Perhaps it is timely to point out that the core idea of an “Objective record of Achievement” is anything but a proper approach to the studies and writing of history.

I may add that I am not an Australian, and being an academically educated historian I must say I increasing pleased that I am a European with some interest in Australian history.

Did Inga Clendinnen really travel around in all those years writing about past events in South America with the sole purpose of enhancing the national identity of the South American peoples?

It seems that all Australian historians, even Inga, admirers the idea of performing the act of some sort of National Identity Santa’s who looks kindly overt the edge of the glasses while passing on little presents of national identity to the children of the Australian nationhood.

Somebody ought to remind Australian historians that – Blainey’s and well as Manning Clark’s approach to the craft represents a fundamental fallacy - history is not at all a matter of achievements and nations - it is a matter of attempting to objectively describing all aspects of the human condition over time – historians are not servants of nationhood or political movements – to the extend they acts as such they ought to be stripped of their credentials publicly - history is not about national mythmaking – it is about serving and performing some social science.

achievement
/uh'cheevmuhnt/
noun
1. something accomplished, especially by valour, boldness, or superior ability; a great or heroic deed.
2. the act of achieving; accomplishment: the achievement of one's object.