FOREWORD: This letter has been written in the context of the increasing numbers of shell necklaces purporting to be "Tasmanian Aboriginal Shell Necklaces" coming onto the 'antique' market and especially via eBAY. This phenominea raises some issues that need to be addressed.
Unsafe in what context?
Taking into account:
1. The very large numbers of necklaces being produced commercially by non-Aboriginal makers circa 1875 >> 1960s;
2. The fact that for all practical purposes, technically or scientifically, it is difficult – if not impossible – to distinguish a commercial maireener shell necklace from one made by an Aboriginal maker in many/most instances;
3. The large numbers of maireener shell necklaces appearing on the market via eBAY, estate sales, etc.;
4. The fact that in the last 20 years contemporary Tasmanian Aboriginal makers have been making their necklaces in larger number and increasingly winning substantial prices for their necklaces in the Aboriginal art market;
it is no longer safe to assume that ALL maireener shell necklaces are authentic "Tasmanian Aboriginal necklaces." As with other cultural material, before such authenticity can be claimed, and relied upon, there needs to be provenanceing evidence.
If those records have not been kept – and typically/often they have not – then the authenticity of ANY maireener shell necklace without provenancing evidence – concrete or circumstantial – needs to be regarded with suspicion and as having ambiguous authenticity.
Indeed, there is a good argument that says that any such necklace without clear provenance – concrete or circumstantial – should be regarded as having ambiguous Aboriginal authenticity. The commercially produced colonial maireener necklaces have their own rich story, and they are aesthetically attractive, so they might well be valued for that rather than engaging in counterproductive, and often spurious, authenticity arguments.
How might these necklaces be best described?
Firstly, since the word "maireener" has entered and become entrenched in the eBAY lexicon it may provide a good place to start. Languages are alive, and living things, and if :
• maireener has been borrowed from the recorded Tasmanian Aboriginal languages; and given
• contemporary Tasmanian Aboriginal people's use of it;
then it would seem to be sound to use maireener to describe the shells used in Tasmanian Aboriginal cultural production. Clearly the word has won currency in a contemporary language context. Given this, if the shells in colonial commercial production are described as maireeners – given they are indeed the same species – it is legitimate to call these shells maireener shells.
Secondly, since the shells come from Tasmania it would be reasonable to call them Tasmanian maireener shells. Against this background it is also reasonable to call all the necklaces "Tasmanian maireener shell necklaces." It seems that the main reason the eBAY sellers who invoke the 'Aboriginal factor' do so because their research tells them that Tasmanian Aboriginal shell necklaces made with maireener shell realise high prices – higher than they imagine they may without doing so .
To be fair some may not be up with the latest information. However, that's not going to cut it for much longer given all the information now available online.
Thirdly, the 'Tasmanian maireener shell necklaces' story', or 'The Hobart Necklace story', needs to be told – albeit that its a distinctly different story than has generally been told up until now. When it is told, it is possible to imagine that Hobart Necklaces will attract good prices because:
1. Old necklaces are relatively scarce despite the fact they were made in the thousands;
2. The necklaces have a high aesthetic value in their own right along with the Aboriginal necklaces they mimic; and
3. Even though their colonial story, and their colonial appropriation, may be bleak stories, they are nonetheless stories that need to be remembered and told.
with these three elements working together these necklaces should be valued in much the same way as other colonial objects are valued – for what they are and for their own particular cargo of stories.
The first 'seller' to tell the stories, relate the histories and do the marketing is likely to set a newer set of values – and be rewarded for doing so. Tasmania's shell necklaces, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, are quintessential exemplars of Tasmaniana! Somehaow, because of Tasmania's histories, Tasmaniana seems to have value – curiosity and other.
•••
On eBAY in particular, but elsewhere also, Tasmanian maireener shell necklaces are regularly described as "Tasmanian Aboriginal Maireener Necklaces." Until relatively recently that has been a practice that seemed to be one where the object was being honestly described. However, with the recent discovery that very large numbers – by the thousands! – were being produced 'commercially' in Hobart from at least 1875 – a year before Truganini's death – that description has been somewhat unsafe.Unsafe in what context?
Taking into account:
1. The very large numbers of necklaces being produced commercially by non-Aboriginal makers circa 1875 >> 1960s;
2. The fact that for all practical purposes, technically or scientifically, it is difficult – if not impossible – to distinguish a commercial maireener shell necklace from one made by an Aboriginal maker in many/most instances;
3. The large numbers of maireener shell necklaces appearing on the market via eBAY, estate sales, etc.;
4. The fact that in the last 20 years contemporary Tasmanian Aboriginal makers have been making their necklaces in larger number and increasingly winning substantial prices for their necklaces in the Aboriginal art market;
it is no longer safe to assume that ALL maireener shell necklaces are authentic "Tasmanian Aboriginal necklaces." As with other cultural material, before such authenticity can be claimed, and relied upon, there needs to be provenanceing evidence.
If those records have not been kept – and typically/often they have not – then the authenticity of ANY maireener shell necklace without provenancing evidence – concrete or circumstantial – needs to be regarded with suspicion and as having ambiguous authenticity.
Indeed, there is a good argument that says that any such necklace without clear provenance – concrete or circumstantial – should be regarded as having ambiguous Aboriginal authenticity. The commercially produced colonial maireener necklaces have their own rich story, and they are aesthetically attractive, so they might well be valued for that rather than engaging in counterproductive, and often spurious, authenticity arguments.
How might these necklaces be best described?
Firstly, since the word "maireener" has entered and become entrenched in the eBAY lexicon it may provide a good place to start. Languages are alive, and living things, and if :
• maireener has been borrowed from the recorded Tasmanian Aboriginal languages; and given
• contemporary Tasmanian Aboriginal people's use of it;
then it would seem to be sound to use maireener to describe the shells used in Tasmanian Aboriginal cultural production. Clearly the word has won currency in a contemporary language context. Given this, if the shells in colonial commercial production are described as maireeners – given they are indeed the same species – it is legitimate to call these shells maireener shells.
Secondly, since the shells come from Tasmania it would be reasonable to call them Tasmanian maireener shells. Against this background it is also reasonable to call all the necklaces "Tasmanian maireener shell necklaces." It seems that the main reason the eBAY sellers who invoke the 'Aboriginal factor' do so because their research tells them that Tasmanian Aboriginal shell necklaces made with maireener shell realise high prices – higher than they imagine they may without doing so .
To be fair some may not be up with the latest information. However, that's not going to cut it for much longer given all the information now available online.
Thirdly, the 'Tasmanian maireener shell necklaces' story', or 'The Hobart Necklace story', needs to be told – albeit that its a distinctly different story than has generally been told up until now. When it is told, it is possible to imagine that Hobart Necklaces will attract good prices because:
1. Old necklaces are relatively scarce despite the fact they were made in the thousands;
2. The necklaces have a high aesthetic value in their own right along with the Aboriginal necklaces they mimic; and
3. Even though their colonial story, and their colonial appropriation, may be bleak stories, they are nonetheless stories that need to be remembered and told.
with these three elements working together these necklaces should be valued in much the same way as other colonial objects are valued – for what they are and for their own particular cargo of stories.
The first 'seller' to tell the stories, relate the histories and do the marketing is likely to set a newer set of values – and be rewarded for doing so. Tasmania's shell necklaces, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, are quintessential exemplars of Tasmaniana! Somehaow, because of Tasmania's histories, Tasmaniana seems to have value – curiosity and other.
Ray Norman
Reference Links – click to link
Tasmania Aboriginal shell necklaces
Tasmanian Aboriginal Art and Culture
The Shell Necklace File
The Tasmanian Shell Necklace Research BLOG
Aunty Dulcie Greeno's shell necklaces
From Hobart to Honolulu; the Tasmanian shell necklace trade
Shell Necklaces
Necklace Making : Aboriginal Elders' Council of Tasmania
Tasmanian Aboriginal shell necklaces
2009 Tasmanian Heritage Icons: Shell Necklaces
Tasmania Aboriginal shell necklaces
Tasmanian Aboriginal Art and Culture
The Shell Necklace File
The Tasmanian Shell Necklace Research BLOG
Aunty Dulcie Greeno's shell necklaces
From Hobart to Honolulu; the Tasmanian shell necklace trade
Shell Necklaces
Necklace Making : Aboriginal Elders' Council of Tasmania
Tasmanian Aboriginal shell necklaces
2009 Tasmanian Heritage Icons: Shell Necklaces
