THE KILLING OF HISTORY ane | | | |THE KILLING OF His i@ Ry HOW LITERARY CRITICS AND SOCIAL THEORISTS ARE MURDERING OUR PAST Keith Windschuttle g& ENCOUNTER BOOKS NEW YORK: LONDONFor Blicabeth Copy © 196 by Kei Wide Allis ese No pr ois pb my he eps ein "ena tem oan ym yay ms, eens sa ‘a phy crn, ohare, ho er Wien perano Exner Boas 900 Bday, Sa ty New er NewYork 103 Fat eck eine pubis 200 by Eon Roksan nyo abled in 1996 by Simon & Schuster ae ae aie Aaa, (cover anda dn by Aes Dao ‘ier megs yee Nth Me (Compe by Carine Canpages Manefacredin the nie eter and print ce pap, Leary of Cnge: Casing Pilon Dita on Keith Winches odo these eg eda NS Al May Po 9% fe an Inds phi ec and inde Here 2 Hewson TeCONTENTS ARIS LABELS AND DESIONER CONCERTS The Ascension of Cultural Studies aed the Deluge of Social Theory THE OMNIPOTENCE OF SlaNs Semiotics and the Conquest of Ameria BAD LANGUAGE AND THEATRICAL GESTURES Structuralin and Ethnobistry in the Pace ‘THE DECONSTRUCTION OF IMFERIAL HISTORY Poststructualism ad the Founding of Australia Posetruturlo ad Ant: aomaniss THE FALL OF COMMUNISM AND THE END OF HISTORY From Posthistoryt0Pastmodernism Relativism, Hermeneutics and Induction Fetion, Pogtice and Critic THE RETURN OF TRIBALISM Guloual Relativism, Stecralion «andthe Death of Cook 2PREFACE He. isan intellecoal disipine more than 2400 years oe Ic eanks with philosophy and mathemati anion the ost ‘profound and enduring contributions that ancien Gresce made, not caly wo European cvation, but othe human specie asa whole Inscad ofthe mythical tales which ll human culures had sed 0 alr thei sense of selfsworth and thei place inthe cosmos, the ‘Greek historians decided to ty to recoed the eth abou the pas. “They di his even thowh they knew thee stories wold expose how frag was thee existence, how their heroes cosld not guarantee ‘hei wore, how their oraces could noe foreel hie future and how their gods could not ensure thee fortes. The greatest of ther, “Thucyies, revealed how the fate of peopl was entirely contingent upon human ations and socal organisation. Myth had been com forcing, bt history wasbecing. For most of the lat 2400 years the cesence of history has continsed tobe that it shoud try fo tell the truth, to describe as esta possible wha realy happened. Ove this time ofcourse, many historians have ben exposed as mistaken, ‘pinioated and often completely wrong, bu thei eres have use Ally fel obliged to show they were wrong about res hings, that ‘hei claims abou the past were diferer fran the ings that ada ae actually happened In other word, the exits sill operated on the ‘assumption thar the euch was within the historian’ gras. “Today, thee assumptions are widely ejected, even among some people employed as historians themselves In the 1990s, the newly dominan theorists within the umanises and socal sciences assert ‘hat iis impossible wo tll dhe wath about the past orto se history to produce knowledge in any objective sense a al. Tey claim we ‘an only see the pas through the perspeccve of our own culture and, hence, what we sein history are our own intrest a concerns reflected back at us. The central point upon which history wae founded no longer holds: there is no fundamental distinction any ‘more berween history and myth. This view isnot self new. Ie was forcefally argued mor than one hundred years ago bythe Geran plilosophee Feiedrch Nietche, and bas been nurtured by his fl lowers ever since. Whats new is dhe succes these ideas have had among English-speaking universes and academic publishers in che laste years. have long agreed with E . Thompson’ assessment ‘that history isthe “Queen of the Homanities" and, inde the proper study of humankiad. Sociology, anthropology and payca- ‘ogy have lay been prey to fashionable and seins bizare the ‘ove, but, while history remained intact, he humanities and social sciences had some claim to being itellealyzespectae. eis amaa- ing how quickly this has changed. ‘The talitional practice of history is now suffering potentially ‘moral atack from the rise to academic prominence of rlaiely new array of literary and social theories. Ag well x making @ ge ral ronal assault om the prinipes for which the discipline hasta Aionally stood these theories have entrenched themselves bebind the lines inthe specie ways. First, we are dow witnessing a breed ofliterary rites, iterary theorists and theoretical sociologists who have moved ia and began writing thei owe versions of history. To éreate the room for this manoeutre they have procaied the rai tonal discipline eo be fatally Aad, Second, some of chose who trained as historians and spent mom of thir working ives in the ik have accepted the validity of the critic’ arguments and have wrt ten works fom wha would one have been fegatded san alin pee spective. In doings, they have been applauded not only by cheie new allies bur by many who might have been expected to have out w ater seement to challenge ther o bate, to bring hack Captives for sare and to carry off women, chien and slaves, One doesn't need much understanding of Mesoamerican elgion to realise that such practices were bound to generate the desire for revenge MILITARY TECHNOLOGY. The second type of argument is the ‘obvious one af altar echnoogy By he Benth cet the Baro eans had developed hard-edged weapons made of ron and ste! but Aztec weapoary had nor progresed beyond wooden and stone lmplemens.Clndinnen ys that, because ofthe Aztec preiletion for taking capives rater than killing opponents, thee arrows and dacs were not meant ro kil but to wesken and draw blood. Bat the fact emis tha this was the ost hat hee ecology cowl hope Wo achieve anyway. The atrows and dares were made of wood and some were dipped with Rint. Wespons ofthis kind were incapable56 THe KILLING oF MtsToRY in battle of piercing warriors to the heart. The same was true ofthe flint and obsidian kaives erred by the Aztecs and of their wooden lances tipped with ln, The most powerful weapon in the Aztec armoury was che cab embeded with obsidian. Like theres, this was nota kiliag weapon, lewis normally directed tan opponent legs, 0 exppl o teow him soe could be grappled to the ground and subdued. In contrast, the Spanish sel cutlass was physically capable of decapitating a man with one blow: Spanish lances could Kc with one strike, especial fom the height and theust given by horseback. Even if we disregard the ovewelming superiority peo vided by brgantnes, hoses, canton and arquebuses (handguns, th Spanintds had weapons for hand-to-hand combat that killed «asl, while their opponents had weapons that injured on at best Aisable. Spanish soldiers in fat, found Aztec weapons so incon. Sequential thar they abandoned thee on heavy metal armout in favour of quite coon Although thee clerl belie about battle may well have meant that the Aztecs thought it dishonourable strike from a distance, it was also true that they had ao weapons that would have allowed them o do so, In fact, reading Clenin nen’ acount ofthc cultural strctres om bated behaviour one anot bel but think that che Azzes were making @ virtue oxt of neces. Ie Tooks ery much ike their technology had placed sue limits om he kind of warfare that ws available to them and other religion and codes of waeior honour had santifed the only pac: ties tha were possible In accountng for the Spanish congest, tis just as necessary to explain the Spanish military eavgonment a that oftheir opponent, Thais is something that Clendinnen omits to do The Spanish inva son of America took place in the midst of what was the greatest transformation in European warts in a thousand yeas—the gun powder revolution. By che eaely 1490s, French foundeymen had pee fected a new bronze-ast cannon that Fired wrought ion ball In 1494, the posession of frtyeannon allowed Chares VI of France| to ct a swathe through lal, conquering Flgence then marching south and overwhelming in eight hours the fortress at Naples, which had once withscood a siege by tational military means for seven yeas. The whole of aly quaked at his passage’ records the mili ‘acy historian John Keegan. “His guns had brought tue revolution in warmaking’." By the warn ofthe sateen centry, on the eve THE OMNIFOTENCE OF SIGNS $7 of Cons’ departure forthe Americas, reat ia the form of gue buses and muskets were added to eannon and the eorsbow (eld invented in Europe only a eentury before) to complete the supeeacy Xi weapons cnt cvaly sa pS of tees Ea- team soe power copay a Fane and Germany re Keedto ree he aw Lindo warfare tht farms permite owes he ity cls ofthe en ee owes apy Eg tind; aly nd Spi, ested the oportentics ha inentions Cente and embed earn ae cage: Kegan crs at the Spaar wah he Let eo ir ad tthe inne themontenovac athens iene epost le bac a Cra 1903 nd Bese n 1 mame ape tor Pech and Sis inacy were eyed by he reper a Spun anges" In Ms Cores hadall hs new ech ogy ahi dapocaon, rest crore moto mention ‘ily He faced an eneny wove weapons wera he sone MILITARY TACTICS, A third case that should be made is that of ary ts. The Mea had nvr bere end af siege ware prac hy Cot Eucopeana onthe ote hand tadbeen const sge mre tan oon yn fore ‘he Spanish lin nec apenn ci ad oe his tine ped thi cnnco, apples and densest te psy ‘sage Moree 2th ine the Spaniards wee departing fot Seve, nrpea foriiaon ere ng ag ed of tap ces nus ofte calenge presented bythe avn larly areanged that one could coune them, and [estimated them st ‘more than one hundred chousand’. Another conqustador, Anes ‘de Tapia, estimated the numberof skals hanging om ack ia Tench, tisha to be no less than 136,000, Though twentieth eensury shal as believe these and other contemporary observations exaggerate te picture, the most plausible estimates ae that the numbers exe ‘uted every year ran to several howsand.*" Thos killed were not panded as some lowe form of le. The Mexica knew they were killing human beings like chemseves that 195 the whole point. Human bodies an blood were offered a ses tenance to their gods the powers ofthe earth and ofthe sun-—eape ialy to Texcalipoca the omnipotent and omnipresent god ofthe interior ofthe earth, and to Hutilopocl, the bal deity ofthe Mexic and the god ofthe son and god of wat The kilns Chenin. nen noes, ‘were also explicily about te dominance a the Mexica and oftheir tucary deity poli displays to overawe the watcher Mexics or stranger ina sate theatre of power at which the rulers of other and ese cies allies and ener alike, were routing presen. The exceuions were performed before shrines ofthe gods, on te platform atthe top of grea pycamide that were constricted for the purpose of sacrifice. The victim walked or was dragged up the temple steps othe platorm, wae spresdeagled alive actos the lege Killing stone, and was held dowa by ve priests, Four would hold the limbs and one the head. The ale of the plane of the sone meant thatthe vitimis chest cavity was arched an elevated. The exec toner priest then plunged a knife of fi unde the exposed ban sawed through che arteries tothe heat, which was pulled out aad he high as an offerings the gos. The execution was a messy fi, with priests, stone platform and sep all drenched bythe spurting blood, The head ofthe victim was usally severed and spted on skull rack while the lifeless body was pushed and colle dow the pyramid steps. Atthe base ofthe pyramid he body was butchered and, after being dstbuted to relatives and friends ofthe warior wo had offered the saecfce, the parts were cooked and eaten, After cereain kind of sacrifees, the skin ofthe itis back was split open and the skin peeled fromm the body. A pret woul chen res himself inthe flayed skin, with che wet sie out, dead hand and feet dangling fom lve wrists and ankles, and continue the THE OMNIFOTENCE OF SIGNS 67 ceremony. Dain Opn te fev sventh mort, ‘tesa isin wat woman who forfour day was deed with flowers and teased by the women attending her about het impenin oom. On theft nig the women accompanied her tothe rep ofthe Maite Lord whee he wa ted co he tock ofa prist and killed, Clendinnen contin Then sila dass, ence and urge hase, her body was Sayed, nd a asked pret "very song ma, very power, very tal sogaed into the we skin with is slack brass and Poched genitalia: a double nakedness of layered, ambiguous sexuality, The skin of one thigh was teserved to be fashioned Into a facemask forthe man impersonating Ceneol, Young ond Maize Cb, the son of Toc ot allo hot ed wero one were lor env and snes nm tin she commanty of Toca al cre wore chide ofa wiin ti cy Tho chiten were ioe oT te ed oagila ty or eet ‘onto alee Ps chs cee ile fom ‘ngewe who ad bern born parla yg ad whose Iaiewas mated wth dbl comic The hire, ged ween two ad seven yt, wen stent pe en os sd eprops inoue for soe wea bef dewt athe topcoat va ated, ty weeded in naga co ‘Mes and parade ings vongh ey. Te por of he ‘ihe moved chine watching ear The den, wh hac ie fe aka wepe The pia welcomed hs ess er ete Seog eon The craton eens ante wv ofl Talon bodied Hover of mie’ ‘Wl bran cir wa pated yall Naha eps po. ps th tling tat ut dating the Menasha fh gre cronies thal fnew alan he et cate ofa eg oa ge ot of expe Thro ‘Shyu dn te fn Hane pole ase [ocoal vl n 149 tte tht comeded with on of ‘hs geatcrmerca The Mean sy del he ss pe ner ack o Teen whee he rege tem thc they were alo ifr nagar of he ey68 THE KILLING oF misToRY «completed Temple of Huilopoca the sime pyramid recently exc ‘ated in che square ofthe Catedral of Mexico), Clendinnen detetes “the men inked by cord chtough the wari peforationsin thir ‘epeums, the maidens andthe ite boys sil to young to have had thei noses pierced secured by yokes around thei ects, all wailing 4 ptf lament. Though dhe conistdor Berna Diaz claimed hat more than eighty thousand people wer ile or this one ina. sion, Clendinnen argues that a more selistic igure was closet 10 ‘vent thousand, al executed over Four days: fou patent lines stretching the fal length ofthe processional ways an marshalled slong the causeways, slowly moving towards the pyramid" leis dct for anyone brought up in Westen culture ro know ‘how o respond wo the drendfildenls ofthese Menican rials, There are some Marxist commentators, ever ready with theory to inpate ‘unspeakable mocies to anyone in authority, and always secing the lower orders as paragons of vite, who have claimed the uals ‘were a frm of ate eros launched by the Aztec ving clase Prete ts power- Clndanen, wee nis ths kind fh from the outset. i: The killings were nt remote op-fthe- pyramid firs only igh pis nl rare, they card our most he bc ce work en plein az and noe only in the in temple precinct but in he neighbouthod empl don the ser The peo ‘were implicated in the are ad preparation ofthe victims, ie avery to the place of deat, and hen in the elaborate pro both contain esays on Australian historical theres and vere published in 1992. Carter poststeucturalist who contests the wating of history on at least thee grounds Fist he eet the notin that narrative writing can reflec rea iy, This kind of wring ilies he sys, wheres expecene is ml tiimeasional Cane observes tha, because ofthe limitations of he linea the poststractralist theorist Jacques Dred has ale fora Ailleret kind of weting, one that lets people reread past writing100 THE KILLING oF stoRY according toa diferent organisation of space’ Carer cll his ‘own atemp a this kind ofreceading ‘spatial history Second, he claims that narrative history i nether valve aor ‘objective tis charged with ideology. In partculan itis product ‘oftheimpera era and was italy designed by imperialist record their own creation of order ou of chaos. Cate says tha all ch narratives deserve the label imperial history Third the narrative historians notion of time selfs mistaken and out of date. Temporal experince i always porwayed by hist ‘ans ina ina fashion, In doing thi they ae simply electing this discipline’ origins in prerwentcth century, mechanistic though “Temporality has continued tobe conceived fin Newtonian em, 48 a pure intuition independent of space’ Carter inns that his torical evens are pail aswell as empora and so, by implication, historians in the er of Einstein shouldbe operating withthe notion ‘of space-time. Spatial history i is version of this concep. THE RAD TO BOTANY Bay ‘When Paul Carter’ frst hook on Australian history The Road to Botany Bay, ws published in 1987, i atacted far more attention than might have ben expected for anew author writing fora spe. sialised, academic audience twas discussed not only inthe acade= mmc pes bat all majo Austin newspapers, atactng reviews from some of the senior figures of Austalan historiography, inca ing Manning Clark and Russe! Ward, Unusually for such an evote tally Autalian work, i was also reviewed in London inthe Tes Literary Spplement, the Tones Educstonal Sapplement andthe London Review of Books.* Not all the reviews were favoutable-— some, infact, were ancemitiglyhosie—but the book wes widely earded a something significant which lke o aot, could ot be ignored (On es fst appearance, the book's dust jacket carried eothus asic commendations from three of Australia's internationally bert known novels, David Malou, Peter Carey and Barey Hil By the ‘ime a eprnted edition appeared, publisher Faber and Faber bad organised even moe heavy-weight endorsements rom the New York literati or its cover uth. Columbia University’s postcolonial Ii ‘tary crite, Baward Sed, ws fll of praise: THE DECONSTRUCTION OF IMPERIAL MISTORY 101 Astonishing orginal methods of clutlresecch .. This is s compling work of great inellecl power. The postmodern cuturlesayst Susan Sontag concurred Paul Carer’ ingenious account of ation founding nlf 1 kind of founding book—of the aventarosdsipline of sp tal istry. brian bok fr many apeties. Pare ofthe explanation forthe book's instant celebrity lay in Faber and Faber oop in gaining such llstriowsresoramendatons, bt hemain eas i inthe promise ofthe content el. The Road to Botany Bay anounced islf a a radical, new and iconoclastic approach ro che easly history of the Brsh in Australia —the die onery ofthe eas coast, British exploration and setlement, che com vice sjtem and contat withthe Aborigines. Is author claimed not only 2 be offering afresh yeesion af all hese old, fila, school urtculum topics but to have invented 8 new kind of history alo ‘ster spatial history. The book, moreover was peppered through tut wih quotations from fashionable Continental plosophers such a5 Jacques Dereida, Paul Ricoevr, Giles Delesre and Edmond Hissecl—plus some reverent citations ofthe works of Edvard Said hmself—seactic guaranteed to intrigue local readers, who had regarded Australian history as an unevental sideshow, hard to ft into de annals ofthe rest ofthe world ‘he Road to Botany Bay combines crt of tadiional meh ds of writing history withthe advocacy of anew approach to the subject. The etgue i fandamental rather than pcsemel, Two of ‘Australias best-known historians, Manning Clark nd Geoffrey Blane, who would be regarded by most readers as having quite di ferent perspectives on thei subject mater, ae lrsped tether by Carte ab members ofthe one camp, Though Clarks work leans, polly, othe Le, and Blaney’ othe Right, an though most ‘ould regard these two historians as being Austalanst i their spproach, Cater ses them both a epresentatves ofthe one ting: “imperial history. Heney Reynolds wo, during the previous decade, fd been widely revere in the profession for his pioneering work Jn neovering evidence of how the Aborigines respond othe Bris ‘occupation of their lands, i dsmissed by Carter as someone whose102 THE KILLING OF MIsToRY book ‘merely continues by ther means two hundred years of white history? These historians, and virtually every other who wroteon Aus lia before Carter appeazed ate fundamentally aed, he sys, by theie adoption ofthe eadional,empticalynatetie approach their subject. When historians wate what Carte cals ines, nae ative history’ they attempt to reste Long chan of causes and eficts about lives, events and facs. They ar eying, through the sequenil panera they creat, ro show how one period inthe past ‘caused another more recent period, to come ito being, Ukimatel, they wane co show how the past crested the present. Carer main tains hat the cause and eee patterns they find are mere aries, From the perspective of historical narrative, which is always wet ten from hindsight, the past appears ro move relentesly towards the present. But Carter argues that fom the perspective ofthe hi torical actors themselves, history is experienced diferently—there ‘sno sens of inevitably, and the world is full of possiblities, Tra Aiional history, he writes, ian illsory vision ofthe world which locks us out of an understanding of how things were actually expee riened by people the pas‘ i precisely the particulary of his torical experienc, the maeril herenese and nownes which cannot be repeated hat such arrive history crowds out in favour of a transcendent classification in terms of mulplying causes and efes* (Carte likens the methodology of the empirical historian to that of the botanis of the eighteenth century. Just asthe am ofthe botaist vast eransate the living, breathing, natural world into the rife il classifications of Enlightenment science, the viewpoint ofthe natracive historian is contaminated by hindsight ad the attempt to ‘explain how things came to be a they are now. (Carter maintains that, despite thei various politcal leanings the "acrative empiricism of eradonal historians binds them allt the ‘one ideological poston. He regard their descriptions ofthe fst Earopeanstlments ofthe making of roads, bilings and laws, as defensive attempts to demonstrate the emergence of order fom chaos and therefore as endorsements ofthe “unlawful usurpation and con stttional legitimacy’ ofthe colonial founders, Empiral history of his kind hata its focus fats which, in a sense, come afte the vent The primary objet is nto understand orto interpret 0 legiimate. This wt his history is asocated with imperialism’? THE DECONSTRUCTION OF IhPERIAL HISTORY 103 In working out his own aleratve, “spatial” version of history ‘Carter traverses the familar topics and characters sociated with the exploration, discovery and initial settlement of Australia by the Bris, His book is more a collection of essays on related themes than a sustained and integrated argument. He begins with a stuly fof James Cook and joseph Banks tm the Endeavour and oles his ‘ow account of why Cook chose the names he did forthe geographic features he recorded on his maps ofthe coastlines of eastern Aus tialia and New Zealand. He then follows the First Flet a sais fto Botany Bay in 1788 and ast subsoquenly abandons tht site forthe more congenial shores of Sydney Cove. Founding Fires sch 5 Watkia Tench brought with them, Carer writes, the thetorie of fn imperial vision that sought co expunge the explore’ loge of (Cook. He next analyses the journals of some ofthe famous explor sof the inland, including Charles Start, Thomas Mighell and Edward John Eyre, aswell as tha of his favourite characte, the con ‘inet’ fist citcumnavigatog Matthew Flinders. There are essays exposing she ideology of mid-century cel estate developer’ urban iid plans for Melbourne and Adelaide, ps ther pices on white seulement and domestication ofthe rainforest and bush of he Vic- torian countryside. He frishes with discussions of the existentialist tnd spatial perspectives held by the early convicts and bythe As ‘tli Aborigines. ‘These ofthe book cares a last wo meanings. In its wider sens the rou isthe process of discovery and exploration ofthe east coast of Australia, via the eighteenth century inlet baggage thar Cook and Banks beoughe with them, leading tothe eventual establishment of the British settlement in New South Wales. In its ‘her sense, itis also the tle of one chaper i the book devored Understanding the experience ofthe convicts. When the Fis Feet, afer having been anchored for some days on the shores of Botany ay, moved camp afew Klometis north Sydney Cove the site of Botany ay bacemethefrs other place inthe colony and the ver land roure to it came to be sen by the convicts a a way of escape, that is, escape to another place rather than simply escape iat the wilderness. This ‘oad, which was ae hes a barely discernible Abo Tiinal rack through bush and swamp, was more symbole han el “The bli chat itexsted, and that at she end of there were French ships chat would take chem aboard the French explorer La Perouse104 THe KILLING OF HISTORY had sailed into Botany Bay within days ofthe First let's aeival was an important convict Fanta. As long as this imaginary road ‘xinted, Carter writes, the conv" dream of escape was kept alive ad their independent, antieseblshaent mentality and language could be sain, ln opposion othe grand narratives of ‘ause an efect emp ical hisery*in which the end of the ssry is known before the writer stares Carter presents ‘a form of nonlinear writing. He traces“ spatiaty of historical experienc’ through his reinerpretations of some ofthe familiar texts used by other historians, eter hore, explores’ ourmals unfinished map’. He argues that the istrian tse of these eas should not be to plo he story of nation-building orto write heroic biographies of hisorcal individual, a5 he seat ‘Gark and Blaney bo doin, Ta read them this way {sto exclude precisely what distinguishes them: thee active engugement with the road so the horton. Fo the historia sigilicance ofthe explores journals and the setts dares oes not side in any sy ilson of picturesque complete es... Quite the contrary, ister ope ended th lack fish, even ther earch for words, which characte: for it is here, where forms and conveations break down, tha we «an disesr the proces of ansforming space into place, the ‘tentional word ofthe ets, wherein bes this cept sd thir enduring if hitherto gnoted, histor sgncance The “acs of his pail history, Carer writes, are ‘not houses and clearings, bu phenomena as they appeat the travel his ine sional gaze conjuces them up. They are the diections and distances in which houses and clearings may be found or founded!" To read. ers broughe upon traditional hisory, sone ofthis is easy co follow, s0 ee me ty to explain what he mesns, When he writes sow the {intentional world ofthe ext" and the ‘intentional gaz’ of theta sles, Carter is describing how explorers and tavellers write about aud give meanings co what they see. The language they use to pe ‘rate their meaning has itself the power to make history. Such spa tial hiscory—hisory that discovers and exploves the lacuna lf by imperial hstocy—begins and ends in language’ The ment impor ‘ane use of language that he ids inthe making of history is hat of {THE DECONSTRUCTION OF IMPERIAL HISTORY 105 saming. He says that we make a mistake in assuming sat land is lead there’ before itis named, The at of naming brings ld nto ‘being, in the historical sense. He does acknowledge that the land sctualy exist inthe geological sense before its named but says that ‘his sno historically eleva, For bythe at of placenaming, space transformed symbol cally into place, hata space with a history. And, by the same token, the mime iasribes his pasiage permanently onthe ‘world, making 2 metaphorical word place which ethes may fone day inhabi and by wich, in he meantime, he ase bis ‘em place in itor Other kinds of language-use that also made history were map. ping, ploning directions and even the act of imagining, asin the case ofthe imaginary inland sea sought by Charles Sturt. Undersnding the significance of hese language forms, Carter sys allows ws dispense with the imperal historians’ myth of theatrical setlement followed by near progeess and to subacute a demonstration of ‘the dialectical nature of foundation. We need to understand ‘he sense in which the new countey was Hetil eonsracon, a prod uct of language and the intentional ge" The geological forms that ‘ay explorers of the inland such 3 Sut, Mitchell and Eyre me cron were noe significant in thems They became so only bees they were named as being diferent from her surroundings. A slight "eon a at inland plain was named as 4 mount” or ail dy tinguish ie rhetorically from the “svecesion of conceivable places’ ‘ha the explorer could rea rom the lndscpe. Whether they existed ‘or not was by the ways they were nsesay differences without which a dscnc idea ofthe landseape could not he formed. Historically Speaking’, Carter sys "the country di not precede the tavelle: was the offpring of his intention -.. he fosnd there wht he was looking for. Inter words, the countryside was nota gven entity, wating o be setled, Ie was something that was brought nt being for European comprchension by exploces and setlers in their acts ‘of naming and desribing the kinds ofdtferences—diferences berween hills plans, creck, lakes and valleys—that they wanted 0 ein, Hence, the historical objet clled Australia was not disco rede was created by che aplication of language.