious act with such perfect indifference my blood chilled. Still, I felt anxious to hear a full account. I am sickened at the remembrance of it.” [GA Robinson journal 16 June 1830, at Cape Grim]

Robinson later ”Interrogated Gunchannon respecting the massacre at Cape Grim…He acknowledged to having been one of the four men who massacred the natives. I asked him how many they killed. He said he could not tell whether any were killed, but they saw traces of blood afterwards. ‘How long was it after killing the sheep that this circumstance occurred?’-‘Six weeks’. ‘Were there any women among them?’-‘Yes, there was both men and women’. Finding this man was not willing to disclose, I told him that I had full information on the subject, both from blacks and whites, and it was of little consequence his keeping it back; he might prevaricate but I knew; Chamberlain, an accessory, had told me there was thirty killed. I severely reprehended him and assured him I was not certain he would not be cited to Hobart Town for the murder. He seemed to glory in the act and said he would shoot them whenever he met them. These circumstances may be worth recording; the four were John Weaver, Nicholson, Chamberlain and Gunchannon. Nicholson has been drowned; Chamberlain is at Woolnorth; Gunchannon was severely speared afterwards at the Surrey Hills, as was several others, when the natives came down and robbed the hut and made an attack upon the shepherds and speared them, a just retribution for the horrid deed; and Weaver is at Hobart Town. The white men at the Hampshire and Surrey Hills evince a hostile feeling towards the aborigines and declare they will shoot them whenever they may find them.” [GA Robinson journal 10 August 1830, at Hampshire Hills]

Midden at luwuka (“Suicide Bay”. The dark patches are from the fires of our people.

After this, the NW tribes avoided the settlement at Cape Grim but plundered remote huts to obtain provisions.

[Additional information compiled from L Ryan: Tasmanian Aborigines: A History Since 1803. 2012]

palawa kani Language Program

February 2017

 


palawa kani names for two waterfalls

0
0

palawa kani names for two waterfalls

Two waterfalls in Tasmania which don’t have official names can be given palawa kani names.

One is on the foothills of kunanyi/Mt Wellington, Hobart.

turikina    truwala

said as

(tu ree kee nah)    (tru wah lah).

which means:

  Mountain     Waterfall

(literally –  ‘waterfall mountain’ as the palawa kani word order is the reverse of English).

 

 

 

 

 

press play to hear pronunciation:

 


 

The second is in Punchbowl Reserve, Launceston.

luyni mungalina

said as

(loy nee ) (mu ngah lee nah).

which means:

  Raining Rock [Waterfall]

because the falls only run after heavy rain. (literally – ‘rock raining’ – as the palawa kani word order is the reverse of English).

 

 

 

 

 

press play to hear pronunciation:

 

Only the palawa  kani name would be used for each waterfall; these are not dual names like kunanyi/Mt Wellington, with the English name attached.


 

The waterfalls can be given palawa kani names under the Tasmanian Government’s Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012

This official naming of the waterfalls is possible under the Tasmanian Government’s Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy 2012.  Principle 2.1 states “That preference is given to Aboriginal place names for any geographic feature or place that does not already have an existing official name.”

The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy was adopted by the state government in 2012 after many years of lobbying by Aborigines.  Tasmania was the last state to adopt any dual naming policy or practice and still remains far behind all other states and territories, with the lowest percentage of gazetted Aboriginal names.  In 2011, this was 3.9% in Tasmania, while percentages in the other states ranged from 23.9% (ACT)  to 33.1% (SA) [June 2011 PlaceNames Australia,  newsletter of the Australian National PlaceNames Survey].   The gazetting of 6 names in 2014 and another 7 in 2016 has done little to improve this percentage. These names can be seen and heard on the TAC’s website HERE. International and interstate visitors continue to comment on the scarcity of Aboriginal names on signage in Tasmania.

The Policy affirms that  “The Tasmanian Government acknowledges that places in Tasmania were named by Aborigines long before the arrival of Europeans. The Tasmanian Government acknowledges prior Aboriginal ownership and is committed to preserving Aboriginal heritage and language by ensuring that Aboriginal place names can be restored to Tasmanian geographic features and places.”   The Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre is named in the Policy as the recognised representative Aboriginal language organisation, which will advise on names (Point 2.8).

 

The names of the waterfalls

No Aboriginal names for these two waterfalls are still known to us today.

The Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy deals with this situation in: ‘That where a traditional place name is not known as a consequence of the disruption of Aboriginal occupation and language, the use of another Aboriginal name as a place name is also acceptable where the meaning of the word is appropriate for its intended use.’ (Principle  2.4)

Since October 2016 we have consulted with the Aboriginal community on possible names for the waterfalls.  Over 120 Aboriginal people – in Burnie, Launceston, Hobart and Cape Barren Island –  discussed names at playgroups, regional branch meetings, community lunches, gatherings of elders. Individuals and family and community groups visited both waterfalls.  Three possible names for each waterfall were voted on for five months. The votes were tallied at the end of February 2017, and turikina truwala and luyni mungalina were the clear choices.

 

What next?  – Please show your support.

We will submit these names to the Nomenclature (Naming) Board to consider in their June 2017 meeting.

We’ve written to the Launceston City Council which manages the Punchbowl Reserve and to the Hobart City Council, Wellington Park Trust and the South Hobart Progress Association to tell them of our intentions and ask for their support.

Equally important is your support for these names.  Public feedback and support plays a large part in the decision making of the Nomenclature Board. We invite you to make your comments on our Facebook page or in writing. After the names have been gazetted by the Board, there will be a month open for public comment, and we hope you will comment then too.

Letters written to Tasmanian newspapers also make valuable contributions to encouraging public discussion about dual naming.

 

The waterfalls

On the foothills of kunanyi/Mt Wellington:     

turikina    truwala

(Mountain Waterfall)

This waterfall is one of several waterfalls on the mountain. It is located on the Myrtle Gully Track where it crosses Guy Fawkes Rivulet.   It has 2 tiers of falling water – the lower one falls for about 1 metre; and the higher one falls for about 6 metres.  The water falls into a small gully about 8 metres across in which grow dogwood, myrtle and eucalyptus trees and tree ferns, with ground covers of moss, fern and typical wet scrub.

It’s a 15 minute walk from the car park to the waterfall along a well maintained and well-worn track. The track slopes slightly as it follows the gully up, with stepped stone in most of the steep sections. The track passes well beyond the waterfall, going above it and further up the gully for some distance.  The falls can also be viewed from a bridge slightly downstream and about 5-6 metres below the falls. The bridge is positioned across the stream and used as a viewing platform.

The Naming Policy requires the Nomenclature Board to refer any name proposals they receive for unnamed features to the TAC ( Section 4.8).  In 2016 they received one to name this waterfall “Oakes Falls” because of the long connection of the Oakes family to this area; Courtland Oakes was the appointed ranger for the Cascades estate in 1916.  We told the Board we would propose an Aboriginal name instead.

 

GDA94; MGA55; 521530E; 5250771N


 

Occasional waterfall on Kings Meadows Rivulet, in Punchbowl Reserve, Launceston      

luyni mungalina

Raining Rock [Waterfall]

 

The name refers  to the fact that the falls only run after heavy rain.

These falls only flow in wet weather through a fissure in a dolerite outcrop of rock; it is fed by water from the Kings Meadows Rivulet.  The fall height is roughly 3.5 metres.  It often dries up in drier months and is best viewed after rainfall; these photos were taken after the big rains in May 2016.

The falls are not signed on any of the tracks, but as you walk from the main Punchbowl Reserve carpark towards the overflow carpark, a sign directs you to a ‘Natural Rock Fissure’. This is a 5 minute walk on a sealed surface track. It’s a loop track that crosses the rivulet with a foot-bridge that is also a viewing platform for the Stunning Rock Fissure, through which the Falls flow.

The falls are also accessible from above via a gravel track off Morshead Street, Punchbowl.

They are locally known as ‘Punchbowl Falls’.  In November 2015 the Naming Board asked if we were happy with this name becoming official as they were expecting a proposal for that; we replied that in accordance with the Policy, we asserted our intention to propose an Aboriginal name.  As far as we know, that proposal to officially name them ‘Punchbowl Falls’ has not yet been made.

Photo 1. Falls from the footbridge

 

Photo 2. Main fall up close

Photo 3. Children from a TAC Youth Group visit the falls after last winter’s heavy rains.

Map created in theLIST.tas.gov.au

Google Earth

Launceston City Council today voted unanimously to pass their motion to support TAC’s submission to the Nomenclature Board to name the rock fissure within Punchbowl Reserve luyni mungalina (Raining Rock).

0
0

Launceston City Council today voted unanimously to pass their motion to support TAC’s submission to the Nomenclature Board to name the rock fissure within Punchbowl Reserve luyni mungalina (Raining Rock).

We thank the councillors for their invitation to address the Council meeting, for their decision, and for the statements they made in the spirit of reconciliation of continuing support for our shared present and future.

You can hear the Council meeting at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvM7wt9cr8Y .

City of Launceston supports Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre name submission for Punchbowl Reserve waterfall

11 more Aboriginal + Dual Names to go to Nomenclature Board in June 2017

0
0

11 more Aboriginal and Dual Names to go to Nomenclature Board in June 2017

11 palawa kani Names for places are ready to be sent to the Tasmanian Government’s Nomenclature Board to consider in their June 2017 meeting.   These are names for 9 places at Cape Grim; and for 2 waterfalls which do not already have names – one in Launceston and one in Hobart. The previous two batches of names each took about twelve months to be assigned so we can expect this to be another very long process.

A group of Aborigines visiting pilri as part of Preminghana Camp 2017

 

NINE PLACES at CAPE GRIM

We propose that 3 offensive names in this region be replaced with the original Aboriginal names and that 3 other places are assigned dual names.  For another 3 places which do not have European names, we propose the reinstatement of the original names. These name changes are provided for in the Tasmanian Government’s Aboriginal and Dual Naming Policy for the Naming of Tasmanian Geographic Features 2012.

Booklet cover. Click to open.

REPLACE  3 OFFENSIVE NAMES:               

luwuka                   now named ‘Suicide Bay’

 

timuk                      now named ‘Victory Hill’

 

karanutung           now named ‘Niggerhead Rock’

 

Under Policy Principle 2.5:  That consideration will be given to renaming places or features where the existing name is considered offensive to the Tasmanian Aboriginal community.

 No original name is known for ‘Niggerhead Rock’; but this situation is covered in Policy Principle 2.4:   That where a traditional place name is not known as a consequence of the disruption of Aboriginal occupation and language, the use of another Aboriginal name as a place name is also acceptable where the meaning of the word is appropriate for its intended use.

 

3 DUAL NAMES:

pilri/Cape Grim

 

ranamitim /The Doughboys (Islands)

 

layrimanuk/Woolnorth Point  

 

Under Policy Principle 2.2: That a dual naming system be adopted by which Aboriginal names can be applied to geographic features and places that already bear registered names and when a name change is not possible or acceptable. Both will be registered names, and both names will be used together in the future and appear together on all official documents and maps.

In this same NW area, titima/Trefoil Island has been an official dual name since 2016.    

 

NAMES FOR 3 UNNAMED PLACES:

taynayuwa                        the cliff where the people were killed – location of the Cape Grim massacre

 

nakali                                  the cave opposite the Doughboys

 

ranapim   taynamun      point of land opposite Victory Hill

 

Under Policy Principle 2.1: That preference is given to Aboriginal place names for any geographic feature or place that does not already have an existing official name.

We have found no English names for these 3 places. If they do turn out to already have official names, we can propose instead the places be dual named.

 

More information about these 9 names and the history of events at Cape Grim can be seen in the pilri/Cape Grim – Our Story is in our country and its names booklet.

See also:    waranta tangara takariliya ngini, krakapaka pilri-ta.

 

Plus:

palawa kani names for two waterfalls

Tasmanian Aboriginal place names proposed by language group

palawa kani place names on the way to Kings Run Handover

0
0

 

palawa kani  place names
on the way to
Kings Run Handover 2017


pataway

(pah tah why)

Burnie, city at Blackman Point


 

pinmatik/Rocky Cape

(peen mah teek)

 

 


munatrik

(mu nah treek)

Stanley; The Nut (Circular Head)


titima/Trefoil Island

(tee tee mah)

 

pilri

(peel ree)

Cape Grim


pilitika

(pee lee tee kah)

Robbins Island


luwuka

(lu wu kah)

‘Suicide Bay’


ranamitim

(rah nah mee teem)

The Doughboys


taypalaka/Green Point

(tie pah lah kah)

nungu/West Point

(nu ngu)

muntarikawtim

(mun tah ree cow teem)

Bluff Hill Point


namuruwatim

(nah mu ru wah teem)

small river before Arthur River


maytim

(my teem)

Arthur River


laraturunawn/Sundown Point

(lah rah tu ru nown)

muntrikawripa

(mun tree cow ree pah)

Sandy Cape


takayna/The Tarkine

(tah kye nah)

 

Reconsider Naming – Letter to the Editor by Michael Mansell about Dual Naming, Mercury 5 March 2018


Our palawa kani advertisement which some people saw on Southern Cross television last night – to help protect takayna launched yesterday. Many thanks to all involved.

Aboriginal Issues in the Tasmanian Election 2018

Michael Mansell: Tasmanian Aborigines disappointed at another four years under the Liberals

What’s in a name? A brief history of Tasmania’s changing place names

Hobart should adopt dual Aboriginal name nipaluna, community says

Viewing all 28 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images