Australian Archaeology (Number 64) June 2007

Transcription

In this issue
Editorial
Sean Ulm & Annie Ross
ii
ARTICLES
Seeds from the Slums: Archaeobotanical Investigations at Mountain Street, Ultimo, Sydney, New South Wales
Andrew Fairbairn
1
Massacre, Frontier Conflict and Australian Archaeology
Bryce Barker
9
Stone Constructions on Rankin Island, Kimberley, Western Australia
Sue O’Connor, Len Zell & Anthony Barham
15
To Make a Point: Ethnographic Reality and the Ethnographic and Experimental Replication of Australian
Macroblades Known as Leilira
Kim Akerman
23
Burkes Cave and Flaked Stone Assemblage Variability in Western New South Wales, Australia
Justin Shiner, Simon Holdaway, Harry Allen & Patricia Fanning
35
SHORT REPORTS
Bundeena Bling? Possible Aboriginal Shell Adornments from Southern Sydney
Paul Irish
46
A Reinvestigation of the Archaeology of Geosurveys Hill, Northern Simpson Desert
M.A. Smith & J. Ross
50
BOOK REVIEWS
Shamans, Sorcerers and Saints: A Prehistory of Religion by Brian Hayden
Reviewed by Bryce Barker
53
The Goddess and the Bull: Çatalhöyük: An Archaeological Journey to the Dawn of Civilization by Michael Balter
Reviewed by Andrew Fairbairn
54
Introduction to Rock Art Research by David S. Whitley
Reviewed by Natalie Franklin
56
Many Exchanges: Archaeology, History, Community and the Work of Isabel McBryde edited
by Ingereth McFarlane with Mary-Jane Mountain & Robert Paton
Reviewed by Martin Gibbs
57
Writing Archaeology: Telling Stories about the Past by Brian Fagan
Reviewed by Karen Murphy
58
Australian Apocalypse: The Story of Australia’s Greatest Cultural Monument by Robert G. Bednarik
Reviewed by Paul Taçon
59
THESIS ABSTRACTS
61
OBITUARIES
Richard John Hunter (1946–2006)
63
2007
number 64
64
2006 AAA Conference Awards
74
Conferences
78
Successful Australian Research Council Grants 2007
79
The Australian Academy of the Humanities: 2006 Fellows
84
NOTES TO CONTRIBUTORS
85
ISSN 0312-2417
number 64
BACKFILL
Minutes of the 2006 Annual General Meeting of the Australian Archaeological Association Inc.
June 2007
AUSTRALIAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION INC.
Office Bearers for 2007
Position
Australian Archaeology, the official publication of the
Editors
Australian Archaeological Association Inc., is a refereed
Sean Ulm University of Queensland
journal published since 1974. It accepts original articles
Annie Ross University of Queensland
in all fields of archaeology and other subjects relevant to
Name
Address
Executive
President
Alistair Paterson
Secretary
Fiona Hook
Archaeology, M405, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway,
Crawley, WA 6009
Archae-aus Pty Ltd, PO Box 177, South Fremantle, WA 6162
archaeological research and practice in Australia and nearby
Editorial Advisory Board
Treasurer
Adam Dias
areas. Contributions are accepted in five sections: Articles
Val Attenbrow Australian Museum
Membership Secretary
Annie Carson
Public Officer
Sally Brockwell
Webmaster
Sam Bolton
(5000-8000 words), Short Reports (1000-3000), Obituaries
Margaret Conkey University of California, Berkeley
(500-2000),
Bruno David Monash University
Thesis
Abstracts
(200-500),
Book
Reviews
(500-2000) and Backfill (which includes letters, conference
Andrew Fairbairn University of Queensland
details, announcements and other material of interest to
Richard Fullagar Scarp Archaeology
members). Australian Archaeology is published twice a year,
Martin Gibbs University of Sydney
in June and December.
Simon Holdaway University of Auckland
Crawley, WA 6009
& Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200
are
available
to
individuals
through
Crawley, WA 6009
Media Liaison Officer
Kelly Fleming
Crawley, WA 6009
Jo McDonald JMcD CHM Pty Ltd
Subscriptions
Department of Archaeology & Natural History, Research School of Pacific
& Australian National University
membership of the Australian Archaeological Association
Tim Murray La Trobe University
Australian Archaeology Editors
Inc. or to organisations through institutional subscription.
Jim O’Connell University of Utah
Editor
Subscription application/renewal forms are available at
Fiona Petchey University of Waikato
http://www.australianarchaeologicalassociation.com.au.
Paul Rainbird University of Wales
Editor
Annie Ross
Lynette Russell Monash University
Editorial Assistant
Geraldine Mate
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072
Short Reports Editor
Catherine Westcott
Environmental Protection Agency, PO Box 15155, City East, QLD 4002
Graphic Design: Lovehate Design
Robin Torrence Australian Museum
Printing:
Peter Veth Australian National University
Printpoint Australia Pty Ltd
Cover: View looking southeast across built stone wall to
Editorial Assistant
small cave, Rankin Island, Kimberley, Western Australia
Geraldine Mate University of Queensland
(Photograph: Len Zell).
Short Report Editors
All correspondence and submissions should be addressed to:
Chris Clarkson University of Queensland
Australian Archaeology
Catherine Westcott Environmental Protection
Lara Lamb University of Southern Queensland
PO Box 6088
AUSTRALIA
Book Review Editors
Email: [email protected]
Ian Lilley University of Queensland
URL: http://www.australianarchaeologicalassociation.com.au
Jill Reid Department of Main Roads (Qld)
the Australian Archaeological Association Inc. or the Editors.
© Australian Archaeological Association Inc., 2007
ISSN 0312-2417
Thesis Abstract Editor
Stephen Nichols University of Queensland
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, University of Queensland,
Brisbane, QLD 4072
Chris Clarkson
Lara Lamb
School of Humanities & Communications, University of Southern
Review Editor
Ian Lilley
Review Editor
Jill Reid
Department of Main Roads, GPO Box 1412, Brisbane, QLD 4001
Stephen Nichols
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD 4072
Queensland
Lara Lamb
New South Wales
Val Attenbrow
Australian Capital Territory
Alex McKay
Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350
Brisbane, QLD 4072
State Representatives
Agency (Qld)
St Lucia QLD 4067
The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of
Sean Ulm
Anthropology, Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, NSW 2010
School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University,
Canberra, ACT 0200
Victoria
Nicola Stern
Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086
Tasmania
Vacant
—
South Australia
Lynley Wallis
Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide,
SA 5001
Western Australia
Stuart Rapley
Archae-aus Pty Ltd, PO Box 177, South Freemantle, WA 6162
Northern Territory
Daryl Guse
PO Box 43119, Casuarina, NT 0811
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Editorial
ii
ARTICLES
Andrew Fairbairn
1
Bryce Barker
9
15
To Make a Point: Ethnographic Reality and the Ethnographic and Experimental Replication of Australian Macroblades Known as Leilira
Kim Akerman
23
35
SHORT REPORTS
Paul Irish
46
50
BOOK REVIEWS
53
54
56
Many Exchanges: Archaeology, History, Community and the Work of Isabel McBryde edited by Ingereth McFarlane with Mary-Jane Mountain
& Robert Paton
57
58
59
THESIS ABSTRACTS
61
OBITUARIES
63
BACKFILL
64
74
Conferences
78
79
84
85
Number 64, June 2007
i
EDITORIAL
Welcome to the first issue of AA for 2007. We mark the start of
the New Year with a new colour for the cover and a new batch of
offerings highlighting the strength and depth of contemporary
Australian archaeology.
In this issue we follow-up on Andrew Sneddon’s discussion
of the Blackwattle Creek slums in Sydney reported in the last
volume with Andrew Fairbairn’s analysis of seed remains from
the site. Fairbairn is able to partially answer Sneddon’s (AA63:8)
call to ‘create a more complete picture of these vanished
communities’ by demonstrating that while diet was clearly
fairly narrow and Old World in focus, slum inhabitants were
also able to access exotic goods, such as coconuts, lychees and
dates. Bryce Barker asks ethical, moral and practical questions
about the role of archaeology in exploring Aboriginal massacre
sites in Australia. He makes the argument that an archaeological
signature for massacre sites is unlikely, given the social, cultural
and taphonomic contexts of the disposal of human remains
following a massacre. Barker’s arguments are an important
contribution to the ‘history wars’ debate. Sue O’Connor, Len Zell
and Tony Barham describe intriguing stone structures on Rankin
Island in the Kimberley region and in the process examine some
of the methodological problems involved in mapping such
structures, and identifying them as being of human origin. Stone
artefacts also feature prominently in this issue with Kim Akerman
bringing archaeology, ethnography and his own considerable
knapping experience to the problem of understanding how
long macroblades, or leilira blades, were manufactured. Finally,
Justin Shiner, Simon Holdaway, Harry Allen and Trish Fanning
undertake a detailed assessment of the Burkes Cave stone artefact
assemblage to investigate variability in stone provisioning and
reduction strategies in western New South Wales.
Readers will also notice an important addition in this issue
of AA: an Editorial Advisory Board. This initiative is part of
our ongoing efforts to improve the quality and standing of the
journal as well as to ensure our long-term competitiveness and
scholarly reputation. The appointment of an Editorial Advisory
Board of international standing is a key element of this process.
The appointment of an Editorial Advisory Board further
formalises our peer review process: every article and short report
received will now be reviewed not only by an Editor and a senior
and junior referee, but an Editorial Advisory Board member will
also be selected to review each submission.
Members of the inaugural Editorial Advisory Board were
appointed by the Editors on the basis of their demonstrated
track record of refereeing for AA and/or publishing in the area
of Australian archaeology. They represent a broad cross-section
of theoretical, methodological, topical and geographical interests
relevant to Australian archaeology. Up to five Board members
will be changed biennially, to ensure broad representation but
retain continuity, while allowing a rotation of workload between
interested people. Readers are invited to make an expression of
interest to the Editors if they would like to be considered for
future appointment to the Editorial Advisory Board.
ii
The guidelines for the Editorial Advisory Board are
as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Board will comprise 15 members appointed by the
elected Editors (i.e. they are non-elected positions).
There will be a minimum of five international members.
The minimum term will notionally be two years.
Up to five members will be changed biennially.
Any changes in Board composition will be at the discretion of
the Editors.
It is a requirement that Board members do not circulate,
discuss or cite manuscripts before publication except with
each other for the purpose of reviewing and assessing
the manuscript, or with the express written permission
of the author/s. Where a Board member wishes to discuss
manuscripts with colleagues for the purpose of review or
assessment this should be discussed with the Editors and the
names of those involved provided.
Board members must declare any conflicts of interest that
have the potential to influence the review and assessment of
a manuscript.
Whilst the duties of the Editorial Advisory Board are not
onerous, each Board member will be expected to review up
to three manuscripts per 12 month period. It is expected that
their reviews will be completed within four weeks of receipt of
manuscripts. Board members are also expected to advise the
Editors from time-to-time on Editorial Policy and Procedures.
Other roles of Editorial Advisory Board members will be to
promote AA and encourage submission of high quality papers
to the journal whenever possible.
Following positive feedback on the inclusion of successful
ARC Grants in AA62, we have included a (rather long) list of
archaeology-related grants commencing in 2007. We also
extend our congratulations to Mike Smith (National Museum
of Australia) who was not only awarded the 2006 Rhys Jones
Medal for Outstanding Contribution to Australian Archaeology,
but was also elected as a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the
Humanities. On a sombre note, we note the passing of Richard
Hunter and extend our condolences to his family, friends
and colleagues.
In bringing AA64 together we thank the contributors, referees,
Editorial Committee and John Reid (Lovehate Design).
Antje Noll and Jo Bowman provided support in the Editorial
Offices. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit
and the School of Social Science at the University of Queensland
provided funds to employ Geraldine Mate as a casual
Editorial Assistant.
Sean Ulm and Annie Ross
SEEDS FROM THE SLUMS:
Archaeobotanical Investigations at Mountain Street, Ultimo,
Sydney, New South Wales
Andrew Fairbairn
Abstract
Analysis of seeds from cesspits and other deposits excavated
at Mountain Street, Ultimo, Sydney, provided insights into
the diet, ethnicity and socio-economic status of the site’s
inhabitants. Sample composition was similar to seed finds
from urban cesspit assemblages in both Australia and Europe,
combining locally produced dietary ‘staples’ with occasional
imports and even a collected wild plant. It is unlikely that
the seed analysis provided a complete picture of the diet of
the Mountain Street dwellers, but it suggests an Old World
culinary tradition, incorporating fresh and preserved fruits.
Ethnicity is often reflected in food choice, but it is difficult
to know if the range of species identified at Mountain Street
accurately reflects a population derived from Old World
immigrants, or rather the food supply system of Sydney at the
time. Difficulty in identifying some common seed types may
also have distorted the picture of dietary breadth and thus
ethnic identity. Imported and exotic items are not considered
to show affluence, but rather the desire of the slum dwellers
to eat some luxury items.
Introduction
In various parts of the world, the deep permanently waterlogged
strata of urban settlements provide a rich source of archaeological
plant remains that can illuminate aspects of the diet, health,
environment and economy of past town-dwellers, especially
those retrieved from cesspits and latrines (e.g. Greig 1981;
Hellwig 1997; Märkle 2005). Relatively few archaeobotanical
analyses of Australian urban contexts have been completed and
fewer published in any detail. This paper presents an analysis of
seeds (in this case used as shorthand for seeds, fruitstones and
nutshells – see Fairbairn in press) found during the excavation
of nineteenth century housing at Mountain Street, Ultimo,
Sydney, New South Wales (hereafter MTS03) (see Sneddon
2006). Samples from cesspits, drains, yard deposits and room
fills provided an opportunity to investigate the range of plants
used by the inhabitants of a slum housing area. Archaeobotanical
analysis aimed to identify the remains of food plants and thus
illuminate the diet of the slum-dwellers. In addition, it was hoped
to contribute to a broader understanding of the site, especially
the ethnicity and socio-economic status of the community as
manifest in plant use.
suburb of Ultimo along Blackwattle Creek occupied between
c.1840 and 1906–1907 (Figures 1-2), after which time the area
was forcibly resumed, cleared and filled by the state government.
The area was identified as a slum by contemporary authorities,
with open drains, cesspits, flooding and disease (see Sneddon
2006 for a discussion of conditions). Excavation uncovered the
remains of a dozen houses with yards and cesspits, preserving a
large number of artefacts, including: glass and ceramic vessels;
footwear of various types and sizes; animal bones mainly from
the cheaper cuts of sheep and cattle; bones of some game animals;
seafood remains; some personal adornments and toys/gaming
pieces. Analysis showed an area inhabited by men, women and
children of modest means and of Anglo-Irish ethnicity (Godden
Mackay Logan 2005; Sneddon 2006).
Seeds were collected from 27 samples, including four samples
from two cesspits (C in Table 1; 061 and 095) in Area 5 (Figure 2),
as well as samples from a drain fill (DF), three room fills (R), a pit
fill (PF), seven yard fills (Y) and a number of other deposits (D)
including post-demolition fills, distributed through excavation
areas 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 (as indicated by the first context number in
Table 1; for map of building locations see Figure 2). The samples
provided a partial record of plant use at the site as represented in
the seed/fruit flora. While preserved in small quantities, analysis
did not include identification of non-seed material, such as
leaves, wood and wood charcoal, as they were considered of little
relevance for understanding dietary practices.
Analytical Methods
Seeds and fruits were recovered from the site’s waterlogged
deposits by sieving during the excavation. In the laboratory, the
dried seed assemblages were sieved into >4mm, >2mm, >1mm
and <1mm size fractions and analysed using a low-powered
dissecting microscope. Seed types were classified according
to morphology (overall shape and size) and identified by
comparison to modern seed specimens from known plant taxa.
Identified plant types in each sample were counted and results
are presented in Table 1, with summaries of seed sum (total seed
count) and diversity (in this case a simple total of identified
types). The seed sum, presence (numbers of samples in which
present) and ubiquity (presence expressed as a % of the sample
set) are presented in Table 2.
Results
Site and Samples
Samples were recovered from MTS03 during excavations by
Godden Mackay Logan for Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd (all
of the following information was taken from Godden Mackay
Logan 2005). Excavation sampled an area of housing in the
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane,
QLD 4072, Australia
Seed Distribution and Preservation
Twenty-four plant types, including 20 named taxa, were
identified among the 6985 seeds, 99% of which came from three
of the cesspit fill deposits (Table 1, contexts 5.062 and 5.065
from cesspit 061 and 5.103 from cesspit 095). The cesspit fills
also contained the most diverse assemblages of identified plant
species, with cesspit 095 only lacking two of the species on the
1
Figure 1 Map showing the location of the Mountain Street site in
Ultimo, Sydney (shaded).
site list. These contexts were dominated by seeds that are often
ingested with soft fruits during their consumption and pass
easily through the digestive tract, such as apple/pear, passionfruit
and grapes. The large concentration of such seeds confirms the
identification of the contexts as cesspits and the composition is
consistent with other cesspits in other geographical regions (e.g.
Hellwig 1997; Märkle 2005). Elsewhere at Mountain Street, most
deposits contained only 1–5 identifiable items from 1–3 taxa,
usually the large fruitstones of peach/nectarine. Many of these
specimens had no clear association with the nineteenth century
occupation phase. Several post-demolition fill deposits may
have incorporated material from other parts of Sydney and even
some of the general fill and yard deposits may have incorporated
rubbish and incidental plant material during flooding.
The cesspit fills provide the best contexts for understanding
aspects of nineteenth century life, especially the consumption
of foods – limited to those represented by large seeds and fruits
– being well-sealed, related to specific occupation phases and
containing the direct remains of consumption in the form of
excrement. Interestingly, the basal deposit of cesspit 061 (context
5.063) contained many fewer seed remains than the other fills,
perhaps suggesting that it was not primarily a sewage deposit,
but perhaps related to pit construction. Overall, the presence
of well-preserved organic remains confirms that soil conditions
must have been very wet from the time of their deposition,
2
Figure 2 Site plan showing the Mountain Street site at the close of
excavations. Blackwattle Lane follows the line of the former Blackwattle
Creek. The numbered ‘Areas’ refer to excavation areas. The grey eastwest oriented rectangles were modern concrete piers.
perhaps lending support to contemporary accounts of wet and
uncomfortable living conditions (Sneddon 2006).
Food Species
Most seeds were readily identifiable and derived from wellknown cultivated plant food species. They included many
introduced Old World species, as well as tropical imports and
even one probable native plant (Table 1). Approximately 4%
of the seeds remained unidentified (classed as ‘Indeterminate’
in Table 1), though only 0.2% were unidentifiable due to poor
preservation (see below). Four morphologically distinctive
indeterminate seed types (labelled A-D) were found mainly in
the richer cesspit deposits. On the basis of context it is probable
that these seed types were also derived from food plants or other
economic species, though from beyond the usual expected range
found in comparable sites.
Vegetables
The only vegetable represented was the pumpkin/squash
(Cucurbita sp.), a native plant of the Americas. Its seeds were
common in cesspit samples, including one very large specimen
(c.2cm in length) from cesspit 061 (context 5.062). Identification
of the exact type of squash/pumpkin is not possible using seed
shape and size, as both vary considerably between and within
both species and varieties.
Coconut
Lychee
Date
Passionfruit
Satinash
Knotweed
Purslane
Woundwort
Cocos nucifera L.
Litchi chinensis Sonn.
Mill.
Phoenix dactlyifera L.
Passiflora edulis Sims
Syzygium sp.
Weed Seeds
Polygonum aviculare L.
Portulaca sp.
Stachys sp.
Other
Nut shell
2
Diversity
Indeterminate
4
Seed
Indeterminate Type D
-
-
Seed
Seed
Indeterminate Type B
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Seed Sum
Seed
Indeterminate Type A
Seed
Seed
Seed
Seed
Seed
Fruit stone
Seed
-
-
Candlenut
Aleurites moluccana (L.)
Willd.
Fruit
-
-
3
1
-
-
Seed
Fruit stone
Fruit stone
Fruit stone
Seed
Nut shell
-
-
-
-
Vitis vinifera L.
Grape
Seed
Fruits/Nuts – Tropical & Warm Climate
Raspberry
Cherry
Prunus avium L. or
P. cerasus L.
Rubus idaeus L.
Apple/Pear
Malus /Pyrus sp.
Plum
Walnut
Juglans regia L.
Peach/
Nectarine
Fig
Ficus carica L.
Prunus persica (L.)
Stokes
Nut shell
Hazelnut
Corylus avellana L.
Prunus domestica L.
Seed
cf. Citrullus lanatus
Watermelon
(Thunb.) Matsun & Nakai
Seed
Seed
Vegetables
Cucurbita sp.
Pumpkin
Fruits/Nuts – Old World Introductions
12
1929
1
2
22
2
-
-
-
2
521
-
-
-
-
1341
-
2
13
15
2
-
-
1
-
5
10
1799
-
1
17
8
-
-
-
-
692
-
-
-
-
986
-
8
45
31
1
-
-
-
-
10
22
3209
11
82
95
1
1
1
5
1
512
1
1
1
-
2128
5
12
90
13
75
1
13
2
1
157
2
5
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
4
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
3
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
4
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Context
5.063 5.062 5.065 5.103 6.024 5.022 6.047 6.089 6.106 6.016 6.036 6.084 6.085 6.086
Context
C
C
C
C
DF
R
R
R
PF
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Type
Cesspit No.
61
61
61
95
English Name Component
Andrew Fairbairn
Table 1 Seeds identified at Mountain Street, Ultimo, Sydney (MTS03). Key to summary data: Seed Sum = total number of seeds in sample; Diversity
= number of species present in sample (excludes unclassified indeterminates). Key to context types: C = cesspit fill; D = undifferentiated deposits;
DF = ditch fill; PDF = post-depositional fill; PF = pit fill; R = room fill; Y = yard fill.
3
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
2
1
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
Diversity
1
2
Seed Sum
1
1
3
1
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Indeterminate
-
-
Seed
Seed
Indeterminate Type C
1
Coconut
Nut shell
Cocos nucifera L.
OTHER
-
-
-
-
-
1
1
1
3
3
2
2
Prunus persica (L.)
Peach/
Fruit stone
Stokes
Nectarine
1
1
1
-
1
1
Fruit stone
Cherry
Prunus avium L. or
P. cerasus L.
-
-
-
1
-
2
Seed
Cucurbita sp.
Pumpkin
English Name Component
Vegetables
Context
6.087 6.091 2B.021 2B.024 3B.037 4.055 5.028 6.017 6.001 4.001 4.002 5.001 5.046
Y
Y
D
D
D
D
D
D
PDF
PDF
PDF
PDF
PDF
-
Table 1 (cont.) Seeds identified at Mountain Street, Ultimo, Sydney
(MTS03). Key to summary data: Seed Sum = total number of seeds
in sample; Diversity = number of species present in sample (excludes
unclassified indeterminates). Key to context types: C = cesspit fill; D =
undifferentiated deposits; DF = ditch fill; PDF = post-depositional fill;
PF = pit fill; R = room fill; Y = yard fill.
Fruits and Nuts Introduced from the Old World
Introduced fruits and nuts from the Old World (Europe,
western Asia and Africa) dominated the samples in terms
of both species diversity and seed abundance. The most
common were the rosaceous fruits, especially the stone-fruits.
Cherry stones were abundant in the cesspits and could come
from varieties of either sweet (Prunus avium) or sour cherry
(P. cerasus), as the stones are identical (Figure 3). The cesspits
also contained stones of the domestic plum (P. domestica),
and the highest concentrations of peach/nectarine stones
(P. persica), which were by far the most ubiquitous remains at
the site, being present in 85% of all samples (Table 2). Seeds
of a domestic pome fruit – either apple (Malus domestica)
or pear (Pyrus domestica) as the seeds are indistinguishable
– were also present in the cesspit samples. A few raspberry seeds
(Rubus idaeus) were found in cesspit 095, being more slender
than the morphologically similar seeds of blackberry (Rubus
fruticosus agg.).
A few fragments of nutshell from walnut (Juglans regia)
and hazelnut (Corylus sp.) were found in the cesspit deposits
along with a single badly preserved seed identified tentatively
as watermelon (Citrullus lanatus) in cesspit 095. A small
number of seeds from the Mediterranean fig (Ficus carica) were
also preserved in the same cesspit; note that these seeds were
clearly not from one of Australia’s numerous native fig species.
Cultivated grape (Vitis vinifera) seeds were also preserved in
large numbers in the cesspit samples (Figure 4) and, like most of
the other species recorded here, probably derived from directly
eaten fresh or dried fruits.
Fruits and Nuts of the Tropics and Warm-Climate Regions
Several tropical species were present, including coconut (Cocos
nucifera), the shells of which were found in several samples.
Cesspit 095 contained one fragment, as well as a single seed each
of date (Phoenix dactlyifera) and lychee (Litchi chinensis – see
Figure 5). Environmental conditions would not have allowed the
production of coconut and date fruits in Sydney, even though
date palms tolerate Sydney’s climate. Lychee is a crop originally
from China and is first thought to have appeared in Australia in
the 1850s (Menzel 2002). It has recently been established as a
commercial crop in the cool tropical parts of Australia, but its
cultivation is not known in the Sydney region (Menzel 2001). It
is most likely that the seed came from an imported fruit, though
there is a slim possibility that the fruit came from a local early
experiment with cultivation. The mid-to-late nineteenth century
seed from Mountain Street is the earliest known archaeological
find of the species in Australia.
Large quantities of passionfruit seeds were found in the
cesspits. The seeds were identical to Passiflora edulis (Figure 6),
the commercial black passionfruit, an American native
(Nicholson 1969), which is now a common weed in eastern
Australia. Passionfruit is today grown commercially in northern
New South Wales and Queensland, though plants do set viable
fruit in Sydney. The seeds were morphologically dissimilar to
those of Australia’s native passionfruit species.
Seeds of the Australian native Syzygium sp. (family Myrtaceae)
were found in both cesspits. Syzygium is a large genus of trees
and shrubs which go by a variety of common names, including
satinash, water apple and creek cherry. Species in this genus
Andrew Fairbairn
Table 2 Summary data for plant species identified in seed samples from Mountain Street, Ultimo, Sydney (MTS03). Seed Sum = total number
of seeds in sample; Presence = total number of samples in which a seed is present; Ubiquity = % presence of seed type in the samples
(sample sum=27).
English Name
Component
Seed Sum
Presence
Ubiquity
Vegetables
Cucurbita sp.
Pumpkin
Seed
174
4
14.8
cf. Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.)
Matsun & Nakai
Watermelon
Seed
1
1
3.7
Corylus avellana L.
Hazelnut
Nut shell
Ficus carica L.
Fig
Seed
Juglans regia L.
Walnut
Nut shell
3
2
7.4
13
1
3.7
1
1
3.7
Malus /Pyrus sp.
Apple/Pear
Seed
78
3
11.1
Prunus avium L. or P. cerasus L.
Cherry
Fruit stone
66
7
25.9
Prunus domestica L.
Plum
Fruit stone
151
4
14.8
Prunus persica (L.) Stokes
Peach/Nectarine
Fruit stone
50
23
85.2
Rubus idaeus L.
Raspberry
Seed
5
1
3.7
Vitis vinifera L.
Grape
Seed
4455
3
11.1
Aleurites moluccana (L.) Willd.
Candlenut
Fruit
1
1
3.7
Cocos nucifera L.
Coconut
Nut shell
5
4
14.8
Litchi chinensis Sonn. Mill.
Lychee
Seed
1
1
3.7
Phoenix dactlyifera L.
Date
Fruit stone
1
1
3.7
Passiflora edulis Sims
Passionfruit
Seed
1725
3
11.1
Syzygium sp.
Weed Seeds
Satinash
Seed
3
2
7.4
Polygonum aviculare L.
Knotweed
Seed
5
1
3.7
Portulaca sp.
Purslane
Seed
1
1
3.7
Stachys sp.
Other
Woundwort
Seed
1
1
3.7
Indeterminate Type A
Seed
11
3
11.1
Indeterminate Type B
Seed
134
3
11.1
Indeterminate Type C
Seed
1
1
3.7
Indeterminate Type D
Seed
85
3
11.1
Seed
14
3
18.5
Sum
6985
-
-
24
-
-
Indeterminate
Diversity
produce small succulent fruits, similar to the closely related
lillypilly (Acmena smithii), and are widely collected and eaten in
Australia, New Guinea and southeast Asia. The context suggests
the seeds came from consumed fruits which were probably
locally collected and consumed rapidly after collection, given
their short storage life.
A single whole fruit of the tropical candlenut (Aleurites
moluccana) was found in a room fill (5.022). Candlenut grows
naturally in Australia only in the tropics and northern New
South Wales, though it is planted as far south as Sydney. Its fruits
are also occasionally found in beach drift in New South Wales
(Smith 1998), though in this case this seems an unlikely source
of the seed. Its seeds are commonly used throughout southeast
Asia and the Pacific for medicine, oil, flavourings, tattoo pigment,
are burnt to produce light, as their name may suggest, and are
edible in moderate quantities after cooking/processing (Elevitch
and Manner 2006). The candlenut specimen is an odd find in
this context, standing out from the other remains of obvious
food species and weeds. There is a remote chance that it came
from an incidental inclusion to the site deposits, perhaps from
park/street trees (a specimen grows in Sydney’s Royal Botanical
Gardens), but more probably it was a deliberate acquisition by
one of Mountain Street’s inhabitants.
Probable foods?
Four distinctive but indeterminate seed types were identified,
three of which (A, B and D) were found in large quantities in
both cesspits. Type A seeds were 7–9mm in length, narrowly
ovate in lateral view and laterally compressed, with a bent embryo
and mid-brown testa, superficially similar to seeds of the family
Sapotaceae (for terminology see Berggren 1981; Martin 1946;
Nesbitt 2006). Type B (Figure 7) were distinctive pentagonal
seeds 6–7mm in length, resembling seeds of the Apiaceae family
(carrot family), though they did not closely match any recorded
species. Type D seeds (Figure 8) were 5–6mm in length, broadly
obovate in lateral view, circular in apical view and were covered
in longitudinal striations. Despite extensive searches the seed
types remained unidentified. Context, size and quantity suggest
that they probably derived from edible species, though in this
case from plants outside the expected economic range and
certainly not from the standard Old World crop assemblage.
Type C was 16mm in length and 10mm broad, ovate, with a
5
Figure 3 Seed of cultivated cherry (Prunus cerasus/P. avium) from
context 5.103.
Figure 4 Seed of grape (Vitis vinifera) from context 5.103.
Figure 5 Seed of lychee (Litchi chinensis) from context 5.103.
Figure 6 Seed of passionfruit (Passiflora edulis) from context 5.103.
Figure 7 Seed of Indeterminate Type B from context 5.103.
Figure 8 Seed of Indeterminate Type D from context 5.103.
6
Andrew Fairbairn
strongly developed longitudinal ridge. It was found in a postdemolition fill and thus had no clear relationship to nineteenth
century features.
Weed Seeds
A small number of common weed species was also found in cesspit
095 – knotweed (Polygonum aviculare), purslane (Portulaca sp.)
and woundwort (Stachys sp.). All are common ruderal species
(plants of disturbed ground), provide little environmentallyspecific information and probably grew around the cesspit.
Discussion
The MTS03 cesspit fills provide a useful insight into the plant
foods eaten by the people living there at the end of the nineteenth
century. While some seeds may have entered the cesspits from
weeds growing around the site, most appear to come from the
excrement of local inhabitants or, in the case of the nutshells,
from food waste discarded in the pits. These primary sewage
contexts are ‘pearls beyond price’ for understanding the plants
actually eaten by past societies (Hillman 1986). In the case of
cesspits, the record is skewed towards those plants with large,
robust seeds that are not removed or ground into smaller
fragments during food processing, can survive the gastrointestinal tract and persist when using standard archaeological
recovery methods. Plants such as the cereals, domestic pulses
(beans, peas etc) and leafy greens, that probably made a greater
contribution to the diet, were missing from the MTS03 samples.
Rather than having a complete list of plants used on the site,
the cesspit fills preserve some of the vegetables and fruits/nuts
consumed at the site, which would have provided both a tasty
and nutritionally vital part of the diet.
A wide diversity of food plants was preserved showing
some reliance on the introduced Old World fruit species that
accompanied European settlers to Australia, mixed with a
range of other species. These included a mix of locally grown
introduced species suited to the local climate (passionfruit) and
collection of at least one native species (satinash), with imported
fruits from warmer climates, such as coconut, date and probably
lychee. Dates, probably dried, and coconuts were widely traded
for centuries and, like the other ‘exotics’ would have been easily
accessible via Sydney’s docks. Indeterminate Types A, B and D
hint at even greater diversity and exoticism.
Most of the Old World fruits probably came from Sydney’s
agricultural hinterland, along with species such as passionfruit.
While many may have been used fresh, seeds may also have
come from dried fruits, such as fig, plum (as prunes) and grapes
(as raisins or sultanas). Cherries, watermelon, peach/nectarine,
pumpkin and passionfruit were probably consumed fresh,
though most fruits can be easily converted into a preserved form
for longer-term storage. In that regard, some fruit seeds, for
example raspberry, fig, plum and cherry, may have derived from
the jam and other preserves which were used at the site as shown
in the site’s glassware (Sneddon 2006).
What does this tell us about the lives of people at the site,
especially their ethnicity, social status and economic situation?
Food is an important part of personal and group identity
(see Hendry 1990; Piper 1988) and the seed data show traces
of a strong Eurasian food tradition, with a predominance of
traditional European/Mediterranean crops. Most of the plants
would have been familiar to people from that region for centuries,
such as grapes, plums, cherries, dates and figs, all of which are
found in Medieval and post-Medieval cesspits, some in huge
quantities (Greig 1981, 1996; Hellwig 1997; Paap 1984). Direct
equation of seed flora with a European/Mediterranean ethnicity
is complicated by a number of factors, including site formation
processes and the difficulties in separating the influence of
cultural food choices from other influences on consumption
behaviour. These include the vagaries of supply, often subject to
restriction in Australian cities during the nineteenth century (see
Simons and Maitri 2006).
The presence of several warm-climate fruits originating
outside western Eurasia and the unidentified seed types,
especially A, B and D, could be seen as either an indictor of
ethnic diversity among the inhabitants of the houses serviced
by the cesspits or the occasional consumption of culturally
exotic foods by a predominantly European population. The
latter is more probable given the artefact analysis at the site (see
papers in Godden Mackay Logan 2005). It is tempting to see the
presence of lychee as reflecting a Chinese influence, as the fruit
was particularly associated with the people of its home country
in the nineteenth century (Menzel 2002). In this case, given the
other finds at the site, the seed perhaps better reflects the casual
consumption of a Chinese delicacy, perhaps even supplied by
Chinese horticulture, rather than representing the presence
of a Chinese person or family. Candlenut has a great cultural
significance to Polynesian peoples in particular and is a popular
medicine/condiment across the Asia-Pacific region (Elevitch
and Manner 2006). The fruit perhaps indicates the presence of
Asia-Pacific peoples at the site, but as it derived from an open
yard context it is difficult even to associate it with deliberate
collection/use, let alone a particular ethnic group.
Archaeology also provides us with the chance to understand
the mosaic of ‘real’ social and economic conditions in recorded
slum areas, such as MTS03, as opposed to the potentially
exaggerated and uniform stereotypes of nineteenth century
social reformers (see Mayne and Murray 2001). In evaluating
economic conditions, a task to which seed data are well-suited,
it could be tempting to see the seeds of ‘exotic’ and imported
goods, as well as categories of expensive food, such as fruit (see
Simons and Maitri 2006 for a discussion of fruit in nineteenth
century Melbourne), reflecting a certain amount of luxury in
the MTS03 dwellings. A comparison with the urban cesspits of
Europe is again instructive, showing that even the most modest
town dwellings of Europe had access to fruits and seeds of
local varieties, with small quantities of imported varieties (see
summary by Greig 1996). Indeed, the MTS03 picture is very
similar to that drawn from the few available seed assemblages
from broadly contemporary cesspit contexts in Australia (e.g.
Harris et al. 2004; Lydon 1995; Maitri 2004; Simons and Maitri
2006), where seeds of ubiquitous foods, such as plums, apples and
cherries, were found mixed with a few seeds of exotics, in the case
of Mountain Street, date, coconut and lychee. As with the fine
china from the site (Sneddon 2006), the MTS03 archaeobotanical
analysis shows occasional acquisition of exotics, in this case
among a diet of perhaps more regularly consumed fruit ‘staples’,
though it should be noted that even the thousands of grape and
passionfruit seeds found here may represent only a few kilos of
fruit. A modest fruit diet is represented, which correlates well
7
with contemporary accounts and economic information gained
from other studies of fauna and material culture at Mountain
Street (see papers in Godden Mackay Logan 2005).
Conclusions
Seed analysis of deposits at MTS03 identified secure evidence for
some aspects of nineteenth century urban diet in the slums of
Sydney’s Ultimo suburb. The mix of locally grown introduced
fruit and nut crops, with imported crops and locally gathered
foods shows similarities in range and source to other cesspit
assemblages from Australia and Europe. Diet clearly included
a wide range of fruits and nuts, but was based in Old World
food species and probably included dried/preserved fruits and
fruit products as well as fresh produce. Ethnic identity and
diversity are difficult to attribute on the basis of seed analysis
alone, yet a consideration of the food suite in context suggests a
strong Old World heritage. Broader taphonomic and contextual
considerations suggests that the presence of lychee, dates and
other ‘exotics’ reflect the occasional consumption of imported
and rare foods, though it is possible that ethnic diversity has
been obliterated by archaeological formation processes. We
should not view the presence of a few exotics and possible
‘luxuries’ as indicative of a luxuriant and comfortable life.
Contextual archaeological analysis combined with a critical
review of historical texts show this was certainly not the case
(see Sneddon 2006). Rather, this investigation shows that there
is no easy correlation between the archaeological presence of
material luxuries and past social standing. Poor as the dwellers
of nineteenth century Mountain Street surely were, they still
actively and successfully acquired and ate foods that many of
today would see as luxuries.
Acknowledgements
This paper was developed from a specialist report prepared
for Godden Mackay Logan (GML) on behalf of Multiplex
Constructions Pty Ltd. Thanks to Andrew Sneddon and
Catherine Tucker of GML for discussion and advice about the
MTS site and this paper.
References
Berggren, G. 1981 Atlas of Seeds and Small Fruits of Northwest European Plant
Species, with Morphological Descriptions. Part 3. Salicaceae to Cruciferae.
Stockholm: Swedish Natural Science Research Council.
Elevitch, C.R. and H.I. Manner 2006 Species Profiles for Pacific Island Agrofrestry:
Aleurites moluccana (Kukui). Honolulu: Traditional Tree Initiative. Retrieved
10 August 2006 from http://www.agroforestry.net.
Fairbairn, A. in press Beyond economy: Seed analysis in landscape archaeology.
In B. David and J. Thomas (eds), Handbook of Landscape Archaeology. World
Archaeological Congress Research Handbooks. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Godden Mackay Logan 2005 22-36 Mountain Street and 16-20 Smail Street, Ultimo
(NSW) Archaeological Excavation Report. Unpublished report to Multiplex
Constructions Pty Ltd and the NSW Heritage Office, October 2005.
Greig, J. 1981 The investigation of a Medieval barrel-latrine from Worcester. Journal
of Archaeological Science 8:265-282.
Greig, J. 1996 Archaeobotanical and historical records compared. Circaea
1:211-247.
Harris, E.J., G. Ginn and C. Coroneos 2004 How to dig a dump: Strategy and
research design for investigation of Brisbane’s nineteenth-century municipal
dump. Australian Historical Archaeology 22:15-26.
8
Hellwig, M. 1997 Plant remains from two cesspits (15th and 16th century) and
a pond (13th century) from Göttingen, Southern Lower Saxony, Germany.
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 6:105-116.
Hendry, J. 1990 Food as social nutrition? The Japanese case. In M. Chapman and H.
Macbeth (eds), Food for Humanity, pp.57-62. Oxford: Centre for the Science
of Food and Nutrition.
Hillman, G.C. 1986 Plant foods in ancient diet: The archaeological role in
paleofaeces in general and Lindow Man’s gut contents in particular. In I.M.
Stead (ed.), Lindow Man: The Body in the Bog, pp.90-114. London: British
Museum Publications.
Lydon, J. 1995 Boarding houses in The Rocks: Mrs Ann Lewis’s privy, 1865. Public
History Review 4:73-88.
Maitri, M. 2004 Botanical remains. In Godden Mackay Logan, La Trobe University
(Archaeology Program) and Austral Archaeology (eds), Casselden Place (50
Lonsdale Street), Melbourne Archaeological Excavations: Research Archive
Report. Unpublished report to ISPT and Heritage Victoria.
Märkle, T. 2005 Nutrition, aspects of land use and environment in medieval times
in southern Germany: Plant macro-remain analysis from latrines (late 11th–
13th century A.D.) at the town of Überlingen, Lake Constance. Vegetation
History and Archaeobotany 14:427-441.
Martin, A.C. 1946 The comparative internal morphology of seeds. The American
Midland Naturalist 36:513-660.
Mayne, A. and T. Murray 2001 The archaeology of urban landscapes: Explorations
in slumland. In A. Mayne and T. Murray (eds), The Archaeology of Urban
Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland, pp.1-7. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Menzel, C. 2001 Lychee production in Australia. In M.K. Papademetriou and F.J.
Dent (eds), Lychee Production in the Asia-Pacific Region, pp.339-344. Bangkok:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Menzel C. 2002 The Lychee Crop in Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok: Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Nesbitt, M. 2006 Identification Guide for Near Eastern Grass Seeds. London:
Institute of Archaeology.
Nicholson, B.E. 1969 The Oxford Book of Food Plants. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Paap N.A. 1984 Palaeobotanical investigations in Amsterdam. In W. Casparie and
W. Van Zeist (eds), Plants and Ancient Man, pp.339-344. Rotterdam: Balkema.
Piper, A. 1988 Chinese diet and cultural conservatism in nineteenth century
southern New Zealand. Australian Historical Archaeology 6:34-48.
Simons, A. and M. Maitri 2006 The food remains from Casselden Place, Melbourne,
Australia. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10(4):357-373.
Smith, J. 1998 Australia Driftseeds: A Compendium of Seeds and Fruits Commonly
Found on Australian Beaches. Armidale: University of New England.
Sneddon A. 2006 Seeing slums through rose-coloured glasses: The Mountain Street
Site, Sydney and its limitations in the search for vanished slum communities.
Australian Archaeology 63:1-8.
MASSACRE,
Frontier Conflict and Australian Archaeology
Bryce Barker
Abstract
This paper examines the nature of archaeological evidence
relating to frontier conflict/violence in the Australian context.
Because of the unique nature of Aboriginal/European
frontier encounters, it is argued that a focus on locating
archaeological evidence for massacres is problematic. It is
suggested that rather than focus on frontier conflict in terms
of massacre sites, archaeologists employ a broader social
landscape archaeological approach, thus allowing a more
holistic contextualisation of Aboriginal/European frontier
interactions.
Introduction
Recent revisionist accounts of European/Aboriginal frontier
interaction in Australian history have sought to downplay the
degree and extent of conflict on the frontier (e.g. Windschuttle
2002). This debate is part of a wider socio-political agenda at
the national level in which a largely conservative ideology
has challenged what is seen as a left/liberal interpretation of
Australian history, one characterised by conservatives as the
‘black armband’ version of European settlement (Moran 1999;
Windschuttle 2000, 2002). These debates have taken place almost
exclusively within the domains of European historical discourses,
as part of the wider so-called ‘culture wars’ (Attwood and Foster
2003; Manne 2003). In other countries such as the United States,
where oral and historical accounts of frontier conflict between
Indigenous populations and Europeans resulting in massacre
or even genocide have been recorded, attempts have been
made to support the historical record through archaeological
investigation (Scott 2003; Scott et al. 1989; Smiley 1999). In
Australia, however, relatively little research attention has been
paid to the archaeology of Aboriginal/European interaction
and almost none at all to the archaeology of frontier conflict
(although see Murray and Williamson 2003). As a consequence,
in this paper I present a few of the many specific incidents of
frontier violence recorded orally and/or historically, with a
focus on the central Queensland coast and northern Australia.
These provide a basis for discussion regarding the archaeological
verification of massacres, highlighting the problems inherent in
the archaeology of frontier conflict in the Australian context.
Because I want to focus on the archaeological signature of
frontier conflict in Australia I do not intend to enter into the
semantic debates concerning the ‘language of conflict’, nor the
statistics of conflict relating to ‘how many killed constitute a
massacre’ etc (see, for example, Griffiths 2003 and Broome 2003
for discussions on these aspects of the debate). For the purpose
of this paper I define ‘massacre’ as the ‘one-sided’, indiscriminate
killing of a group or groups of people (Eck et al. 2005). This
definition can also include single killings if they are part of a
systematic and ongoing process of killings, where the single
School of Humanities and Communications, University of Southern
Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
death constitutes part of a wider event as described in some of
the examples outlined below.
The Historical and Archaeological Record
On the central Queensland coast the primary historical sources
relating to European/Aboriginal conflict are numerous, consisting
in many cases of private hand-written diaries, memoirs of
personal accounts of the ‘pioneering’ experience and newspaper
accounts. Similarly, oral traditions relating to massacres are a
recurrent narrative of contemporary Indigenous reconstructions
of the historical past – a component of the debate that has been
almost wholly ignored. The nature of the evidence, much of it
in personal diaries and memoirs and thus never intended for
publication, or in verified official documents or newspaper
reports, means that it is virtually unimpeachable as evidence for
the scale and commonplace nature of systematic violence against
Aboriginal people in the Bowen/Burdekin region (cf. Brandon
1845-1899; Breslin 1992; Cunningham 1895; Dalrymple 1860;
Loos 1971, 1982; Morrill 1863; Port Denison Times 1864-1869;
Queensland Guardian 1863-1869). This strong body of historical
and oral primary evidence lacks a corresponding archaeological
signature for these events. Although the absence of archaeological
evidence could be to some extent due to a lack of focus on this
aspect of Aboriginal/European interaction, I propose that it has
more to do with the nature of frontier violence in the Australian
context and the kind of archaeological signature related to it,
rather than a lack of research in this area.
One of the problems for archaeology in terms of finding sites
of frontier conflict relates to a lack of locational precision in the
‘official’ historical documentation, with many accounts being
general expressions of the ‘Aboriginal threat’ in the region. Some
personal accounts, however, do provide general locations and
document the nature of specific interactions and instances of
violence. This is particularly important as it has the potential
to help us understand the possible archaeological signature of
frontier violence in Australia.
The following accounts are fairly typical of the range of conflict
recorded and serve to illustrate something of the opportunistic
and relatively small-scale (in terms of numbers of individuals
involved in specific incidents) of these violent encounters. One
such example comes from the hand-written memoirs of Korah
Wills, an eventual Mayor of Port Denison who lived in Bowen
from 1862 to 1882. In this account, in which at least three people
were killed in reprisal for the killing of a shepherd, the nature of
the encounter is graphically illustrated:
When we turned out and run them to earth [on horseback] where
they got on the top of a big mound and defied us and smacked
their buttocks at us and hurled large stones down on us and hid
themselves behind large trees and huge rocks but some of them
paid dearly for their bravado. They had no idea that we could
reach them to a dead certainty at the distance of a mile by our
little patent breach loading “Terrys” when they were brought to
9
bear upon them some of them jumped I am sure six feet into the
air with astonishment and a clear out for those who were not in
receipt of such medicine (in Brandon 1845-1899).
Another personal account comes from Jimmy Morrill, a
shipwrecked sailor who lived with Juru and Gia groups between
Cape Cleveland and Bowen from 1846 to 1863. This excerpt
provides a rare account of frontier conflict from an Indigenous
perspective. Recounting an incident at Cape Cleveland in
September 1860, Morrill writes:
Nothing is said in the report about shooting the natives, but one
raw boned, stout able-bodied blackfellow, a friend of mine, was
shot dead by some one in the boat, and another was wounded;
and the hideous yelling was the noise they usually make over their
dead (Morrill 1863:13).
These are just two examples of the many unreported incidents
of violence against Aboriginal people. The events were only
documented in the latter case because of the presence of
a European/Aboriginal person at the scene. In each case
relatively small numbers were killed, all of whom were probably
traditionally interred.
By 1861, with the newly-established settlement of Port
Denison, Morrill reports increased levels of violence:
Soon afterwards a report came into camp of a lot of white and
black men on horseback near Cape Upstart, shooting down
people that I had been living with when the Captain died at Port
Denison (Morrill 1863:16).
A typical newspaper account from the region further reinforces
the nature of the violence:
close down to the town beach and to the immediate vicinity of the
official tents, the traces of two natives, apparently acting as spies
were observed and followed. They were overtaken [on horseback]:
one of the two was shot the other escaped (Queensland Guardian
29 June 1861).
Although widespread and large-scale relative to the population
size of the indigenes, the modus operandi of the settlers and
Native Police was to ambush camps and shoot people as they
fled, usually resulting in small numbers killed at one time at a
single location. In the mid-nineteenth century, the European
parties who were involved in this form of frontier conflict were
small, generally far from European centres of population and
travelling through hostile Aboriginal country in which they
often expressed the fear of vast numerical superiority against
them (e.g. Breslin 1992).
Thus, the tactic most often outlined in the historical records
was of opportunistic hit-and-run attacks. There are no accounts
of collecting the dead and burying them, of capturing people
alive, tying them up, taking them to a central location and
executing them into mass graves. Even if this did occur, it would
not result in the densely-packed mass graves found at places such
as the Kharkov massacre site in the Katyn Forest in Poland in
which the bodies of 6400 individuals were located, or sites such
as Crow Creek in South Dakota in which 500 individuals dating
10
from the fourteenth century were excavated in a mass grave
measuring 6m² (Harrington 1997; Willey and Emerson 1993). It
is more likely, as with the Morrill incident, that the bodies were
left where they died to be retrieved by kin sometime after the
event and almost certainly given traditional burials or burnt. In
keeping with the relatively small-scale societies the Europeans
encountered, killings were more likely to be in the order of a few
people at a time dispersed across the landscape as outlined in the
examples above.
Three examples of officially examined twentieth century
massacres of Aboriginal people, at Coniston in the Northern
Territory in 1928, the Forrest River in Western Australia in 1926,
and near Mapoon on Cape York Peninsula in 1902, provide strong
supporting evidence for this analysis. The Coniston massacre,
for example, was a series of punitive raids carried out by police
against the Warlpiri people over a period of ‘some weeks at various
locations’ in which the official government enquiry admitted to
the deaths of 31 people (Summers 2000:23). Similarly, the Forrest
River massacres were a series of punitive raids against Aboriginal
groups northwest of Wyndham in the Kimberley region. An
account of the nature of this violence is described by the Royal
Commission into one of the Forrest River incidents in which four
Aboriginal men were shot by a police patrol and their remains
burned (Green 1995:211). Another account from the region
comes from the Forrest River Mission daily journal in which the
Reverend Gribble states: ‘News brought to us today that police
boys Windie and Tommy killed old Blui-nua with the butt of their
rifles and threw the body into the water. When the patrol moved
on, two women, possibly Buli-nua’s wives, recovered the body and
gave it a traditional burial’ (Green 1995:135).
Similarly, an account of a massacre by the Native Mounted
Police under the command of Constable Hoole near Mapoon
on Cape York Peninsula shares many of the characteristics of
the examples outlined above. This incident was investigated by
the Protector of Aborigines, Walter E. Roth, and subsequently
became the subject of an official enquiry (Queensland State
Archives JUS/N309/330, cited in Richards 1999):
Soon, the news spread that a number of Aboriginal men had
been killed near the Ducie River. Bishop White was visiting
Mapoon with Protector Roth when news of the deaths arrived.
The Aboriginal people they spoke to recounted how the attacking
party had opened fire and then returned the next day to burn the
bodies. Roth began his investigation on arrival at the waterhole
on the 15th May 1902. He was shown two bodies wrapped in
bark [i.e. traditionally interred] and was also shown the remains
of a fire ‘in which he found human remains and portions of two
bodies’. White related how Roth located a lump of lead ‘of the
exact weight of a bullet’ under one of the skulls but no cartridge
cases (White 1918, cited in Richards 1999:5).
In all three cases the nature of the violence clearly shows wideranging and systematic murders of small groups of Aboriginal
people at different locations. In each case the bodies were either
disposed of by burning by the perpetrators or were traditionally
interred after the events.
In the United States, where frontier conflict is an important
research area in historical archaeology, the focus of the
archaeological enquiry does not necessarily revolve around
Bryce Barker
locating skeletal remains, but instead focuses on finding the
artefacts of particular incidents recorded historically and
orally. Thus at the Sand Creek massacre site in Colorado, where
150 Cheyenne and Arapaho people were killed by soldiers under
the command of Colonel John Chivington in 1864, archaeologists
found over 400 artefacts dating to the time of the massacre,
including cannon ball fragments, bullets and an extensive
material culture signature relating to post-European Native
American use (Scott 2003). This was a densely populated village
of approximately 500 people, employing an extensive range of
European material culture items including tin cups, horseshoes,
nails, plates, bowls, knives, forks, spoons, coffee pots, barrel hoops,
iron arrowheads and ammunition for guns. Despite the large
numbers killed and the numerous historical sources that state
that the dead were left where they lay, the archaeological survey
recovered no human skeletal remains at the site (Borowsky 2002).
In this case, it was the rich artefactual material which allowed the
site to be located, and the large quantities of ordinance known to
have been used by the military which confirmed that it had been
the site of a major violent encounter. This type of site is unlikely
to be encountered in the Australian context.
In the Bowen/Burdekin region of the central Queensland coast,
the only potential physical evidence for frontier violence found
in the region comes from Cape Upstart. The evidence consists
of the burnt remains of three Aboriginal adults removed nonarchaeologically from a sand dune in the 1970s (James Gaston,
Giru Dala Council of Elders, pers. comm., 2004). The precise
in situ location of these remains is not known and the reason it
is thought that these remains may have been a result of violent
deaths is the fact that they were burnt – a mortuary practice not
commonly known from the region (James Gaston, Giru Dala
Council of Elders, pers. comm., 2004). These individuals, if indeed
their deaths were the result of frontier violence, further support
the idea of small numbers of a group being murdered. Because of
the proximity of the site to Port Denison, the bodies in this case
were possibly collected and an attempt made to dispose of them
by burning, a similar scenario to the Forrest River, Myall Creek
and Ducie River killings where cover-ups were deemed necessary
(Green 1995; Yarwood and Knowling 1982). Thus, I contend that
the nature of the murders, although widespread, systematic and
unrelenting, generally did not involve high numbers of deaths
in any one location, did not result in mass graves, and left little
material evidence in the form of human bones.
It is thus considered that a research project that specifically sets
out to find a massacre site in Australia is potentially problematic.
Firstly, the nature of frontier violence in Australia makes it
unlikely that a massacre site, in which relatively large numbers of
bodies have been concentrated together in a clearly defined place,
will be found. Secondly, dense concentrations of artefactual
material relating to European/Aboriginal violence, such as found
at sites like the Sand Creek massacre site in the United States, are
also unlikely to be found in the Australian context. Thirdly, it is
probable that in many cases the victims’ bodies were retrieved
by kin and traditionally interred. Finally, there are problems in
determining whether human remains, if located, were indeed
the result of frontier violence. This relates to the often poor
condition of skeletal remains in the Australian context and the
rarity of physical remains resulting from gunshot death. The fact
that no archaeological project has yet documented a massacre or
a suspicious death in relation to Indigenous remains bears these
factors out to some degree; although it is also acknowledged that
the fact researchers are rarely looking for such evidence when
excavating skeletal remains may also be a factor.
Aboriginal Perspectives
For archaeology in Australia, the other important issue to address
is the marginalisation of the Aboriginal perspective in this debate.
What do Aboriginal people feel about being put in the position
of being obliged to search for their ancestors’ remains in order to
confirm for ‘white people’ what they themselves already know?
That nearly all Aboriginal communities retain a strong memory
of massacres as a component of their history is testimony to the
reality of these events and the devastating impact they had, and
continue to have, on Aboriginal people. However, Aboriginal
communities are generally highly averse to the disturbance of
their ancestral remains, especially those that may have been
killed through frontier violence. Godwin and Weiner (2006:131)
argue that such places ‘constitute one of the most important and
impassioned categories of contemporary ‘sacred’ places for all
indigenous communities in Australia’.
As well as needing to pay heed to these sensitivities, the
emphasis on a scientifically-based empiricism in regards to the
onus of proof has the potential to undermine an Aboriginal
massacre narrative, a tradition that can be central to Aboriginal
understanding of their historical and contemporary position in
Australian society. The archaeological need for precise locations
and material evidence can be at odds with Aboriginal ways of
knowing in terms of oral history, and to some extent misinterprets
the concept of ‘massacre’ in terms of contemporary Indigenous
knowledge which can be (but is not always) part of a collective
memory, a temporally- and spatially-conflated accumulation
of events, not necessarily one event at a precise location. This
is especially so in regions such as the central Queensland coast
where peoples’ traditional ways of life were almost wholly
disrupted by systematic violence, subsequent removal from land
and a sustained and aggressive acculturation process.
In this context the word ‘massacre’ can incorporate the whole
range of frontier violence that Aboriginal groups experienced over
a long period of time. So although Juru people can tell you that
massacres happened at Cape Upstart, or on the Don River, precise
locations are not necessarily a part of that knowledge (or even
necessarily considered important) because the massacre may have
been a series of events at different locations and times, with one or
two people murdered on each individual occasion making up the
entire event, and with each body subsequently removed from the
location for traditional burial (James Gaston, Giru Dala Council of
Elders, pers. comm., 2004). Thus ‘location’ can be a multifacetted
concept, taking in elements of the actual site where the violence
occurred, the place where the individual may eventually have been
buried, as well as incorporating wider notions of ‘place’ in regards
to broader categories of the landscape relating to the creation
myths of the ‘dreaming’. As Godwin and Weiner (2006:126) state,
researchers ‘have shown that the historical events of contact history
can take their place within the mythico-cosmological recreation of
the landscape’ and are thus embodied within a wider ideational
framework of place that may or may not relate to precise locations
or events (see also Clement 2003). Further to this, Bird-Rose
(2003:124) states:
11
Western historians are heirs to the proposition that historical
truthfulness is a matter of reconstructing, as best we can, an event
or series of events that happened in the past. Equally significant
in Aboriginal oral histories is what we might call faithfulness to
the moral content of events. In such stories a range of people
are likely to coalesce into one or two people and events that
may have been relatively disconnected from the perspective
of the participants are organised into connections based on a
presumption about their intention. Stories that start to coalesce
detail around the participants’ intention tend to be placed further
back in the past; that is, as events recede, those who tell the stories
focus on the intention of the participants rather than the event.
The truthfulness, or what I prefer to call the faithfulness, of these
stories is directed towards understanding and recounting the
meaning of what happened (as well as the relationship between
past and present). What stands out is the moral content of the
process of colonisation.
from a Western view of the past must be acknowledged and
incorporated into archaeological research design.
Towards an Explicitly Australian Archaeology of
Frontier Conflict
Unknown places are all potentially dangerous and must either
be avoided or fitted into a system which allows them to be
defined as inherently safe or dangerous. Accompanying this
anxiety is the need for secrecy. That which is truly important is
to be carried out in secret. Knowledge is power. Power may be
misused. To make misuse impossible, access to knowledge must
be rigidly controlled. Only those with proven abilities acquire full
knowledge (Biernoff 1978:104).
It is not being suggested here that archaeology as a discipline
should not look for the physical evidence for frontier violence.
What is suggested is that a better strategy than going into the field
to explicitly look for ‘massacre sites’ is to employ a broadly-based
social landscape archaeology approach, in which all the elements
of frontier interaction can be examined, thus contextualising the
frontier conflict in a more holistic way. This would involve a
complex multidisciplinary research focus (involving professional
and local historians, Aboriginal traditional owners, European
descendants of early settlers and archaeologists), in which the
material remains of this interaction would comprise just one of
the many layers of knowledge relating to frontier violence (cf.
Shackel 2003). Although some Australian archaeologists have
already foreshadowed this type of study (Cole 2004; Rowland
2004; Smith 2005) few of these researchers have explored (or
published) the archaeological component of their case studies.
Archaeologically, the focus should not necessarily be on
skeletal remains but on the more tangible and durable material
culture relating to frontier interaction. This is present in the form
of Native Mounted Police barracks and camps, Aboriginal fringe
camps around settlements and homesteads, shepherd’s huts,
known areas of large Aboriginal camps and general locations
identified through oral histories. Once locations are identified,
methodologies could be geared towards spatially plotting
oral traditions relating to massacre events (dangerous places),
relative to known locations of Native Mounted Police barracks,
or areas of initial European frontier settlement, for example. It
is these kinds of ‘core’ locations that provide the most visible
archaeological manifestation of frontier activity, within which
more focused evidence for violence could be sought in the form
of expended ammunition, or other nineteenth century European
artefacts associated with frontier violence. Thus a multitiered
accumulation of evidence involving the historical record, oral
traditions and the archaeological record relating to generalised
and specific locations and/or specific incidents within a broader
framework of regional frontier conflict, could bring a greater
weight of evidence to bear on the issue.
For the young men who accompanied Biernoff in his
fieldwork, it was not uncommon for localities to be identified
as dangerous places, even if the nature and explanation of the
danger was not known in any detailed way: ‘Such information
about localities provides minimum identification of danger,
sufficient for purposes of avoidance, but detailed knowledge is
still lacking’ (Biernoff 1978:95). This generalised information was
provided to the young men by specific elders before setting out
on the field trip. In some cases different levels of explanation were
given, corresponding to information available and appropriate
to different age and initiation levels; ‘vague and fantastic for the
young and inexperienced (uninitiated/non-indigenous), and
more explicit and rational for older persons’ (Biernoff 1978:95).
Thus the importance of an Aboriginal view of past events
and notions of place as expressed orally lies in how the past is
perceived and articulated. That it can be manifestly different
The risk of exploring the archaeology of frontier conflict in the
form of a search for massacre sites is that it could ultimately
fail, because even if evidence is found, it is unlikely to be of
the kind that will be unequivocal, thus providing succour to
revisionists and ‘deniers’. On the central Queensland coast, and
I suspect elsewhere, the strength of the evidence for frontier
conflict is the historical record, found in the multiplicity of
accounts in newspapers, diaries, journals and memoirs. Any
reading of the historical record of settlement on the central
Queensland coast, strongly supported by Aboriginal oral
history, clearly indicates that systematic frontier violence
occurred as part of European occupation. Similarly, the
strength of the oral traditions relating to frontier violence is
not necessarily about precise details of where, how and why.
Rather the validity of oral testimony lies in the sheer magnitude
Another issue in relation to knowledge of precise locations in
oral traditions, relates to control of the knowledge of ‘dangerous
events/places’ and how such knowledge may be restricted and
circumscribed in Aboriginal society. For example, Biernoff
(1978:97) states that Aboriginal groups in eastern Arnhem Land
have a range of dangerous places generally referred to as secret or
sacred sites, including places which have acquired their dangerous
potential in the human past rather than the ‘dreamtime’. These
dangerous powers have usually accumulated as the result of a
local disaster, such as disease, massacre, magic, or the activity of
supernatural forces, which resulted in the deaths of large numbers
of people. Importantly in regards to precise locations, the stories
of these catastrophes are not known to the community at large
but are held by the elders who act as responsible guardians of
the information:
12
Conclusion
Bryce Barker
and persistence of the ‘massacre’ narrative in Aboriginal oral
tradition relating to country. That such an overwhelming and
near-universal history is some kind of invention defies logic.
That we have a continental landscape inscribed with the place
names of this conflict also suggests that it was endemic, with
no fewer than 21 places officially named alluding to some form
of frontier violence, including Massacre Bay, Massacre Hills,
Massacre Inlet, Massacre Island and Massacre Lake; numerous
Murdering Creeks, Lagoons, Gullies and Sandhills; several
Gins Leaps; a Skirmish Point and Skirmish Hill; and several
Attack Creeks and Waterholes (Committee for Geographical
Names in Australasia 2004).
This issue is, however, not about a lack of evidence – the
evidence is already there in the historical record and the oral
traditions. This debate is part of an ideologically-driven attempt
at reshaping how we view the European occupation of the
Australian continent. The primary source material relating to
frontier conflict is undeniable to all but those adhering to a
revisionist agenda. Those who study the past should be wary of
pursuing an agenda centred in ideology rather than scholarship
in which narrowly determined definitions of words such as
‘holocaust’, ‘genocide’ and ‘massacre’ are analysed semantically
and found wanting, because it will not be long before the
scientific evidence in the form of the archaeological proof for
these concepts is demanded and also found to be inadequate.
Archaeology as a discipline should not allow ideology to set its
agenda and it should not fall into the trap of accepting that the
revisionist criticisms of the historical record and dismissal of
Aboriginal oral traditions are valid, therefore raising the bar of
evidence to an impossible level of proof.
Mike Rowland (2004) states, in one of the most detailed
and moving histories relating to this topic, that the emphasis
on ‘massacre’ reduces decades of all kinds of human suffering
(from sexual slavery, beatings, forced labour, rape and forcible
removals) to the semantics of numbers and terminology, thus
masking the real long-term exploitation and misery of the
Aboriginal frontier experience. As Ian Clark (1995) states, the
frontier was a complex and diverse place and very few situations
were alike. For the central Queensland coast at least, I contend
that it is unlikely we will find evidence for mass killings and
even if we were to, I question that it would constitute stronger
evidence than the existing historical record and oral tradition.
For archaeology to contribute to this debate it must pursue
a carefully thought out and complex multilayered research
strategy that focuses on the broader issues of Aboriginal/
European frontier interaction.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the organisers and participants of the
Archaeology of Frontier Conflict session at the 2005 Australian
Archaeological Association Annual Conference in Fremantle for
providing the opportunity to develop and present components
of this paper, Jim Gaston (Gia Elder) for conversations pertinent
to this topic over the years as well as Lara Lamb and the Editors
for their sound editorial advice.
This paper was first presented at the joint Public Memory
Research Centre, University of Southern Queensland, and Cobb
and Co. Museum War and Memory Symposium in 2005.
References
Attwood, B. and S.G. Foster (eds) 2003 Frontier Conflict: The Australian Experience.
Canberra: National Museum of Australia.
Biernoff, D. 1978 Safe and dangerous places. In L.R. Hiatt (ed.), Australian
Aboriginal Concepts, pp.93-106. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal
Studies.
Bird-Rose, D. 2003 Oral histories and knowledge. In B. Attwood and S.G. Foster
(eds), Frontier Conflict: The Australian Experience, pp.120-132. Canberra:
National Museum of Australia.
Borowsky, L. 2002 Revisiting Sand Creek. Terrain.org 11. Retrieved 7 March 2007
from http://terrain.org/articles/11/borowsky.htm.
Brandon, H. 1845-1899 Memoirs of Korah Halcomb Wills, in the Henry Brandon
Papers, John Oxley Library, State Library of Queensland, Australia.
Breslin, B. 1992 Exterminate with Pride: Aboriginal-European Relations in the
Townsville-Bowen Region to 1896. Studies in North Queensland History 18.
Townsville: Department of History and Politics, James Cook University.
Broome, R. 2003 The statistics of frontier conflict. In B. Attwood and S.G. Foster
(eds), Frontier Conflict: The Australian Experience, pp.88-98. Canberra:
National Museum of Australia.
Clark, I. 1995 Scars in the Landscape: A Register of Massacre Sites in Western
Victoria, 1803-1859. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Clement, C. 2003 Mistake Creek. In R. Manne (ed.), Whitewash: On Keith
Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History, pp.199-214. Melbourne: Black
Inc. Agenda.
Cole, N. 2004 Battle Camp to Boralga: A local study of colonial war on Cape York
Peninsula 1873-1894. Aboriginal History 28:156-189.
Committee for Geographical Names in Australasia 2004 Gazetteer of Australia
2004. Retrieved 20 December 2004 from http://www.ga.gov.au/map/names/.
Cunningham, M.W. 1895 The Pioneering of the River Burdekin, Strathmore Station,
Collinsville: Original Manuscript.
Dalrymple, G.E. 1860 Report of the Proceedings of the Queensland Government
Schooner “Spitfire” in Search of the Mouth of the River Burdekin on the NorthEastern Coast of Australia and of the Exploration of a Portion of that Coast,
Extending from Gloucester Island to Halifax Bay. Brisbane: Government
Printer.
Eck, K., M. Sollenberg and P. Wallensteen 2005 One-sided violence and non-state
conflict. In L. Harbom (ed.), States in Armed Conflict 2003, pp.1-9. Research
Report 70. Sweden: Uppsala University.
Godwin, L. and J.F. Weiner 2006 Footprints of the ancestors: The convergence of
anthropological and archaeological perspectives in contemporary Aboriginal
heritage studies. In B. David, B. Barker and I.J. McNiven (eds), The Social
Archaeology of Australian Indigenous Societies, pp.124-138. Canberra:
Aboriginal Studies Press.
Green, N. 1995 The Forrest River Massacres. Fremantle: Fremantle Arts Centre
Press.
Griffiths, T. 2003 The language of conflict. In B. Attwood and S.G. Foster (eds),
Frontier Conflict: The Australian Experience, pp.133-134. Canberra: National
Museum of Australia.
Harrington, S.P.M. 1997 Unearthing Soviet massacres. Archaeology 50(4):16.
Loos, N.A. 1971 Some Aspects of Aboriginal-European Relations in the Bowen
District 1861-1874. Townsville: Townsville Historical Trust Proceedings.
Loos, N. 1982 Invasion and Resistance: Aboriginal-European Relations on
the North Queensland Frontier 1861-1897. Canberra: Australian National
University Press.
Manne, R. 2003 (ed.) Whitewash: On Keith Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal
History. Melbourne: Black Inc. Agenda.
Moran, R. 1999 Massacre Myth: An Investigation into Allegations Concerning
the Mass Murder of Aborigines at Forrest River, 1926. Bassendean:
Access Press.
13
Morrill, J. 1863 Sketch of a Residence among the Aboriginals of North Queensland
for Seventeen Years, being a Narrative of my Life, Shipwreck, Landing on the
Coast, Residence among the Aboriginals, with an Account of their Manners
and Customs and Mode of Living. Parliamentary Archives, State Library of
Queensland, Brisbane.
Murray, T. and C. Williamson 2003 Archaeology and history. In R. Manne (ed.),
Whitewash: On Keith Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History, pp.311336. Melbourne: Black Inc. Agenda.
Richards, J. 1999 Moreton Telegraph Station: 1902 The Native Police on Cape York
Peninsula. Paper presented at the History of Crime, Policing and Punishment
Conference, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.
Rowland, M. 2004 Myths and non-myths: Frontier ‘massacres’ in Australian history.
The Woppaburra of the Keppel Islands. Journal of Australian Studies 81:39-57.
Scott, D.D. 2003 Oral tradition and archaeology: Conflict and concordance;
Examples from two Indian war sites. Historical Archaeology 37(3):55-65.
Scott, D.D., R.A. Fox, M.A. Connor and D. Harmon 1989 Archaeological Perspectives
on the Battle of the Little Bighorn. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Shackel, P.A. 2003 Archaeology, memory, and landscapes of conflict. Historical
Archaeology 37(3):3-13.
14
Smiley, B. 1999 The Sand Creek Massacre. Archaeology 52(6):22.
Smith, M.A. 2005 Peopling the Cleland Hills: Aboriginal History in Western Central
Australia 1850-1980. Aboriginal History Monograph 12. Canberra: Aboriginal
History Inc.
Summers, J. 2000 The Vision in Hindsight: Parliament and the Constitution.
Research Paper 10. Canberra: Information and Research Services, Department
of the Parlimentary Library.
White, G. 1918 Thirty Years in Tropical Australia. London: The Society for
Promoting Christian Knowledge.
Willey, P. and T. Emerson 1993 The osteology and archaeology of the Crow Creek
Massacre. Plains Anthropologist Memoir 38(145):227-269.
Windschuttle, K. 2000 The myths of frontier massacres in Australian history:
Part 1. Quadrant 44(10):8-21.
Windschuttle, K. 2002 The Fabrication of Aboriginal History: Volume 1: Van
Diemen’s Land 1803-1847. Sydney: Macleay Press.
Yarwood, A.T. and M.J. Knowling 1982 Race Relations in Australia: A History.
Sydney: Methuen Australia.
STONE CONSTRUCTIONS
on Rankin Island, Kimberley, Western Australia
Sue O’Connor¹, Len Zell² and Anthony Barham¹
Abstract
Here we report on a variety of stone constructions that have
been recently recorded and mapped on Rankin Island in the
Kimberley region of Western Australia. The function of one of
these features, a long stone wall, is discussed in the context of
similar built stone features in other areas of northern Australia
and Torres Strait. The possibility that the wall functioned as a
fish trap is examined but dismissed on the basis of the survey
levelling data which indicate that even with a higher relative
sea stand of +1–2m the wall would only have been breached
by king tides on a few days of the year. It is probable that
the wall had associative ‘ritual’ or ‘magic’ functions, although
it is acknowledged that the distinction between ‘ritual’ and
‘subsistence’ is a moot one where increase ceremonies
and hunting magic are regarded as essential for success in
procuring resources.
Introduction
Despite the paucity of systematic archaeological survey, the
Kimberley coast has a large number of built stone constructions
recorded in the Western Australian Register of Aboriginal Sites.
These appear to be mainly located on the small offshore islands that
dot the coastline, although examples from the coastal mainland
are also known. The structures take a variety of forms and include
circular structures with substantial walls made of multiple layers
of stones with small entrances, meandering and straight single
stone lines or walls, parallel stone lines or walls which appear to
form ‘pathways’, cairns and a variety of geometric shapes including
circles, concentric circles, ovals, crescents, dumbbells and stars.
Some of these features are within the current tidal range and
could possibly have functioned as fish traps, however, most are
on headlands and on high ground behind embayments. Many
of these features are found on the small offshore islands of the
Buccaneer and Bonaparte archipelagos. Those on one of the High
Cliffy islands in the Buccaneer Archipelago are comparatively
well-documented, having been described by Blundell (1975:156)
and O’Connor (1987, 1999). Others have been sighted and
photographed during low-level flights including those made by
Coastwatch and have subsequently been reported to the Western
Australia Department of Indigenous Affairs, but have never been
systematically photographed or surveyed on the ground. Here we
report on a variety of stone constructions that have been recently
recorded and mapped on Rankin Island and on attempts to
provide radiometric dating for the construction of one of these
features, a long stone wall, located unusually on a beach.
Figure 1 Rankin Island and the Buccaneer Archipelago.
Figure 2 Aerial view of Rankin Island showing topographic features
Rankin Island
Rankin Island is a small, low island (to 66m), almost square
in shape, located less than 500m from the mainland at 16°18'S,
¹ Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Research School of
Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra,
ACT 0200, Australia
² Faculty of the Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW
2351, Australia
Figure 3 Aerial view of built stone wall and cobble beach on Rankin
Island (Photograph: Len Zell).
15
Figure 4 (a) Datum envelope of main wall based on heights for top and base of main wall. (b) Plan showing GPS track of main stone wall and
selected other stone features, bifaces and blade flaking areas. (c) Position of main wall T1-T5 on Rankin Island.
Figure 5 (a) Levelling data for archaeological features such as main wall and pit projected onto levelled beach transect (A1-A2). (b) Position of
transect A1-A2.
16
Sue O’Connor, Len Zell and Anthony Barham
124°20'E (Figure 1), on the shore of Collier Bay, east of the
Yampi Peninsula in the Kimberley. The island has small open
embayments on all sides and a prominent sandstone cliff on the
southeast side. The coastline comprises rock shelf platforms and
low cliffs, with intervening cobble beaches and mangrove fringes
to low tide mudflats. On the west and southwest shorelines steep
cobble beaches link a low outlying rock outcrop to the main
island, enclosing a low swamp depression behind the cobble
beaches and headland (Figure 2).
Today Rankin Island is covered with a tangled scrub of stunted
Eucalyptus and Acacia with patchy groundcover of grasses and
spinifex. Stinking passionfruit vine (Passiflora foetida) is seasonally
pervasive, making ground surface visibility poor over much of the
stony areas behind the embayments. The low-lying swamp area
on the southwest side of the island is inundated during the wet
season by a combination of freshwater run-off and tidal seepage
and supports a healthy stand of Melaleuca, reeds and other aquaticassociated plants. A mudflat offshore from the southwest beach
supports a small sparse mangrove community (Figure 3).
Geologically Rankin Island consists of well-bedded quartz and
feldspathic sandstones, siltstones and quartz-pebble conglomerates
of the Yampi Formation of the Kimberley Group (Tyler et al.
1992). The strata, laid down 1840–1800 million years ago, exhibit
strong north-south faulting and generally dip west into Collier
Bay (Gellatly and Sofoulis 1973; Sofoulis et al. 1971). Sandstone
outcrops from the headland areas near the cobble beach have been
eroded as flat tabular slabs of rock 30–75cm in length and about
2.5–5cm thick. On the northwest and southwest sides of the island
are beaches formed from water-rolled cobbles and boulders of this
material. These are now eroding locally on the northwest beach,
revealing cemented clast-supported gravel stratigraphy dipping at
angles different from the present shoreface. There are also small
sand beaches on the eastern side of the island.
The Rankin Island Stone Constructions
The Rankin Island stone constructions were first recorded by one
of the authors in 1986 during the course of a general site survey
of the Buccaneer Archipelago (O’Connor 1999). At this time the
constructions were photographed but systematic survey and
mapping were not carried out. Several different types of stone
construction were noted. The most prominent is a long stone wall
which runs southeast-northwest on top of the cobble beach on
the southwest side of the island (Figures 3-4). The Rankin Island
sites were again visited in 2003 after Zell examined aerial obliques
taken in early 2002 showing large pools of freshwater impounded
in the low-lying areas behind the beaches and headlands. The
pools were dry in June 2003 and June 2004, when the site was
next visited. During these excursions the built wall and some of
the other stone features such as depressions or pits in the upper
area of the cobble beach were mapped with GPS (Figure 4b).
Some knapping areas associated with the depressions were noted
and a small cave with midden debris and flaked artefacts on the
surface was recorded on the southeast end of the cobble beach
(Figure 4b).
A permit was obtained from the Mowanjum Community
by Dr Moya Smith of the Western Australian Museum for the
removal of some material suitable for dating from the built
wall and in 2004 another visit was made which allowed further
mapping, photography and collection of several coral skeletons
Figure 6 View looking southeast across built stone wall to the small
cave (Photograph: Len Zell).
from within the wall. Some of the stone bifaces and blade
knapping areas noted above were photographed and located
with GPS (Figure 4b).
In August 2006 the site was visited again with Donny
Woolagoodja, Adrian Woolagoodja-Lane and Alfie Umbagi,
members of the Worora Community. Further surveying and
recording was completed, including surveying the main wall,
a subsidiary wall and a sample of excavated hollows which
contain in situ lithic knapping material. Maximum and
minimum height datums were established for constructed
archaeological features, and tied into one long profile running
the length of the main wall on the beach crest (Figure 4, T1T5) and a second transect orthogonal to the beach ridge axis
(Figure 5, A1-A2), running down the maximum slope of the
beach face at the southeast end of the beach. The levelling data
included observations on tide height. This allows comparison
of the height distributions of the archaeological features with
predicted tidal datums, available for a gauge station 7.5km to
the southeast on Shale Island.
The Stone Wall
The main wall is over 160m in length and stands 50–105cm high
along most of its length (Figures 3-4, 6). The axial line of the
main wall runs on a bearing of 300–310° tracking the present
crest of the cobble beach for the first 100m of its length (Figure
4a, T1-T3), after which the wall veers to the north, behind and
below the beach crest (Figure 4b, T3-T4). At its northwest end,
close to the back beach swamp, the wall curves back on itself
towards the southeast (Figure 4b, T4-T5). Near its southeast end,
the wall splits into two semi-parallel walls, 1.5–3m apart, for a
distance of 16m. Northeast of the wall, lying lower than the beach
crest on the swamp side, are a complex of minor walls, other
stone structures and hollows, unconnected to the main wall (see,
for example, the structures in Figures 7 and 8). These subsidiary
constructions have not been fully surveyed.
The wall is built on top of the cobble beach and is constructed
from the same large water-worn rounded cobbles as comprise
the upper beach. It consists of multiple layers of stacked cobbles,
with the upper wall layer composed of single or paired stones. In
most places along its length the wall is about 1m wide at the base.
Most cobbles are stacked with the long axis vertical, or steeply
17
dipping, giving the wall an imbricated appearance. The angles
of the cobbles suggest construction involved stacking stones at
steep angles. There is no evidence for subhorizontal layering,
or ‘dry stone’ methods of overlapping construction. Occasional
large rounded cobbles are erected as single stones vertically in the
top of the wall (e.g. at point T3, see Figure 4a).
Heights for the base and top of the main wall were levelled
to produce a datum envelope (see Figure 4a). There is a general
decrease in the height of the base of the wall from point T1
(at the junction with the adjacent hillslope) to T3, caused by
a westerly dipping slope on the beach crest and berm. Wall
construction may have compensated for this. Wall height
increases westwards with the beach surface dip, keeping the top
of the surviving wall ±0.2m of horizontal for over 120m and
with highest surviving areas of wall located in depressions (e.g.
at T3). Arguably, this lends support to the idea that construction
attempted to produce a level surface for the top of the wall, and
therefore use as a fish trap. However, beyond T3 the main wall
no longer follows the highest beach crest, and instead tracks
over the spillover area down the backslope of the beach to the
swamp. The wall is generally less than 0.4m in height on the
backslope and in the curve back to the southeast from T4–T5.
To have maintained the level of the main wall into this area (e.g.
as a functional fish trap) the wall construction would have to
have been over 2m high. Neither the remaining wall base width,
nor the absence of collapsed wall stone structure suggest that
this was ever the case.
The Cobble Beach, Tide Levels and Elevations of
Archaeological Features
The highest surfaces of the beach abut the base of the hillslope
to the east, and comprise wave-rolled and subrounded clasts of
large cobble and small boulder size (Gale and Hoare 1991:58-59).
Clast shape strongly reflects the geology of the sandstone (Sneed
and Folk 1958) with high cleavage producing generally large
disc-shaped cobbles and small boulders. Many larger clasts show
natural chipping and chink facets (Gale and Hoare 1991:110-111;
Wentworth 1919, 1925) typical of brittle rock material on beaches.
At the junction of the hillslope base and the beach there are 0.5–
1.5m high erosion scars, indicating slope trimming and erosion
by wave action on very high storm tides. Angular cobbles and
boulders weathering out of bedrock and regolith stratigraphically
overlie and seal rounded beach cobbles, providing datum index
points for highest beach cobble elevations (see Figure 4a, BCmax),
and indicating that slope instability post-dates last active rolling of
clasts on the upper beach by wave action.
Almost all of the main wall, subsidiary wall and excavated
hollows lie within a 2m datum envelope (see Figure 5). This datum
envelope occupies the highest parts of the beach where rafted trees
and other debris are entirely absent, and coral clasts are blackened
from surface exposure and weathering. The highest elevations for
the wall lie close to the maximum observed heights of water-rolled
beach cobbles (see Figure 4a, BCmax). The lowest point on the
main wall (T4) lies at a height of -3.6m relative to survey datum.
This datum envelope for archaeological features is shown projected
onto a levelled beach transect (A1-A2) in Figure 5.
The present shoreface of the cobble beach has a steep slightly
concave surface, which steepens through the Mean High Water Spring
(MHWS) level, terminating in an undercut break of slope above
18
Highest Astronomical Tides (HAT) and just above the uppermost
datums to which rafted wood, trees and debris accumulate during
wet season ‘king tides’. The highest datums of rafted wood equate
to +14.3m on the Tidal Prediction Datum for Shale Island – a level
equivalent to the lowest occurrences of archaeological features on
the beach, and 1.35m above HAT and 2.5m above MHWS. Unlike
sandy beaches on nearby islands, wet season ‘king tide’ rafted
trees and wood are entirely absent across the upper cobble beach
surface and berm. There is therefore coincidence of evidence for in
situ subaerial weathering of coral clasts, survival of archaeological
features and absence of wave inundation – even by extreme tides
and storms – above 14.3m on the beach.
Most of the main wall, and excavated hollows containing
knapped debris, lie between +15–16m relative to the Shale Island
Tidal Prediction Datum. It is therefore clear that the wall could
not function as a fish trap relative to the present tidal regime. The
parsimonious conclusion, which fits well with the archaeological
evidence for no reworking of artefact scatters by waves, is that
the upper beach berm is geomorphologically inactive relative
to present Mean Sea Level (MSL) and associated regimes of
wet season tidal range and storms coincident with high tides.
Archaeological features are preserved because they lie above
the limit of active extreme swash. The stone wall would need
to be positioned over 4m lower, well below the uppermost wet
season wrack marks, to function as a fish trap on the relatively
small number of days high tides lie between ±1m of MHWS.
In such a situation, on a steep cobble beach, a built wall would
require regular maintenance and only survive wave action briefly
after abandonment.
The wall and associated archaeological features occur on a
geomorphologically stable relic part of the present beach where
wave action is absent, but one on which storm wave action was
formerly sufficient to form a cobble-boulder beach and erode
regolith from slopes. The relative position of the upper datum
of rafted wood (i.e extreme storm wave effect) would have to
be 1.2–1.5m higher than present (i.e. 15.5m to 15.8m relative to
Shale Island Tidal Prediction Datum) to allow for wave surge and
cobble rolling across the berm.
Holocene Sea Levels, Storms and Tsunami
Effects and the Relative Age of the Constructed
Stone Wall
These data would fit with several scenarios for past wave regimes
coupled with extreme storm events, and wave surge. The
southwest facing coast of Rankin Island is situated in a relatively
exposed position within Collier Bay. The island occupies a
position on the southern leeward edge of a broad subtidal shelf
lying at about -15–20m below MSL. This is unusually shallow
offshore bathymetry in Collier Bay, and might be important in
relation to cobble debris supply and wave train run-up especially
during the Holocene transgression (e.g. from 9ka to 7.5ka BP).
For storm events coinciding with low tides these depths may
also limit wave energy reaching the shoreline. The area also lies
within the broader geographic context of the western Australian
coast and shelf – which is prone to major storms associated with
tropical cyclones, and also tsunamis. Nott and Bryant (2003)
cite the western Australian coast as Australia’s most tsunamiprone region – locally experiencing 4–6m high tsunami runup inundations twice in the last 30 years. However, there is no
Figure 7 Standing stone (Photograph: Sue O’Connor).
Figure 8 Small rosette-shaped stone construction on cobble beach
(Photograph: Sue O’Connor).
evidence that these tsunami events influenced the archaeology
at Rankin Island.
Nott and Bryant (2003:698) suggest that the largest historically
documented tropical cyclones only produce peak inundation
levels (maximum run-up heights) 5–6m higher than high tide in
northern Australia. They suggest larger events of up to 10m runup height may have occurred before European settlement, and
that cyclonic tidal surges may be further amplified or funnelled
locally. This would suggest that the beach crest and berm at
Rankin Island lies within a datum zone which is potentially
modified by both extreme storm and/or tsunami events but only
when the timing of extreme events coincides with high spring
tides. Features or terrain lying above HAT on coastlines with very
large tidal ranges are, paradoxically, well-protected from extreme
inundations during most states of the tide.
Another possibility is that the relic morphology of the upper
beach reflects a relative fall in MSL (and associated high tidal
process datums) during the Holocene. This does appear to fit the
evidence well as the cobble-boulder clasts have clearly been well
rounded; a condition unlikely to be achieved during occasional
brief catastrophic inundation. Also the cobble beaches represent
very large volumes of cobble and boulder material, are thick wellstratified units (not veneers) and in places are weakly cemented by
downward percolating carbonates. Where seen in eroded section
their bedded internal structures are not conformable with the
present equilibrium cobble shoreface. Samples of molluscs and
coral from cemented beds have been collected for radiocarbon
dating from these exposures.
The balance of geomorphic and stratigraphic evidence
suggests that the cobble beaches originally formed in the midHolocene or earlier (a last interglacial age cannot be excluded)
and that the upper part of the berm is stable, relic and well
above normal storm high tide inundations. This ‘stranded’
morphology may reflect gradual isolation from extreme storm
inundation over time (by a relative fall in MSL) and/or the fact
that catastrophic inundations that coincide with high tides occur
on very low return periods (e.g. 500-several thousand years).
We conclude the stone walls are not functional fish traps and
occur on a geomorphic surface which may not have been wave-
inundated for many hundreds or possibly thousands of years. The
age of the beach and its upper surface morphology is not known,
but represents a maximum probable age of c.7000 BP. Defining the
age of the beach will only provide a general maximum age estimate
for the wall architecture construction. More usefully, defining the
maximum age of the archaeological features, contexts and in situ
knapping assemblages would provide a fairly accurate minimum
date for last wave inundation of the upper beach. This is of more
than just archaeological relevance. Nott and Bryant (2003:705)
suggest that the Western Australian coastline may be subject to
tsunami inundations with run-up heights of 10–30m or greater
on recurrence frequencies of 400–500 years.
An Attempt to Radiometrically Date the Time of
Construction of the Stone Wall
An attempt was made to radiometrically date the time of wall
construction by dating a sample of coral which was embedded
within it (away from the seaward edge). The radiocarbon age
determination was 4569±42 BP (Wk-15537). While it is possible
that the coral was incorporated into the wall as fresh material at
the time the wall was built, which would place construction at
about 4500 years ago, it is much more likely that the coral clast was
one of the many lying resident on the beach surface, and simply
incorporated along with other cobbles. The wall could have been
built at any time after 4500 BP, and fragments of ‘old’ coral from
the beach included in its construction. The date merely provides a
maximum age for construction or repair of the wall.
Zell (2004) had previously hypothesised that the wall may
have been built during a mid-to-late Holocene high sea stand
between 5000 and 4000 cal BP (Baker et al. 2004), to function
as a fish trap. This is not an interpretation which easily fits with
the new tidal level data, as it would only function very briefly at
very high ‘king tidal’ states even if past higher sea-level stands of
+1–2m are invoked.
Stone Constructions and Seascapes: Secular
and Sacred
Other researchers working along the north coast of Western
Australia have nominated similar stone constructions as fish traps.
19
Figure 9 Biface 1 located on Figure 4b (Photograph: Len Zell). The
authors acknowledge that moving artefacts to photograph them is
not desirable, however, this is the only available photograph of this
specimen.
At Cape Range Peninsula, Przywolnik (2002:315-323) recorded
a low stone wall that today is over 1500m inland of the high tide
zone. The limestone boulders comprising the wall were encrusted
with deposits of marine bivalves which had a very weathered
appearance (Przywolnik 2002:317) and on this basis Przywolnik
suggested that the wall had been built as a fish trap during a midHolocene higher sea stand. In the case of the Cape Range stone
wall, dating multiple samples of the marine shellfish adhering to
the wall would help resolve the time of construction. If the dates
were tightly clustered around 5000–4500 BP, the proposed phase
of a higher stand in MSL, this would be compelling evidence that
the wall had been constructed at, or prior to, this time and been
regularly submerged. However, it would still not demonstrate
that the wall was built to function as a fish trap. Conversely, if
the dates were late Holocene or had a spread of ages this would
indicate that the wall had been built using limestone retrieved
from the subtidal zone, possibly over a considerable period.
Unfortunately the cobbles forming the Rankin Island wall are
clean of any marine growths which could potentially be dated.
While a mid-Holocene age for construction of the Rankin wall
remains a possibility, the condition of the wall suggests that it is
unlikely to have great antiquity. The wall itself is largely intact
with little collapse evident.
Other possible functions for the wall need to be considered.
Rock arrangements are widespread on coastal islands around
tropical northern Australia. In Torres Strait stone arrangements
variously include effigy forms known to depict animal totems
(e.g. crocodile, turtle) (Harris and Ghaleb 1987:27, 32, Plates 5a5b; Neal 1989:Photographs 4-5), land or territory boundaries
(Barham et al. 2004:22-29; Laade 1973); cairns acting as lookouts
for dugong or turtle (Ghaleb 1990; McIntyre-Tamwoy and
Harrison 2004; Moore 1979;) and stone lines and trackways
associated with gardening activities and settlement areas (e.g.
Harris and Ghaleb 1987; Laade 1973; Neal 1989) on both lowlying coastal margins and high ground situations. In Torres
20
Strait some stone arrangements comprise extensive spatial
complexes, some on ridge-tops remote from settlements (e.g. at
Argan on Badu) (David et al. 2004), while others co-locate within
complex historically abandoned landscapes of shell midden
mounds, wells, garden mounds and dugong bone mounds, as
at Gumu on Mabuiag (see Harris and Ghaleb 1987:Figure 4).
Dating of shallow stratigraphy banked against wall structures at
Argan (David et al. 2004) and shell-rich mounds co-associated
with stone arrangements at Gumu (Harris and Ghaleb 1987)
suggest construction within the last 600–1000 years. Many
stone arrangements relate to ‘magic’ and ritual, but in Torres
Strait, and northern Australian insular seascapes more generally,
distinctions between ‘subsistence’ and ‘ritual’ sites blur rapidly
given the known significance of totemism, ‘increase’ ritual and
magic both in hunting turtle and dugong, and in plant gathering
and use (Barham et al. 2004:23; McNiven 2003; McNiven and
Feldman 2003).
To the back of the built wall and in other areas of the cobble
beach are structures which cannot be explained as having secular
functions. These include several small cairns supporting large
standing stones (Figure 7) and a circular rosette-like structure
(Figure 8). Large numbers of these non-secular or ritual stone
constructions are found on High Cliffy Island and in other parts
of the Buccaneer Archipelago and there is restricted ethnographic
information pertaining to the ritual function of some of these
structures. This might also be seen as lending support to the view
that the Rankin wall may have had a ritual function. Although
many of the stone constructions associated with ceremonial/
ritual activities are double walls or ‘pathways’, variations on
single stone lines have been recorded. Most of these are of sizes
and shapes and in locations that would mitigate against their
interpretation as ‘functional’ fish traps, although there is always
the possibility they may be ‘ritual’ fish traps.
Depressions, Quarrying Pits and Patterns of
Cobble Reduction
Cursory surveys of the cobble beach on the landward side of the
wall revealed the presence of many depressions in the cobble
surface. The depressions vary in size but are roughly circular and
approximately 1–1.5m in diameter, with a raised rim resulting
from where the stones dug from the depression have been placed
or discarded to the side. The depressions are often up to 1m deep
(see Figure 4a, C1-C4; Figure 5a, C4). Knapping debris was found
in the bottom of many of the depressions as well as concentrated
on the cobble beach around them, however, this is not always
the case. Some depressions have little or no knapping debris
associated with them. The sandstone from which the cobbles are
formed is extremely hard, resembling quartzite, and eminently
suitable for knapping. Small quantities of edible mollusca are
also found in some depressions. The upper beach is otherwise
devoid of shell material.
McBryde’s (1984) description of the shallow circular or oval
pits resulting from mining greenstone at Mt William perhaps
gives some insight into the process of formation of the pits
recorded on Rankin. McBryde describes how wooden sticks were
used to extract the rock from seams and how extracted blocks
were then selected and knapped. The continuous removal of rock
from the same area resulted in depressions in the ground and
flaking debris:
rocks such as basalt or dolerite. Perhaps the bifaces manufactured
on the small islands of the Buccaneer Archipelago where sources
of volcanic rock were not available were a multipurpose tool like
those reported by Tindale for Bentinck; perhaps they were even
hafted. Further in situ investigation of the technology of these
bifaces is planned for the future.
Many of the circular mining pits are several metres in diameter
and even now over a metre deep. Most have associated flaking
floors, and often in the centre an undisturbed slab of outcrop, left
to serve as an anvil stone for rough shaping of the mined material
(McBryde 1984:273).
Whilst the operations at Rankin were obviously on a smaller
scale than those at the Mt William quarry, the similarities would
indicate that the Rankin pits likewise resulted from the quest for
suitable raw material, as cobbles were dug from the beach, some
selected for knapping, and others moved to the side.
The resulting knapping debris indicates that two different
processes or pathways of reduction were taking place using the
quarried cobbles. Some cobbles have been bifacially reduced
over the entire surface (Figure 9). Other cobbles have been
knapped by removing a flake to produce a flat striking platform
and subsequently large blades have been removed from this
platform. The two sequences of core reduction are independent
as the blades could not have been derived from the bifacial cores
at any stage of reduction. The flakes removed from the bifacial
cores are as wide or wider than they are long. The blades struck
from the single platform core are by definition at least twice as
long as they are wide. Interestingly, no blade cores were recorded
amongst the abundant manufacturing debris on Rankin Island
but this may be due to limited time spent recording.
Similar bifacial cores to those found on Rankin Island were
recorded by one of the authors on McCleay Island during
reconnaissance of islands in the Buccaneer Archipelago in
1985 (O’Connor 1999). These were also made on cobbles and
found on a cobble beach. However, such artefacts have never
been recovered from stratified contexts in the Kimberley. In
all instances where diagnostic features remain on the bifacially
worked implements from stratified contexts, it is clear that the
bifaces have been produced on large flakes or blades. On only
a few archaeological specimens was retouch so completely
obscuring that it was not possible to discern whether the
implement was made on a core or a flake/blade, but the length,
width and thickness of these examples would suggest the latter
(O’Connor 1999). In an ethnographic context Mitchell (1949:75)
reports small bifacial hafted axes from the Kimberley region
and states that these hafted bifaces do not have ground edges.
Unfortunately he provides no detail on the location or context
of these artefacts, their hafting or use.
Elsewhere in northern Australia, bifaces made on cores are
reported from the Barkly Tableland, Northern Territory, and the
Edith River area, near Mt Todd (Anon. 1979). The Barkly Tableland
series is quite variable in length; from 63mm to 175mm with most
(75%) falling between 73mm and 130mm. The Rankin Island
bifaces would fit comfortably within this distribution. Tindale
(1977:260-261) also records the manufacture and use of handheld bifacially flaked cores which he calls ‘the tjilangand bifacial
fist-axe’ by Kaiadilt men on Bentinck Island. As the name implies,
these were hand-held and used for a variety of tasks including
trimming driftwood poles for making rafts, cutting of ‘shorter
lengths of hardwood in the making of weapons such as throwing
clubs’ and old ones were used for hammering oysters off rocks.
Ethnographically, hafted axes in the Kimberley were partially
or fully edge-ground and may more properly be described as
edge-ground hatchets. They are invariably made on volcanic
A Raised Circular Stone Construction
A low circular walled structure was recorded on the north side
of Rankin Island on a low headland overlooking the coast. The
walls were constructed from naturally fractured tabular blocks of
sandstone which form a ready-made building material. Although
the walls have collapsed, the location, shape and size of the Rankin
structure is similar to the circular walled structures reported from
one of the High Cliffy islands (O’Connor 1999:113-117). The High
Cliffy circular structures were also made from naturally exfoliated
tabular slabs of sandstone consecutively placed to form layered
dry stone walls. The walls were substantial; up to 1m in height and
the structures had small entrances up to 0.75m across and had
marine shell and extensive flaked stone artefact scatters. One of
the structures on High Cliffy (HC-2) had accumulated sediment
within its walls and was excavated. The excavation revealed fish and
turtle bone, marine shell and hundreds of flaked chert artefacts
within the enclosure (O’Connor 1999:115). A broken baler shell
embedded in the topsoil within the structure was dated to 370±50
BP (Wk-1095). On the basis of the artefacts and food remains
associated with them, and information provided by Aboriginal
traditional owners and custodians, the High Cliffy circular
walled structures were interpreted as the bases of small huts or
windbreaks (Blundell 1975:156; O’Connor 1987, 1999:113-115).
Anthropological information had been obtained for examples of
circular constructions found in the Kimberley coastal mainland
on the Mitchell Plateau which also indicated their use as house
bases (O’Connor 1987). The Rankin circular structure is less
complete than most of those on High Cliffy, but may have had a
similar function.
The single radiocarbon date on shell from the HC-2 structure
does not inform on the antiquity of construction of such
structures, but does indicate that they probably remained in use
into the European contact period in this region. The fact that
glass and European materials are not found in association with
the structures suggests that their use may have been discontinued
by ‘mission times’ when European raw materials became more
readily accessible. The High Cliffy open site (HC-3) was used
as a camp site during school holidays when the Port George
IV/Kunmunya Missions were in operation. It contains glass
Kimberley points, fragments of clay pipes and other items
indicating European contact such as shell and bone buttons
(O’Connor 1999:112-113).
Rankin Cave
At the southeast end of the cobble beach on which the wall
is built is a small cave (Figure 4b, 6). The floor of the cave is
approximately 7m wide and 6m from entrance to back wall at its
maximum dimensions and is covered with a fine silty sediment
and large ‘slab-like’ rocks which have exfoliated from the roof
and walls, as well as some water-worn cobbles. Pockets of midden
shell are found in low points in the cave floor and between rocks.
The aspect of the cave is westerly. On the visit undertaken by
21
Zell (2004) the cave floor deposits were probed and found to
have a maximum depth of 26cm. At present neither the deposit
sequence nor the height datum of the cave floor deposit is known.
Future work is planned which will aim to establish whether the
cave deposits provide a chronology which might assist in refining
age estimates for construction of wall features on the beach, and
associated lithic knapping events and shellfish discard within
hollows on the cobble beach berm.
Conclusions
The coastline of the Buccaneer and Bonaparte Archipelagos
preserves a wealth of archaeological sites, including many different
forms of stone construction. In the past archaeologists have been
deterred from investigating these sites due to the low probability
of being able to date them, assign function to them or integrate
them with the broader archaeological record. Recordings of
these structures based on ground survey and mapping are rare.
The above discussion indicates that it may be possible to acquire
spatial and topographic information about these constructions
that can assist with the interpretation of their age and function,
even when dating materials are absent. By surveying the Rankin
stone wall we were able to determine that the wall could not have
functioned effectively as a fish trap even in the event of a relative
sea-level stand of +1–2m higher than the present.
Acknowledgements
Mowanjum Community are thanked for permission to visit the site
and collect the coral specimen for dating from the stone wall, Dr
Moya Smith, Western Australian Museum, is thanked for arranging
the permits, Aurora Expeditions and Coral Princess Cruises for
logistical support and Mike Cusack is especially acknowledged for
his GPS mapping of the stone wall. Adam Brumm (Department of
Archaeology and Natural History, Australian National University)
is thanked for pointing out the reference on the Barkly Tableland
bifaces. Sophie Collins (Department of Archaeology and Natural
History, Australian National University) assisted with the drawn
figures and annotated the photographs.
References
Anon. 1979 Bifaces in the Barkly Tablelands. The Artefact 4(3 & 4):85-94.
Barham, A.J., M.J. Rowland and G. Hitchcock 2004 Torres Strait bepotaim: An
overview of archaeological and ethnoarchaeological investigations and
research. In I.J. McNiven and M. Quinell (eds), Torres Strait Archaeology and
Material Culture, pp.1-72. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, Cultural
Heritage Series 3(1). Brisbane: Queensland Museum.
Baker, R.G.V., R.J. Howarth and P.G. Flood 2004 An oscillating Holocene sea level?:
Revisiting Rottnest Island, Western Australia and the Fairbridge Eustatic
Hypothesis. Journal of Coastal Research 42:403-414.
Blundell, V.J. 1975 Aboriginal Adaptation in Northwest Australia. Unpublished PhD
thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
David, B., I.J. McNiven, Mura Badulgal (Torres Strait Islanders) Corporation
Committee, J. Crouch and L. Brady 2004 The Argan stone arrangement
complex, Badu: Initial results from Torres Strait. Australian Archaeology
58:1-6.
Gale, S.J. and P.G. Hoare 1991 Quaternary Sediments: Petrographic Methods for the
Study of Unlithified Rocks. London: Belhaven Press.
Gellatly, D.C. and J. Sofoulis 1973 Yampi, Western Australia. 1:250,000 Geological
Series – Explanatory Notes. Sheet SE/51-3 International Index. Canberra:
Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics.
22
Ghaleb, B. 1990 An Ethnoarchaeological Study of Mabuiag Island, Torres
Strait, Northern Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, University College
London, London.
Harris, D.R. and B. Ghaleb 1987 Archaeological and ecological investigations
on Mabuiag Island. In A.J. Barham and D.R. Harris (eds), Archaeological
and Palaeoenvironmetal Investigations in Western Torres Strait, Northern
Australia. Unpublished report to the Research and Exploration Committee
of the National Geographic Society on ‘Part IIB of The Torres Strait Research
Project July-October 1985’.
Laade, W. 1973 Notes on the clans, economy, trade, and traditional law of the Murray
Islanders, Torres Straits. Journal de la Société des Oceanistes 29(30):151-167.
McBryde, I. 1984 Kulin greenstone quarries: The social context of production and
distribution for the Mount William site. World Archaeology 16(2):267-285.
McIntyre-Tamwoy, S. and R. Harrison 2004 Monuments to colonialism? Stone
arrangements, tourist cairns and turtle magic at Evans Bay, Cape York.
Australian Archaeology 59:31-42.
McNiven, I.J. 2003 Saltwater people: Spiritscapes, maritime rituals and the
archaeology of Australian indigenous seascapes. World Archaeology
35(3):329-349.
McNiven, I.J. and R. Feldman 2003 Ritual orchestration of seascapes: Hunting
magic and dugong bone mounds in Torres Strait, NE Australia. Cambridge
Archaeological Journal 13(2):169-194.
Mitchell, S.R. 1949 Stone-Age Craftsmen: Stone Tools and Camping Places of the
Australian Aborigines. Melbourne: Tait Book Co. Pty Ltd.
Moore, D.R. 1979 Islanders and Aborigines at Cape York. Canberra: Australian
Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Neal, R.A. 1989 An Archaeological Inspection of Alternative Telecom Locations on
Mabuiag and Yam Islands, Torres Strait. Report No. 013. Unpublished report
to Landscapes and Cultural Appreciation Sub-programme, Department of
Community Services and Ethnic Affairs, Brisbane.
Nott, J. and E. Bryant 2003 Extreme marine inundations (tsuanmis?) of coastal
Western Australia. The Journal of Geology 111:691-706.
O’Connor, S. 1987 The stone house structures of High Cliffy Island, northwest
Kimberley, Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 25:30-39.
O’Connor, S. 1999 30,000 Years of Aboriginal Occupation: Kimberley, North West
Australia. Terra Australis 14. Canberra: ANH Publications and Centre for
Archaeological Research, Australian National University.
Przywolnik, K. 2002 Patterns of Occupation in Cape Range Peninsula (WA) over
the last 36,000 years. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Archaeology,
University of Western Australia, Perth.
Sneed, E.D. and R.L. Folk 1958 Pebbles in the lower Colorado River, Texas: A study
in particle morphogenesis. The Journal of Geology 66:114-150.
Sofoulis, J., D.C. Gellatly, G.M. Derrick, R.A. Farbridge and C.M. Morgan 1971 The
Geology of the Yampi 1:250,000 Sheet area SE/51-3 Western Australia. Record:
1971/1. Unpublished report to Department of National Development, Bureau
of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics.
Tindale, N.B. 1977 Further report on the Kaiadilt people of Bentinck Island, Gulf
of Carpentaria, Queensland. In J. Allen, J. Golson and R. Jones (eds), Sunda
and Sahul: Prehistoric Studies in Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia,
pp.247-273. London: Academic Press.
Tyler, I.M. and T. J. Giffin with a contribution from P. Playford 1992 Explanatory
Notes on the Yampi 1:250,000 Geological Sheet Western Australia. 2nd ed.
Record 1992/8. Perth: Geological Survey of Western Australia.
Wentworth, C.K. 1919 A laboratory and field study of cobble abrasion. The Journal
of Geology 27:507-521.
Wentworth, C.K. 1925 Chink-faceting: A new process of pebble-shaping. The
Journal of Geology 33:260-267.
Zell, L. 2004 Rankin Island Report. Unpublished report to Western Australian
Museum, University of New England and Aurora Expeditions.
TO MAKE A POINT:
Ethnographic Reality and the Ethnographic and Experimental
Replication of Australian Macroblades Known as Leilira
Kim Akerman
Abstract
Long macroblades, generally known in Australia as ‘leilira‘
blades and created by direct percussion, were used as
knives and spear points in many parts of northern and
Central Australia until very recently. By the 1960s, however,
it is clear that there were no Indigenous knappers remaining
who could produce such blades in a regular and consistent
manner. There are very few ethnographic accounts of the
manufacture of these blades and those that do exist generally
lack technological detail that is useful to those wishing to
understand the reduction processes involved in their creation.
More recent studies involving Indigenous knappers have
provided important insights into many concepts relating to
stone as a ‘living entity’, focusing on power, the significance
of the blades, access to quarries and other social phenomena
rather than successfully demonstrating the technology itself.
It is apparent that, dependent on the form of the raw material,
a number of different techniques were used to produce these
blades. This paper seeks to examine the Australian literature
relevant to the production of leilira blades and, drawing on
experimental work, to consider the technological factors
relevant to the knapping process.
Introduction
‘Leilira’ is the term many Australian archaeologists give to
elongate flakes and flake blades generally made of quartzite or
silcrete. The term derives from the Arrernte (Aranda) name
for the resin-hafted flake knives carried by men and used for
ceremonial purposes and as a weapon. Lalira is the name given
by Spencer and Gillen (1899:652) to ‘the large stone knives made
of quartzite’. These knives are differentiated from smaller knives
thus: ‘The longest free blade which we have measured is 13 cm.,
and in the case of the larger knives from 10 to 12 cm. may be
regarded as the limits of size within which they all of them fall’
(Spencer and Gillen 1899:592). The term ‘free blade’ refers to
the visible portion of a hafted specimen. ‘In addition to these
large stone knives which are but rarely indeed seen, there are
smaller ones made for ordinary use which, so far as their form is
concerned are simply small and often roughly made specimens
of the first kind described’ (Spencer and Gillen 1899:593). The
longest blade recorded by Spencer and Gillen hafted as a Central
Australian pick had an exposed length of 225mm and was 60mm
wide. Three spearheads in my own collection are 175mm, 185mm
and 230mm in length respectively.
McCarthy (1976:35) describes leilira as ‘either a long pointed
blade triangular in section, or an elongate rectangular blade
trapezoid in section. The striking platform is plain and high
angled … They range in size up to 20cm long. Most are made
of cream to reddish quartzite but slate and other stones are
4 Dorset Street, Moonah, TAS 7009, Australia
used to make them.’ I have seen blades exceeding 240mm and
Mulvaney and Kamminga (1999:241) refer to lengths exceeding
300mm. These authors also give a lower limit as 50mm. In this
paper I address only the production of blades over 120mm as
the knapping of the longer blades involves a distinctly different
set of technological considerations from those required in the
production of smaller pointed flakes and blades.
It is clear that in some instances the term ‘leilira’ is applied
inappropriately to any pointed flake made from silcrete or
quartzite and conversely that any pointed flake end-hafted as a
knife or spearhead may also be incorrectly termed a ‘leilira’. Jones
and Johnson (1985:58) confuse the nomenclature by referring
to rectilinear scrapers from western Arnhem Land, made by
retouching quartzite blades, as ‘leilira’. While the blades from
which the scrapers are presumed to have been made may or may
not have originally been suitable for spearheads or knives, the
use of the term ‘leilira’ is inappropriate in this instance. This
inappropriate use of the term is surprising as, in the same paper,
the authors refer to a large unifacially trimmed blade of quartzite
as a unifacial point, rather than recognising its affinity to leilira
blades in the accepted sense of the word (Jones and Johnson
1985:75).
The problem of nomenclature has been recognised by Casey
et al. (1968) and reiterated by Graham and Thorley (1996:78-79).
The latter reference is currently the most detailed study of the
hafted Central Australian blade knives available. Unfortunately,
however, there are several problematic features about this paper
that will be elaborated on below.
In Central Australia, extending eastwards into western
Queensland, the blades were hafted and used as ‘men’s knives’
and ‘women’s knives’; hafted in a split stick or bent-wood handle
as ‘fighting picks’; and were also used as spearheads (Figure 1).
There seems to be a clear relationship in terms of the amount of
retouch present between blades used as spearheads, pick heads,
women’s knives and men’s knives. Of 91 hafted men’s knives
examined in the collections of the South Australian Museum
only 13 examples bore signs of retouch (Mulvaney 1969:69-70).
Women’s knives bear considerable modification on the margins
and the distal end – often resembling hafted Upper Palaeolithic
endscrapers with retouched lateral margins. Blades used for
spearheads and picks may also bear considerable marginal
retouch and have the area about the striking platform reduced
to facilitate hafting. In relation to marginal retouch, Warner
(1931:494, 1969:179) in a detailed record of a series of conflicts
that made up a complex feud, describes how one protagonist
‘knocked off little pieces from the edge of his stone spearhead. He
chipped it only on one side to make it very sharp’.
In the Kimberley the blades appear to have been used
as unhafted knives while in Arnhem Land they primarily
functioned as spearheads. Thomson collected examples of resinhafted blade knives furnished with bark sheaths and also hafted
23
To Make a Point: Ethnographic Reality and the Ethnographic and Experimental Replication of Australian Macroblades
a
c
d
b
Not to scale.
e
Not to scale.
Figure 1 Hafted and unhafted leilira blades (after Akerman 1976b:127). (a) Unhafted spearheads, northwest Queensland (Roth 1904:
Plate VI). Scale=5cm. (b) Hafted knives, northwest Queensland (Roth 1904:Plate XVII). Scale=5cm. (c) Hafted knife, Lawn Hill, Queensland (left) and
unhafted spearhead, Oenpelli, Northern Territory (right) (McCarthy 1976:Figures 16-3, 16-4). Scale=5cm. (d) Blade spearheads, eastern Arnhem
Land, Northern Territory (Thompson 1961:106). Not to scale. (e) Hafted blade knives, Tennant Creek, Central Australia (Spencer and Gillen 1912:
Figures 222-227, 229). Not to scale.
24
Kim Akerman
blade picks while in Arnhem Land in 1935, but these are the
only examples from the area to my knowledge, and may well
represent commissioned items. On the Dampierland Peninsula
of the Kimberley Region leilira blades, often with one edge
naturally-backed (that is with one margin having an edge angle
greater than 60° and often retaining cortex), were used to butcher
dugong and turtle (Akerman 1976a).
While there has been some work done on the social and
economic roles of the blades within the Indigenous cultural
milieus where they are found (Allen 1997; Murgatroyd 1991;
Paton 1994) there is little information or knowledge recorded
about the technological aspects of their production. Some
information dates from the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries while other information derives from salvage
ethnoarchaeological work undertaken in the latter half of the
twentieth century.
It is my intention to examine the evidence available in the
literature and in film archives to show how technological
observation in the recent ethnographic present may not always
reveal the true nature of technological understanding and ability
that existed in the traditional ethnographic past.
Accounts of Large Blade Production
Figure 2 Knapping stone at Camooweal (after Roth 1904:Plate III/23).
The earliest report of the knapping techniques used to
manufacture knife blades is found in Roth (1904:16-18, Figures
23-24). Roth, working in far western Queensland, describes and
illustrates diagrammatically the flaking by direct percussion of
flakes and blades from a hand-held pyramidal core (Figure 2).
His description is worthy of repeating as it does provide some
details, albeit in a convoluted form, that can be understood by
lithic technologists:
The core is of andesite, quartzite or chert, is loosely fixed by the
digits in the left palm dropped more or less backwards, and is
thus provided, when struck, with a certain amount of resiliency.
This method of holding it allows of the surface, about to be
struck, being conveniently held at the necessary angle: another
advantage is that the flake which is removed, as will shortly be
described, from its under-surface is prevented falling to the
ground, and so becoming accidentally fractured … Amongst
necessary essentials for good flaking is that the particular area
of core to be struck must be comparatively flat, and held in such
manner that it is at an acute angle with the line of direction in
which the blow falls: in cases where its natural contour does not
allow of its being maintained in the hand at the requisite angle,
it may be deliberately broken by indiscriminate tapping until the
object in view is obtained … Another important point is that
the special portion of core to be properly struck must be along
its lower edge so that, provided the blow be successful, a flake
becomes separated from its under-surface, and thus comes to lie
in the palm of the hand … the line of cleavage being apparently
at a comparatively open angle with the line of striking (Roth
1904:16).
From Roth’s description and further references to the locale
in which he observed the knapping process, it seems quite
likely that he was in fact watching the manufacture of chert
rather than silcrete or quartzite flakes. This view is reinforced
by a photograph in McCarthy (1976:Figure 1) taken by Roth
and showing an Aboriginal man at Camooweal, Queensland,
preparing to knap (while standing) what appears to be a core of
the banded chert ubiquitous to the region. In the same volume
McCarthy also provides a photograph of a chert core with a
series of five conjoinable flakes that have been knapped from it
(McCarthy 1976:Figure 64); these were also collected by Roth at
Camooweal. Roth notes that it was at Camooweal that he saw 300
flakes being removed before a ‘passably’ suitable one for a good
knife was obtained (Roth 1904:16). My own experience of the
Barkly Tableland chert nodules (Camooweal being at the eastern
margin of the Tableland) is that they are extremely varied in both
quality of the material, both fine- and coarse-grained zones may
appear in a single nodule, and also often have concealed flaws
in the form of unresolved fractures. Roth seems to distinguish
between what he terms ‘lancet flakes’ made of chert (a material
from which flake adzes, or tulas, were also made) and those of
other suitable stone, which have a more restricted occurrence in
the region.
In a recent publication Moore (2003a) illustrates and describes
chert blade cores and blades from the Camooweal area. Moore
identifies two knapping strategies used to create the pointed
blades/flakes used as cutting elements in the hafted knives of
the region (Moore 2003a:25, 27-28). In a further paper Moore
expands on the Camooweal chert cobble-based blade technology
and also provides a Roth photograph of an Aboriginal knapper at
Camooweal in the act of striking flakes from a split cobble core
(Moore 2003b:40-41). This photograph shows the same knapper
as that in the photograph in McCarthy (1976) referred to earlier
and appears to have been taken subsequent to it. The hand holding
the hammerstone is now in the follow through position. The
removed flake or blade is held in the third, fourth and fifth fingers
which loosely cup the core. Unfortunately, the accompanying line
drawing in Moore’s paper, a drawing taken from Roth’s original
publication, is incorrectly oriented and needs to be rotated 90° to
the left to make sense of the original image.
25
Figure 3 Tutjero preparing to remove a secondary decortication flake
and set up a ridge prior to removing a primary blade, Ngillipidji,
Arnhem Land (Photograph: D.F. Thomson. Courtesy of Mrs D.M.
Thomson and Museum Victoria).
Figure 4 Tutjero examining a hafted blade spear-point; before him
are a range of blades, most without secondary retouch. These are
presumably a collection of blades made in the initial selection process
– the ‘knapper’s choice’. Other blades are already carefully wrapped
in soft bark in order to facilitate transportation, Ngillipidji, Arnhem
Land (Photograph: D.F. Thomson. Courtesy of Mrs D.M. Thomson and
Museum Victoria).
Banded chert blades and flakes were commonly hafted as
knives on the Barkly Tableland of the Northern Territory and
adjacent areas of Queensland, including the Camooweal area.
They were, however, generally smaller (with lengths <80mm and
widths <40mm) than the large blades made of silcrete, quartzite,
andesite and the silicified tuffs and felsites used elsewhere for the
same purpose and, more specifically, for spearheads and picks.
Spencer and Gillen (1912:374-375) described the knapping
of leilira blades by a Warramunga craftsman at Renner Springs
in northern Central Australia:
In October 1935 the anthropologist Donald Thomson
visited the quarry at Ngillipidji on the Walker River in eastern
Arnhem Land. This quarry of distinctive, fine-grained quartzite
with hues of greyish-pink and purple was the reputed source
of fine leilira blades that were exchanged widely across eastern
and central Arnhem Land. While Thomson’s (1935:1-3) notes
are unfortunately brief in the description of the actual knapping
practice they do give some insights into the quarrying techniques
used and also the manner in which blades were selected
for introduction into the socio-economic arena of the area.
Photographs taken by Thomson at the time show the nature of
the quarry, the master-knapper Tutjero setting up a huge core
as it rests in front of him and also Tutjero examining hafted
and unhafted examples of his work (Figures 3-4). Figure 3 is of
particular interest as it shows Tutjero sitting to one side of the core
and facing it, about to drive off a large secondary decortication
flake. The intersection of this flake with the existing flake scar on
the core face will set up the initial median ridge and readjust the
core face to the correct angle, in terms of the striking platform,
for successful blade removal on the third blow. It can be seen that
the flake about to be struck will fall distal-end first into the sand
ahead of, and below the core. The blow will be a forceful one
in order to remove a large flake that clears the face of the core
of cortex. Creating a plunging flake best ensures that the core
face is cleared at this stage and sets up the core face morphology
for blade removal. The direction and force of the blow used in
this operation is not the same as that used to remove the blades
proper. The figure also provides a clear indication of the nature
of the hammerstone.
The raw material at Ngillipidji occurs in the form of large
boulders of quartzite that are covered with a cortex that may be
>100mm thick in parts. These boulders were excavated from the
First of all he chose a small lump of quartzite which measured
about eight inches in length and, roughly, six in diameter, the
surface at one end being approximately flat, whilst towards the
other it tapered away. The latter was placed on the ground and
then, holding the block upright in his left hand, he gave a series of
sharp blows with a little quartzite stone held in his right hand.
The first two blows were in spots close together, just within the
margin, each resulting in the detachment of a flake, in such a way
as to form two surfaces that ran down the face of the block and
met towards the lower part … By means of a third blow … a flake
like the one figured may be made.
This description is important, as it is the first reference to the
use of the ground to rest or support the core during the knapping
process. While smaller blades can be knapped from hand held cores,
larger blades require cores of greater length and mass than can be
comfortably held in the hand. While long, low mass cores can be
hand-held, the hand alone cannot provide sufficient support to stop
the core rolling at the moment of impact and lead to the successful
removal of a larger blade (i.e. one with a length >120mm).
26
Kim Akerman
ground with the aid of a wooden digging stick and rolled to a
suitably clear area for reduction. A large and heavy hammerstone
was used to create the core and remove the blades. Thomson
(1935) notes that at least 70% of the flakes struck were rejected,
the craftsman only selecting the most perfect examples for his
own use. However, Thomson makes it quite clear that other
visitors to the quarry may be given permission by the traditional
owners to fossick among the debitage for reject blades which they
collected for their own use: ‘Some of these though rejected by the
craftsmen, were still fine spearheads’(Thomson 1935:2). It must
be remembered that a significant portion of the debitage would
consist of both decortication flakes and also flakes removed in
setting up the appropriate core morphology for successful blade
removal – factors that are also not taken into consideration
by Roth when he describes a 1 in 300 success/selection rate at
Camooweal. It is also likely that there would be a need for a
greater degree of retouch to bring these ‘seconds’ into a condition
suitable for use.
Elkin (1970: opposite page 122) provides two photographs of
men in Arnhem Land knapping blades from silcrete or quartzite
cores that are held in the left hand (Figure 5). Each knapper holds,
in his right hand, a medium-sized much-battered hammerstone.
Elkin’s unfortunately undated images clearly show the use of a
knapping technique similar to that described by Roth.
There is, however, in front of one of these craftsmen a much
larger core that was probably knapped while resting on the
ground; a long negative scar runs the full length of the core and
beside it, resting against a piece of wood, are several similarlysized blades. To his immediate right and beside his ankle is a
much larger boulder hammerstone that would probably weigh
more than 1.5kg (Figure 5). Smaller blades and pointed flakes
are possibly derived from the hand-held core. All of these
blades, regardless of whether large or small would be classed as
‘leilira’ by most Australian archaeologists. Staff at the University
Archives, University of Sydney, located this photograph and
other associated images. The series of images was photographed
at Roper River in 1952; the knapper is not identified. Another,
poorer quality image in the series shows the knapper striking the
larger core as it rests on the ground facing him.
It is clear that in terms of technology, the term ‘leilira’ is used
very loosely to describe blades made by either of two techniques.
In the first, the core is hand-held and the blades necessarily fall
into the smaller end of the size range. The second technique relies
on large cores, which are rested or supported on the ground and
from which both large and small blades may be knapped with the
primary intention being the creation of large blades.
A further problem contributing, I feel, to the problem of
‘leilira’ nomenclature, is a result of poor understanding of the
properties of different materials from which blades have been
knapped. For example, Graham and Thorley (1996:78, 83-86)
discuss the silcrete/quartzite blades commonly referred to
as ‘leilira’. Their focal site is, however, a quarry for a cherty to
chalcedonic material. While it is true that there are examples
of hafted chalcedony blade knives, they are not as common as
hafted blades of silcrete or quartzite. I am not aware of any early
ethnographic examples of chalcedonic blade spear points or pick
blades. In the 1960s and 1970s chalcedonic blades salvaged from
archaeological quarries were hafted for sale to staff and visitors
at a number of Aboriginal settlements including Yuendumu in
Figure 5 Yolngu man knapping blades and points of quartzite, Roper
River (Photograph: University Archives, University of Sydney).
Central Australia. In the vicinity of Halls Creek in the southeast
Kimberley there are a number of these prehistoric chalcedonic
blade quarries. Older Aboriginal people denied that their
products were used in the ethnographic past. It was rare that
these blades were as large as those produced of silcrete, which
were known to have been traded into the area from the southeast.
During one field trip in the Tanami, when the party I was with
came across an outcrop of silcrete, I took the opportunity to
make a large leilira blade. One of the younger Aboriginal men on
the trip asked if he could have the blade to haft as a fighting knife.
When asked why he did not use a metal knife he pointed out the
fine micro-serrate margins of the silcrete blade and said ‘This
knife talks to you. When a person is being cut across the back
[a permissible stroke when dueling with knives] the knife talks.
That person hears ‘tje-tje-tje-tje’ as the knife cuts him’. I believe
that in most instances the production of the chalcedonic blades
was prehistoric and that generally these blades were smaller
than those made from silcrete. A distinction was made between
chalcedonic blades and those of silcrete.
The same situation arises with the cherty siltstone materials
used for making blades as reported by Dortch (1972) in the
Chichester Ranges of the Pilbara Region, Western Australia.
While the Chichester site has beautifully knapped blades, they are
generally smaller than the silcrete blades used as hafted knives
(Dortch 1972:Figure 4). Large blades made of rock resembling
fine-grained dolerite do however occur in the Pilbara and I have
collected them in the area of Millstream Station. In the Kimberley
large blade points (>100mm) are rare. However, smaller points
and blades are quite common. Dortch and Bordes (1977:3),
describing blade and point technologies, differentiate correctly
between large blades made from massive blocks of raw material
and smaller ‘Levallois’ points flaked from cores made on small
cobbles or pebbles of chert, fine-grained quartzite and basalt.
Roth (1904), in reference to the Queensland point technologies
referred to earlier, does not differentiate between hafted knives
with blades of chert from those with silcrete or quartzite blades. It
27
is my impression from examining museum and other collections
that the chert knives generally have smaller blades, with resin
handles that are relatively larger than those found on knives with
silcrete blades. There is an exception to this rule and that is that
small but particularly symmetrical silcrete blades will be hafted
as knives in Central Australia. These knives however are usually
used for circumcision and other rituals requiring the cutting
of flesh.
The production of small symmetrical blades of cherty
materials such as those from the Chichester Ranges, the Barkly
Tableland of the Northern Territory and Queensland, or from the
south Kimberley requires a different strategy from macroblades
made of silcrete or quartzite.
Lack of understanding by archaeologists of material and
technological considerations also leads to a confusion of
description that is apparent in an examination of more recent
studies of blade-making in ‘ethnographic contexts’ or of
observations recorded of contemporary Indigenous knappers
of the late twentieth century. As in most instances these are
records of demonstrations of crafts, based on the knapper’s
own observations, not ability, I consider them as examples of
Indigenous lithic replication rather than the demonstration of
controlled and learned cultural behaviour. In some cases, due
to old age, infirmity etc, skills once possessed may have lapsed
through lack of practice.
Indigenous Replication of Leilira Blades
blades. Jelínek remarks that the artefacts were later used in a
variety of ways: as butchering tools; as scrapers in preparing bark
string; as chisels for thinning sheets of bark prior to creating bark
paintings; and as drills when making sockets in the basal unit
of fire-drill sets as well as spear points. It is interesting to note
that in a later photograph showing the hafting of a stone-blade
spear point by Mandarrg’s oldest son, the lithic element, a broad
pointed blade that appears to be at least 120mm long, is not one
made during the recorded knapping sequence (Jelínek 1979:
Table VII, Figure 1).
In the 1980s it was still possible to purchase stone-headed
spears made by Mandarrg or other male members of his
immediate family. The stone heads were, however, usually
blades and flakes, apparently debitage (from the existing patina),
salvaged from old knapping floors. It was rare to find a fine leilira
blade hafted at this period.
South of Arnhem Land in eastern Central Australia, other
Indigenous knappers were still capable of knapping fine blades,
primarily for use as hafted knives. In 1974 Binford and O’Connell
(1984:406-432) observed Alyawara (Alyawerre) men quarrying,
fracturing stone by carefully applied heat and/or hurling large
stones at boulders of raw material, setting up cores and removing
blades. These activities are all described in great detail.
In relation to the actual knapping of the blades some confusion
arises with these authors’ use of the terms ‘behind’ and ‘in front’
in relation to the knapper’s position in relationship to the core
and also in the description of the core topography itself:
During the Czechoslovak Anthropos Expedition to Northern
Australia (1969-1973), members of the expedition observed a
senior Rembrranga man, Mandarrg, renowned for his traditional
skills and bush lore, flake blades and points (Jelínek 1979:308).
Using a hammerstone ‘twice the size of a man’s fist’, large pieces
of silicified sandstone were removed from boulders and ledges
of outcropping rock at a quarry located on the banks of the
upper Cadell River in central Arnhem Land. According to Jelínek
(1979:308), Mandarrg
usually worked them on the soft part of his heel. Hammerstone
and core were both of the same material. He held the core on
his left heel with his left hand so that the place struck was partly
enclosed by his thumb, holding thus the chipped-off blade and
preventing it falling to the ground. The blows were medium-heavy
and accurate. The flake was of course often a failure … Before
each blow he scraped the hammerstone across the core edge in
the place where the blow was to fall. If the core was still quite
big, but only a small striking surface had been left, he modified
it in his hand with heavy blows (he often knocked it out of his
left hand onto the ground), or placing it on the hard base of the
rock surface. When making on his heel, he directed the blows
obliquely to the striking surface of the core.
The accompanying photograph (Jelínek 1979: Figure 1) shows
the core being supported on the right heel and the hard surface
referred to upon which the core is modified is the shelf of stone
upon which Mandarrg sits as he works.
Two hours of knapping resulted in 17 blades and flakes being
selected by Mandarrg as suitable for use as spearheads (Jelínek
1979:Table 1, Figure 5). This collection includes rectangular
flakes, irregular blades and several relatively symmetrical pointed
28
Squatting behind the core, Sandy directed heavy blows with the
butt of his ax, so that large flakes were removed. As each flake
was detached, it was picked up, examined, and then placed at
arm’s length in front of him. He turned the core frequently
and examined the scar where the previous flake had been
removed. Sometimes he struck off another flake adjacent to the
earlier scar, and sometimes he used the flake scar itself as the
striking platform.
Throughout all this, Sandy worked kneeling or squatting behind
the core, which was positioned on the ground in front of him.
A flake struck off the core would be driven downward into the
sand. We later learned that the flakes were picked up “so you
know what you were making,” and then placed out of the way
so that the next flake would also fall into the sand, preventing its
edges from being dulled by hitting previously struck flakes … It
was only after he succeeded in producing a core of desired shape
that we understood that he was trying to produce a core with a
transverse cross-section shaped like a high-angled triangle. Once
he was successful, he could strike off blades or flakes along the
flat face of the triangle.
Once the core had been roughly preformed, a number of blades
or flakes were then struck alternately from each side of the nose
of the core. After this more detailed preforming of the core face,
a blow was struck farther back from the core rim, just above one
of the ridges running down the face of the core. This procedure
yielded blades of the desired shape: long triangular pieces with
sharp edges on the converging sides. These blades had either
one or two medial ridges on the dorsal surface (Binford and
O’Connell 1984:412).
Kim Akerman
Looking at the figures accompanying the paper (Binford
and O’Connell 1984:Figures 6–7) it is clear that the knapper
is squatting in front of the core and either directly addressing
the core face or is slightly oblique to it. The position is virtually
the same as that adopted by the Arnhem Land artisan, Tutjero,
in Figure 3. The percussor (in this case the poll of a hafted
commercial steel axe) is swung in an arc toward the knapper and
resulting flakes or blades drop between the core and the knapper.
The struck flakes selected as suitable for the manufacture of
prestigious ‘men’s knives’ are pointed blades and flakes which
require no further retouch to be serviceable (Binford and
O’Connell 1984:Figure 18). An illustrated exhausted core is
incorrectly referred to as a horsehoof core – a misnomer common
to Australian archaeologists as well as those from other countries.
I have already addressed the problems of differentiation between
horsehoof core tools on one hand and exhausted producer cores
on the other (Akerman 1993:125-127).
In a further paper, Binford (1986:550) describes how the
proximal sections of the blades were later reduced in width
by retouch of the margins. This operation was undertaken in
order that the flakes were of a width suitable for the attaching of
wooden slat handles. My own examination of hafted blades with
wooden ‘handles’ suggests that they are, in fact, more like finials
with the resin adhesive itself being the area gripped in the hand.
In most cases these finials are decorated with typical Central
Australian art motifs, probably indicating the totemic affiliations
of their owners. The use of resin permits great flexibility in fitting
the two solid elements together and when the stone elements of
museum specimens separate over time from their resin hafts they
invariably show little or no reduction of the butt area. Indeed the
overhangs etc found on the rim of the striking platform increase
the surface to which the adhesive is fixed permitting a firmer
bond. A glance at any ‘traditional’ ethnographic collection of
these knives will show that there is often no correlation between
the size of the wooden finial and the blade itself.
This is not the situation with leilira blades, hafted as spear
points. In these cases considerable butt reduction to facilitate
hafting to the shaft is the norm. Old, previously hafted blade
spear points usually bear traces of native bees wax, the preferred
hafting medium when attaching blade points to spears.
A chance to observe other Alyawarra (Alyawerre) knapping
was afforded when two senior men were invited to demonstrate
blade-making at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies
(AIAS) at Canberra in September 1978. At this time I was
attending meetings at the Institute myself and had some of my
own replicas of leilira blades with me. I had been experimenting
and making leilira blades for more than five years (Akerman
1976b). Both men examined my hafted and unhafted blades
and indicated that these were the types of products that they
intended to produce.
Unlike my own approach to blade-making, or any of the
descriptions or images of leilira blade-making that I had
previously seen or heard of, the knapping technique that they
used to strike flakes and blades appeared most uncoordinated
and violent. Only one man knapped while the other watched and
retrieved pieces of flaked stone that flew dramatically across part
of the knapping area.
Rather than addressing the core directly, the knapper, kneeling,
situated the core beside and slightly away from his left knee. The
core was held on its side on the ground with the striking platform
area facing forward. The hammerstone, held in the right hand at
shoulder height was then swung in a descending arc across the
body to make contact with the uppermost margin of the platform
area. Detached flakes were propelled at high velocity to fall within
a moderately broad fan shaped zone behind and to one side of
the knapper. This technique did not permit the careful placing
of the hammerstone in discrete areas of the striking platform,
which itself could only be seen in an awkward oblique manner.
Control of the blow was considerably diminished. Similarly the
force at which flakes were detached and flew free exacerbated
the likelihood of endshock occurring, either in the air or when
they hit ground.
No leilira blades resulted from this exercise and a variety of
flakes were ultimately hafted with resin and presented as varieties
of knives of the type used in adjacent areas for ritual purposes.
Video footage of the knapping events was made by staff of the
Institute and is held in their archives (Butler 1978). A detailed
description of this technique has been undertaken by Hiscock
(2005), which suggests that it is a valid and unrecognised
knapping method. My own feelings are that in this instance, while
the knapper had perhaps observed knapping in his earlier years,
he was not an experienced knapper and had little understanding
of the principles involved. I have strong doubts that we were
witnessing a traditional form of stone reduction.
Interestingly, in 1981, a similar situation was observed in
Arnhem Land when Jones, White and McKenzie recorded elderly
Yolngu men attempting blade-making at a site adjacent to the
Ngillipidji quarry, visited by Thomson nearly 50 years earlier
(Jones and White 1988; McKenzie 1983). In this instance, a shallow,
elongate hollow was prepared and lined with a mat of dried grass.
The core, with striking platform forward and the core face-down,
was placed on the grass pad, its longer axis aligned with that of the
hollow. As with the Alyawarra knapper, the Yolngu artisan sat to
one side of the core and holding the core with the near hand (the
left), directed the hammerstone (held in the right hand) down
and across the body to make contact with the lower margin of
the platform. Any flakes removed were thus detached directly
into the pad of grass. The use of the pad to catch detached flakes
reduced problems such as endshock but there was still little of
the control of flake removal necessary for successful and regular
removal of blades. McKenzie’s footage is excellent in that it clearly
demonstrates the knapping posture and process.
Although the Yolngu in this exercise had been attempting to
make blades of the type collected by Thomson decades earlier,
their success was limited. Indeed all five of the completed ‘ngambi’
illustrated by Jones and White (1988:Figure 7) show moderate to
extensive bifacial retouch – a situation not found in the examples
collected by Thomson. Dimensions of 13 completed points also
appear to be at odds with points collected in earlier times, the
largest having a length of 120mm and width of 45mm (Jones
and White 1988:Table 8).
The real value of the film and the Jones and White paper
is the lucid presentation of the social dimensions in which
the treasured stone – at the quarry, and as finished products
– operates. Unfortunately, as with the Alyawarra exercise, there
is little value in the technological aspects of the paper and the
results do not match those points and blades made and used in
the first half of the last century.
29
In 1985 Paton (n.d.:1-39) also had an opportunity to watch
Indigenous knapping in Central Australia at a quarry near Elliot,
on the western margin of the Barkly Tableland. As Paton (n.d:8)
notes, the Mudbara and Jingili knappers were men aged in their
late 50s and 60s who had learnt knapping ‘though none of them
claimed to have mastered the art’. However, the preformed core
was rested on the ground and, as Paton’s photograph shows, the
knapping was accomplished with the back of a hafted metal
axe head but from a standing position. The knapper held the
haft of the axe close to the head with one hand and caught the
removed flakes and blades close to the core with the other. The
results, according to Paton, were relatively shorter and narrower
than the archaeological examples sighted at the quarry (Paton
n.d:7-9). Paton also recorded quarrying and the fracturing of
large pieces of stone by fire. The main focus of his research was
on the use and ultimate disposal of the blades themselves and
their function within the societies that made and used them, that
is, the role that they played in the societies that produced them
(Paton 1994).
From the above it can be seen that I have serious doubts about
the validity of more recent studies of traditional technology as
remembered by older people who have real links with a not-sodistant ‘traditional’ past, but who probably did not learn and
practice the skills associated with a pre-metal past. I perceive
a failure by some researchers to analyse their material critically
and present a balanced and objective explanation of their
observations. The presenting of such aberrant behaviour as a
cultural norm, even in an ethnographic salvage situation, may
be perceived as misleading.
Having worked with Aboriginal Australian craftsmen and
craftswomen for much of my life, I have had many opportunities
to observe both skilled and less accomplished artisans. I have
also seen many instances where individuals recall, and succinctly
describe, skills that they have seen but not practiced. Similarly,
some Indigenous peoples try to discover for themselves how
‘the old people did it’. I have heard Indigenous people describe
how Kimberley points were made by heating a flake of stone and
carefully dripping water onto it. In another instance a young
Aboriginal male carefully flaked notches onto an old stone axe
head that he had picked up. This was done in order to haft it
‘in the old way’, although waisted axes were unknown in the area.
Non-Indigenous Replication of Leilira Blades
While a number of Australian archaeologists have knapped or
attempted to knap blades and points (Graham and Thorley
1996:78; M. Moore, University of New England, pers. comm.,
2006), I am the only person, to my knowledge, who has presented
details of the technological requirements that lead to the
successful and regular detachment of large blades. Graham and
Thorley (1996: Figure 2), for example, provide a diagrammatic
illustration of a prepared core showing a projected sequential
removal of six leilira blades. A number of misleading features of
this illustration are evident. First, each of the blades appears to
be virtually identical in length to the initial blade. Consequently
the final topography of the core face shows that the final blade
removals terminate in a low arc hinge, rather than feather at the
distal end. Second, the angle of force is, in my experience much
too high, approaching 90° rather than approximately 60°, which I
find leads to successful removal. Indeed the Graham and Thorley
30
illustration resembles a prismatic blade core rather than one used
to produce leilira blades.
In describing my own replication of leilira blades I draw upon
work that I undertook in the 1970s (Akerman 1976b:117-128).
I have continued to make and use leilira blades whenever I can
access suitable raw materials. In 1993 I had the opportunity to use
an experimentally-produced hafted leilira blade knife to butcher
and remove sinew from a dead sperm whale that was being
reduced to a skeleton by staff of the Museum and Art Gallery
of the Northern Territory. More recently I have replicated a
Central Australian leilira knife for the National Science Museum,
Tokyo, Japan.
The size and mass of the hammerstone is of critical importance
in achieving the successful removal of leilira blades. In shape,
the stone should be roughly spherical to ovate in form with a
gently rounded profile at the impact area (Figure 3). Weight
varies between 0.5 and 1.5kg, depending on the toughness of
the material being knapped and the size of the core. I prefer
larger hammerstones that can be comfortably held in one hand.
For initial decortication and setting up the initial platform face
on boulder cores, or when quartering boulder cores, I have
used hammerstones up to 3kg in weight, swinging them with
both hands.
I have used a variety of materials for hammerstones to produce
blades including dolerite and basalt cobbles. However, I have
also successfully used water-worn cobbles of silcrete, the same
material being flaked, to remove blades successfully. The main
problem with silcrete or brittle quartzite cobble hammerstones is
that they tend to fracture, particularly when removing the larger
initial flakes that may be required to remove cortex, create the
striking platform and prepare the core face. The hammerstone
being used in Figure 3, appears to have been previously damaged
in this manner, but is still deemed suitable for the task at hand.
Successful blade production requires that the mass of the
hammerstone, rather than the velocity of the hammerstone
on the core, effects blade removal. The hand holding the
hammerstone directs it so that it strikes at the correct angle
rather than swinging it with any exaggerated velocity.
To prepare a block of stone or a boulder for blade production,
a suitable surface is first created by removing a large flake, the
scar of which will form the next striking platform. Planes created
by using fire to fracture boulders may serve the same purpose.
The clear surface is then used as a striking platform from which
flakes can be removed to prepare the core face or to remove a
large flake, the scar of which will become the ultimate platform
from which, after rotating the core, blades will be struck.
Core face preparation is achieved by removing two adjacent,
large flakes that run to the end of the core or terminate just before
it. As well as creating the median ridge where they intersect, the
removal of these large flakes is crucial in setting up the correct
angle between the core face and the striking platform. In a sample
of 24 blades produced experimentally, this angle varied between
64° and 84° with a mean of 72°. This is a similar technique to
Levallois point technology that produces a core face, properly
angled in relation to a pre-existing platform area, rather than one
that depends on direct platform preparation. In the latter case
the platform morphology itself is created by flaking or abrading.
Prior to blade removal the edge of the intended platform above
the median ridge is strengthened by removing any overhang left by
Kim Akerman
the removal of the flakes used in setting up the core face. This may
be accomplished by either abrasion or by careful removal of small
flakes. At this stage thinning of the proximal end of the intended
blade may be undertaken by removal of one or more small blades
that remove the proximal end of the median ridge. This is a more
effective means of obtaining a blade with a thin-sectioned proximal
end than can be achieved by attempting to flake the finished blade.
Figure 6e illustrates a blade snapped by endshock while attempting
to thin the area about the striking platform.
With the core prepared it only requires a single stroke to
remove the blade. If the core is small, suitable for blades of
<100mm, it is hand held as in Figure 2. The platform is tapped 1020mm back from the edge with the hammerstone at an obtuse
angle in relation to the platform edge. If the blow is too forceful
a prismatic blade, rather than one with convergent sides, will
result or a narrow overshot blade truncating the distal end of the
core may occur. I find that using the mass of the hammerstone
to virtually ‘bump’ the striking platform is a most effective way
of removing blades.
Incorrect application of force, both in terms of striking
angle and velocity, will lead to one of several types of failure
depending on the various combinations of angle and velocity
of applied force that may occur. Striking too far into the core
will result in a hinge termination or if done with insufficient
velocity, a step fracture.
To produce large, straight blades, cores must be of dimensions
that preclude their being held in the hand. As noted earlier the
Aboriginal evidence shows that large cores are knapped resting
on the ground. I believe the stability achieved by resting the core
on the ground is crucial to successful blade removal. It appears
also as if there is some continuity of mass if the core is cushioned
on the ground; this contributes to the creation of blades with
reduced longitudinal curvature.
If the core face is damaged in the attempted removal of a
blade or because of the successful removal of a series of blades
resulting in the gradual increase in the angle between core face
and striking platform, it may be rejuvenated by repeating the
preliminary stages of core preparation; that is, removing two
large, overshot and intersecting flakes by forcefully striking the
core well back from the platform margin. This is usually done
only with large cores that have sufficient mass. What may well
appear to be blade cores made on large flakes seen on some
archaeological sites may in fact be flakes removed in the course
of rejuvenating the core face.
Satisfactory blades have edges that converge on the median
ridge and will possess individual attributes governed to a great
degree by the morphology of the median ridge. If this is curved, so
will the resultant blade be curved. A ridge that is wavy will produce
a blade that has similarly undulating margins. If the ridge is created
by the intersection of flake scars that meet at an obtuse angle, the
blade will be flatter than one in which the angle of the median
ridge is more acute. A selection of blades produced experimentally
in the manner described is illustrated in Figures 6-7.
Conclusions
Setting up cores and detaching blades in the manner described has
produced products identical to ethnographic examples collected
at a time when the production of stone tools was still a significant
feature of the technology and economy of Indigenous Australians.
Confusion as to the economic viability of such a technology, as
evidenced by statements by Roth (1904) and Spencer and Gillen
(1912), is countered by the observations of Thomson (1935).
Thomson’s note on the high degree of selectivity practised by
the owners and knappers at quarries and the avid gleaning of
their rejected pieces by others suggests that many more blades
in fact may enter the ethnographic/archaeological record than is
generally considered.
Of the observations made in the last 40 years, I would
consider that only Binford and O’Connell (1984) and Paton
(n.d.) have reported activity that resembles traditional blade
knapping technology and in both cases a metal axe was used as
a percussor. My own observations of Alyawarra knappers and
viewing the Yolngu knapping strategies filmed by McKenzie
(1983) and recorded by Jones and White (1988) indicates quite
clearly that there was little understanding of blade production
by these knappers and their results confirmed their inexperience
with blade technology.
Increasingly, as traditional technical skills are lost through
time, the crucial aspect of ethnographic evidence lies in the
transmission of the role that artefacts might have played within
the broader cultural milieu of the societies that made and used
them. An understanding of such roles permits speculation, at least,
about the possible manner in which similar tools were situated in
prehistoric societies. There is an almost desperate need to record
the skills and knowledge of the world’s Indigenous peoples, not
only in order to preserve for academic purposes that which is
under constant threat of loss, but also in order to ensure that the
descendants of today’s Indigenous artisans can also access this
information.
As the general awareness of the cultural importance of the
world’s Indigenous peoples grows, so I expect there will be
a growth of interest (beyond anthropology) in Indigenous
technology, just as there is in Indigenous art, religion or
philosophy. However, this is not to say that just by being of
Indigenous stock automatically makes a person a master of one’s
cultural heritage. As with all cultural phenomena, the crafts and
skills of the past must be taught, learnt, practised and transmitted,
in order to ensure continuity into the future.
Acknowledgements
I am extremely grateful for the constructive comments received
on earlier drafts of this paper from Ian Thorley, Richard Fullagar,
Dan Witter and Harry Allen. Peter Hiscock generously allowed
me access to his paper on reverse knapping. Permission to use
the photographs taken by Donald Thomson was generously
given by Mrs Dorita Thomson and access facilitated by the
Museum of Victoria where the original images are lodged. The
University of Queensland permitted the use of figures previously
published in the series Occasional Papers in Anthropology. Staff at
the University Archives, University of Sydney, assisted in locating
the Elkin image and gave me permission to use it in this paper.
Members of the Ngukurr Community took the time to seek and
give me verbal permission to use the photograph, at a time when
they were under great pressure from other, more important
issues. I thank Mr Bobby Ngunggumajbah, Northern Land
Council representative for the area, for his efforts in securing
this permission. I am finally indebted to Dr Val Hawkes, who
read and corrected earlier drafts of the manuscript.
31
a
b
d
c
e
g
f
h
Figure 6 Leilira blades produced experimentally by the writer (after Akerman 1976b:125-126). (a-d) Primary blades with no further retouch.
(e-f) Blade with feathering on right distal margin and same blade with margin straightened and butt modified by unifacial retouch. (g) Blade
with minor retouch at right margin of striking platform. (h) Blade with lateral snap caused by endshock induced while thinning dorsal face at the
proximal end.
32
Kim Akerman
a
b
c
Figure 7 Leilira blades produced experimentally by the writer (after Akerman 1976b:125-126). (a) Blade with retouch. (b-c) Unretouched blades.
33
References
Akerman, K. 1976a An analysis of stone implements from Quondong, Western
Australia. In P.K. Lauer (ed.), Occasional Papers in Anthropology 6:108-116. St
Lucia, QLD: Anthropology Museum, University of Queensland.
Akerman, K. 1976b Notes on the experimental manufacture of long blades
and points by percussion flaking. In P.K. Lauer (ed.), Occasional Papers in
Anthropology 6:117-128. St Lucia, QLD: Anthropology Museum, University
of Queensland.
Akerman, K. 1993 The status of the horsehoof core. In J. Specht (ed.), D. McCarthy,
Commemorative Papers (Archaeology, Anthropology, Rock Art), pp.125127. Records of the Australian Museum Supplement 17. South Sydney:
Australian Museum.
Allen, H. 1997 The distribution of large blades: Evidence of recent changes in
Aboriginal ceremonial exchange networks. In P. McConvell and N. Evans (eds),
Archaeology and Linguistics: Aboriginal Australia in Global Perspective, pp.357376. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Binford, L.R. 1986 An Alyawara day: Making stone knives and beyond. American
Antiquity 51(3):547-562.
Binford, L.R. and J. O’Connell 1984 An Alyawara day: The stone quarry. Journal of
Anthropological Research 40:406-432.
Butler, B. 1978 Stone Tool Technology [video]. Canberra: Australian Institute of
Aboriginal Studies.
Casey, D.A., I.M. Crawford and R.V.S. Wright 1968 The recognition, description,
classification and nomenclature of Australian stone implements: The report
of the Stone Implement Committee, 1967. In D.J. Mulvaney (ed.), Australian
Archaeology: A Guide to Field Techniques, pp.241-268. Canberra: Australian
Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Dortch, C.E. 1972 An archaeological site in the Chichester Range, Western Australia:
Preliminary account. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 55(3):65-72.
Dortch, C.E. and F. Bordes 1977 Blade and Levallois technology in Western
Australian prehistory. Quartar 27/28:1-19.
Elkin, A.P. 1970 The Australian Aborigines: How to Understand Them. 4th ed.
Sydney: Angus and Robertson.
Graham, R. and P. Thorley 1996 Central Australian Aboriginal stone knives:
Their cultural significance, manufacture and trade. In S.R. Morton and D.J.
Mulvaney (eds), Exploring Central Australia: Society, the Environment and
the 1894 Horn Expedition, pp.74-89. Chipping Norton, NSW: Surrey Beatty
and Sons.
Hiscock, P. 2005 Reverse knapping in the Antipodes: The spatial implications
of alternate approaches to knapping. In X. Terradas (ed.), Stone Tools in
Ethnoarchaeological Contexts, pp.35-39. BAR International Series 1370.
Oxford: Archaeopress.
Jelínek, J. 1979 Rembrranga ethnographical notes. In J. Jelínek (ed.), Anthropology
of the Rembrranga People: A Contribution of the Czechoslovak Expedition to
Arnhem Land, pp.307-323. Anthropologie 17(2-3). Brno, Czech Republic:
Moravian Museum.
34
Jones, R. and I. Johnson 1985 Rockshelter excavations: Nourlangie and Mt
Brockman Massifs. In R. Jones (ed.), Archaeological Research in Kakadu
National Park, pp.39-76. Canberra: Australian National Parks and Wildlife
Service.
Jones, R. and N. White 1988 Point blank: Stone tool manufacture at the Ngilipitji
quarry, Arnhem Land, 1981. In B. Meehan and R. Jones (eds), Archaeology
with Ethnography: An Australian Perspective, pp.51-87. Canberra:
Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian
National University.
McCarthy, F.D. 1976 Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements: Including Bone, Shell
and Tooth Implements. 2nd ed. Sydney: Australian Museum Trust.
McKenzie, K. 1983 The Spear in the Stone [video]. Canberra: Australian Institute
of Aboriginal Studies.
Moore, M.W. 2003a Flexibility of stone tool manufacturing methods on the
Georgina River, Camooweal, Queensland. Archaeology in Oceania 38(1):23-36.
Moore, M.W. 2003b Australian Aboriginal blade production methods on the
Georgina River, Camooweal, Queensland. Lithic Technology 28(1):35-63.
Mulvaney, D.J. 1969 The Prehistory of Australia. London: Thames and Hudson.
Mulvaney, D.J. and J. Kamminga 1999 Prehistory of Australia. Crows Nest, NSW:
Allen and Unwin.
Murgatroyd, W. 1991 Djaperi: A Prestige Item in Aboriginal Exchange. Unpublished
BA (Hons) thesis, Northern Territory University, Darwin.
Paton, R. 1994 Speaking through stones: A study from northern Australia. World
Archaeology 26(2):172-184.
Paton, R. n.d. Stone Blade Production and Use: An Ethnoarchaeological Case Study
from Central Northern Territory Australia. Unpublished report, Department of
Prehistory and Anthropology, Australian National University.
Roth, W.E. 1904 Domestic Implements, Arts and Manufactures. North Queensland
Ethnography Bulletin 7. Brisbane: Government Printer.
Spencer, W.B. and F.J. Gillen 1899 The Native Tribes of Central Australia. London.
Macmillan and Co.
Spencer, W.B. and F.J. Gillen 1912 Across Australia. London. Macmillan and Co.
Thomson, D.F. 1935 Making of stone spear heads and stone (circumcision) knives,
Ngillipidji, Upper Walker River, Blue Mud Bay, October, 1935. Unpublished
extract from the original field notes of D.F Thomson, October 1935.
Thomson, D.F. 1961 The Aborigines of Australia. In C. Barrett (ed.), The
Australian Junior Encyclopaedia, pp.79-107. 4th ed. Melbourne: Australian
Educational Foundation.
Warner, W.L. 1931 Murngin warfare. Oceania 1(4):458-494.
Warner, W.L. 1969 A Black Civilization: A Social Study of an Australian Tribe.
Gloucester, Mass. Peter Smith.
BURKES CAVE
and Flaked Stone Assemblage Variability in Western
New South Wales, Australia
Justin Shiner¹, Simon Holdaway², Harry Allen² and Patricia Fanning³
Abstract
In 1970, Harry Allen excavated a small section of creek terrace
adjacent to Burkes Cave in the Scope Range of western
New South Wales, revealing a stratified deposit dated by a
single radiocarbon determination to c.2000 BP. An analysis
of the stone artefact assemblage was never fully published.
In this paper we present a description of the technological
characteristics and composition of the stone artefact
assemblage from this important site and consider similarities
to and differences from other western New South Wales
assemblages we have studied.
Introduction
The late 1960s and early 1970s were important years in the
development of Australian archaeology. Fieldwork throughout
Australia revealed a range of sites that illustrated the increasing
diversity and antiquity of the archaeological record. Some of the
most significant work was undertaken in the Willandra Lakes
region of western New South Wales (NSW), where, in addition
to extending the age of human arrival into Australia, the analysis
of stone artefacts from Pleistocene deposits gave rise to the
identification of the ‘Australian core tool and scraper tradition’
(Bowler et al. 1970). The work was undertaken when Australian
archaeologists were grappling with a range of theoretical and
methodological issues associated with the study of surface
archaeological deposits (Shawcross 1998). In this context,
Harry Allen undertook his doctoral research into the surface
archaeological record of southwest NSW.
A major component of Allen’s research was the analysis of stone
artefacts from surface deposits within the Willandra Lakes region.
Allen thought that the assemblages were Pleistocene in age, but
acknowledged that the presence of artefacts characteristic of the
last 5000 years suggested that some deposits were ‘mixed’ (Allen
1972:134). The palimpsest nature of the deposits made it difficult
to date the introduction of artefact types let alone examine the
relationships between individual artefacts. Allen thought that
these issues could be resolved if a comparative assemblage from a
stratified deposit were available. This, he reasoned, would provide
the temporal control required for the seriation of the surface
material from the Willandra Lakes. With this in mind Allen set
about identifying a suitable site for excavation.
Following the investigation of a number of rangeland areas
across western NSW, Burkes Cave in the Scopes Range north
of Menindee was selected (Figure 1). Burkes Cave itself is a
small rockshelter with a shallow rocky floor. Allen thought it
¹ Heritage, Rio Tinto Aluminium, C/O Post Office Weipa, QLD 4874,
Australia
² Department of Anthropology, Faculty of Arts, University of
Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland Mail Centre, Auckland 1142,
New Zealand
³ Graduate School of the Environment, Macquarie University, North
Ryde, NSW 2109, Australia
Figure 1 Map of western New South Wales and other locations
mentioned in the text.
unlikely that this would yield the deeply stratified deposit he
was looking for, and instead he excavated a 2.88m² area on
the terrace immediately outside the rockshelter, attaining a
maximum depth of 1.7m (Allen 1972:143-144). The deposit was
removed in arbitrary 15cm spits that were occasionally modified
to fit in with the natural stratigraphy of the deposit. Four soil
horizons reflecting subtle changes in texture, colour and charcoal
content were defined. A single radiocarbon determination
of 1850±240 BP (ANU-704) was obtained on charcoal from
a depth of 61cm immediately below the layers that contained
the majority of stone artefacts (Allen 1972:150). Using the
southern hemisphere atmospheric data from McCormac et al.
(2004) in Oxcal 3.1 (Bronk-Ramsey 1995) this value returns a
calibrated result of 2050–1450 cal BP at 68.2% probability and
2350–1250 cal BP at 95.4% probability. This charcoal-rich deposit
has similarities to a charcoal- and artefact-rich section excavated
by Dan Witter and Patricia Fanning at nearby Mutawintji
National Park (Dan Witter, NSW NPWS, pers. comm., 1999).
The Burkes Cave excavation recovered an estimated 17,000
stone artefacts, as well as faunal material and charcoal. Burkes
Cave was soon recognised as one of the most artefactually-rich
open sites in the Australian arid zone (Allen 1972; Gould 1980).
But despite the richness of the deposit, the single radiocarbon
determination indicated that the majority of the assemblage was
deposited during the late Holocene. Therefore, the assemblage
35
could not be used as a direct chronological analogue with which
to seriate the Pleistocene material from the Willandra Lakes.
Instead, Allen compared the Burkes Cave assemblage to others
from the Willandra Lakes sites in an effort to investigate variation
in assemblage composition through time. He concluded that
Burkes Cave represented a base camp for a fairly permanent
group of people who moved to the Darling River area during
times of flooding. This interpretation, based on the high density
of material in the deposit, has continued to be a major influence
on subsequent work (e.g. Gould 1980; Smith 1989).
In his original interpretation, Allen noted some similarities
between the Burkes Cave artefacts and those from the Willandra
Lakes. In particular, he thought that the presence of horsehoof
cores and steep-edged scrapers at Burkes Cave was evidence for
a cultural connection with the Willandra sites. This was used to
support the notion of continuity in stone artefact manufacturing
styles spanning approximately 30,000 years. More recently, in
a reassessment of the conclusions of the 1969–72 work, Allen
recognised that there was insufficient evidence to support the
assumption of a cultural relationship between the western NSW
sites, and that the original analysis took insufficient account of
the influence of raw material variability and core reduction (Allen
1998). He noted that differences in raw material access have ‘resulted
in a marked segregation of artefacts across the landscape, and
possibly through time as well’ (Allen 1998:211). This is significant
because, as recent studies across western NSW have demonstrated
(e.g. Doelman et al. 2001; Holdaway et al. 2004; Shiner 2004), raw
material distribution is a major contributing factor to regional
differences in assemblage reduction and composition. Whether
this is also the case at Burkes Cave will be considered in this paper.
The importance of Burkes Cave is illustrated by its prominence
in archaeological textbooks and discussions of arid zone
occupation and the definition of the adaptive systems adopted
by Aboriginal people in the past (e.g. Flood 1995; Gould 1980;
Lourandos 1997; Smith 1986, 1989). Gould (1980) discussed
Burkes Cave in his model for risk minimising behaviour in the
Western Desert. While acknowledging significant stratigraphic
differences, he identified several similarities between Burkes
Cave and sites from Central Australia. A low ratio of flakes to
implements, for instance, was argued to show a similarity between
Burkes Cave and the James Range East site. Additionally, in a
discussion of the mechanical properties of hafted tools, Gould
suggested that the adzes (tula slugs) from Burkes Cave were
comparable to those from some Central Australian sites. The
comparison was extended further to the dominance of local raw
materials in the Pleistocene assemblages from the Willandra Lakes.
Gould contrasted this to Burkes Cave where, he suggested, either
utilitarian or socio-ideational factors explained the dominance
of ‘exotic’ silcretes (Gould 1980:227-228). Mechanical studies
indicating that silcrete had a technological advantage over local
stone types, particularly for the manufacture of adzes would
support a utilitarian interpretation. Alternatively, if silcrete
offered no technological advantage over local materials then
the increased movement of raw materials would reflect, Gould
argued, the emergence of expanded social networks following
the onset of stressful environmental conditions between
approximately 15,000 and 10,000 years ago. Gould suggested that
this could easily be resolved by undertaking mechanical studies
of the Burkes Cave raw materials (Gould 1980:228).
36
For Smith, like Gould, Burkes Cave offered a window into
Aboriginal adaptive systems. He compared Burkes Cave with sites
in Central Australia and the Western Desert in the context of late
Holocene seed-grinding technologies and subsistence strategies
(Smith 1986, 1989). The presence of seed-grinding artefacts at
Burkes Cave was used by Smith (1989) to support an argument
for increased reliance on the processing of plant seed within arid
areas during the late Holocene as a consequence of population
increase. Smith’s argument also relied on an interpretation of
the richness of the Burkes Cave lithic assemblage. More artefacts
reflected longer occupations, more occupations or both.
Finally, analyses of the Burkes Cave stone artefact assemblage
provide an insight into the development of Australian lithic
studies. During the late 1960s and early 1970s Australian
archaeologists were moving away from typological schemes
and developing edge-based approaches for determining tool
function (Holdaway and Stern 2004). Allen (1972) wrestled with
the changes in approaches to stone artefacts in his thesis. On
the one hand he recognised distinct tool types as indicated by
his scraper typology, while on the other hand he undertook a
detailed analysis of the characteristics of tool edge modification
in an effort to develop an understanding of tool function (Allen
1972). Ethnographic accounts of Aboriginal activities along the
Darling River and in adjacent areas provided a model into which
a functional assessment of Burkes Cave seemed to fit. Based
on stylistic similarities in the types of tools produced when
compared to those represented in the Willandra Pleistocene
assemblages, a case could be made for cultural continuity (Allen
1972:348-357).
Some 30 years on, a new analysis of the Burkes Cave stone
artefacts provides the opportunity to address issues of raw
material access, occupation intensity and site function that have
interested a generation of Australian archaeologists. A reanalysis
of the Burkes Cave assemblage is also timely since there is now an
increasing body of comparative data in articles and theses from
western NSW (e.g. Doelman et al. 2001; Holdaway and Fanning
in press; Holdaway et al. 2006; Holdaway et al. 2000; Holdaway
et al. 2004; Shiner 1999, 2004).
Here we present a description of the Burkes Cave assemblage
based on a set of analyses that we have found useful for comparative
purposes (Holdaway and Fanning in press; Holdaway et al. 2006;
Shiner et al. 2005). We are able to assess the significance of raw
material access to address some of the issues raised by Gould.
We are also able to discuss the issue of assemblage size raised
by Smith. Stone technology has proved more useful than tool
function in our western NSW studies so we deal with the former
rather than the latter. As in Allen’s original study, the significance
of the frequency of tools of different forms is still of interest.
However, our overriding aim is to re-evaluate how Burkes Cave
might be considered in a regional context, exploring the question
that led Allen to excavate the site in the first place. From a twentyfirst century perspective, we consider what the analysis of a stone
artefact assemblage from a single site can tell us and on what
basis it should be compared with other sites.
Burkes Cave Study Area: Geomorphic Context
The Scopes Range, located 100km east of Broken Hill, is
composed of an upper-Cambrian quartz-rich sequence of
sandstone and conglomerate. The eastern flank of the range
Justin Shiner, Simon Holdaway, Harry Allen and Patricia Fanning
consists of a basal quartzite pebble/boulder conglomerate
overlain by quartzose fluvial sandstone (Mills and Buckley 2000).
Tertiary silcretes border the range in the northeast. Residual and
colluvial deposits of angular, poorly-sorted sand and gravel
dominate the plains to the east of the range, with occasional
outcrops of silicified conglomerate, quartzite and porcellanite.
Flat to gently undulating alluvial and colluvial plains of red and
brown clayey sand, loam and lateritic soils occur to the west of
the range. The plains to the north and south consist of dune
deposits of red and brown clayey sand, loam and lateritic soils
with irregular deposits of aeolian sand. Elevations vary between
354m above sea-level at Mount Scope to 140m above sea-level on
the surrounding plain.
Significantly, Burkes Cave is only 40km northwest of the
Menindee Lakes, an easy day’s ride for the Burke and Wills party
which camped at Burkes Cave (called Kokriega or Gogirga by
Aboriginal people) and left their mark on the shelter wall. Native
wells were located in a small ravine near the shelter (Beckler
1993; Wright 1862 cited in Allen 1972:138-141). The site is thus
located at an intermediary position between silcrete rich ranges
to the northeast and the stone poor Darling River flood plains
to the south.
Chronology and Methods of Analysis
A single radiocarbon determination from Burkes Cave indicates
that the majority of artefacts were discarded during the last
2000 years, but reveals little about the chronology of occupation
during this period. This is a similar situation to deflated surface
assemblages found elsewhere in western NSW, where the age of
the surface upon which artefacts are distributed is established
through Optically-Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dating of
the sediments and a chronology of place use determined from
radiocarbon dating of charcoal from heat retainer hearths with
which the artefacts are associated (e.g. Holdaway et al. 2002;
Holdaway, Fanning and Shiner 2005). At Burkes Cave, we know
the block of time over which the assemblage accumulated but
little else. The assemblage is therefore best thought of as a
palimpsest of accumulation documenting an unknown number
of occupational episodes during the last 2000 years.
The relative stratigraphic relationship between artefacts at
Burkes Cave is of little analytical value because of the arbitrary
definition of the excavation spits and the absence of radiocarbon
determinations throughout the deposit. Accordingly, material
from all spits is combined into one assemblage for the analysis
presented here. This approach allows us to investigate overall
patterns in assemblage formation at the expense of identifying
patterns related to change through time.
Raw Materials
The Scopes Range is a rich lithic landscape with numerous sources
of quartz, quartzite and silcrete. Quartz occurs both as nodules
within the conglomerate sedimentary rock that constitutes much
of the Scopes Range, and as extensive gibber pavements. The
gibber nodules have a distinctive smooth and rounded exterior.
There are no quantitative data available for the size range of these
nodules, but visual inspection indicates that few nodules are
larger than fist size. Quartzite nodules are also widely available,
within creek beds and in the gibber pavements on valley slopes.
Silcrete outcrops are restricted to the eastern flank of the Scopes
Range. Doelman et al. (2001) identified three types of silcrete
at Mount Wood in northwest NSW on the basis of the nature
of Cretaceous sediments before silicification: microcrystalline
(no or few clasts visible), fine-grained (fine sand-sized quartz
clasts in microcrystalline quartz matrix) and medium-grained
(medium-sized quartz clasts). Although the geological history
of the Scopes Range is different from that of northwest NSW,
these categories have proved useful for differentiating the silcrete
artefacts present at Burkes Cave. We use a similar but broader
classification of silcrete into two types based upon the proportion
of microcrystalline matrix and clast size. Clast silcrete has a
matrix composed of medium-to-fine-grained clasts. Non-clast
silcrete exhibits none, or only a few visible and scattered clasts.
These categories are used to investigate the probable effect of raw
material variation on core reduction and tool manufacture.
Proportions of raw materials within the Burkes Cave
assemblage can be calculated in three different ways: as a
proportion of the total number of artefacts, as a proportion
of the minimum number of flakes (MNF) and as a proportion
of the total volume (maximum length x maximum width x
maximum thickness) of artefacts (Table 1). Multiple methods
of calculation help to overcome problems associated with highly
fragmented assemblages or those with artefacts of considerably
different sizes (Holdaway and Stern 2004:114).
It is widely acknowledged that raw material form and
physical properties influence core reduction, flake production
and tool manufacture and use (Dibble and Rolland 1992; Gould
1980; Gould and Saggers 1985). The proportion of different raw
materials within assemblages has also been linked to mobility
and occupation duration (Bird 1985; Holdaway 2000; Kuhn
1991; Rolland and Dibble 1990). Therefore, it is important to
quantify the proportion of different raw materials within the
Burkes Cave assemblage because this may reveal information
about the processes responsible for assemblage formation.
All three measures of raw material proportion indicate
that clast silcrete is the major raw material in the assemblage,
accounting for approximately 42.4% of raw materials by number
and volume and 44.6% by MNF. Quartz accounts for a greater
proportion of raw materials by number and volume (30.2% and
30.5% respectively) than non-clast silcrete (24.8% for number
and 16.4% for volume). This is reversed for the MNF measure
where non-clast silcrete accounts for 29.6% of raw materials
Table 1 Raw material proportion calculated by number, minimum
number of flakes (MNF) and volume (percentage in brackets).
Material
Number
MNF
Volume
(mm³)
Clast
2715
(42.4)
1576
(44.6)
14374585
(42.4)
Non-Clast
1592
(24.8)
1045
(29.6)
5554219
(16.4)
Other
9
(0.1)
2
(>0.1)
624066
(1.8)
Quartz
1935
(30.2)
819
(23.2)
10319311
(30.5)
Quartzite
158
(2.5)
91
(2.6)
3003529
(8.9)
Total
6409
(100)
3533
(100)
33875710
(100)
37
and quartz 23.2%. The discrepancy between the measurements
indicates that non-clast artefacts are small and complete, while
quartz is characterised by a larger proportion of incomplete
artefacts and these are generally larger than non-clast artefacts.
Considered together, the proportions of clast and non-clast
silcrete indicate that silcrete was the raw material of choice for
the inhabitants of Burkes Cave. Although sources of both forms
occur within the Scopes Range, they are not available within the
immediate vicinity of the site. Therefore both types of silcrete
were transported in sufficient volumes for them to dominate
the assemblage. Locally available quartz was also flaked in large
volumes, but this produced a significant amount of flaking debris
without platforms. For quartzite, the proportions of this raw
material by number and by MNF are consistent (2.5% and 2.6%
respectively). This is not the case for volume, where quartzite
accounts for 8.9% of raw materials indicating that quartzite
artefacts are large relative to those of other raw materials. The
same applies for the other raw material types (sandstone, hornfels
and glass, grouped together under ‘other’) where number and
MNF measures are both 0.1% whereas volume is 1.8%. Several
large sandstone ground artefacts in this category have probably
influenced this figure.
Dibble et al. (1995) provide a useful definition of local
and non-local raw material. Local raw materials are available
within the immediate vicinity of a site and have no, or very
low, transportation costs. Non-local raw materials are not
available within the immediate vicinity of a site and therefore
have considerable procurement costs, even if they are acquired
through embedded strategies, such as daily or seasonal
subsistence activities (e.g. Binford 1979; Gould and Saggers
1985). In the context of Burkes Cave, quartz and quartzite are
classified as local raw materials because these materials could be
procured within the immediate vicinity of the site. Clast silcrete
and non-clast silcrete are classified as non-local raw materials
because there is a greater cost (energy/time) associated with their
procurement. The analysis of raw material proportions indicates
that the inhabitants of Burkes Cave favoured the importation of
non-local stone over lower cost quartz and particularly quartzite.
Because we believe that raw material properties and availability
are a major factor structuring stone artefact assemblages,
subsequent analyses of core, flake and tool forms and reduction
processes will be considered separately for each of the major
raw materials at the site (i.e. clast silcrete, non-clast silcrete and
quartz). This internal comparison allows us to examine whether
different strategies of artefact manufacture, use and reduction
were being pursued for the different materials.
Cores
Allen (1972:155) originally concluded that ‘the presence of a fairly
large number of cores in the site requires that some flakes were
being manufactured there’ and this contributed to the perception
that Burkes Cave represented one of the highest density deposits
in the arid zone (e.g. Gould 1980). Cores are clearly an important
element of the Burkes Cave assemblage. Describing the core face
and platform characteristics is important for understanding how
flakes were manufactured. Here we describe the Burkes Cave
cores in terms of the direction from which flakes were removed,
their size and the intensity of reduction as represented by the
ratio of flakes to cores.
Core Form Representation
The form of discarded cores reflects the character and intensity of
raw material reduction. Core form proportions calculated within
each raw material category are presented in Table 2. Unifacial
(i.e. cores with a single platform flaked from one direction) is
the most common core category for each raw material. Bifacial
(i.e. cores with a single platform flaked from two directions)
is the second most common form for clast silcrete and quartz,
but third behind multiple (i.e. cores with platforms flaked from
three or more directions – see Holdaway and Stern 2004:180)
for non-clast silcrete and third behind nuclear tool (i.e. cores
with a retouched platform) for quartzite. While the numbers are
low (5) the nuclear tool proportion for quartzite is high (23.8%).
The proportion is considerably lower for the other three raw
materials, non-clast silcrete (12.5%), clast silcrete (5.3%) and
quartz (2%). Bipolar cores (i.e. cores with crushing on opposing
Table 2 Core form proportions per raw material category (percentage in brackets).
Core Type
Bifacial
Clast
Non-Clast
34
(36.2)
Quartz
6
(18.8)
Bipolar
3
(3.2)
Microblade
4
(4.3)
Nuclear Tool
3
(14.3)
34
(22.8)
Flake Blank
Multiple
Quartzite
42
(28.2)
2
(6.3)
10
(10.6)
7
(21.9)
17
(11.4)
2
(9.5)
5
(5.3)
4
(12.5)
3
(2)
5
(23.8)
Test
2
(1.3)
Unifacial
38
(40.4)
13
(40.6)
51
(34.2)
11
(52.4)
Total
94
(100)
32
(100)
149
(100)
21
(100)
38
ends with a flake scar) are only represented in quartz. Other core
forms are rare, with few flake blank (i.e. cores produced on a
flake), microblade (i.e. cores with multiple parallel flake scars
across the core surface) and test core (i.e. cores with one or two
flake scars on a cortical cobble) forms represented.
Cores with platforms flaked from two or more directions
(bifacial and multiple) indicate core rotation and a concern with
extending the reduction life of nodules. The combined proportion
of rotated core forms is greatest for clast silcrete (46.8%) followed
by non-clast silcrete (40.7%) and then quartz (39.6%). This
suggests that extending the reduction life of clast silcrete cores
was emphasised at Burkes Cave although the differences among
raw materials are not great. The large proportion of bipolar
cores in quartz, and nuclear tools in quartzite, indicate variable
reduction strategies between raw materials.
Core Size
As core reduction becomes more intensive, core size and the
length of the longest flake scar on the core surface will decrease.
The length of the longest flake scar on the core can be used to
compare core size in relation to complete flake length in the same
assemblage (Holdaway and Stern 2004:188). If the mean length
of the longest core scar is less than that of the mean length of
complete flakes this suggests more intensive core reduction. For
the Burkes Cave assemblage, the mean length of the longest core
scar is less than that of the mean length of complete flakes in each
raw material indicating that cores of each material were relatively
intensively reduced (Tables 3-4). The difference between the
mean length of the longest core scar and complete flake length is
statistically significant for clast silcrete (t=3.3, df 93, p=0.0016),
non-clast silcrete (t=4.8, df 31, p=<0.0001) and quartz (t=3.6,
df 114, p=0.0004). The difference for quartzite is not significant.
The coefficient of variation (V) is a measure of the spread of
a distribution. A value close to zero indicates a narrow spread
and a value close to one indicates a wide spread. The results for
the three raw materials (Table 3) are all close to zero and thus
indicate a narrow spread meaning that the individual lengths of
the longest core scars are generally similar. From this it can be
inferred that the majority of cores in each raw material category
were discarded once a similar core scar length was attained. It
should also be pointed out that non-clast silcrete cores have
the lowest mean core scar length suggesting that these were
reduced slightly more intensively than cores from the other raw
material categories.
Non-Cortical Core to Cortical Core Ratio
As raw material reduction proceeds, the ratio of non-cortical
to cortical artefacts increases. For the Burkes Cave assemblage
(Table 5), there are far more non-cortical cores than cortical
cores for non-clast and clast silcrete while the ratio for quartz
and quartzite is less than one indicating that cortical cores are
more numerous than non-cortical cores. This suggests low
intensity reduction of local raw materials while imported silcrete
was either more intensively reduced in situ, or brought to the site
as partially decortified nodules. This is especially true for nonclast silcrete where the non-cortical core to cortical core ratio
is highest.
Minimum Number of Flakes (MNF) to Core Ratio
The ratio of flakes to cores provides another measure of the
intensity of core reduction. As the intensity of core reduction
increases, more flakes will be produced from each core so this ratio
will rise. Table 6 indicates that the ratio is highest for non-clast
silcrete (32.6) followed by clast silcrete (16.8) while the low value
of the ratio for quartz and quartzite (<7) is consistent with the
non-cortical to cortical core ratio, further suggesting low intensity
reduction of local raw materials and the high reduction intensity
of non-local raw materials, and especially non-clast silcrete.
Summary
Measures of core reduction presented above indicate that nonlocal, clast silcrete and non-clast silcrete were the most intensively
Table 3 Mean length (mm) of the longest core scar and coefficient of variation (V) per raw material category.
Statistic
Clast
Non-Clast
Mean
Std. dev.
V
Number
Quartz
Quartzite
20.3
17.8
19.6
6.4
4.4
6.2
26.4
9.1
0.31
0.24
0.31
0.34
94
32
115
21
Table 4 Average technological length (mm) of complete flakes per raw material category.
Statistic
Clast
Non-Clast
Mean
Quartz
Quartzite
21.8
19.6
20.9
27.3
Std. dev.
6.9
5.6
5.5
10.7
Number
1139
733
663
73
Table 5 Non-cortical to cortical core ratio per raw material category.
Material
Non-Cortical
Cortical
Table 6 Minimum number of flakes (MNF) to cores ratio per raw
material category.
Ratio
Material
MNF
Cores
Ratio
Clast
67
27
2.5
Clast
1576
94
16.8
Non-Clast
25
7
3.6
Non-Clast
1044
32
32.6
Quartz
29
120
0.2
Quartz
798
115
7.0
5
16
0.3
Quartzite
91
21
4.3
Quartzite
39
worked raw materials. Locally available quartz and quartzite
were less intensively reduced. This suggests that silcretes were
the raw materials of choice for the various occupants of Burkes
Cave lending some support to one part of Gould’s (1980:149)
argument that the majority of artefacts should be made from the
technologically superior raw material. In this case the suggestion
is that at Burkes Cave non-clast silcrete is superior to clast material
and both these imported raw materials are superior to the local
materials. However, the intensity and duration of occupation
also influences raw material use. Access to distant raw materials
may be constrained if occupation duration is increased leading
to a greater reliance on local materials. At Burkes Cave, imported
raw materials were worked more intensively than locally available
materials, a situation that argues against an inference of longer
occupation times.
Flakes
The characteristics of the flake population reflect the way in
which flakes were removed from cores and so are important
for understanding core reduction strategies. Studying these
strategies allows the relative influence of raw material availability
and procurement, occupation intensity and the physical
characteristics of nodules on flake production to be considered.
Flake Platforms
The characteristics of flake platforms reflect the nature of
the core platform from which they were removed. Different
platform types provide not only information about the type of
nodules reduced, but also about the different techniques applied
to core reduction. Uni-directional platforms (struck from one
direction) are the most common platform type for each raw
material (Table 7) and have the highest proportion in non-clast
silcrete (89.4%) followed by clast silcrete (88%), quartz (77.3%)
and quartzite (70.4%). Bifacial platforms represent a core surface
struck from at least two different directions indicating core
rotation. Non-clast silcrete (7.5%) and clast silcrete (6.1%) have
the highest proportions, but these values are only slightly higher
than those for quartz (3.3%) and quartzite (2.8%). The major
difference between flakes manufactured from local (quartz and
quartzite) and non-local raw materials (clast silcrete and nonclast silcrete) is the proportion of flakes with cortical platforms.
Quartzite flakes have the greatest proportion (26.8%) followed
by quartz (19.4%) while clast silcrete (5.9%) and non-clast
silcrete (3.1%) have much lower values. These results support
the conclusion that clast and non-clast silcrete materials were
both reduced more intensively compared to the locally available
quartz and quartzite.
Non-Cortical Flake to Cortical Flake Ratio
Flakes retaining cortex are most likely to be struck from the core
during earlier stages of core reduction. Therefore the number of
flakes without cortex will increase relative to those with cortex
as reduction continues. The value of the non-cortical flake to
cortical flake ratio for quartz (Table 8) is less than one indicating
the presence of more cortical flakes than non-cortical flakes (a
result consistent with the non-cortical to cortical core ratio). The
ratios are much higher for clast and non-clast silcrete indicating
that there are more non-cortical flakes than cortical flakes. Thus,
according to the values of these ratios, both clast and non-clast
silcrete cores were more intensively reduced (producing relatively
more non-cortical silcrete flakes) than quartz cores.
Flake Shape
The process of core reduction leads to changes in the shape of
flakes and the representation of a wide range of flake shapes. This is
an important consideration in determining whether cores or flakes
were brought to the Burkes Cave location (e.g. Holdaway et al. 2004).
Some archaeologists (e.g. Pelcin 1997; Roth and Dibble 1998) have
suggested that maximising the surface area of a flake relative to
thickness is desirable because this increases the length of edge
available for tool use. If all stages of core reduction (including the
importation of cores to the site) are represented in the Burkes Cave
assemblage, a range of flake shapes should be present. The shape
of clast, non-clast and quartz flakes is plotted in Figure 2. Flake
shape is determined by dividing surface area by thickness and then
plotting the mean value against each platform width to platform
thickness ratio value (Holdaway et al. 2004). The plot indicates
that as platform width increases relative to platform thickness, the
surface area of flakes relative to flake thickness increases. In general,
clast silcrete flakes have the largest surface area relative to width,
followed by non-clast silcrete flakes and then flakes made from
quartz. This result suggests that non-local materials were flaked in
a way that maximised the effective cutting edge. Additionally, the
wide range of flake shapes present also suggests that cores rather
than flakes were often transported to the site for reduction.
Summary
In sum, analyses of flake attributes indicate both the way in
which flakes were removed from a core and the process of core
reduction. Quartz flakes were more frequently removed from
cortical nodules than flakes made from either clast or non-clast
silcrete and quartz reduction led to a higher proportion of
broken flakes compared to silcrete and other materials. This
largely reflects the flaking characteristics of quartz but it could
also indicate that imported materials were exploited more fully
than those that were locally available.
Table 7 Number and percentage (in brackets) of platform types per raw material category.
Platform
Clast
Non-Clast
Quartz
Quartzite
Bifacial
76
(6.1)
62
(7.5)
21
(3.3)
2
(2.8)
Cortical
73
(5.9)
26
(3.1)
124
(19.4)
19
(26.8)
Uni
1089
(88)
739
(89.4)
494
(77.3)
50
(70.4)
Total
1238
(100)
827
(100)
639
(100)
71
(100)
40
95
Clast
90
Non-Clast
Quartz
Length*Width/Thickness
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Platform Width/Platform Thickness
Figure 2 Shape plot of clast silcrete, non-clast silcrete and quartz complete flakes from the Burkes Cave assemblage.
Tools
Tool Representation
Allen (1972) used the characteristics of the worked edge rather
than the overall morphology of the artefact to divide retouched
items into specific categories. He recognised several types of
scraper, horsehoof cores, adze slugs and backed flakes. The
ways in which tools were manufactured and flakes selected
for retouching can be investigated through the description of
the characteristics of edge modification and the technological
attributes of the flakes. Both the amount and type of retouch
can be related to occupation duration (Dibble and Roland 1992;
Shott 1989, 1995). The intensity of tool reworking/use will
increase under longer duration occupations, particularly if there
are fewer opportunities to resupply with distant raw materials.
Two tool categories, scrapers and utilised flakes, account for the
majority of tools in each raw material type (Table 9). There are
a number of differences in the representation of tool forms and
proportions between the raw materials, one of the most obvious
being the much smaller proportion of adzes (tula and burren)
manufactured from clast silcrete compared to non-clast silcrete,
a pattern consistent with other western NSW assemblages
(Holdaway et al. 2004; Shiner 2004; Shiner et al. 2005). No
adzes of quartz or quartzite were recorded. Clast silcrete tools
have the largest proportion of scrapers, followed by tools made
from quartz, non-clast silcrete and quartzite, but there are
proportionally fewer utilised flakes made from clast silcrete than
similar tools made from non-clast silcrete and quartz.
Table 8 Non-cortical flake to cortical flake ratio by raw material category.
Material
Non-Cortical
Clast
962
Non-Clast
Quartz
Quartzite
Cortical
Tool Dimensions
Ratio
177
5.4
668
65
10.3
260
403
0.6
26
47
0.6
The length and platform thickness of the major tool classes
(notched, scrapers and utilised flakes) are used to analyse the
relative size of complete tools compared to complete flakes. For
each raw material, the mean length and platform thickness of
Table 9 Number and percentage (in brackets) of complete tool types per raw material category.
Tool Type
Backed Blade
Clast
Non-Clast
Quartz
9
(6.8)
Burin
1
(0.8)
Burren Slug
2
(1.7)
Denticulate
Quartzite
5
(10.6)
9
(6.8)
2
(1.7)
2
(4.3)
4
(3)
7
(5.8)
3
(6.4)
88
(66.7)
59
(49.2)
27
(57.4)
3
(2.3)
7
(5.8)
1
(2.1)
4
(3)
15
(12.5)
Utilised Flake
15
(11.4)
27
(19.2)
9
(19.1)
1
(1)
Total
132
(100)
120
(100)
47
(100)
4
(100)
Notch
Scraper
Thumbnail Scraper
Tula Slug
3
(75)
41
complete tools is greater than that of complete flakes (Table
10). The length measurement is statistically significant only for
clast silcrete (t=5.69, df 115, p= <0.001) however for platform
thickness the results are significant for each raw material (clast
t=2.7, df 97, p=0.0073; non-clast t=4.8, df 80, p=0.0001; quartz
t=3.3, df 33, p=0.0019). This indicates that the largest flakes were
selected from the flake population for modification into scrapers,
notched and utilised flakes. This is consistent with other western
NSW assemblages (Holdaway et al. 2004). Tool dimensions were
not calculated for quartzite because of the small number (4) of
complete tools.
Flake to Tool Ratio
The flake to tool ratio is a measure of the intensity of tool
manufacture. Low values of this ratio imply that proportionally
more flakes have been retouched into tools. Table 11 indicates
that non-clast silcrete flakes were most frequently retouched
into tools followed by clast silcrete, quartzite and quartz. This
supports the inference that non-local raw materials were used
more intensively than local raw materials.
Mean Number of Retouched Edges
Following Dibble’s (1987) reduction model, more intensive
resharpening will lead to an increase in the number of retouched
edges. Table 12 indicates that clast and non-clast scrapers have
the highest mean number of retouched quadrants while clast
silcrete notched tools have the second highest value. Utilised
tools have the lowest value, except for notched tools made from
non-clast silcrete. Quartz tools are the least intensively worked of
all the raw materials. These results are consistent with the more
intensive reduction tools made from non-local raw materials.
Discussion: Burkes Cave in Regional Perspective
Clast and non-clast silcrete, quartzite and quartz are the dominant
raw materials at Burkes Cave as they are at other western NSW
locations we have studied. Silcrete is available locally at Stud Creek
in Sturt National Park (Figure 1) and dominates the assemblage
at this location (Holdaway et al. 2004). Similarly, locally available
quartz is the most utilised raw material at Nundooka at Fowlers
Gap (Holdaway and Fanning in press; Shiner et al. 2005). However,
Burkes Cave is different in that imported silcretes predominate
over the locally abundant quartz. Thus, while raw material access
is important, this factor alone does not determine assemblage
composition in all cases. To understand the regional significance
of the Burkes Cave assemblage we need to understand the range
of factors that are determining the proportions of local and
imported raw materials.
Unlike Nundooka and Stud Creek, Burkes Cave is situated
between the silcrete sources of the northern Scopes Range and
the stone-poor Darling River area. No stone occurs naturally in
the Menindee area and all stone had to be imported, most likely
from sources in the Barrier, Scopes and Mootwingee ranges. The
distance to source for raw materials for Aboriginal people living
near the Darling River is of the order of 50 to 100km. Webb’s
(1993) survey of Kinchega National Park found that large
cobbles (60-200mm) of silcrete (52%), quartzite (37%), quartz
and sandstone were placed around the eastern shore of Lake
Cawndilla. She interpreted this as a provisioning strategy.
Beckler (1993) in 1861 noted that, in addition to Kokriega
(Gogirga or Burkes Cave), Menindee Aborigines knew of five
waterholes in the ranges between Menindee, Mootwingee
and the northern Barrier Ranges. These were Langarerra
(Langawirra), Motuanje (Mutanié or Mootwingee), Yolkoko,
Bengora (Bynguano), and Nothagbulla (Nootambulla) (Beckler
1993:108). This and other ethnographic sources indicate a
familiarity with access routes into the stone country to the west
(Allen 1972:214-251).
The nature of the flaked stone materials at Burkes Cave
means that it is unlikely to have been a ‘half-way house’ in the
movement of stone from the ranges to the river. If this had been
the case, then quantities of larger or unworked (i.e. with cortex)
silcrete materials might have been expected. On the other hand,
Table 10 Mean length (mm) and platform thickness (mm) of complete flakes and complete tools (scrapers, utilised and notched) in the Burkes Cave
assemblage by raw material.
Material
Clast
Non-Clast
Quartz
Statistic
Complete Flake
Length
Mean
Complete Tool
Length
Material
21.8
28.6
4.9
8
6.9
8.8
2.9
4.6
Number
1139
116
995
98
Mean
19.8
23.8
4.2
6.1
Std. dev.
5.6
8.4
2.4
3
Number
733
95
619
81
Mean
20.9
21.5
5.2
8
Std. dev.
5.5
4.9
2.8
3.8
Number
663
41
555
34
Table 12 Mean number of retouched quadrants on the three major
tool types per raw material category.
Flakes
Tools
Ratio
Material
1427
149
9.6
Non-Clast
908
136
6.7
Quartz
748
50
15.0
86
6
14.3
Quartzite
42
Complete Tool
Platform Thickness
Std. dev.
Table 11 Flake to tool ratio per raw material category.
Clast
Complete Flake
Platform Thickness
Notched
Scrapers
Utilised
Clast
1.8
2
1.3
Non-Clast
1.1
2
1.3
Quartz
1.4
1.3
1.2
the interpretation of Burkes Cave offered here, as a location
where there were multiple visits of short duration, suggests a
targeting of local (non-stone) resources. Such a pattern could be
the result of frequent but irregular visits from either (or both)
the Darling River or elsewhere in the ranges.
Measures like the flake to core ratio, non-cortical to cortical
core ratio, and the non-cortical complete flake to cortical
complete flake ratio provide a means of comparing core reduction
intensity among assemblages. At Burkes Cave these measures
evidence more intensive reduction of imported clast and nonclast silcrete compared to the locally available quartz. Sites close
to silcrete sources like Stud Creek (Holdaway et al. 2004) do not
show this level of core reduction but the short distances to raw
material sources, at most a handful of kilometres (Doelman et
al. 2001), make it hard to argue the intensity of core reduction
can be related to some form of distance decay. Rather it is access
to raw material in relation to the duration of occupation that
is a likely candidate for explaining the level of core reduction
of imported and locally available materials. Where local and
imported materials are being intensively reduced, prolonged
occupation can be inferred (e.g. Elston 1990; Holdaway 2000,
2004; Holdaway and Fanning in press; Shiner et al. 2005). At
Burkes cave, the absence of intensive reduction of quartz leads
to the conclusion that occupation duration was not prolonged,
at least in a relative sense, compared to other western NSW
locations (Shiner et al. 2005). This is a significant conclusion
since it reverses the interpretation provided by Allen in his
original study.
The situation is complicated, however, by the chronology of
occupation at any one location. At Nundooka, Fowlers Gap, the
relationship between the levels of core reduction as evidenced
by the flake to core ratio and the levels of tool production and
reuse as evidenced by measures like the flake to tool ratio as well
as indications of tool resharpening are not consistent with either
a prolonged or short-term series of occupations. Rather, it is
argued that at this site, individual occupations were of different
duration, leading to the creation of a palimpsest assemblage
that fits neither the criteria for a short-term nor a long-term
Table 13 Comparison of long-life (scrapers, thumbnail scrapers and
tula and burren slugs) versus short-life (burin, denticulate, notched
and utilised flakes) tool frequency and proportion (in brackets) from
western NSW study locations.
Category
Burkes Cave
Nundooka
Conclusions
Stud 2
Long-Life
206
(72.3)
128
(59)
603
(45.5)
Short-Life
79
(27.7)
89
(41)
721
(54.5)
Total
285
(100)
217
(100)
1324
(100)
The lesson to be drawn from the reassessment of the Burkes
Cave assemblage is that stone artefact assemblages from
western NSW are complex. Allen was correct in his initial
suggestion that the way to understand surface assemblages was
to adopt a comparative approach. He was also correct in his
later (1998) reassessment to suggest that stylistic comparisons
Table 14 Flake to tool ratio per raw material type and assemblage from
selected study locations in western NSW.
Assemblage
Clast
Non-Clast
Quartz
Burkes Cave
9.6
6.7
15.0
Nundooka
7.7
3.4
15.9
14.2
6.1
25.0
Stud 2
occupation (Holdaway and Fanning in press). At this site, it is
inferred that repeated occupations were not of the same type
but varied depending on the conditions that prevailed at any one
particular time.
Long-life tools, that is forms that have been sharpened more
often (scrapers, thumbnail scrapers, tula and burren slugs),
are more frequent at Burkes Cave than at other western NSW
assemblages like Stud 2 and Nundooka where assemblages
contain higher proportions of short-life tools (i.e. forms that
do not show the same level of resharpening: burin, denticulate,
notched and utilised flakes) (Table 13). More long-life tools could
mean longer duration occupation, since tools of this type will
wear out, and therefore accumulate, at locations where people
undertake more activities and therefore are likely to have spent
more time. A greater duration of occupation should, all things
being equal, lead to a greater number of flakes being retouched
into tools, particularly for imported material since people will
tend to use up the material at hand before searching for more.
But at Burkes Cave this is not the case (Table 14). Here the flake
to tool ratio for clast and non-clast silcretes are higher than they
are for Nundooka, even though at Burkes Cave the proportion of
long-life tools is higher than at the Fowlers Gap site.
This inconsistency highlights the difficulty of drawing simple
behavioural explanations on the basis of single assemblages.
The devil is not so much in the detail as it is in developing
an understanding of the significance of location-by-location
differences. Certainly raw material form and access is part of the
picture. There are broad consistencies in the way raw materials
were used to manufacture particular tool types. Table 15, for
instance, illustrates the tendency to manufacture long-life tools
from silcrete rather than quartz. But, as this table shows, there
are also regional differences in the way materials were used. To
understand the significance of the similarities and differences
between assemblages requires a detailed assessment of the
geochronology of each site, the accessibility of local raw material,
the intensity of core reduction and tool manufacture and an
assessment of occupation duration. It should not be assumed
that single locations were used in the same way continuously
through time, so the archaeologist needs to be continually on
the lookout for anomalies in assemblage composition that may
be the clue to a complex history of changing occupation types.
Table 15 Long-life tools per raw material type from selected study
locations in western NSW (percentage in brackets).
Material
Clast
Burkes Cave
95 (46.1)
Nundooka
Stud 2
43 (33.6)
188 (31.2)
Non-Clast
83 (40.3)
56 (43.8)
414 (68.7)
Quartz
28 (13.6)
29 (22.7)
1 (0.2)
Total
206 (100)
128 (100)
603 (100)
43
among assemblages represented too simple an approach. From
a twenty-first century perspective we are now beginning to
realise that the approach Allen pioneered will take a great deal
of work to fulfil. The types of comparisons made by Gould and
Smith do not take sufficient account of the complexity of the
processes that lead to the variability in stone artefact assemblage
composition. Neither large numbers of artefacts nor many longlife tools necessarily equate with long occupation times. A large
quantity of imported stone does not necessarily translate into
intensive social contact. Even the presence of similar types
of retouched tools does not necessarily mean that the same
cultural groups made assemblages. It depends on the time over
which assemblages formed and the raw material landscape that
people exploited (among many other things).
When it was excavated, Burkes Cave was instantly significant
because it was unique in western NSW. As we have learnt
more about the variables that control assemblage variability
in western NSW this significance has not diminished. We
now have many more assemblages to compare with that from
Burkes Cave. But as each new assemblage is added to the list,
the variability increases rather than diminishes. Some of this
variability continues to be related to raw material access, as
with the assemblage from Poolamacca we recently studied
(Holdaway, Fanning, Rhodes et al. 2005). Some probably relates
to the length of time over which assemblages have accumulated
(Holdaway, Fanning and Shiner 2005). Some relates to the
nature of occupation at one particular location as discussed
here. Some variability probably also relates to regional resource
abundance differences, a topic we have investigated at Pine
Point and Langwell (Shiner 2004, 2006) and are currently
researching in the Paroo Darling National Park (Holdaway et
al. 2006). The intriguing conclusion from this list is that we
are clearly some way off from documenting the range of stone
artefact variability across western NSW let alone accounting
for it. This is the legacy of Burkes Cave, one that is every bit
as exciting as when the site was first announced to Australian
archaeology over 30 years ago.
Acknowledgements
The rerecording of the Burkes Cave assemblage was funded
through a University of Auckland Graduate Research Fund Grant
to JS. Leanne Brass of the Australian Museum facilitated access
to the Burkes Cave assemblage. We thank the Edwards family
formerly of Broughton Vale Station for allowing us to visit the
Burkes Cave locality and the Broken Hill Local Aboriginal Land
Council for their continued support of our research in western
NSW. Matt Douglas provided comments on an earlier draft
of this paper. We also would like to thank Dan Witter and an
anonymous referee for their helpful comments.
References
Allen, H. 1972 Where the Crow Flies Backwards: Man and Land in the Darling
Basin. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Prehistory, Australian National
University, Canberra.
Allen, H. 1998 Reinterpreting the 1969-72 archaeological surveys of the Willandra
Lakes. Archaeology in Oceania 33(3):207-220.
Beckler, H. 1993 A Journey to Cooper’s Creek. S. Jeffries and M. Kertesz (trans),
S. Jeffries (ed.). Melbourne: Melbourne University Press at the Miegunyah
Press in Association with The State Library of Victoria.
44
Binford, L.R. 1979 Organization and formation processes: Looking at curated
technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35(3):255-273.
Bird, C.F.M. 1985 Prehistoric Lithic Resource Utilisation: A Case Study from the
Southwest of Western Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Centre for Prehistory,
University of Western Australia, Perth.
Bowler, J.M., R. Jones, H. Allen and A.G. Thorne 1970 Pleistocene human remains
from Australia: A living site and human cremation from Lake Mungo, western
New South Wales. World Archaeology 2:39-60.
Bronk-Ramsey, C. 1995 Radiocarbon calibration and analysis of stratigraphy: The
OxCal program. Radiocarbon 37:425-430.
Dibble, H.L. 1987 The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology.
American Antiquity 52(1):109-117.
Dibble, H.L. and N. Rolland 1992 On assemblage variability in the Middle
Paleolithic of Western Europe: History, perspectives, and a new synthesis. In
H.L. Dibble and P. Mellars (eds), The Middle Paleolithic: Adaptation, Behavior
and Variability, pp.1-25. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania
Museum.
Dibble, H.L., B. Roth and M. Lenior 1995 The use of raw materials at CombeCapelle Bas. In H. Dibble and M. Lenior (eds), The Middle Paleolithic Site
of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), pp.259-287. Philadelphia: The University of
Pennsylvania Museum.
Doelman, T., J. Webb and M. Domanski 2001 Source to discard: Patterns of lithic
raw material procurement and use in Sturt National Park, northwestern New
South Wales. Archaeology in Oceania 36(1):15-33.
Elston, R. 1990 A cost-benefit model of lithic assemblage variability. In R.G. Elston
and E.E. Bundy (eds), The Archaeology of James Creek Shelter, pp. 153-164.
University of Utah Anthropological Papers 115. Salt Lake City: University of
Utah Press.
Flood, J. 1995 Archaeology of the Dreamtime. Sydney: Angus and Robertson.
Gould, R.A. 1980 Living Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gould, R.A. and S. Saggers 1985 Lithic procurement in Central Australia: A closer
look at Binford’s idea of embeddedness in archaeology. American Antiquity
50(1):117-136.
Holdaway, S. 2000 Economic approaches to stone artefact raw material
variation. In A. Anderson and T. Murray (eds), Australian Archaeologist:
Collected Papers in Honour of Jim Allen, pp. 217-230. Canberra: Coombs
Academic Publishing.
Holdaway, S. 2004 Continuity and Change: An Investigation of Flaked Stone
Artefacts from the Pleistocene Deposits at Bone Cave, Southwest Tasmania,
Australia. Melbourne: Archaeology Program, School of Historical and
European Studies, La Trobe University.
Holdaway, S.J. and P.C. Fanning in press Assemblage accumulation as a time
dependent process in the arid zone of western New South Wales, Australia.
In S.J. Holdaway and L.A. Wandsnider (eds), Time in Archaeology: Time
Perspectivism Twenty Years Later. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Holdaway, S.J., P.C. Fanning and D.C. Witter 2000 Prehistoric Aboriginal
occupation of the rangelands: Interpreting the surface archaeological record
of far western New South Wales, Australia. The Rangeland Journal 22(1):
44-57.
Holdaway, S.J., P.C. Fanning, M. Jones, J. Shiner, D.C. Witter and G. Nicholls 2002
Variability in the chronology of late Holocene Aboriginal occupation on the
arid margin of southeastern Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science
29:351-363.
Holdaway, S.J., P.C. Fanning, E.J. Rhodes and Broken Hill Local Aboriginal Lands
Council 2005 A Geoarchaeological and Geochronological Assessment of
the Surface Archaeology of the Campbells Creek Area, ‘Poolamacca’ Station,
Western NSW. Unpublished report to the Australian Institute of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Studies and the NSW Department of Environment
and Conservation.
Holdaway, S.J., P.C. Fanning and J. Shiner 2005 Absence of evidence or evidence of
absence? Understanding the chronology of indigenous occupation of western
New South Wales, Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 40(2):33-49.
Holdaway, S.J., P.C. Fanning and J. Shiner 2006 Geoarchaeological Investigation of
Aboriginal Landscape Occupation in Paroo-Darling National Park, Western
NSW, Australia. RAL-e 1. Auckland: Department of Anthropology, University
of Auckland. Retrieved 18 March 2007 from http://researchspace.itss.auckland.
ac.nz/bitstream/2292/325/1/rale_no01.pdf
Holdaway, S.J., J. Shiner, and P.C. Fanning 2004 Hunter-gatherers and the
archaeology of the long-term: An analysis of surface stone artefact scatters
from Sturt National Park, New South Wales, Australia. Asian Perspectives
43(1):34-72.
Holdaway, S. and N. Stern 2004 A Record in Stone: The Study of Australia’s Flaked
Stone Artefacts. Melbourne: Museum Victoria and Aboriginal Studies Press.
Kuhn, S.L. 1991 “Unpacking” reduction: Lithic raw material economy in the
Mousterian of west-central Italy. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
10:76-106.
Lourandos, H. 1997 Continent of Hunter-Gathers: New Perspectives in Australian
Prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCormac F.G., A.G. Hogg, P.G. Blackwell, C.E. Buck, T.F.G. Higham and P.J. Reimer
2004 SHCal04 Southern Hemisphere Calibration 0–1000 cal BP. Radiocarbon
46:1087-1092.
Mills, K. and P. Buckley 2000 Koonenberry Excursion Guide. Sydney: New South
Wales Department of Mineral Resources.
Pelcin, A.W. 1997 The effect of core surface morphology on flake attributes:
Evidence from a controlled experiment. Journal of Archaeological Science
24:749-756.
Rolland, N. and H. Dibble 1990 A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic variability.
American Antiquity 55(3):480-499.
Roth, B.J. and H.L. Dibble 1998 Production and transport of blanks and tools at
the French Middle Paleolithic site of Combe-Capelle Bas. American Antiquity
63(1):47-62.
Shawcross, W. 1998 Archaeological excavations at Mungo. Archaeology in Oceania
33(3):183-200.
Shiner, J.I. 1999 Stone Artefact Assemblage Composition at Stud Creek, Sturt
National Park, New South Wales, Australia. Unpublished Honours thesis,
Department of Anthropology, University of Auckland, Auckland.
Shiner, J.I. 2004 Place as Occupational Histories: Towards an Understanding of
Deflated Surface Artefact Distributions in the West Darling, New South Wales,
Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Anthropology, University
of Auckland, Auckland.
Shiner, J.I. 2006 Artefact discard and accumulated patterns in stone artefact
assemblage composition in surface archaeological deposits from Pine Point
and Langwell Stations, western New South Wales. The Rangeland Journal 28
(2):183-196.
Shiner, J., S.J. Holdaway, H.A. Allen and P.C. Fanning 2005 Understanding stone
artefact assemblage variability in late Holocene contexts in western New South
Wales, Australia: Burkes Cave, Stud Creek and Fowlers Gap. In C. Clarkson
and L. Lamb (eds), Lithics ‘Down Under’: Australian Perspectives on Lithic
Reduction, Use and Classification. pp.67-80. BAR International Series 1408.
Oxford: Archaeopress.
Shott, M.J. 1989 On tool-class use lives and the formation of archaeological
assemblages. American Antiquity 54(1):9-30.
Shott, M.J. 1995 How much is a scraper? Curation, use rates, and the formation of
scraper assemblages. Lithic Technology 20(1):53-72.
Smith, M.A. 1986 The antiquity of seed grinding in arid Australia. Archaeology in
Oceania 21(2):29-39.
Smith, M.A. 1989 Seed gathering in inland Australia: Current evidence from seedgrinders on the antiquity of the ethnohistorical pattern of exploitation. In D.R.
Harris and G.C. Hillman (eds), Forgaing and Farming: The Evolution of Plant
Exploitation, pp.305-317. London: Unwin Hyman.
Webb, C. 1993 The lithication of a sandy environment. Archaeology in Oceania
28(3):105-111.
45
SHORT REPORTS
Bundeena Bling? Possible Aboriginal Shell Adornments
from Southern Sydney
Paul Irish
Introduction
In the course of recent archaeological test excavations undertaken
at a midden site at Bundeena in southern Sydney, several
perforated black periwinkle (Nerita atramentosa) shells were
retrieved. They resemble other worked specimens found a few
hundred metres away at Bundeena Beach Shelter over a century
earlier (Harper 1899), but not documented anywhere else in the
Sydney region in the intervening period (Figure 1). This finding
has led to a consideration of the evidence which may support
the interpretation of these recently discovered shells as culturally
modified, possibly used as personal adornments. In addition to a
review of the archaeological context and relevant literature, this
involved examining the shells originally excavated by Harper and
conducting experiments with modern black periwinkle shells.
The Shells Recorded by Harper in the 1890s
William Harper was an amateur archaeologist who recorded
several rockshelters with art or midden in the Bundeena area in the
late 1800s. One of these shelters (AHIMS#52-3-0222) (Figure 1)
was excavated by Harper in 1899, and found to contain midden
and the buried remains of an adult and four children, as well as
six perforated black periwinkle shells (Figure 2) (Harper 1899).
Few other details are available about the context of these shells
so it is not possible to ascertain their stratigraphic relationship
(if any) to the skeletal remains, and Harper does not explicitly
link the two. It is also not known if other unworked or partially
modified black periwinkles were retrieved from the midden.
The black periwinkles had portions of their shell removed near
the aperture in the form of a ‘window’. Cut marks and the overall
square form of the window are evident in the original drawing
of one of the shells in Harper’s article (Figure 2a), confirming a
cultural origin. Indeed he interprets them as personal adornments,
having formed ‘part of a necklet or some similar ornament’,
probably cut by a stone flake or oyster shell (Harper 1899:329).
Harper’s shells are held in the Australian Museum collections
and four are still whole, though degraded. Visual inspection
of these shells revealed cut marks on at least two (Figure 2b),
supporting Harper’s suggestion that the holes or ‘windows’ were
most likely cut with a stone or shell blade.
The Shells Recorded by Mary Dallas Consulting
Archaeologists
The 2004 test excavations by Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists,
undertaken in the context of a proposed development at Bundeena,
examined a rockshelter with midden known as the Bundeena UC
Midden (AHIMS#52-3-1224) (MDCA 2004a, 2004b). The shelter is
7 Mitchell Street, Arncliffe, NSW 2205, Australia
46
Figure 1 The location of the two rockshelter sites.
about 10m above and 200m behind Bundeena Creek where it enters
the southern side of Port Hacking at Horderns Beach (Figure 1).
Midden was located both within the shelter and on the steep
slope below. In the shelter it was characterised by thin (<5cm thick)
bands of shell separated by dark, sandy deposit. On the slope below
the shelter it was either sparse shell or a dense layer up to 40cm thick
with a variety of shellfish, fish and mammal remains reflective of
food procurement from the diverse habitats available within close
proximity of the shelter. Two radiocarbon dates were determined
from samples of Sydney cockle shell (Anadara trapezia), returning
values of 2024±36 BP (Wk-15436) and 1034±35 BP (Wk-15437),
indicating that the site was in use within at least the last 1800 years.
The site may have served as a wet or windy weather retreat for the
users of an open midden on the banks of Bundeena Creek below
the shelter (David Ingrey, pers. comm., 2006). The unerupted
upper premolar of a young Aboriginal child (about seven years old)
was located in the midden deposits below the shelter and was most
likely derived from a cranium upslope (presumably a burial). The
limited test excavations did not recover any further evidence for
human remains or burial features so no more can be said at present
about the location or means of interment.
Amongst the excavated midden below the shelter, four black
periwinkle shells were recovered from the same excavation
unit (shovel probe) which had portions of their shell removed
near the aperture (Figure 2c). These were first noted during the
analysis of the shellfish remains from the site. Unfortunately
they are too highly worn and fragile to retain marks of cutting or
filing (use-wear) to indicate a definite cultural origin, as has been
Short Reports
a
c
b
Figure 2 (a) One of Harper’s worked shells (Drawing: Chas Hedley) (Harper 1899, Figure 2). (b) Detail of two of Harper’s shells showing cut marks.
Arrows are perpendicular to cut marks. (c) Perforated shells from Bundeena UC Midden (Photographs: Paul Irish).
possible at other sites (e.g. Fernandez 2002; Henshilwood et al.
2004). The context in which they were found was unremarkable,
being broadly similar to other areas of the site in terms of the
distribution of shellfish species, and black periwinkles were also
present in low numbers in most other excavation units. However,
the shells were immediately regarded as curious for two reasons.
Firstly, they were reminiscent of those described by Harper
from a shelter several hundred metres away. Given that similarly
worked black periwinkle shells have not been described elsewhere
in the Sydney region over the last century, the find seemed to
be too great a coincidence. Secondly, black periwinkle shells are
relatively robust and tend to be found in midden deposits (and
washed up on the beach) as whole or slightly chipped shells, or as
fragmented or split shells. Their small size and thick shell make it
highly unlikely that a hole or window could be created in them
by any natural means – including predation by birds or animals
as documented on other gastropod species in archaeological and
non-archaeological contexts (e.g. McNiven 1996; Snyder 1983)
– without resulting in the splitting of the shell. Furthermore, the
fact that whole shells are common in many middens suggests that
it is unnecessary to remove any of the shell to extract the flesh.
Given the lack of distinguishing cultural markers on the
shells from the Bundeena UC Midden, a series of experiments
was performed on modern black periwinkle shells to test the
assumptions made about natural breakage in these shells, and
the manner by which the windows may have been cut.
Experiments with Modern Shells
•
•
a centre punch and hammer were used to punch a hole in the
shell; and
a metal blade was used to cut the shells.
These four actions were repeated on shells which had been heated
at 200°C for 10 minutes to simulate cooking.
Results
1. Crushing (six shells): The shells were remarkably resilient
to crushing, as one would expect from their thick walls and
small size. Repeated treadage failed to fragment some shells,
which only fragmented when a wooden board was stood upon,
focusing the force of the weight (90kg) onto the surface of the
shell. When shells succumbed to treadage or being crushed
in the vice, they simply shattered into many fragments
(Figure 3a). Heated shells, even once they had cooled, were
much less robust and shattered more easily (Figure 3b).
2. Punching and cutting (nine shells): A hole of considerable size
(up to 6mm diameter) could be punched through the shell
without shattering it (Figure 3c), except where the shell had
been weakened by heating. The natural convex curvature of the
shell makes it relatively easy to cut (or more precisely saw) in a
straight line across the shell, with adjoining perpendicular cuts
intersecting to form a rectangular window. After three such cuts
on one shell, the fourth cut broke and a window was formed, of
remarkably similar form to those recorded by Harper (Figure 3d).
Similar cutting on a pre-heated shell was easier but the shell was
more brittle and thus more prone to fragmentation.
Methods
To determine the effect of crushing by treadage and compaction
in the site shells were:
•
•
crushed underfoot; and
crushed in a vice.
To determine how easily a hole or window could be formed in
the shells:
Summary
This brief foray into experimental archaeology suggests several
things. Firstly, it is highly unlikely that holes of the size and regular
shape documented at the Bundeena sites could be formed on black
periwinkle shells by natural means, including the boring of shell
parasites, crunching by scavenging animals or predation by birds
as noted above. Taphonomic factors such as treadage and natural
47
Short Reports
a
b
c
d
Figure 3 (a) Fragmented shell after treadage. (b) Fragmented shell after heating and treadage. (c) 6mm hole punched through black periwinkle shell.
(d) Window sawn from black periwinkle shell by metal knife (Photographs: Paul Irish).
compaction of the midden over time are likely either to leave the
black periwinkle shells unaffected (whole) or totally fragmented,
rather than a window being created, although actual data on this are
not readily available from analysed midden assemblages without
re-examining black periwinkle shells from other excavations,
which was beyond the scope of the present study.
Secondly, it is most likely that the windows in the shells
were cut by Aboriginal people using a stone or shell blade in a
manner similar to that described above. The resulting cut marks
beyond the corner of the window in both Harper’s shells and the
experimental shells appear to support this (see Figures 2b and
3d). Other experiments have shown that a stone knife can be
used to cut an elliptical hole in shells, but note the inefficiency
of this technique in terms of tool wear in comparison to other
techniques such as hammering or gouging (Francis 1982:713).
Personal Adornments?
What the experiment does not indicate is what function the
modified shells may have performed. As noted above, it seems
unlikely that the windows were cut to extract the shellfish flesh,
and therefore an ornamental purpose is possible, but caution
should be exercised in attributing a single or ornamental purpose
to perforated shells (Francis 1982:713). Ornamentation is
certainly the conclusion of Harper, and supported by McCarthy
(1976:93), though in the latter case mainly by analogy with
perforated shells of other species known ethnographically to
have been used as personal adornments.
Similar small gastropod shells with cut ‘windows’ or drilled
holes have been documented in other parts of the world from
48
New Zealand to the Aegean (e.g. Cooper 1988; Fernandez 2002;
Henshilwood et al. 2004; Karali 1999; McGovern-Wilson et
al. 1996) where they have also been interpreted as adornments.
Other species of shell have been archaeologically documented
and interpreted elsewhere in Australia as being personal
adornments, usually on the basis of a perforation or hole in
the shell (e.g. Akerman 1973; McCarthy 1964:222, Plate 24;
Morse 1993; Przywolnik 2003), and they are also well-known
ethnographically from some areas (e.g. Akerman with Stanton
1994; Roth 1904). Black periwinkles were also collected by early
European settlers around Sydney Cove, but appear only to have
been used as food (e.g. Steele 1999).
Apart from the shells from the two Bundeena sites, the only
other examples of worked shell with a non-utilitarian purpose
documented archaeologically in the Sydney region are rounded
pieces of abalone (Haliotis ruber) shell reported from a midden
at Kurnell (Brayshaw et al. 1992) and a rounded and pierced
valve of Sydney rock oyster (Saccostrea glomerata) collected by
Eugene Stockton at Reef Beach and held by the Macleay Museum
at the University of Sydney. Furthermore, although a range of
personal adornments are historically documented to have been
worn by Aboriginal people in the Sydney area (see Attenbrow
2002:108-110 for an overview), fishhooks appear to be the only
shell objects known to have been used as personal decorations.
A perforated shark tooth recently recovered from an Aboriginal site
(AHIMS#45-5-2648) at Parramatta is said to match historically
depicted hair ornaments worn by Aboriginal people (Jo McDonald
Cultural Heritage Management Pty Ltd 2005:35, 37) but the
depiction of Balloderry (not Bungaree as suggested in the report)
Short Reports
provided in support of this interpretation appears to represent fish
(wrasse?) jaws rather than shark teeth. The piercing of the tooth
does however suggest a possible decorative purpose of some sort.
Although it is not possible to definitively state that the black
periwinkle shells from both Bundeena shelters were used as
personal adornments, another piece of contextual information,
if further explored, may lend weight to this interpretation – the
possible association, in both instances, with the burials of children.
A direct stratigraphic relationship at both sites is not proven,
but given the relatively low number of infant burials recorded
in the Sydney region, and the presence at both sites of worked
black periwinkle shells, it is worth considering that the shells
had some cultural meaning, possibly as the possessions of the
deceased children. Unfortunately since the initial test excavations
and despite conservation plans intended to preserve the site, the
Bundeena UC Midden has been heavily disturbed by development
activity so its capacity to yield further information is not known.
Conclusions
Whilst the discovery of the worked shells at Bundeena is
interesting in itself, it also serves as a cautionary tale in the
sampling and analysis of shell assemblages from midden sites.
Black periwinkles usually account for a small number of the total
shells retrieved from middens, thus the analysis of only small
shell samples from excavated sites may result in the worked shells
not being examined and thus documented. Analysis of entire
shell assemblages is not often practical, or advocated here in all
circumstances, but it is obviously critical to balance time spent
against potential rewards of information. Only a small number
of black periwinkle shells were retrieved from the limited test
excavations of the Bundeena UC Midden (48 or about 4% of
the total number of shells analysed), and excepting the four
shells documented here, none displayed any signs of working,
including preliminary or unfinished cuts on the shell surface.
It should also be acknowledged that the worn and irregular
holes in the four black periwinkle shells from the Bundeena UC
Midden may not have attracted any interest if it were not for the
known presence of Harper’s shells from the shelter nearby. Hence
there is a possibility that such shells may have been retrieved
from other sites but not recognised as culturally modified. This
highlights the importance of documenting all observations
from an excavation, no matter how relevant they may seem at
the time, as they may prove significant even a century later, as
Harper’s have.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Val Attenbrow, David Ingrey, Kathryn
Przywolnik, Dominic Steele, Katherine Szabó and Richard Wright
for their comments on a draft of this article and discussions of
the subject in general. Also, thanks to Barrina South and again to
Val Attenbrow of the Australian Museum for facilitating access to
the worked shells from Harper’s excavations, to Rose Stack and
Rebecca Conway of the Macleay Museum for informing me of
and allowing access to the worked shell from Reef Beach, and to
Dylan Besley for assistance in the shell experiments.
References
Akerman, K. 1973 Aboriginal baler shell objects in Western Australia. Mankind
9:124-125.
Akerman, K. with J. Stanton 1994 Riji and Jakoli: Kimberley Pearlshell in Aboriginal
Australia. Monograph Series 4. Darwin: Northern Territory Museum of Arts
and Sciences.
Attenbrow, V. 2002 Sydney’s Aboriginal Past: Investigating the Archaeological and
Historical Records. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.
Brayshaw, H., M. Dallas, D. Byrne, D.N. Baker, D. Donlon and A. Ross 1992 Sydney
Destination Resort. Excavation of an Open Site BHW [#52-3-724] Bate Bay,
Kurnell Peninsula NSW. Unpublished report to Besmaw Pty Ltd through
Planning Workshop.
Cooper, Z. 1988 Shell artefacts from the Andaman Islands. Australian Archaeology
26:24-41.
Fernandez,E.A.2002 Perforated Homalopoma sanguineum from Tito Bustillo (Asturias):
Mobility of Magdelanian groups in northern Spain. Antiquity 76:641-646.
Francis Jr, P. 1982 Experiments with early techniques for making whole shells into
beads. Current Anthropology 23(6):713-714.
Harper, W.R. 1899 Results of an exploration of Aboriginal rock-shelters at Port
Hacking. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 24:322-332.
Henshilwood, C., F. d’Errico, M. Vanhaeren, K. van Niekerk and Z. Jacobs 2004
Middle Stone Age shell beads from South Africa. Science 304:404 and online
supplementary material retrieved 7 March 2007 from www.sciencemag.org/
cgi/content/full/304/5669/404/DC1.
Jo McDonald Cultural Heritage Management Pty Ltd 2005 Archaeological Salvage
Excavation of Site CG1 (NPWS#45-5-2648), at the Corner of Charles & George
Streets Parramatta, NSW. Unpublished report to Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd.
Karali, L. 1999 Shells in Aegean Prehistory. BAR International Series 761. Oxford:
Archaeopress.
Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists 2004a Aboriginal Archaeological Test
Excavations. Uniting Church Conference Centre Bundeena, NSW. Unpublished
report to The Uniting Church in Australia.
Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists 2004b Aboriginal Archaeological Test
Excavations. Uniting Church Conference Centre Bundeena, NSW. Addendum:
Results of Radiocarbon Dating. Unpublished report to The Uniting Church
in Australia.
McCarthy, F.D. 1964 The archaeology of the Capertee Valley, New South Wales.
Records of the Australian Museum 26(6):197-246.
McCarthy, F.D. 1976 Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements: Including Bone, Shell
and Tooth Implements. 2nd ed. Sydney: Australian Museum Trust.
McGovern-Wilson, R., B. Allingham, P. Bristow and I. Smith 1996 Other artefacts.
In A. Anderson, B. Allingham, and I. Smith (eds), Shag River Mouth: The
Archaeology of an Early Southern Maori Village, pp.161-181. Canberra: ANH
Publications, Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Research
School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
McNiven, I.J. 1996 Mid- to late Holocene shell deposits at Hibbs Bay, southwest
Tasmania: Implications for Aboriginal occupation and marine resource
exploitation. In J. Allen (ed.), Report of the Southern Forests Archaeological
Project. Volume 1. Site Descriptions, Stratigraphies and Chronologies, pp. 219247. Bundoora: School of Archaeology, La Trobe University.
Morse, K. 1993 Shell beads from Mandu Mandu Creek rock-shelter, Cape Range
Peninsula, Western Australia, dated before 30,000b.p. Antiquity 67:877-883.
Przywolnik, K. 2003 Shell artefacts from northern Cape Range Peninsula, northwest
Western Australia. Australian Archaeology 56:12-21.
Roth, W.E. 1904 Domestic Implements, Arts and Manufactures. North Queensland
Ethnography Bulletin 7. Brisbane: Government Printer.
Snyder, N.F.R. and H.W. Kale II 1983 Mollusk predation by snail kites in Colombia.
The Auk 100:93-97.
Steele, D. 1999 Animal bone and shell artefacts. In Godden Mackay Heritage
Consultants (eds), The Cumberland/Gloucester Streets Site, The Rocks.
Archaeological Investigation Report. Volume 4, Part 2 Specialist Artefact
Reports. Unpublished report to the Sydney Cove Authority.
49
Short Reports
A Reinvestigation of the Archaeology of Geosurveys Hill,
Northern Simpson Desert
M.A. Smith¹ and J. Ross²
In October 1962 Norman Tindale was flown to the Geosurveys
Hill area, deep in the Simpson dunefield (Figure 1), to follow up
reports of prehistoric occupation exposed on interdunal pans
in the area (Anon. 1962). Tindale, then at the South Australian
Museum, had been invited to make the trip by Reg Sprigg,
Managing Director of Geosurveys of Australia Ltd, one of several
companies prospecting the Simpson Desert for oil and gas in the
1960s (Sprigg 1993). Geosurveys staff had noticed that ‘long lines
of stones on a claypan disappear under sand hills’ (Sprigg 1993).
Left alone in the desert in the late afternoon, Tindale, then nearly
62, was a hardy, self-reliant field archaeologist: ‘I took stock of
my camp,’ he wrote in his journal, ‘got together some firewood
against the night, chose a place to sleep and then made a hasty
reconnaissance of the claypan.’ Later he ‘fed on chops grilled in
ashes, made tea and then with a flashlight searched for and found
stone implements … on the claypan’ (Tindale 1962:7). Although
he had planned for several days of fieldwork, Tindale only had a
few hours of daylight in the area as the plane returned the next
morning to collect him before impending rain made local clay
pans too soft to land on.
His investigation showed extensive stone arrangements on
several pans, as well as scatters of chipped stone artefacts, which
Tindale thought represented two phases of occupation: the older
and more extensive was 6000–8000 years old, the other was
more ephemeral and dated within the last 1000 years. He fully
intended to follow up his initial visit (‘I am on 24 hours notice to
go again’) but the opportunity never came (Tindale 1962:51).
The early Holocene is poorly documented in archaeological
sequences across arid Australia, yet this was a period of significant
environmental change with new opportunities for Aboriginal
populations. The period from 13,000 BP is likely to have seen
some of the most favourable conditions for hunter-gatherer
settlement in the desert, peaking around 6000–7000 BP followed
by a deteriorating climate after about 5000 BP. The regional
response to these conditions will have varied but the early
Holocene may well have seen more sustained use of what today
are fairly marginal parts of the desert for human use (cf. Smith
et al. 1991; Veth et al. 1990). The possibility that the Geosurveys
Hill evidence represented an extension of Aboriginal settlement
into the Simpson dunefield at this time, and was associated with
construction of a major stone arrangement, caught the attention
of one of us (MAS) more than 25 years ago. However, because
of the difficult logistics, an opportunity to visit the site did not
become available until 2006.
Today, the northern Simpson Desert is the most inhospitable
area within the Simpson dunefield, itself one of most arid
parts of the Australian continent. With median annual rainfall
less than 100mm, the area consists of active sand ridges, with
open spinifex steppe and isolated stands of Grevillea (mainly
¹ Centre for Historical Research, National Museum of Australia,
GPO Box 1901, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
² School of Human and Environmental Studies, University of New
England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia
50
Figure 1 The Simpson Desert, showing the location of Geosurveys
Hill in relation to ephemeral rivers and sandridges. Black triangles
show archaeological sites (including mikiri wells) discussed in Smith
and Clark (1993).
beefwood and rattlepod) in broad interdune swales. There are
few claypans or rock outcrops and none of the small mikiri wells
that underpinned Wangkangkurru settlement in the central
and southern sections of the dunefield (Hercus and Clark 1986;
Smith and Clark 1993). The Geosurveys Hill area is unusual in
that it consists of a focal area of silcrete lag, gibber surfaces and
small claypans associated with Geosurveys Hill – one of the few
outcrops of isotropic rock in the Simpson Desert. The area is
more than 90km from the terminal floodouts of the ephemeral
rivers – the Todd, Hale, Ilogwa and Hay – that empty into the
northern fringe of the dunefield. Anthropological research for
the Simpson Desert Land Claim in the 1980s demonstrated
the paucity of contemporary knowledge and ethnographic
records for this part of the desert (Olney 1991, 1992, 1993),
suggesting that the focus of pre-contact occupation was around
the floodouts further north. Certainly chipped stone artefacts
are very rare outside of these areas, except in the Geosurveys
Hill area.
Field investigation by the authors in May 2006 showed that
there are five pans near Geosurveys Hill, in a west-east series with
Short Reports
the hill at the eastern end. These pans are aligned roughly northsouth, with the largest 800m long. They form local depressions
in interdune areas, where wind erosion has exposed a lag of
yellow-grey, cherty (pedogenic), silcrete cobbles (up to 150mm
in diameter). In places, the silcrete cobbles are interspersed with
gibber with characteristic desert varnish. Within these pans,
there are smaller focal claypans, rarely more than 10–15m across,
which would hold water after rain. Geosurveys Hill is a conical
hill of silcrete, about 30m above the swales, surrounded by an
extensive pediment of silcrete gravel. Both the hill and the lag on
the pans are remnants of a duricrust surface of probable Tertiary
age (Mabbutt 1971:155-156).
There are a range of archaeological remains in the
area. Geosurveys Hill is a silcrete quarry: the hill has been
extensive quarried, with the highest density of flaking debris
(>100 artefacts/m²) on the crest, and an extensive scatter of core
reduction debris and blocky platform cores on the hill slope
and surrounding pediment. There is no evidence for specialised
reduction techniques, or of intensive on-site reduction of cores,
and there are few retouched tools.
The pans to the west all have palimpsests of stone
arrangements of different ages, consisting of single or
occasionally multiple lines of silcrete cobbles, stone piles, and
sometimes circles of stone or cleared areas (2-4m diameter).
Several of the stone arrangements are clearly of some antiquity,
as they consist of disarticulated or dispersed lines of stones, with
several phases of rebuilding on different alignments. Deflation
appears to be the major process responsible for destruction
of the stone arrangements: some stone lines have been laid
out on sandy surfaces 30–50mm above the modern surface of
the pan. Subsequent deflation of exposed surfaces has led to
dislodgement and dispersal of stones. Others appear to have
sunk into the pan surface, presumably as wetting and drying
caused swelling and contraction of the clays. The most recent
arrangements consist of intact discrete geometric arrangements,
and stone piles, generally covering relatively small areas (up to
50m x 20m) at the southern ends of the pans. Figure 2 shows an
example of the resulting palimpsest of stone arrangements (on
Pan 2, 2.4km west of Geosurveys Hill). In this case, it is the long
axial alignments, extending for more than 300m, which have
been rebuilt or curated, whereas the older arrangements were
apparently of a different form and have been constructed on a
different alignment (mostly short, disarticulated lines trending
north-east).
Tindale thought the circular cleared areas were areas swept
clean to prepare ‘calandrinia seed’ or possibly the sites of huts.
We think both of these explanations are unlikely: the positions
are exposed to strong south-easterly winds, and there are no seedgrinding implements in local artefact scatters. Rather the cleared
areas seem aligned to articulate in some way with the latest phase
of use of the stone arrangements.
All of the pans contain an extensive scatter of reduction
debris from the flaking of silcrete cobbles. Most artefacts
are lightly patinated. In a few places, there are discrete arcs
of reduction debris that retain functional association with a
core. Here, the knapping debris is fresh and unpatinated: these
must reflect the last phase of Aboriginal use of the pans. Pan
2 seems to have been the focus of occupation, as it is the only
pan to have a wide range of lithologies amongst the stone
artefact assemblage (chalcedony, mudstone, quartzite, exotic
red silcrete and local yellow-grey cherty silcrete), combined
with a wide range of retouched artefacts, and more heavily
reduced cores and flakes. Much of this material rests on
aeolian surfaces on dune flanks and local sandsheet, and has
subsequently deflated onto the margins of the pan. We could
find no artefacts in situ in indurated dune core sediments.
The most common formal tools are tula adze flakes and tula
slugs (we counted 25), uniformly on exotic white chalcedony.
Geometric microliths and endscrapers were present but rare.
There were no seed-grinding implements and only one small
amorphous grindstone.
Although early Holocene occupation of this dune field
remains a distinct possibility, the balance of evidence in the
Geosurveys Hill area points to late Holocene occupation.
The stone arrangements suggest episodic occupation within
the late Holocene, separated by periods of disuse. We
systematically searched the margins of the pans for hearths,
hoping to establish a radiocarbon chronology for the site.
However, even where occupation remains lie on the more
indurated sands of exposed dune cores, no hearths, fireplaces
or pits were preserved. We are unable, therefore, to determine
whether or not use of the Geosurveys Hill area correlates with
documented changes in prehistoric settlement elsewhere in
central Australia at 3000 BP or at 1000–1500 BP (Smith 1996;
Thorley 1998). The latter seems likely as palaeoclimatic data
registers an increase in extreme rainfall events during this
period, precisely the sort of events that would favour periodic
reactivation of this area as a focal point of human activity in
the Simpson Desert.
Tindale appears to have interpreted the large primary flakes,
large flake tools and blocky platform cores that result from
working of the local silcrete cobbles as representative of his
‘Tartangan’ phase of occupation. His aircraft must have landed
on Pan 4, one of the westernmost pans (4km west of Geosurveys
Hill) because this is the only pan where a light plane could
land. It is also the pan with most evidence for oil survey activity
(seismic lines, oil drums, tyre marks). In the time available,
Tindale did not reach Geosurveys Hill or see the silcrete quarry
there. If he had, he would certainly have realised that much of
the character of the stone assemblage is due to its proximity to a
silcrete quarry, rather than an early Holocene age. However, his
short trip deserves recognition as the first archaeological work in
the Simpson dunefield.
Acknowledgements
Travel to Geosurveys Hill was supported by 4X4 Australia
magazine, Land Rover Australia, Cooper Tires and ARB Gawler
with fuel courtesy of Rod Parker and RFW Trucks. We thank Allan
Whiting for organising the trip, and our travelling companions:
Allan and Kez, Tony and Sheila, Stan and Sheena, Stuart, Rob,
Brad, Jesse and James, Graham and Kevin. The Aboriginal Areas
Protection Authority (Alice Springs) advised that there are
currently no records of sacred sites in the Geosurveys Hill area.
We thank Philip Jones and the South Australian Museum for
access to Tindale’s Simpson Desert Journal. Figure 1 was drawn
by Win Mumford. Fieldwork was supported in part by AIATSIS
G2005/7067.
51
Short Reports
Figure 2 Pan 2, showing stone arrangements of varying age. The later constructions (black) consist of long axial alignments, using pale silcrete
cobbles that contrast with the black gibber surface of the pan. Earlier construction phases (grey) are preserved mainly as short disarticulated
lines trending northeast, and consist of cobbles that now have a dark patina similar to the gibber surface. The outline of the pan is shown by the
dotted line. The major scatters of stone artefacts occur on deflating sand surfaces on the southern and eastern margins of the pan.
References
Anon. 1962 The desert gives up thousand-year secrets. And an Adelaide scientist
has a strange birthday. Sunday Mail 3 November:31.
Hercus, L.A. and P.M. Clark 1986 Nine Simpson Desert wells. Archaeology in
Oceania 21(1):51-62.
Mabbutt, J.A. 1971 Denudation chronology in Central Australia: Structure, climate,
and landform inheritance in the Alice Springs area. In J.N. Jennings and J.A.
Mabbutt (eds), Landform Studies from Australia and New Guinea, pp.144-188.
Canberra: Australian National University Press.
Olney, H.W. 1991 Finke Land Claim: Report No 39. Canberra: Aboriginal Land
Commissioner, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Olney, H.W. 1992 North-West Simpson Desert Land Claim: Report No 41. Canberra:
Aboriginal Land Commissioner, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Olney, H.W. 1993 North Simpson Desert Land Claim: Report No 45. Canberra:
Aboriginal Land Commissioner, Australian Government Publishing Service.
Smith, M.A. 1996 Prehistory and human ecology in Central Australia: An
archaeological perspective. In S.R. Morton and D.J. Mulvaney (eds), Exploring
Central Australia: Society, the Environment and the 1894 Horn Expedition,
pp.61-73. Chipping Norton, NSW: Surrey Beatty & Sons.
52
Smith, M.A. and P.M. Clark 1993 Radiocarbon dates for prehistoric occupation of
the Simpson Desert. Records of the South Australian Museum 26(2):121-127.
Smith, M.A., E. Williams and R.J. Wasson 1991 The archaeology of the JSN site: Some
implications for the dynamics of human occupation in the Strzelecki Desert during
the late Pleistocene. Records of the South Australian Museum 25(2):175-92.
Sprigg, R.C. 1993 A Geologist Strikes Out: Recollections 1954-1993. Adelaide:
Arkaroola Pty Ltd.
Thorley, P.B. 1998 Shifting Location, Shifting Scale: A Regional Landscape Approach
to the Prehistoric Archaeology of the Palmer River Catchment, Central Australia.
Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Anthropology, School of Southeast
Asian and Australian Studies, Northern Territory University, Darwin.
Tindale, N.B. 1962 Journal of Field Work in and near the Simpson Desert (Arunta
Desert) Central Australia. Unpublished ms AA 338/1/24, Tindale Archive,
South Australian Museum, Adelaide.
Veth, P.M., G. Hamm and R. Lampert 1990 The archaeological significance of the
Lower Cooper Creek. Records of the South Australian Museum 24(1):43-66.
BOOK REVIEWS
SHAMANS, SORCERERS AND SAINTS:
A PREHISTORY OF RELIGION
Brian Hayden
Smithsonian Books, Washington, 2003, xi+468pp,
ISBN 1-58834-168-2
School of Humanities and Communications, University of
Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
The idea of this book developed from a university course on
the prehistory of religion run by the author over a number
of years. Its main emphasis examines ‘traditional’ religions;
that is, those that are transmitted orally or experientially
rather than ‘book’ religions such as Christianity, Judaism or
Islam. Hayden’s theoretical perspective explicitly employs
cultural ecology to explain why religion developed and how
it continues to evolve today. In this context, belief emerged
as an evolutionary mechanism that enabled humans to cope
with the stress and crises experienced by our early human
ancestors. To quote the author:
The general premise of this book is that basic religious
behaviours of the past and present have been shaped by
two factors: ecology and an innate emotional foundation
in humans that distinguishes us from other animals. This
emotional foundation specifically consists of the ability to
enter into ecstatic states via a number of techniques and to
create strong, emotionally binding relationships with other
people (or institutions or ideals) associated with those states.
These factors become crucial in understanding the origins of
the human penchant for religious experiences (p.3).
To some extent what makes this book unique is its attempt
to look at some of the fundamental underpinnings of ‘belief ’
common to us all, from an archaeological perspective; indeed
it is the use of the archaeological evidence for religious practice
that is the strongest component of the book. This evidence
is most strongly presented in Chapter 4 in a review of the
evidence for Neanderthal ritual in southern France, in which
a convincing case is put forward for complex ritual capacity in
pre-modern human populations. Although providing strong
evidence for the presence of belief systems in early prehistory,
Hayden’s emphasis on the universal role of states of altered
consciousness (such as shamanism) as fundamental to early
belief systems is less convincingly demonstrated. Indeed,
one of the problems with the book is when Hayden departs
from the archaeological data/evidence into descriptions of
religious practices such as shamanism based on contemporary
or historical examples.
Clearly when dealing with a ‘prehistory’ of a cognitive
process such as belief, the use of the ethnographic record in
proper context can provide valuable insight into how people
in the past may have structured their belief systems. However,
there are major problems with equating contemporary
Indigenous belief systems with those of the deep past. These
problems are further compounded when such analogies are
applied to peoples on different continents, as seems to be
the case when comparing archaic human religious practices
with contemporary human practices. For instance, in the
‘Primal Palaeolithic’ chapter, Hayden uses a contemporary
description of Aboriginal Australian ceremony as being
analogous to ‘rituals from the very dawn of humanity’ (p.88).
This description is accompanied by two photographs of
Arunta Aboriginal men partaking in ceremony. Hayden goes
on to state that:
Ethnographic observations among hunter-gatherers and other
traditional groups provide archaeologists with some inkling
of what ritual life may have been like in the distant past. If the
ecological conditions and adaptations of the present and past
groups are relatively similar, reasonably persuasive arguments
can be made that the ritual life of the past may have been
similar to the present (p.89).
This temporal and spatial conflation of behaviour is
to some extent compatible within a cultural ecological
framework because if hunters and gatherers live in a particular
environment they will have similar cultural adaptations – time
and place are subordinate to ecological conditions. There is
little place within this framework for the idea of cultural
practice as an internally driven ‘independent system of ideas’
(p.14) specific to place and time. Unfortunately the portrayal
of contemporary hunter-gatherer societies in this way also
evokes the image of contemporary Aboriginal people as
living fossils; the living template of stone-age Europeans. Or
as nineteenth century unilineal evolutionary theorists such
as Lubbock state, observations of the life of these ‘miserable
savages’ would ‘throw light on the ancient remains found
in Europe, and on the condition of the early races which
inhabited our continent’ (Lubbock 1865:336-337, 354, cited
in McNiven and Russell 2005:63).
This book attempts a difficult task in presenting a world
prehistory of religion and is unique in its approach and scope
on this topic. It is beautifully published and lavishly illustrated,
and in spite of some of the issues outlined above, the detailed
presentation of the archaeological correlates relating to belief
makes this a worthwhile purchase for anyone teaching a subject
on early religion. Whether you agree with the interpretation
of the evidence, or the rather hardline theoretical approach
adopted, is perhaps secondary to its value as a source book on
this somewhat neglected area of archaeology.
References
McNiven, I.J. and L. Russell 2005 Appropriated Pasts: Indigenous Peoples and the
Colonial Culture of Archaeology. New York: AltaMira Press.
53
Book Reviews
THE GODDESS AND THE BULL:
ÇATALHÖYÜK: AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL
JOURNEY TO THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION
Michael Balter
Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2006, xiii+400,
ISBN 1-59874-069-5
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, QLD 4072,
Australia
Çatalhöyük is a near legendary Neolithic site in central Turkey
under renewed archaeological investigation since 1993 when Ian
Hodder made it the focus of his practical application of ‘reflexive
archaeology’. In the revised paperback edition of The Goddess
and the Bull, Science correspondent Michael Balter takes the
reader on an entertaining journey through the complex and at
times unbelievable archaeology of the site in its regional context.
As alluded to in its introduction, the book takes the form of an
ambitious biography, weaving together an historical narrative
with the personal histories of many famous, infamous and notso-famous characters that have contributed to Çatalhöyük’s
unlikely status in the popular and professional psyche. At this
point I have to declare an interest – I am one of those not-sofamous characters and while interviewed for the book I was,
thankfully, avoided in Balter’s biographical sections. Jaded by
three years of employment on Hodder’s project, including the
1999 ‘long season’, and with both positive and negative memories
of that time, it took considerable effort to turn the book’s opening
page. I am glad to have done so and now offer this review with a
modicum of ‘insider-knowledge’ and an active research interest
in the Turkish Neolithic.
After starting with an account of his own peculiar and almost
accidental incorporation into the project, Balter’s narrative kicks
off with the story of James Mellaart’s initial work at the site in
the 1960s and ends with a party on the dig-house roof in 2001.
To summarise as briefly as possible, Mellaart discovers and then
excavates a huge Neolithic mound in then archaeologicallyunfashionable central Turkey. He discovers a well-preserved site
of unexpected complexity, replete with beautiful and unique
artwork, figurines and numerous human burials beneath the
floors of its densely-packed houses. Fame is assured as he reveals
his stunning finds and claims the site as the earliest known city,
turning accepted knowledge on its head. He is then ejected from
Turkey after the theft and sale of artefacts by some workmen and
his involvement in the Dorak Affair – involving, and I assure you
this is not made up, a mysterious woman on a train and equally
mysterious treasure. Even in mothballs, Çatalhöyük becomes
ever more well-known as a result of Mellaart’s voracious appetite
for publicity, including publication of controversial ‘kilim’ wall
paintings, the site’s appropriation by Gimbutas-inspired Mother
Goddess worshippers and, not to be forgotten, the archaeological
importance of the finds. Though further archaeological research
eventually shows Çatalhöyük to be but one element of a regional
Neolithic sequence with local antecedants, the concentration of
artwork in its middle levels remains unparalleled. Cut to 28 years
later, Ian Hodder unexpectedly becomes the person to reopen the
site and starts a 25-year project that rapidly becomes one of the
54
most high profile and largest research excavations on earth with
a cast of thousands. Hodder aims to test Mellaart’s conclusions
and go beyond the crude empiricism of the ‘New Archaeology’
(i.e. science-based archaeology emerging in the 1960s and
1970s) to develop his own brand of contextual archaeology. The
project also allows Hodder to investigate further the Neolithic
phenomenon, this time in the excavation trench rather than
the armchair, and address one of the key questions of human
existence, as phrased in a Science piece by Balter (1998): ‘Why
settle down? The mystery of communities’.
Balter’s chronological narrative is peppered with biographies
of key characters in the Çatalhöyük story, including many of
the archaeologists who have contributed their labour to its
investigation. There is a natural focus on researchers with a
long presence at the site and those, such as Greek charcoal
analyst Eleni Asouti, whose presence transcends geopolitical
expectations. The most enjoyable and relevant accounts are of
Mellaart and Hodder; I have to admit that I tired of some others
towards the end of the book and wondered whether some of the
personal details were necessary. Mostly, the biographies were an
effective means of illuminating parts of the story, the detail of
archaeological techniques, the excitement and plain hard work
involved in discovery and the personal drive behind many of the
characters leading to their appearance at Çatalhöyük. Having
experienced Mellaart’s final years as a lecturer, including those
slides of the Dorak treasure and ‘new’ wall paintings, I could
understand Hodder’s fascination with both the man and the site.
The biographical approach also allowed a textured understanding
of life at the excavation itself; its highs and lows and many
tensions. Craig Cessford’s thoughts on the arrival of the main
dig team midway through the 1999 long season (p.269) mirrored
my own exactly. Many specialist techniques are also effortlessly
explained via personal experience and occasional wry comment,
giving a rich representation of the frantic and methodologically
deep investigation of the site.
To add further meat to a fairly rich stew, the author somehow
manages to insert a condensed Neolithic into the narrative,
including many of its key theories, sites, debates, researchers and
recent discoveries. In addition there is a well-written and highly
condensed history of archaeological theory thrown in for good
measure. The treatment is necessarily brief and focuses mainly
on Hodder’s views and the archaeology of Neolithic Turkey, but
provides both an indispensable backdrop to the site biography
and a useful entry point for the uninitiated. The author mostly
provides succinct and accurate précis of the issues, though in one
or two places I sensed a loss of focus and a density in writing that
may have baffled the newcomer. This type of writing is not easy,
yet it is all too easy for archaeological professionals to scoff at
such syntheses and to pick holes endlessly in the generalisations
and simplifications that are necessarily part of a broadly
accessible work. Indeed I have heard many such gripes about this
book. While I do not agree with some of Balter’s observations
(published data at Aşıklı Höyük show it to not be a gatherer
site), I admire his ability to provide a coherent, comprehensible
and well-founded argument, especially in a subject carrying so
many strong, varied and conflicting opinions. Some sections
were particularly well-written and provide excellently worked
examples illustrating how we can and should, to paraphrase
Wheeler’s wise words that grace the Chapter 1 heading, dig
Book Reviews
up people not things. My favourite concerns the identity of
mudbrick makers (p.144) which draws on analyses of mudbrick
composition and skeletal analysis. In other places, I did feel that
accounts were over-dramatised to either segue between chapters
or arouse the reader’s interest. A few times I also winced at what I
considered unnecessary exaggeration, for example in describing
the result of Mellaart’s expulsion from Turkey as depriving
‘humankind of a cornerstone of its heritage’ (p.54).
Difficult and highly controversial issues are not avoided, but
treated with caution and skill. And there is plenty of controversy
in the story without journalistic sensationalism, including the
baffling ‘Dorak Affair’, Mellaart’s expulsion from Turkey and his
credibility, especially regarding claims of kilim wall-paintings,
Hodder’s acceptance and demands of corporate sponsorship, the
missing bead that almost closed the dig in 1996, tensions with
the Mother Goddess community and the minefield of Turkish
political and cultural sensitivities. These issues are reported
factually and the lack of sensationalism not only strengthens
the account but adds weight to their impact on the story. Of
course there are the visible and rather predictable personal
gripes and divisions in the dig team, especially the rift between
the excavators, self-styled as honest put-upon labourers, and socalled specialists, styled by everyone as a bunch of demanding,
prima-donnas. From my experience, Balter’s treatment of this
issue is pretty good and he illustrates nicely why some of the
tensions between teams occurred and that the two warring
factions contained a rather wider range of personalities than the
preceding sentence may suggest. You can read the diary entries
yourself to see how vicious the war of words got and then marvel
at how Shahina Farid managed to call a truce and make the dig
work, which it certainly did by the time I arrived there.
The author also provides enough information for those who
are interested in evaluating how well the project has fulfilled
its aims to develop a reflexive method, as set out by Hodder in
a 1997 Antiquity article, which also managed to annoy every
field archaeologist who read it. In short I don’t believe it has
and suspect Hodder grossly misunderstood the extent to
which archaeologists debate and query their own work in the
field, especially the definition, description and interpretation
of archaeological contexts. I thought the comments of Shahina
Faird, Hodder’s field director, about ‘interpretation at the trowel’s
edge’ (p.145) were rather apposite in this regard. I also suspect he
underestimated the extent to which specialist fields are integrated
into many excavations in southwest Asia and the strong record of
specialist residence on excavations.
A final theme that deserves mention is the complex place
that Çatalhöyük has in the broader world: Turkish national
icon, religious site, inspiration to artists and fashion designers,
vehicle for economic growth, cultural heritage problem and
advertising tool. Again, the author manages to tread carefully
through this tangled web of relationships and explains why many
came about. The preface shows that the real world has bitten
back at Michael Balter, with the Mother Goddess worshiping
community especially aggrieved by his coverage. More locally, an
Australian review of The Goddess and the Bull led to one article
stating that both the book and the Çatalhöyük project itself
showed archaeology to be a waste of time, based on unproveable
conjecture (Campbell 2006). Ignoring the inherent lack of
intellectual rigour in the argument (post-modern theory used to
support a positivist statement!) and clear misreading of the text,
the example shows just how far Çatalhöyük’s influence extends
into the world beyond the academy.
On a technical note, the book is an attractive production,
with a quirky cover design, comfortable font and pleasing
illustrations at each chapter heading by John Swogger, Hodder’s
illustrator. A section of black-and-white plates provides, with a
solitary map at the start of the book, illustrative material for the
text. For those not familiar with the region, a map referring to
some of the Levantine sites mentioned in the text and perhaps a
chronological table to help understand the temporal relationships
of sites mentioned in the text would have been useful. I noticed
only a couple of typos, a minor miracle in modern academic
publishing, and this edition has a useful preface and epilogue, the
latter bringing the reader up-to-date with findings immediately
prior to publication. Extensive footnotes and bibliography, with
a good index and attractive price tag, complete an impressive
package and the volume demonstrates once again that Left Coast
Press has well and truly arrived as an ambitious, high-quality
archaeological publisher.
Beyond its relevance to those of us obsessed by the Turkish
Neolithic, The Goddess and the Bull is a highly worthwhile read
for anyone interested in the complexity of archaeology, how it
relates to the outside world and the dynamics of its theory and
practice. The book presents a very different form of archaeology
to that familiar to many AA readers and gives a good insight
to the stifling conditions of large-scale Old World excavation. If
you ever wondered what life was like on one of those ‘cast of
thousands’ newsreel excavations from the Middle East, then you
may get a good idea by reading this book. For budding directors,
you could also do worse than reflect on the trials of Ian Hodder
as he raised funds and gained permission to open the site anew.
I felt a great deal of admiration for his persistence and ultimate
success, let alone the project he has stitched together. This is
not the definitive work on the archaeology of Çatalhöyük that
some may hope for, and indeed it does not set out to be so, even
though some reviews have I think unfairly judged it in these
terms. It does, however, fulfill its aims extremely well and gets as
close as anyone has to distilling the archaeological process and
the essence of what makes Çatalhöyük such a focus of national,
personal and professional obsession. In writing this review I am
again stunned at just how much the story contains. If you want
the detailed archaeological data produced by Hodder’s team,
read the McDonald Institute volumes that have recently been
produced and/or visit the project’s sleek and comprehensive
website (www.catalhoyuk.com). For a personal, and it has to be
said rather partial, synthesis of this material seek out Hodder’s
The Leopard’s Tale (2006), which fleshes out his theory of ‘material
entanglement’ described briefly in Balter’s tome.
To conclude, The Goddess and the Bull provides a good
read about one of the few prehistoric sites that attract a global
interest by both public and professional alike. The popular style
will not be to everyone’s taste, but I certainly enjoyed the book
and admire Michael Balter’s ability to sensitively weave together
so many strands of information, opinion, and biographical
information. In doing so, he has produced an entertaining
and high-quality popular archaeological text based on good
scholarship and exhaustive journalism. The Goddess and the
Bull provides the general public with an excellently-written and
55
Book Reviews
comprehensible entry point to our subject, students with a great
insight into the complexity and reality of working in our field,
the teacher a wonderful text to prompt critical and wide-ranging
discussion about archaeology, and the established professional
plenty of food for thought. And its last sentence is one with
whose sentiment I am sure we all agree. I am pleased to have
finally read it.
References
Balter, M. 1998 Why settle down? The mystery of communities. Science 282:
1442-1445.
Campbell, F. 2006 Molesting the past. Weekend Australian (Review Section) 25
February:14.
Hodder, I. 1997 ‘Always momentary, fluid and flexible’: Towards a reflexive
excavation methodology. Antiquity 71:691-700.
Hodder, I. 2006 The Leopard’s Tale: Revealing the Mysteries of Çatalhöyük. London:
Thames and Hudson.
INTRODUCTION TO ROCK ART RESEARCH
David S. Whitley
Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2005, xiv+215pp,
ISBN 1-59874-001-6
Reviewed by Natalie R. Franklin
QLD 4072, Australia
This book is exactly what the title proclaims it to be – an
introduction to rock art research – or ‘an introductory text,
intended for college students but also useful to professional
archaeologists and resource managers who … develop an interest
in or need to study or protect rock art sites’ (p.xi). Arising from
the need to provide a text book for a short course on rock art
research taught by the author at San Carlos University in 2004,
the result, this book, was also only ‘intended as a starting point for
students and archaeologists interested in rock art research (and
not … the final word on how this research must be conducted)’
(p.xi). As such, the book reflects the author’s own experience,
research interests, and biases, as Whitley unashamedly points out
(p.xi), and draws on a wealth of examples from the area where he
has undertaken most of his work, North America. However, any
introductory work on rock art research or archaeology in general
will necessarily reflect the biases and agendas of its author, but
there is still much for the student, archaeologist or cultural
heritage professional to learn from this text.
The book is divided into 10 chapters, plus a useful appendix
with two examples of recording forms that might be applicable
in any rock art recording project, a glossary of the terms used
throughout the book, and an extensive reference list providing
good coverage of the field, although I would like to have seen
more of the Australian literature cited.
The introductory chapter covers definitions of rock art
and the techniques used to make it. It is an indication of the
relative comprehensiveness of this book that Whitley includes
earth figures in his definition of rock art (i.e. intaglios such as
the Nazca lines of Peru and geoglyphs or stone arrangements
like those found in Australia and northern Chile), although it is
unfortunate that they are not considered again. Whitley stresses
56
that rock art research is a subdiscipline of archaeology, but with
its own specialised literature, addressing sometimes-different
problems and requiring its own analytical techniques.
Chapter 2 provides some useful information on rock art
fieldwork and how to record sites, differentiating ‘narrative
recording’, or written documentation of sites, from ‘graphic
documentation’ by such means as photography and tracing.
There is a good coverage of some of the latest recording
techniques, including digital photography and 3D laser
scanning of panels. Whitley stresses the destructive nature of
some recording and of archaeology in general, and although
he mostly provides a balanced approach, I disagree with his
view that direct tracing of paintings is acceptable if they are
covered by mineral skins or coatings. The effect of such tracing
on these accretions and their dating potential is unknown,
and the general precautionary principle followed in the field
of conservation is applicable here. A minor quibble I have
with Whitley’s lucid explanation of the various recording
techniques is the apparent contradiction between his statement
that stippling should be avoided in direct tracings of rock art
panels, as the accuracy of the traced lines is unclear, and his
inclusion of an illustration of a traced panel from his own
recording research that features stippling in the legend. In
this chapter, Whitley again emphasises that rock art is just one
component of a larger archaeological phenomenon, and that
the archaeological context of rock art sites should be recorded
as this may shed light on the creation of the rock art itself,
sentiments with which I strongly agree.
The classification of rock art and the thorny issue of the
equation of similar groupings of motifs with cultural-historical
styles are considered in Chapter 3. In this chapter, Whitley’s
identification of rock art motifs as particular subjects appears as
far too certain, such as his interpretation of engraved ‘bighorn
sheep’ in the Coso Range of eastern California as dead adult
males rather than the pregnant females usually cited. A large
body of research has shown that the precise identification of
particular rock art figures is problematic, and also that it is not
even required for meaningful analysis to follow.
Chapter 4 is a comprehensive coverage of dating methods
for rock art and the advances that have been made in recent
years to provide it with a chronological context. The chapter
includes some little-known techniques, such as cosmogenic
dating and lead-profile dating. However, the certainty provided
by some techniques, such as cation-ration dating, has been
overstated, and Whitley’s views on this method stand in stark
contrast to the Australian experience, where the controversial
results obtained for a rock engraving site in the Olary Province
have since been withdrawn.
The next four chapters consider the interpretation of rock
art and the various approaches that have been taken. Chapter 5
contains ‘a quick refresher on scientific method and some
related topics … because the careful use of scientific method
provides our best means for studying rock art’ (p.71), and
underlines the importance of systematic data collection and
analysis compared to the use of anecdotal evidence.
Symbolic and ethnographic interpretation is covered in
Chapter 6. A contrast is drawn between informed approaches,
where ethnological or ethnographic evidence is used, and
formal approaches, which feature outsiders’ interpretations of
Book Reviews
rock art using quantitative or locational data and other evidence.
Although this chapter has a useful and clear explanation of
ethnographic approaches to rock art interpretation, it would
have benefited from a greater use of Australian examples. This is
particularly apparent in the discussion of rock art manufactured
to commemorate mythic beings and their actions at certain
locales, where parallels with Dreamtime ancestors and the
Dreaming tracks they created are all too clear.
A major emphasis of Whitley’s approach is apparent in
Chapter 7, which discusses the neuropsychological (N-P)
model, and ‘shamanic’ and ‘shamanistic’ interpretations of rock
art. Although numerous examples that illustrate this approach
are cited by Whitley throughout the book, this chapter contains
the first coherent discussion of the model, drawing the various
examples together. I found this chapter quite illuminating and
learnt several things that I had not been aware of before, such
as the observation that altered states of consciousness involve
the generation of iconic (figurative) as well as geometric images
in the brain, and that these would be expected in a corpus
of rock art if its origin is shamanic (made by shamans) or
shamanistic (not made by shamans, but relating to shamanic
beliefs and practices). The N-P model has been widely used
to interpret rock art in Europe, Siberia, southern Africa and
the United States, but has only rarely been applied in Australia.
Although I find the model often unnecessarily complex in the
interpretation of rock art, it may be fruitful to explore it further
as just one explanation rather than a blanket explanation for
variation in Australian rock art through time and space.
Chapter 8 lumps other formal approaches to rock art
interpretation under the headings ‘Landscape and Distributional
Studies’, further subdivided into ‘Archaeoastronomy and
Acoustics’; ‘Rock Art as Communication’; and ‘Ethnicity and
Territoriality’; ‘Quantitative and Metrical Studies’; ‘Physical
Analyses’; and ‘Structuralism and Semiotics’. These subdivisions
in a single chapter make the book appear unbalanced in its
presentation of the various approaches that have been taken
to the interpretation of rock art, especially when compared
to the devotion of a whole chapter to just one model, the
neuropsychological. This chapter is also dismissive in
tone, as illustrated by comments such as ‘we look at formal
approaches beyond neuropsychology, focusing on those that
are most common, if not always successful’ (p.123). However,
this observation appears to be contradicted by some of the
examples cited by Whitley, particularly the studies that have
addressed questions such as why rock art is placed in one
location and not another (e.g. Bradley’s work on the Neolithic
rock art of the Atlantic coast), ethnicity and territoriality
(e.g. Wilson’s study of Pacific Islands rock art), and how the
visibility of rock art panels relates to public versus private sites
(e.g. Loubser’s research at Hell’s Canyon, Columbia Plateau).
Again, this chapter would have benefited from the inclusion
of more Australian studies, if only to refute statements such
as ‘formal quantitative and statistical analyses in rock art are
the exception rather than the rule’ (p.141), as there is a large
body of Australian literature that indicates an increasing use of
statistical and multivariate analyses.
The final two chapters (9 and 10) deal with management
and conservation, and the relationship between archaeology,
anthropology and rock art. The first of these chapters comprises
a fairly standard text on management planning that might be
found in any cultural resource management book, while the
final chapter emphasises the need to incorporate the results of
rock art research into ‘the interpretation of wider archaeological
issues’ (p.163). It also highlights the reciprocal needs of dirt
archaeology, rock art research, and anthropology in the form of
a continuing priority for worldwide ethnographic research on
rock art. These points are well made in Whitley’s final summing
up of the exciting research that has been undertaken in rock art
research over the last two decades.
This book is a useful, interesting and welcome addition
to the library of any rock art archaeologist. Although largely
drawn from the author’s experience with rock art research in
the United States, it has much that is applicable to rock art
research in Australia and to Australian archaeology in general.
MANY EXCHANGES: ARCHAEOLOGY,
HISTORY, COMMUNITY AND THE WORK
OF ISABEL MCBRYDE
Ingereth Macfarlane with Mary-Jane Mountain
& Robert Paton (eds)
Aboriginal History Monograph 11, Aboriginal History Inc.,
Canberra, 2005, xxxv+412pp, ISBN 0958563772
Department of Archaeology, School of Philosophical and
Historical Inquiry, Building A14, University of Sydney, NSW
2006, Australia
During the last few years we have seen an increasing number of
festschrifts released for both the first and second generations of
Australian archaeologists. More than anything else this indicates
not just the rapid retirement of so many of our founding
researchers, but also the start of a very different phase in how
we perceive our profession. Although ‘closely knit community’
may not be the right phrase, it has certainly been the case that
until recently making acquaintance with almost anyone from the
first generation onwards only required turning up at the next
conference and shouting a beer. At worst, critique of someone’s
academic or personal foibles could be readily obtained as
fairly immediate gossip. The roles of personality and personal
relationships – and let’s face it, so much of Australian archaeology
has taken shape from these – could also be factored in without
too much effort. However, with retirement and, for many, a
progressive withdrawal from active participation, the immediacy
of their personalities and their intellectual contributions is fading
or taking a different form. For most fourth generation Australian
archaeologists (the student’s student’s students?) what they know
about the foundations and trajectories of the profession is based
almost solely on what they have read, rather than who they know.
Australian archaeology is starting to formalise its own history,
but are we doing it justice?
The festschrifts that we are now seeing span the range. Some,
possibly restricted by the nature of the journal or publication,
provide restrained academic acknowledgement with papers from
peers, students and fellow researchers recognising the subject’s
work and influences. Others relax a little and sneak in a few
anecdotes or life stories which flesh out the subject’s personality,
57
Book Reviews
sometimes even progressing beyond their archaeological
interests. Most annoying are those volumes which have papers
where relevance or even reference to the person being honoured
is non-existent, suggesting to me a lack of effort by authors and
editors and possibly an opportunity to simply dust off something
lying around on the contributor’s desk.
Having made the above comments, if I ever get to the point
where I am honored with a festschrift, I want it to be just like the
one dedicated to Isabel McBryde. Based on the ‘Many Exchanges’
symposium held at the Australian National University in 2001,
this volume presents a true appreciation of the breadth and
durability of Professor McBryde’s long-term contributions.
The papers in this collection are redolent with genuine
affection and respect for both her academic achievements and
personality. The backgrounds of the authors, invariably now
senior in their own right, demonstrate the impact one person
can have in a range of fields: archaeology, ethnohistory, material
culture studies, linguistics, art and imagery, cultural heritage
management, teaching and relationships with Indigenous and
non-Indigenous communities. Each paper also makes a clear
connection to McBryde’s works and influences, thus satisfying
my own desire to see the thread of relationships.
The volume opens immediately with a useful map of
McBryde’s field areas and an annotated list of studies, rather than
just the usual chronological listing of papers and professional
positions (although a bibliography of her publications is also
provided at the end of the book). Following this is a preface by
editor Ingereth MacFarlane which provides a potted history of
McBryde’s career, and explains the logic of the three sections of
the volume. In the first, titled Exchanges of Ideas: The Development
of an Approach to Archaeological Practice and its Influences and
Outcomes, colleagues and past students provide a history of
McBryde’s career and testimonies as to her personal and academic
impacts. My only real quibble with the structuring of the volume
lies here, that between the history provided in the preface and
the first several papers of the volume, there is a lot of repetition
of basic facts about McBryde’s career which might have been
reduced with a touch of editorial control as to who might focus
on what elements. Other than that the overlaps can be forgiven
as representing different perspectives. The contributions by
Sullivan, Johnston, Byrne and others are particularly enjoyable
reflections on the teacher-student relationship, giving hope to
all of us that some of our own students will go on to bigger and
better things (and still like us at the end). Tjikatu, Pappin and
Kennedy present touching tributes to McBryde’s work with
Indigenous communities across Australia.
The second section, Exchanges within Regions, between
Disciplines: Integrative Approaches, traces McBryde’s
interdisciplinary emphasis, especially her innovative use of
ethnohistory. This is perhaps the most interesting section, with
studies on trade and exchange systems, movement, ceremony
and the contact period which follow her lead in drawing
upon diverse bodies of archaeological, historical, linguistic
and ethnographic data. In particular, Davidson’s paper on the
trade networks in northwest central Queensland and Meehan
and Jones’ paper on Anbarra perceptions of the significance
of stone are fascinating insights into their own long-term
multifaceted research projects. Although Pearson’s paper on
historic shipping networks along the Western Australian coast
58
initially looked somewhat out of place, he cleverly parallels
these systems to our understandings of Aboriginal exchange
networks, while also integrating a charming narrative about
McBryde’s father, who worked as a Captain on these routes in
the mid-twentieth century.
Section 3, Exchanges in Stone: Lithic Approaches to Past Social
Interactions includes studies of stone tool production, use and
distribution. The majority of the papers (Hiscock, Mulvaney,
Ulm et al.) are within the Australian context, with a strong
emphasis on the social mechanisms underlying the various
processes and their relationships to wider networks. Paton’s
essay looks at the changing values of the Mt William quarry
during the historic period, providing a valuable addition and
context to McBryde’s research at the site. Specht and Torrence
both take some of the conceptual structures pioneered by
McBryde into their researches on Melanesian obsidian exchange
networks.
One of the most attractive qualities of this volume is that on the
whole the contributors are such good writers, with the majority
of the papers being eloquent examples of good academic prose.
This might also be seen as a testiment to the strong narrative
qualities of McBryde’s own publications. Structurally it is clear
that some of these papers could have been equally effective
within other sections, but I think that overall the editors did a
good job in making sense of the contributions.
As one of the growing number who has never had the
opportunity to meet Isabel McBryde, the value of this volume
is that it not only provided me with a valuable insight into
the extraordinary career of one of our discipinary founders,
but also demonstrated how her contibutions have resonated
in both my own and so many people’s research and careers.
I suspect that this festschrift will prove to be an important
contribution for future researchers trying to understand why
and how Australian archaeology has come to be.
WRITING ARCHAEOLOGY: TELLING
STORIES ABOUT THE PAST
Brian Fagan
Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2006, 175pp,
ISBN 1-59874-005-9
QLD 4072, Australia
This book is timely with the recent focus on the importance of
public outreach and engaging the public’s interest in archaeology
in Australia, particularly through mass media, in this case
through popular publications. If one author comes to mind when
thinking about writing archaeology for the public it is Brian
Fagan, who has been publishing widely-used texts and general
books since the 1970s. As Fagan himself articulately puts it, ‘this
book is about the process of writing, the challenges, frustrations,
and deep satisfactions of writing a book not for your colleagues
but for a general audience’ (p.28).
Divided into nine logical chapters, it is written in an accessible,
conversational style that makes you feel Fagan is in the room
coaching you to write. Each chapter contains a key ‘rule’ to keep
Book Reviews
you on track throughout the writing process and provides a
significant reminder to the main point Fagan is making.
Chapter 1 provides an introduction to general writing and
storytelling with Rule 1 being ‘always tell a story’ (p.13). Fagan
provides excellent examples of how to tell an archaeological
story (and how not to tell it) when aiming at a general audience
and provides advice on practicing writing and setting up a
regular routine.
The second chapter provides a way to start off small and
local by focusing on writing articles and columns for local
newspapers and magazines. In this way, the writer serves an
apprenticeship and learns how to write before moving onto
bigger projects. Fagan provides a practical outline of how
to submit material to major magazines and how the process
works, with an introduction to the tough world of publishing
with Rule 2: ‘Deadlines are sacred. Meet them’ (p.29).
The next six chapters detail the process of writing and
publishing a trade book for general audiences. Chapter 3
addresses the generation of ideas for the ‘proven niche’ (p.51)
of archaeology trade books and introduces the reader to the
trade market and how it works. Rule 3: ‘write only about
topics that passionately interest you’ (p.47) reflects Fagan’s
recommendation to firstly write a ‘passionate narrative’ (p.59)
that is the story of your book which gathers and develops the
main themes into ‘a seamless tale’ (p.59).
Chapter 4 takes the passionate narrative to the next stage –
writing the formal proposal for your book and Rule 4: ‘treat the
proposal as seriously as the book because you’re selling yourself
and your idea’ (p.63). Fagan details what the proposal should
and shouldn’t be, describes how editors make their decisions,
and outlines the required elements of the proposal and the
book outline.
The next stage, writing specimen chapters, is covered in
Chapter 5, which also discusses the fundamental importance of
editors, what different types of editors do and most importantly,
Rule 5, how to ‘develop a good relationship with your editor’
(p.79). The chapter provides more detail on how the publishing
industry works including the use of literary agents, and the
world of contracts and advances.
Chapter 6 moves onto the next important stage – writing
the first draft. Fagan concurs with every book about writing
with his Rule 6: ‘make writing a daily habit’ (p.91). The chapter
provides a wide range of detailed hints and suggestions about
getting into the habit of writing, setting up a workspace, and
how to get started. He also provides his proven strategies to
get over procrastination and writer’s block that will be of great
benefit to all archaeologists and students who are trying to
write. Fagan also discusses doing the research for your book,
and various techniques for building up the narrative.
Rule 7 – ‘Revision is the essence of good writing. Listen to
criticism and leave your ego at home’ (p.109) – introduces Chapter
7, with Fagan again providing a wide range of useful advice on
getting that first draft to the final manuscript stage. He covers his
own ‘writing mantras’ (p.111) and provides a suggested (but not
the only) revision strategy that works for him. He provides advice
for tackling the various rounds of revision, getting others to read
the manuscript, and submitting the final version.
Chapter 8 follows the book into the production process and
beyond with Rule 8 being ‘don’t walk away from your book
when you finish writing it’ (p.127). Fagan covers the nittygritty of the process from production through copy-editing,
illustrations, the cover design, the proofs and index to the
actual publication, and then on to the final stage of marketing
and promotion.
The final chapter discusses the writing and publishing of
another genre of book altogether – the textbook. The chapter runs
through the publication process identifying the key differences
between texts and trade books. Fagan’s Rule 9 for textbooks:
‘never write a textbook unless you have the time to revise it’
(p.143). Fagan rounds the book off with a concise conclusion and
a range of key resources for writers to further investigate the topic,
including resources on general, academic and textbook writing,
(the very few) on writing about archaeology, archaeological
illustration, writing magazines and web resources.
The book provides a practical approach to writing about
archaeology for general audiences and enlightens those of us who
have never had any experience with the trade publishing world.
Focused on the North American publishing scene, the book will
be a valuable resource for the increasing number of Australian
archaeologists seeking to publish their work in the US market.
The structure of the chapters provides an easily accessible format
that enables individual chapters to be consulted while actually
working through the various stages of the process. Not only
does Fagan provide practical advice on the process, he provides
inspiration to get out there and start writing. Although aimed
directly at those archaeologists wanting to write for a general
audience, the advice Fagan provides about writing will be of great
value to all professionals and students in the field of archaeology.
If, as Nichols (2004:44) indicates, ‘that the future of the discipline
… will be dependent on the profession’s ability to reach a wider
popular audience’, Fagan’s book is certainly a step in the right
direction. To give Fagan the last word: ‘We archaeologists have
lost sight of distant horizons, of the great issues of our discipline.
We need to write for humanity, for civilisation, not just for our
friends – and our enemies’ (p.163).
References
Nichols, S. 2004 Out of the Box: Popular Notions of Archaeology in Documentary
Programs on Australian Television. Unpublished BA (Hons) thesis, School of
Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
AUSTRALIAN APOCALYPSE: THE STORY
OF AUSTRALIA’S GREATEST CULTURAL
MONUMENT
Robert G. Bednarik
Occasional AURA Publication 14, Australian Rock Art Research
Association Inc., Melbourne, 2006, 64pp, ISBN 0-9586802-2-1
Reviewed by Paul S.C. Taçon
School of Arts, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, PMB 50,
Gold Coast Mail Centre, QLD 9726, Australia
Robert Bednarik’s Australian Apocalypse: The Story of Australia’s
Greatest Cultural Monument is not an academic book in the
sense of having references, new method or theory. Rather, it is
a fascinating but tragic story of culture contact, conquest and
concern. It is both an historical overview and a personal story of
59
Book Reviews
the author himself. Conspiracy theory advocates will find it has
great appeal. Aboriginal people will find it a sad metaphor for
what happened and continues to happen across Australia and
in many other parts of the world. Those interested in Bednarik
himself will find it gives us great insight into what drives this
well-known rock art researcher. And all readers will learn, in
shocking and vivid detail, how we have stood by idly while the
cultural heritage of an important part of Western Australia has
been systematically vandalised.
Australian Apocalypse focuses on the post-contact history of
Murujuga/Puratha rock art of what Europeans refer to as the
Dampier Archipelago and/or the Burrup Peninsula. The book
begins with a quick overview of the colonisation of Australia
40,000–60,000 years ago, with much discussion of early rafting
and ensuing developments within the Dampier Archipelago,
from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous perspectives. The
devastating effects of Aboriginal first contact with Europeans
is then detailed, followed by further changes brought about
by European and European-Australian occupation, including
massacres of local Aboriginal populations. Bednarik then moves
on to the rediscovery of Murujuga/Puratha rock art and his
own involvement in this process in the late 1960s. All of this is
summarised in 32 pages, accounting for half the book.
The second half of the book focuses on Dampier since 1970,
with a chapter on the period of 1970–2000 and another on what
has happened since. Industrial development, supposed corrupt
governments and perceived irresponsible archaeologists are
given serves. A short epilogue rounds out the book. It is here that
Bednarik’s passion becomes especially apparent with pleas to the
thinking people of Western Australia to rid themselves of their
government and to stop the destruction of the region’s cultural
heritage. The book concludes in an idiosyncratic way: a box with
a speculative page on what could happen to Dampier industry
should the archipelago be hit by a tsunami.
This book is a compelling read. It is part history story, part
adventure, part personal tale. It is particularly pertinent given that
during the Christmas period of 2006 permission was granted by
the Australian Federal Government for over a hundred boulders
containing rock art to be relocated or destroyed. Australian
Apocalypse will undoubtedly receive mixed reactions. Readers
will either love or hate it and some might question whether
Bednarik has crossed the line in his portrayal of some politicians
and archaeologists. Although it is a beautifully illustrated book,
the text would have benefited from being less aggressive and less
personal. As well, Bednarik’s own role is overstated in many areas,
with little or no attention given to Alan Thorne’s work on early
rafting, Bruce Wright’s pioneering rock art research and the late
Pat Vinnicombe’s own valiant efforts to help save this amazing
body of rock art.
Although I agree that the rock engravings of the Dampier
Archipelago are outstanding and of world heritage value, I
take issue with Bednarik and others referring to the extensive
complex as Australia’s ‘greatest cultural monument’ (p.1) or
‘largest engraving site’. The area consists of many sites, some
widely separated, some close to each other. Some are small;
some are large. They vary in quality and some have rock art while
others do not. And in all of the recent Burrup debate not enough
attention has been given to the non-rock art sites: the standing
stones (although Bednarik mentions some, including recent
60
vandalism), stone artefact scatters and so forth. Furthermore, I
disagree with the very notion of a ‘greatest cultural monument’
or that Dampier rock art is Australia’s greatest. This is because
it equally could be argued that the rock art of Kakadu, the
Kimberley, Cape York or some other area is the greatest. Even
some individual engraving sites or site complexes of the greater
Sydney region could be argued to be as significant. In the end it’s
like comparing apples to oranges to bananas to mangoes. Each
Australian rock art complex is important and significant in its
own way. Each complex reflects local Indigenous concerns and
history, has artistic merit and national/international historic and
contemporary importance for many different groups of people.
Finally, it is disappointing Bednarik and all of the
archaeologists working in the Dampier area during the past 40
years did not develop detailed survey, recording, conservation
and management plans long ago. There is still much to do and
certainly Robert Bednarik is to be congratulated for raising
the world’s awareness of what continues to plague the cultural
heritage of northwest Australia.
THESIS ABSTRACTS
THE SOCIAL MEANING OF CLASSICAL
STYLE PUBLIC ARCHITECTURE IN
ADELAIDE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
Deborah Arthur
B. Archaeology (Hons), Department of Archaeology, Flinders
University, October 2004
Adelaide (South Australia’s capital city) has a vast number of
classical style public buildings in the city centre. Many of these
buildings were constructed throughout the nineteenth century,
and are still standing today. Classical style public buildings
in three locations – the northern part of King William
Street, North Terrace and Victoria Square – were analysed
for this study. Fieldwork recorded the physical attributes of
the buildings, while historical research noted the social and
functional attributes.
The main aim of this study was to discuss the social meanings
of classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the nineteenth
century. Other aims were to examine the types of classical
styles present in Adelaide, whether these styles were prevalent
on public buildings in other Australian capitals and in other
British colonies, and what the influences were for the choice of
architectural style.
Analysis of architectural style in Adelaide has shown that
architects and other influential individuals were emulating
the behaviour of British elite, and copying historical trends
for classical styles. At the same time there was some resistance
against the strict rules governing traditional forms of classical
architecture, providing new styles and orders, which formed
different social meanings.
EXAMINING VARIATION BETWEEN
NORTH AND NORTHWESTERN
TASMANIAN STONE ARTEFACT
ASSEMBLAGES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
OF THE ARMITSTEAD PROPERTY AND
ROCKY CAPE
Chris Kaskadanis
B. Archaeology (Hons), Archaeology Program, School
of Historical and European Studies, La Trobe University,
October 2005
edged scrapers (Type 3), notched scrapers (Type 4) and concave/
nosed scrapers (Type 5) numbering 129 artefacts. Eighty-three
complete Ballywinnes and 254 Ballywinne fragments were also
recorded, a tool possibly used to grind ochre and for other
ritual practices.
A primary objective of my thesis was to compare and
contrast the Armitstead stone artefact assemblage to the Rocky
Cape assemblage and to discuss variation between inland and
coastal scrapers. The study investigates whether Jones’ Rocky
Cape Holocene stone tool typology is useful for the study
of inland open sites. Another aim was to establish a culturehistorical sequence for the Armitstead assemblage; however,
this was not possible because there is little technological change
through time demonstrated for the Rocky Cape assemblage.
Despite this limitation, the functional significance of the site
is assessed using formal tool types such as the various scrapers
and the culturally and socially significant Ballywinnes.
Typological/attribute analysis demonstrated variation in the
size of the scrapers and their edge characteristics compared to
the Rocky Cape assemblage.
Even though tillage has impacted on the ‘original’ distribution
of the surface scatters, the composition of the Armitstead
artefact assemblage is typical of a Tasmanian Holocene flaked
stone assemblage. In addition to the Ballywinne stones, the
assemblage contains the cores, flakes and broken flakes, scraper
types and broken scrapers, and other flaking debris that would
be expected on the basis of previous research. Added to this is the
exploitation of locally abundant raw materials such as quartzite
and chert-hornfels.
I conclude that Jones’ Rocky Cape tool typology is still
useful in present-day analyses and interpretations of Aboriginal
archaeological sites. Technological and typological/attribute
analyses were useful in detecting artefact variability such as
variation in scraper size and the frequency of worked edges.
The cultural significance of Armitstead is underscored by the
presence of Ballywinnes and its association with ochre, an
artefact not recorded at Rocky Cape.
UNDER THE BOARDS: THE STUDY OF
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORMATION
PROCESSES AT THE COMMISSARIAT
STORE SITE, BRISBANE
Karen Murphy
In December 2003, La Trobe University conducted a large-scale
pedestrian survey and three-dimensional mapping of Aboriginal
stone artefact scatters found on the ‘Armitstead Property’, a tree
plantation in northern Tasmania. The study area is approximately
90 hectares and is bounded by the Dasher and Mersey Rivers.
Subsequent ploughing of terraces exposed over 4300 Aboriginal
artefacts including other cultural material such as ochre.
Over 36% of recorded stone artefacts are complete flakes,
nearly 13% are broken flakes, over 25% are flaked pieces, with
cores/core fragments comprising over 13%. Tool types include
Rhys Jones’ scraper types: round-edged scrapers (Type 1), small
and large steep-edged scrapers (Types 2A and 2B), flat/straight-
BA (Hons), School of Social Science, University of Queensland,
October 2003
The study of archaeological site formation processes, although
commonly undertaken in prehistoric sites, is only carried out in
historical archaeological sites in a limited way. Understanding
the processes which formed the archaeological record of a site is
an important first step towards developing justifiable inferences
about past behaviour and past societies regardless of the age of
the site. This thesis identifies and examines the cultural and noncultural processes that formed the archaeological record at the
Commissariat Store, Brisbane, Australia.
61
Thesis Abstracts
The history of the site, from its construction in 1829 as
part of the Moreton Bay penal settlement to the present, is
examined and the expected impacts and processes on the
archaeological record are identified. The archaeological
evidence from the salvage excavation of the site undertaken in
1978–1979 is analysed to identify the cultural and non-cultural
site formation processes.
This study identified the presence of the cultural formation
processes of discard, loss, abandonment and reuse from an
examination of the historical and archaeological evidence.
Non-cultural formation processes at work in the site include
faunalturbation, floralturbation, flooding and aquaturbation.
This research also identified deficiencies in Schiffer’s model for
identifying and categorising cultural formation processes. The
activity of construction of the site’s drainage system did not
clearly fit within a single type of formation process. Water as
a formation agent is only discussed in the literature as a noncultural formation process, while at this site water can be seen as
a cultural formation process. This thesis demonstrates the value
and importance of understanding site formation processes as
a firm basis for future interpretation of the archaeology of the
Commissariat Store site.
archaeological issues to determine the court’s attitude to
archaeological heritage protection.
Situating archaeological heritage protective legislation
within the field of environmental law allows the examination
of alternate modes of protecting archaeological heritage and
creates opportunities for ‘public good’ conservation outcomes.
This shift of focus to ‘public good’ conservation as an alternative
to narrowly-conceived scientific outcomes better aligns with
current public policy directions including sustainability
principles, as they have developed in Australia, as well as
Indigenous rights of self-determination. The thesis suggests
areas for legal reforms which direct future archaeological
heritage management practice to consider the ‘public good’
values for archaeological heritage protection.
PROTECTING THE PAST FOR THE PUBLIC
GOOD: ARCHAEOLOGY AND AUSTRALIAN
HERITAGE LAW
This thesis investigates hominid cognitive development and
the emergence of symbolism prior to the Upper Palaeolithic
period. It involves a global review and examination of a
wide range of Pleistocene evidence for early symbolism,
language, and non-utilitarian behaviour, including that from
Australia. Both palaeoanthropological evidence and material
culture are discussed in relation to their significance for the
evolutionary emergence of symbolic cognition. Discussion
of palaeoanthropological evidence includes the relevance
of cranial endocasts, encephalisation, skull morphology,
and vocal tract reconstruction. Discussion concerned with
material culture includes the role of palaeoart, colour
symbolism, mortuary practice and stone tools. Collectively
the wide range of evidence has important implications for
the study of cognitive evolution. It is argued that the evidence
strongly supports a model for a considerably early emergence
of complex symbolic behaviour in various regions of the
world well before 40,000 years ago. The thesis contends that
the cognitive capacities for symbolic behaviour developed
gradually and emerged considerably earlier than the Upper
Palaeolithic, with the cognitive preconditions appearing c.2.5
million years ago, and fully symbolic cognition developed by
as early as the Lower Palaeolithic.
MacLaren North
PhD, Department of Archaeology, School of Philosophical and
Historical Inquiry, University of Sydney, February 2007
Archaeological remains have long been recognised as fragile
evidence of the past, which require protection. Legal protection
for archaeological heritage has existed in Australia for more
than 30 years but there has been little analysis of the aims and
effectiveness of that legislation by the archaeological profession.
Much Australian heritage legislation was developed in a period
where the dominant paradigm in archaeological theory
and practice held that archaeology was an objective science.
Australian legislative frameworks continue to strongly reflect
this scientific paradigm and contemporary archaeological
heritage management practice is in turn driven by these
legislative requirements.
This thesis examines whether archaeological heritage
legislation is fulfilling its original intent. Analysis of legislative
development in this thesis reveals that legislators viewed
archaeological heritage as having a wide societal value, not solely
or principally for the archaeological community. Archaeological
heritage protection is considered within the broader philosophy
of environmental conservation. As an environmental issue, it is
suggested that a ‘public good’ conservation paradigm is closer to
the original intent of archaeological heritage legislation, rather
than the ‘scientific’ paradigm which underlies much Australian
legislation. Through investigation of the developmental history
of Australian heritage legislation it is possible to observe how
current practice has diverged from the original intent of the
legislation, with New South Wales and Victoria serving as case
studies. Further analysis is undertaken of the limited number
of Australian court cases which have involved substantial
62
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT AND
SYMBOLISM IN THE PRE-UPPER
PALAEOLITHIC
Ben Watson
BA (Hons), Centre for Classics and Archaeology, University of
Melbourne, October 2003
OBITUARIES
RICHARD JOHN HUNTER (1946–2006)
Richard John Hunter was born on 27 May 1946 at Swan Reach
Mission on the Murray River, South Australia. Richard was the
first of five children of Harry Hunter and May Hunter (née
Richards). He was a recognised Nganguruku, Peramangk and
Ngarrindjeri elder and a custodian of the culture for this region.
Indeed, he spent many decades caring for the heritage of his
country to which he had a deep connection.
Richard’s formative years were spent at Swan Reach Area School
where he was head prefect, sports captain, tennis captain and
football captain. After leaving school he worked many and varying
jobs including working on the fruit blocks, as a jackeroo, as a head
ganger on the railways and as a gardener for the Mannum Council.
Undoubtedly many of these years were tough, although Richard was
not one to complain about such hardships. It was in his subsequent
years that he was able to devote his time to working to protect his
culture and heritage.
To achieve his mission Richard enrolled at the University of
South Australia and studied archaeology. He also involved himself in
many important research projects and came to be involved in most
if not all heritage issues on his country. In fact, he was Chairperson
of the Mannum Aboriginal Community Association for countless
years. This important work is being carried on by his children.
One of the earlier archaeological research projects in which
he was heavily involved was the Swan Reach Mission Archaeology,
History and Anthropology Project and subsequent publications
on which he was a co-author (Anderson et al. 1999; Hemming et al.
2000). Later he was also involved in research at Fromm’s Landing
(which included a reanalysis of some of the materials excavated by
D.J. Mulvaney) and again was a co-author on one of the papers
arising out of this research (see Roberts et al. 1999). These two
examples are just a small selection of the archaeological research
projects in which he was involved and actually co-authored.
Indeed, as mentioned above, his involvement with heritage surveys
was extensive.
It was Richard’s enthusiasm for archaeology and other related
disciplines which led him to attend numerous archaeological and
anthropological seminars, conferences and congresses – often as an
invited speaker and/or guest. He was admired in his community for
travelling overseas to attend the World Archaeological Congresses in
India in 1994 and South Africa in 1999.
Richard was also passionate about preserving his beloved Ngaut
Ngaut for the future generations of his people. This dream was finally
realised only recently through a co-management arrangement with
the Department of Environment and Heritage. Ngaut Ngaut (also
known as Devon Downs) is of course famous for being the first
archaeological site in Australia to be ‘scientifically’ excavated by N.B.
Tindale and H. Hale in 1929 and for challenging the theories of the
day which argued that Aboriginal people had not occupied Australia
for any significant length of time. Richard of course had a lot to say
about such theories!
Ngaut Ngaut is also the site that Richard used to educate many
thousands of tourists, students, government officials, archaeologists
and others about the importance of Aboriginal culture. In this
regard he used the large collection of rock engravings at the site
as the conduit for his goals.
His involvement in cultural
tourism was recognised by
both his lifetime membership
of Aboriginal Tourism
Australia as well as his South
Australian Citizen of the
Year Award (2006). The
important cultural tourism Figure 1 Richard Hunter at Ngaut
(Photograph used with the
and education work at Ngaut Ngaut
permission of the Hunter Family).
Ngaut continues.
Apart from Ngaut Ngaut, Richard considered that his other
major life achievement was gaining the title to the land known as
Sugar Shack. In fact, it was these two events that he prized above any
other awards or recognition.
In relation to archaeology and education he was also
enthusiastic about improving relationships between Aboriginal
people and researchers and educating us about the importance of
consultation and negotiation with Aboriginal people. This facet
of his interest in the discipline is evident in all research projects in
which he involved himself. In particular, his views were recorded
through his participation in a study which aimed to investigate
such issues and the report for which he was also a co-author (see
Roberts et al. 2002).
It is difficult to sum up such a full and remarkable life in a few
short paragraphs except by saying that his passing continues to be
mourned by the very many people who loved him. Importantly,
his devotion to protecting the heritage of his people has also left a
beneficial legacy to be enjoyed by future generations.
Richard is sadly missed by his friends (many of whom work in
the South Australian archaeological community) and especially by
his family including his 12 children Sharon, Ivy, Geoffrey, Rynald,
Rebecca, Belinda, Phillip, Isobelle, Mavis, Samantha, Shannon,
Stephanie, his many, many grandchildren, his dearly loved wife
Cynthia and countless other family members.
Amy Roberts
Selected Publications
Anderson, S., S. Hemming and R. Hunter 1999 Swan Reach Mission: Archaeology,
History and Anthropology. Unpublished report for the National Estate
Grants Program.
Hemming, S., V. Wood and R. Hunter 2000 Researching the past: Oral history and
archaeology at Swan Reach. In R. Torrence and A. Clarke (eds), The Archaeology
of Difference: Negotiating Cross-Cultural Engagements in Oceania, pp.331-359.
London: Routledge.
Roberts, A.L., F.D. Pate and R. Hunter 1999 Late Holocene climatic changes
recorded in macropod bone collagen stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes at
Fromm’s Landing, South Australia. Australian Archaeology 49:48-49.
Roberts, A.L. with R. Hunter, P. Coulthard, I. Agius, E. Newchurch, J. Bramfield,
M. Smith, A. Rigney, V. Copley, D. Hirschausen, V. Branson, T. Trevorrow, M.
Rigney, G. Trevorrow, P. Dixon, K. Hunt and one anonymous participant 2002
Indigenous South Australian Perspectives of Archaeology Project Report.
Unpublished report to the Department of Archaeology, Flinders University.
63
BACKFILL
Minutes of the 2006 Annual General Meeting of the Australian
Archaeological Association Inc.
La Trobe University, Beechworth Campus, Victoria
9 December 2006
1. Welcome
4.2 Cossack
The 2006 AGM commenced at 6:06 pm. The President welcomed
everyone to the conference and the AGM with a special welcome
to Mitch Allen and Jim O’Connell from the United States.
The Executive has been lobbying on behalf of the Association
regarding the development of areas surrounding Cossack. The
development of the historical site of Cossack was raised at the
AAA 2005 AGM. AAA has written to state and federal members
of parliament about this development project. In late November
2006 a Management Plan was released for the town, and we have
been invited to comment on the plan. In keeping with several
other initiatives this year, AAA will be making a joint submission
on this matter, in this instance with ASHA, AIMA and the
National Trust of Australia (WA). Any members with an interest
in these matters should contact the AAA Secretary immediately
to be involved with the submission.
2. Apologies
Apologies were received from Samantha Bolton, Shaun Canning,
Neale Draper, Rebecca Edwards-Booth, Kelly Fleming, Vanessa
Hardy, Sue Hudson, Peter Randolph and Annie Ross.
3. Confirmation of the Minutes of the 2005 AAA
AGM
The minutes of the 2005 AAA AGM held at Fremantle, Western
Australia on 28 November 2005 were published in Australian
Archaeology (62:68-74). Motion: ‘that the minutes of the 2005
Annual General Meeting of the Australian Archaeological
Association Inc. as circulated, be taken as read and confirmed’.
Moved: Lynley Wallis. Seconded: Jill Reid. Motion carried nem.
con.
4.3 Establishment of a Submissions Page
Sue McIntyre suggested that AAA consider the establishment of
a ‘Submissions’ page on the AAA website, similar to that on the
AACAI website. The Executive will consider this option.
5. Reports
4. Business Arising from Previous AGM
5.1 President’s Report (Alistair Paterson)
4.1 Burrup Peninsula
At the 2005 AGM members directed the Executive to lobby
the federal and state governments to consider the importance
of the cultural heritage of the Burrup Peninsula. The Burrup
has been an issue which has garnered state, national and
international attention. Additionally the introduction of the
Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Bill into
federal parliament on 12 October 2005 was seen to relate to the
push to develop the Peninsula. AAA made a submission to this
Bill, and has been in contact with state and federal members on
this matter. Letters from the President expressing AAA’s concern
that important archaeological sites may be compromised in
the push for development were sent to the respective Western
Australian Premiers Gallop and Carpenter; additionally, two
letters were sent to Senator Ian Campbell offering the expertise
of our membership, and our shared concern. The support of
Paul Taçon and Sharon Sullivan throughout the year has been
much appreciated. Paul was very helpful with AAA’s submission
to the ‘Draft Management Plan for the Proposed Burrup
Conservation Reserve’. Sharon assisted with letters to Senator
Ian Campbell. Other members of the archaeological community
have assisted us with media requests for information. Many
thanks for their efforts. This issue will continue to be important
in 2007. The President submitted to the AGM a suggestion that
the membership discuss whether they wish the AAA Executive to
take further action on this matter.
64
Welcome to the 2006 Annual General Meeting of the Australian
Archaeological Association Incorporated. I would like to
commence proceedings by acknowledging the Traditional
Owners of this land. I thank the organisers at La Trobe University
for organising this conference.
2006 was a year of change for AAA Inc. The Executive
moved westwards and has gone through a lengthy process of
learning the ropes. I would like to start by introducing the
Officers of the Association and subcommittee chairs. Firstly,
I am a Lecturer at the University of Western Australia in the
School of Social and Cultural Studies, in the Discipline of
Archaeology. Fiona Hook is AAA’s Secretary – Fiona is the
Director of Archae-aus, the largest employer of archaeologists
west of Adelaide. Our Treasurer is Adam Dias, Senior
Archaeologist at Archae-aus. The Australian Archaeology
editors are Sean Ulm and Annie Ross, both at the University
of Queensland. The Public Officer is Sue O’Connor, Head
of the Centre for Archaeological Research at the Australian
National University. Our Membership Secretary is Annie
Carson, an archaeologist at Eureka Archaeological Research
and Consulting at the University of Western Australia. The
Media Liaison Officer and Webmaster are Kelly Fleming and
Samantha Bolton, both PhD students at the University of
Western Australia – both present their apologies.
I acknowledge our subcommittee chairs:
Backfill
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Samantha Bolton, Chair, Information Technology
Subcommittee
Richard Fullagar, Chair, Code of Ethics Review
Subcommittee
Sean Ulm, Chair, Prizes and Awards Subcommittee
Sean Ulm, Chair, Editorial Subcommittee
Stephen Free, Chair, Indigenous Subsidies Subcommittee
Wendy Beck, Chair, Australian National Committee for
Archaeology Teaching and Learning (ANCATL) (formerly
Joint Implementation Standing Committee on Archaeology
Teaching and Learning (JISCATL))
Michael Westaway, Chair, National Archaeology Week
Subcommittee
Nikki Stern and Richard Cosgrove, Chairs, Annual Conference
Subcommittee.
In the report I want to highlight the Association’s major
activities in 2006, as well as the intentions of the Executive for
2007 if re-elected at this meeting.
When we were elected we decided to focus on three areas
over and above the normal running of the Association. These
were to:
•
•
•
improve membership numbers
maintain and improve our financial position
provide added content for members
Our membership situation will be detailed by the Membership
Secretary, but to summarise we have slightly improved our
membership since last year; however, the number needs to be
greater. This year I wrote a letter to 500 people whose membership
had lapsed in the last five years inviting them to rejoin and for
feedback. This was quite successful, and their feedback will guide
our ongoing initiatives. Financially we appear to be better off
than last year.
I want to focus on some initiatives being undertaken by us.
Firstly, during 2006 the website has been moved from the
University of Queensland to be hosted by the University of
Western Australia following UQ’s decision to charge for the
additional space required to expand the website to offer enhanced
features to members. As an aside, as we add content to our site,
we take up space on a server. Moving the website has proven to
be a large problem-ridden task – thankfully this does not occur
often, the last time being the move from the Archaeological
Computing Laboratory at the University of Sydney to UQ. I
am very thankful for Samantha Bolton’s work on the transfer,
and the amount of work she has committed to this task. Luke
Kirkwood has also been invaluable as out-going Webmaster. The
new site is to be launched this week, and some of you may have
already seen it. As a result of the efforts required to transfer the
site the old online site has been rarely updated in 2006, which
means it is increasingly out of date.
We plan to continue working on the new site, leading up to
the situation where a Member’s Only section is made available on
the site – this is intended to provide online content for members,
as seen with other websites such as the European Archaeological
Association, the Society for American Archaeology and Society
for Historical Archaeology. Content needs to be determined by
AAA members; however it could include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
grey and out of print literature
online publications by AAA
information for job seekers and employers
a place to house CVs
an ability to check one’s membership status and to renew
membership
a shopping cart function
It is very clear to me that the website will grow more important
and is one of our most important assets. The housekeeping
conducted in 2006 has revealed that the site is too much work
for one person. Accordingly we plan to increase the size of the
Information Technology Subcommittee, and I would like to hear
from members who are keen to assist. Basically we need people
to keep the site up-to-date, and others for improvements and
more technical ‘behind the webpage’ work which no-one really
fully appreciates.
The changes to the website to include additional content will
help shift our members’ registration behaviour from the current
focus on renewing either at the middle of the year to get the
June volume of Australian Archaeology, or at year’s end for the
conference member’s rate, to a ‘year-round’ membership ethos.
The NAW website needs some work: it is a national effort but
managed by AAA. We still have yet to move the site, and hope
that the expanded subcommittee will make this easier in 2007.
A review process is required to consider how representative of
Australian archaeology the site currently is, and what improvements
could be made. I encourage the enlarged subcommittee to make
this a priority once the AAA website and membership data base
are successfully hosted at the UWA server.
Related to the website, I am please to announce that the
first solely online publication by AAA Inc. is being prepared by
editors led by Laila Haglund, whose initiative led to this project;
they will be editing a volume of currently unpublished papers
from past Women in Archaeology conferences. This will be
published by AAA as an online publication following a peerreview process in consultation with the Australian Archaeology
Editorial Committee. The publication will have an ISBN. As an
interface it will be accessible online as a contents page with the
chapters available as pdf files. I thank Sean Ulm and his editorial
team for assistance with this initiative. We have also started to
add the abstracts from the 2005 AAA conference and intend to
do the same for 2006. These too can have ISBNs, although they
are not peer-reviewed.
Another web-related improvement has been the development
of an online payment system for AAA membership applications
and renewals. This facility is hosted by UWA, and was developed
for last year’s AAA/AIMA conference. It has been immediately
successful, and we expect to see a greater amount of use in years to
come. The architecture is in place for this to be a site to purchase
other AAA products, for example, one can already purchase the
Australian Archaeology DVD online. The funds currently go to
a UWA account, and we have a commitment from the School
of Social and Cultural Studies to continue to host this facility
beyond the life of this current WA-based Executive.
One of the challenges faced by AAA Executives is the typical
term of two years, as a lot of time is spent learning the ropes.
To assist future Executives we are preparing a handover and
induction package which will include, for each key role, an
65
Backfill
inventory of resources, a statement of key tasks and a calendar
of key dates. We will also arrange to have a handover session as
part of the conference proceedings in 2007, so that the outgoing
and incoming executives can meet in the same venue. I note that
ASHA has moved from 3 to 5 year executives.
Conference planning for future years involved a tough
decision: we inherited two concurrent joint conferences, the first
in Sydney proposed for 2007, then a joint conference for 2008
at Flinders. The AAA AGM meeting at the 2002 AAA/ASHA/
AIMA conference proposed that joint conferences should be held
every 3–4 years. We have resolved that AAA2007 will be a tripleheader in Sydney hosted by the University of Sydney at the end
of September. Vanessa Hardy is acting as the AAA representative
on that organising committee. UQ has indicated that they are
willing to host the 2008 conference. Flinders has indicated that
they can host the 2009 conference. ANU has agreed to host the
2010 conference, possibly jointly with AQUA to be held on the
south coast of NSW. I personally think that a longer planning
cycle of conferences is required to allow for joint meetings. We
are working towards that, and wish future Executives the best
of luck.
AAA has maintained close contact with the ASHA and AIMA
Presidents during the year, normally in the form of regular
phone calls and emails. We have been able to work together on
several submissions – this is a direct benefit to members of the
archaeological community. There has been some discussion
within all three organisations over recent years regarding better
communication and better services for members. I will not go
over all the details here, they have been raised in several fora
already, including the editorial of the most recent AA. I propose
getting some data from AAA members on these matters, and as
such we will be organising a simple questionnaire in the New
Year to gain a better idea of what AAA members think on a
range of issues: such as reduced rates for membership of all three
organisations (despite the fact it is very reasonable anyway), the
number of joint conferences etc.
ASHA have been successful in getting funding for an
administrative position, accordingly we are preparing an
application for funding from Grants to Voluntary Organisations
– our submission is being prepared by Stephen Free. If successful
we would be able to pay for someone to process all the incoming
mail and assist the Executive. This would provide great relief to
the process and free up time for other work by the Executive.
In 2005 Stephen Free and Lara Lamb, of the Indigenous
Subsidies Subcommittee, were successful in getting funding
from DEH for Indigenous attendance at this conference. In all,
20 Indigenous participants have been funded to attend, with
$20,000 provided by DEH and approximately $1000 by AAA.
I congratulate Stephen and Lara on their efforts: this committee
worked seamlessly despite being located in the ACT and Queensland,
and negotiating with DEH in Perth. I hope that the committee are
successful in obtaining funding for future meetings.
AAA’s commitment to teaching and learning continued,
with funding provided to Wendy Beck, Chair of the Australian
National Committee for Archaeology Teaching and Learning
(ANCATL) (formerly the Joint Implementation Standing
Committee on Archaeology Teaching and Learning (JISCATL)),
for meetings in 2006. This committee has been successful as
the ‘Benchmarking Archaeology Degrees Project’ has been
66
granted $114,000 from the Carrick Institute for 2007 and 2008
to set up a standards network with all the university providers
of archaeology in Australia. This is an amazing achievement
for our discipline, and I commend the efforts of Wendy Beck
and her associates. For those who are unaware the Carrick
Institute only funds the highest quality applications from
across Australia.
The introduction of the Environment and Heritage Legislation
Amendment Bill into Federal Parliament on 12 October 2005
required a response from the archaeological community. Despite
the fact that there was little time to respond, and over 400 pages
of legislation to digest, a joint submission to the Senate Standing
Committee on Environment, Communications, Information
Technology and the Arts (ECITA) was made by AAA in
collaboration with ASHA; I am particularly thankful to the
efforts of Richard Fullagar, as well as Tracey Ireland and ASHA
President Susan Lawrence. In all, 71 submissions were made to
the Committee.
Another legislative issue was the call for comments regarding
the Federal Government’s Productivity Commission Draft
Report ‘Conservation of Australia’s Historic Heritage Places’,
which was of concern to archaeologists working with historical
heritage. AAA was consulted about ASHA’s comprehensive
written submission to the Commission in February 2006.
We also note the death of Dr Bruce Trigger this year.
We have been assisted in 2007 by the University of Western
Australia, namely the School of Social and Cultural Studies,
Dianne Anstey at Archaeology, the Web Office, and the
Media Officer.
Finally I thank the AAA Executive, Australian Archaeology
Editorial Committee, and Subcommittee Chairs for their work
in 2006.
5.1.1 Discussion Arising
Concerns were raised regarding the high registration fees for
the conference and for the conference dinner. The Executive
noted that they had already written to the organisers of the 2007
conference to request that costs be kept to a minimum.
Concern was raised regarding the scheduling by the 2006
conference organisers of a discussion group that clashed with the
2006 AGM. Motion: ‘In future conferences there should be no
conference events scheduled at the same time as the AAA AGM’.
Moved: Matthew Spriggs. Seconded: Ian Lilley. Motion carried
nem. con.
Concern was raised regarding people presenting multiple
papers at conferences. It was pointed out, however, that while
some groups of papers were presented by one person, they
were not the senior author on more than one. The discussion
then moved to the issue of running multiple sessions. The
President pointed out that the conference organisation was at
the discretion of the organisers and that in some instances such
as joint conferences multiple sessions were required but that on
the whole AAA adhered to a policy of no multiple sessions.
As Indigenous students were being subsidised to attend
the conference it was requested that similar consideration be
given to non-Indigenous students. The Secretary pointed out
that students already receive subsidies in the form of reduced
registration fees in addition to travel subsidies if they present a
paper or poster.
Backfill
5.2 Secretary’s Report (Fiona Hook)
5.3 Treasurer’s Report (Adam Dias)
Further to the matters described in the President’s report, the
Executive held eight meetings over the year where procedural
matters and the issues already outlined by the President were
discussed. Additional to those mentioned by the President, other
matters discussed included:
•
•
Petitioning the federal government in association with
WAC and ASHA regarding the correct management of the
archaeology at Gallipoli.
Discussion of a request for assistance from the NT State
Representative regarding the repatriation of Indigenous
material culture in the NT (this will be discussed in more
detail by the NT State Representative in his report).
In between meetings, members of the Executive generally
communicated by email with 583 emails received by the Secretary
and the subcommittees generating 195 emails.
Correspondence
The Secretary received 165 emails and three letters during 2006
from members and the public. The main themes to emerge from
the correspondence include:
•
•
•
•
•
Requests for information from prospective archaeology
students.
Amateurs looking for volunteer excavation experience.
International and Australian archaeologists looking for work
with numerous requests for remuneration scales.
Membership and Australian Archaeology queries.
Scientific and alternative archaeology enquiries.
The vast majority of the correspondence relates to the first
three themes. The previous Executive flagged the development of
set of common questions and answers to be posted on a specific
school student’s page on the website. While no information was
provided to the current Executive we have developed a section
of the new website that provides some answers to the common
questions received. This new section to the webpage will be
completed early next year.
The Membership Secretary and the AA Editors dealt with
their respective emails. Requests for member contact emails/
addresses were dealt with by the Secretary or Membership
Secretary passing on the request to the member rather than
providing private information.
Enquiries such as Celtic colonisation of New Zealand and the
presence of mummies in Queensland were responded to with a
generic no comment email. Enquiries such as the protection of
Chinese mining sites in Victoria were assisted by putting them in
touch with relevant AAA members.
Overview
The AAA financial year ending 31 August 2006 saw a substantial
profit for the organisation; however, this profit was artificially
inflated as certain payments were not made until after the end of
the financial year (Table 1). Furthermore, profits from the UNE
2004 AAA conference ($6951) did not arrive until several weeks
into 2005–2006. As predicted by the previous Treasurer, both
conference and insurance expenditure saw substantial reductions,
thanks largely to the organisers of the Fremantle 2005 conference
securing sponsorships.
There was a substantial reduction in income from both
subscriptions and DVD sales. Many members had not joined
at the end of the 2005–2006 financial year, but mail-outs and
the arrival of the online membership facilities saw membership
numbers climb in the few months between the end of the financial
year and the 2006 conference. DVD sales have decreased, as is to
be expected given that there is a finite demand for the product,
and sales were so successful in the previous year.
In conclusion, despite a decrease in income from
membership and DVD sales the finances of the Association
remain healthy. This has been achieved primarily through
reductions in expenditure.
Income
The breakdown of income for the year is detailed in Table 2.
This clearly shows that subscriptions remain the primary source
of income, with profits from conferences and donations also
sizeable. The conference income is inflated as it includes profits
from two years: 2004 and 2005. If the 2004 funds were to be
removed, the conference income would be considerably smaller
($1590), and more in line with previous years.
Income from the savings account and the two investment
accounts is moderately higher than previous years. These figures
could have been even higher, but as has often been the case in
the past, the Treasurer was on fieldwork when the investment
Table 1 Profit and Loss – Summary.
2004-2005
$
31,580.00
Total Income
42,249.00
Total Expenses
(-10,669.00) Operating Profit (Loss)
34,625.22
9670.62
24,954.60
57,491.00
Retained Earnings
46,822.23
46,822.23
Total Equity
71,776.83
Table 2 Profit and Loss – Income.
2004–2005
$
743.00
Telephone Calls
The Secretary received 26 telephone calls from amateur
archaeologists, prospective students, a NSW Aboriginal
organisation requesting assistance on a disciplinary matter and
a geologist selling stereoscope and GIS software.
2005-2006
$
Income
2005–2006
$
Copyright fees
630.70
(-5005.00) Conference profits (Loss)
8541.13
9348.00
DVD/Back issue sales
1910.00
1410.00
Interest received
1391.50
25,040.00
Subscriptions
44.00
Other Income
0
31,580.00
Donations
Total Income
19,296.89
0.00
2855.00
34,625.22
67
Backfill
terms were due for renewal. When this occurs the investments
are renewed at the default, low, rate of interest.
A small amount of profits are not represented in these
figures owing to an error in the formation of the University of
Western Australia account which handles online subscriptions.
For a period of two months GST was erroneously deducted
from subscriptions, lowering the income. This mistake was
corrected, and this money will appear in the financial report
of 2006–2007.
Expenditure
As outlined in Table 3 there was a substantial decrease in
expenditure in 2006. It was this decrease in expenditure
that led to the increase in profits (Table 1). However, several
expenditures for 2006 were not paid until after the financial
year had ended. This has the dual effect of artificially lowering
2006 expenditure and increasing that for the subsequent
financial year.
As predicted by the previous Treasurer, there was a substantial
drop in costs associated with DVD production now that setup
costs are not involved. Insurance payments cannot be considered
a real saving, as the 2004–2005 payment represents two years
and the 2005–2006 payment was delayed and does not appear
in this report.
In the coming 2006–2007 financial year, no new costs are
expected. The Association has received a grant of $20,000 from
DEH to fund Indigenous participation in conferences, and it is
expected that this will be utilised in full. Owing to the delay of
some significant costs in 2006 into the 2007 financial year, it may
initially appear that expenses will rise, but this is not expected to
be a real rise, but rather the effect of essentially making several
payments twice.
The arrival of online subscriptions saw the formation of a
new funds account, held at the University of Western Australia.
This account represents fluid funds which can be utilised by the
Association at any time. It is advised that periodically these funds
are shifted to the main savings account.
The details of the two long-term accounts held by the
Commonwealth Bank are detailed in Table 4. As in previous
years these have represented approximately two years’ journal
printings, which remains the intended purpose of these funds.
5.4 Membership Secretary’s Report (Annie Carson)
Summary of Assets
As of 31 August 2006 the AAA assets totalled $71,776.83
(Table 4). This does not include the $10,000 held in the Bruce
Veitch Memorial Award Fund, which is currently held in the
AAA bank account.
AAA had a total of 489 members in 2006 which is comparable
to last year’s number of 482 (Table 1-3). We gained 80 new
members this year, most of whom were Ordinary members
rather than students. This reflects the fact that the Association
did not specifically target students with any membership
drives this year. The membership drive for 2006 instead
targeted lapsed members from 2003–2006, which is where we
recuperated membership numbers to come out with a slightly
larger contingent than last year.
Membership initiatives for 2006 included the introduction of
the online payment facility which allows subscribers to pay for
their AAA subscription and DVD purchases by credit card. This
facility was introduced to the AAA website by the Webmaster
in July 2006 and advertised in our membership drive in August.
This method of subscription and payment has already helped
streamline the subscription process and members should see a
vast improvement in the turn-around time between payment
and receipting in 2007.
Other initiatives introduced this year included a new
subscription/renewal procedure to remind members that
subscription is due for the coming year. On the 1 December
2006, the inaugural subscription reminder notice for 2007 was
emailed and posted out to current members. The December
reminder gives members plenty of time (30 days) to consider and
arrange their renewals for the beginning of the following year.
The December mail-out will replace the annual March reminder
and allow more time to be spent on organising and executing
Table 3 Profit and Loss – Expenditure.
Table 4 Balance Sheet, 31 August 2006.
2004–2005
$
2005–2006
$
950.00
Auditor’s fees
750.00
943.00
Bank charges
42.30
365.00
Bankcard charges
2004–2005
$
Equity
2005–2006
$
Assets
Current Assets
412.19
16,756.12
CBA Cheque Account
36,878.87
4295.00
DVD production
1179.81
22,784.00
CBA Term Deposit
23,436.61
22,461.00
Journal printing
3300.00
17,282.11
CBA Cash Management Trust
18,118.29
0
Sundries
400.00
6224.00
Insurance
0
756.00
54.00
3251.00
2950.00
0
42,249.00
68
Expenditure
0
DWA EFT Account
56,822.23 Total Current Assets
Internet fees
0
Liabilities
Licences, registrations,
permits
0
Current Liabilities
Printing, stationary
and postage
Prizes
1092.95
513.00
Conference
1980.37
Total Expenditure
9670.62
3826.89
82,260.66
10,000.00
Memorial Fund
10,000.00
Total Current Liabilities
10,483.83
10,483.83
46,822.23
Net Assets
71,776.83
Backfill
This was my first year as Webmaster as I took over from Luke
Kirkwood. The major achievements for this year were the launch
of the online payment system for memberships and the transfer
of the website to a new host.
In order to move the website forward and implement new
features it was necessary to move the website as it was going
to be too expensive to continue hosting it at the University of
Queensland (UQ). Several options were investigated, and the
University of Western Australia (UWA) were happy to host the
site. Therefore the decision was made to relocate the site to the
UWA servers.
We obtained full control over the website in April 2006 at which
point the move was started. As it became clear that we wanted to
be able to do a lot more with our website than other sites hosted
at UWA, the initial attempts to move it were aborted, and we
started transferring it using an alternative content management
system, known as Drupal. Ultimately this has meant that the
transfer took a lot longer than initially anticipated, as I had to
learn a new system and rebuild the site almost from scratch.
The new site will be launched in early 2007. New features
that will be added to the site over the next 12 months include
a member’s only area, including an area to look for jobs and
volunteer opportunities, and an opportunity to post a CV online.
In addition to the added features to the AAA website, proposals
are being considered to improve the National Archaeology Week
website and provide more information and access to the general
public about archaeology in Australia.
After using an online payment system for the 2005 annual
conference, we introduced it for memberships to AAA at the
beginning of July. This has proved highly successful, with 34%
of memberships since then being paid using the online system.
Problems that we had with users of Internet Explorer during the
conference have now been rectified with the launch of IE7. In
addition to memberships, the DVD and journal back issues are
also available through the online system.
In September UQ did some work on their web servers which
unfortunately meant we could no longer access the website or
our membership database. This problem was slowly rectified,
mainly thanks to the help of Luke Kirkwood, but it did severely
affect processing of memberships for about two months.
The total hits on the AAA website were unavailable at the
time of writing.
The total hits on the National Archaeology Week website
since January 2006 were 392,000 at an average of 36,000 hits per
month, peaking during March, April and May, just before and
during National Archaeology Week.
The past six months have been an incredible learning
curve for me as I have had to learn to use several new software
programmes and website coding. I would like to acknowledge
the previous Webmaster, Luke Kirkwood, who not only did a
fantastic job with the old website, but despite his best efforts,
has not quite managed to give it up yet as I continually harass
him. Also UWA, and in particular the Web Office, have been very
supportive as I have built the new site. I would also like to thank
the Executive for their patience as the date for the launch of the
new website was continually pushed back.
Table 1 AAA members and new members, 2000–2006.
Table 3 AAA membership by state, 2004-2006.
targeted mail-outs to students, educational institutions, lapsed
members and/or other interested groups.
AAA conference attendees who were not already AAA
members for 2006 were given the option of subscribing to AAA
for both 2006 and 2007 in one payment. The Executive is trialling
multiple year subscriptions to see whether or not options for up
to three years in advance are viable.
In 2007 the Executive will continue efforts to increase
membership and improve our services and benefits to members.
Membership drives in 2007 will focus particularly on students
and educational institutions to improve our student member
population. We also aim to create a detailed and thorough
Procedures Manual for the position of Membership Secretary.
This manual will help improve the handover process between the
executive positions in 2007, allowing a smooth transition from
one Membership Secretary to another.
5.5 Webmaster’s Report (Samantha Bolton)
Year
Members
New Members
2006
2005
2004
489
80
2005
482
93
2004
560
110
2003
568
126
WA
57
64
47
75
60
66
NSW
131
155
154
QLD
91
93
104
2002
497
83
VIC
2001
367
67
ACT
43
50
66
2000
363
38
SA
34
38
31
NT
12
14
20
TAS
4
7
9
Table 2 AAA membership types, 2005–2006.
Type
2006
2005
Ordinary
309
277
Student
68
96
Overseas
20
18
Retiree
28
26
Institutional
57
57
Life Member
7
8
489
482
Total
State
2006
69
Backfill
5.6 Media Liaison Officer’s Report (Kelly Fleming)
There was fairly limited movement on the media front for 2006,
but now that the new website is up and running we’ll be posting
more regularly. In the meantime the following media releases
have been sent out over 2006 primarily through the (very helpful)
University of Western Australia Media Office (Colin CampbellFraser) and AUSARCH-L.
Media Releases 2006
25 May – National Archaeology Week
UWA Media Office released a statement on activities taking place
and the details of the national website which was picked up by a
number of WA news sources.
18 August – AAA Award Nominations
UWA Media Office released the details of the call for nominations
for AAA’s awards. Also posted on AUSARCH-L.
21 September – Conference Indigenous Funding from DEH
Posting to AUSARCH-L, AACAI and AIATSIS list servers
calling for applications from Indigenous people for conference
funding.
8 November – Call for Burrup Submissions
UWA Media Office released details and closing dates. Also posted
on AUSARCH-L.
20 November – Successful Applicants for Indigenous
Conference Funding
UWA News December included a short story on the three UWA
students. Also posted on AIATSIS and AUSARCH-L.
1 December – Conference 2006 Media Release
General announcement of key themes and keynote conference
speakers. Released in collaboration with La Trobe Public
Relations Office.
10 December – Mike Smith (Recipient of the Rhys Jones Medal)
Media release sent out in collaboration with the UWA Media
Office and the National Museum of Australia detailing Mike
Smith’s citation for the Rhys Jones Medal.
5.7 Editors’ Report (Sean Ulm and Annie Ross)
During 2006 Numbers 62 and 63 of Australian Archaeology were
published marking the transition from the Editorial Committee
based at Flinders University to one based at the University of
Queensland. The new team consists of Sean Ulm and Annie Ross
(Editors), Geraldine Mate (Editorial Assistant), Chris Clarkson,
Lara Lamb and Catherine Westcott (Short Reports Editors), Ian
Lilley and Jill Reid (Book Review Editors) and Stephen Nichols
(Thesis Abstract Editor).
We have taken this opportunity to review the place of AA in
the archaeological landscape and make some strategic changes
to ensure that the Association is able to provide a financially
viable high quality journal to our members into the future. At
the most superficial level this involved a cosmetic makeover of
the cover, page layout and paper stock. The redesign is part of
a deliberate policy to broaden the appeal of AA to Australian
70
archaeologists and the wider public. These changes have allowed
improvements in the production quality of the journal within
the existing AA budget. On the distribution front, we have been
able to contain postage costs by establishing a Postage Paid
service with Australia Post.
At a more fundamental level, we have also taken the
opportunity presented by the transition to the new Editorial
Committee to review editorial policies and procedures. One
outcome has been the formalisation and documentation of
editorial policy, including templates for the wide range of
correspondence required in the day-to-day operation of the
journal. This documentation will aid in the transition to a new
Editorial Committee in the future.
Referees are central to ensuring the quality of manuscripts
accepted for publication in AA. In order to build a wider
network of skilled referees, we have adopted a policy of inviting
one senior and one more junior scholar to referee each article
and short report. From this year we also have commenced
publishing a formal list of referees in the December issue in
recognition of the contribution of others to the quality of
the journal.
In this age of digital mania, we also clearly need to improve
the accessibility of AA on the internet. A patchy selection of AA
back issues is already available electronically to many institutional
subscribers through the Australian Public Affairs – Full Text
electronic journal collection, by means of a non-exclusive
license provided by an agreement between AAA, Copyright
Agency Ltd (CAL), RMIT Publishing and the National Library
of Australia (see AA56:72). However, there is a considerable delay
in the availability of current issues and they are not available to
members not affiliated with major institutions. To address this
problem, we are investigating a range of online options for the
journal and hope to have arrangements in place for optional
online subscriptions in the near future. We will also continue to
work with the Executive to improve AA’s visibility and resources
on the AAA website.
In another move, we have signed up to the WAC
Global Libraries Program to support the development
of archaeological resources in developing countries by
donating 50 copies of each issue of AA published. While this
contribution incurs negligible costs to AAA, it clearly helps
to bring AA to a global readership and aligns closely with
AAA’s commitment to working to bring more voices into
archaeological discourses.
Volume 62 was posted in the last week of June and the
December issue was posted in the second last week of November.
In 2007, we plan to mail out the June edition in early May and
the December edition in early November.
The current editorial team is committed to providing a range
of archaeological topics to our readership. In the future, we hope
to be able to continue to provide readers with rich and diverse
content and we therefore welcome quality contributions on all
flavours of archaeology.
In closing we would like to thank the team who helped with
the transition from Flinders University and in relaunching the
journal. Thanks to Donald Pate and Jo McDonald, in particular,
for working with us to make the transition as smooth as possible;
the other members of the Editorial Committee for much
hard work; John Reid (Lovehate Design) for graphic design,
Backfill
innovation and patience; Antje Noll for much general assistance;
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit and the
School of Social Science at the University of Queensland for
providing funds to employ Geraldine Mate as a casual Editorial
Assistant; and the contributors and referees for helping build the
quality of AA.
5.8 Indigenous Subsidies Subcommittee Report
(Stephen Free)
As a result of funding from the Department of Environment and
Heritage, support was provided to 20 Indigenous participants to
attend the conference. There are plans to request new funding
for 2008.
Given the increased attendance in Indigenous participation,
the subcommittee suggests that an Indigenous keynote speaker
be considered for future conferences.
5.9 Australian National Committee for
Archaeology Teaching and Learning Report
(Wendy Beck)
In 2006, this subcommittee (now known as ANCATL to avoid
confusion with earlier subcommittees) has had an active year.
New Subcommittee Membership
After the successful Volume 61 of Australian Archaeology
(Teaching, Learning and Australian Archaeology) was published
in 2005, a new subcommittee membership was formed, from the
group of authors in this volume. The subcommittee, and their
liaison responsibilities are:
A/Prof. Wendy Beck, University of New England (Australian
Institute for Archaeology Liaison) (Chair)
Dr Jane Balme, University of Western Australia (Australian
Archaeological Association Liaison)
Cameo Dalley, University of Queensland
Catherine Clarke, University of New England
Dr Sarah Colley, University of Sydney (UK Higher Education
Academy, History, Classics and Archaeology Subject Area
Liaison)
Dr Martin Gibbs, University of Sydney (Australasian Society for
Historical Archaeology Liaison)
A/Prof. Jay Hall, University of Queensland
Stephen Nichols, University of Queensland
Jody Steele, Tasmanian National Parks (Australasian Society for
Historical Archaeology Liaison)
Dr Sean Ulm, University of Queensland (Australian Association of
Consulting Archaeologists Inc. Liaison; World Archaeological
Congress Liaison)
The Executive of the Subcommittee comprises Wendy Beck
and Sean Ulm (Chairs of Working Parties) and Catherine
Clarke (Secretary). We have met twice this year, we have a
listserver, and a presence on the AAA website to encourage
information flow.
Goals for 2006
The role of ANCATL for 2006 was to further the Redfern Charter,
as these issues still seem to be a major concern to members.
Redfern Charter:
i. Better coordination of opportunities for students and early
career graduates to gain vocational experience.
ii. Accept the principles of the UK benchmarks for teaching and
learning as a step towards the development of a model for
Australian undergraduate archaeology degree structures.
iii. Support for greater interaction and exchange in teaching and
learning between universities on the one hand and regulatory
authorities and industry on the other.
iv. A commitment to gathering reliable data for benchmarking
of a variety of archaeology activities similar to UK survey
instrument.
v. Develop mechanisms to tell the archaeological story to the
public that own and relate to that archaeology.
Priority Actions Completed in 2006
There were two main priorities for 2006 which were (i) and (ii)
above. Priority (iii) has been covered in 2004–2005. Two working
parties were set up to progress these priorities.
Vocational experience (Chaired by Sean Ulm): A list of
vocational opportunities (especially archaeological workplaces
who might be willing to offer work experience to students)
has been initiated, based on a mail-out survey of employers.
It is planned to make this available on the AAA website, with
perhaps a standardised work experience form which would also
be available there.
Benchmarking archaeology degrees (Chaired by Wendy Beck):
Wendy Beck was successful, as Team Leader, in gaining a Carrick
Institute Grant for 2007–2008 ($114,000) for ‘Benchmarking
Archaeology Degrees in Australian Universities’. ANCATL will
be the Steering Committee for this grant, and will work in
partnership with all 10 university providers of four-year degrees,
other university providers and professional bodies to discuss the
UK benchmarks, their strengths and weaknesses and feasibility
for Australia. There will also be opportunities for broader
discussion with other stakeholders. Through a collaborative
process of discussion and endorsement, a shared network of
understanding of the standard of archaeology degrees will be
developed. The final ‘Benchmarks’ could be similar to the ‘Code
of Ethics’ a voluntary charter widely agreed to and publicly
available on the AAA website.
Other Actions
Public archaeology is also a key area and school education is
particularly neglected, but some simple actions could improve
information provision and this will be a priority for 2007.
We are in the process of making a submission to the NSW
Department of Education about archaeology in the curriculum.
The AAA website could be expanded next year to include more
information about other forms of study and not just becoming
an archaeologist, but the other benefits of archaeology as well.
Our thanks are extended to the Australian Archaeological
Association Inc. for their financial and in-kind support of our
work this year.
5.9.1 Discussion Arising
Concern was raised regarding the lack of an archaeologist in the
Prime Minister’s History Teaching Committee. It was proposed
that the ANCATL make a formal approach to the committee.
71
Backfill
5.10 Prizes and Awards Subcommittee Report
(Sean Ulm, Fiona Hook and Ken Mulvaney)
The Prizes and Awards Subcommittee was formed at the 2005
AGM to help manage the increasing number of awards offered
by the Association, which include the Rhys Jones Medal for
Outstanding Contribution to Australian Archaeology, John
Mulvaney Book Award, Bruce Veitch Award for Excellence in
Indigenous Engagement, Life Membership for Outstanding
Contribution to the Australian Archaeological Association Inc.,
and conference paper and poster prizes. The committee also
manages the Laila Haglund Prize for Excellence in Consultancy on
behalf of the Australian Association of Consulting Archaeologists
Inc. In total, there are 10 awards in seven categories.
During 2006 the committee, consisting of Fiona Hook,
Ken Mulvaney and Sean Ulm, formalised the descriptions and
procedures for applying for each award and established selection
criteria for the assessment of each award. These changes provide
the basis for ensuring a consistent and transparent assessment
process across all award categories.
The committee received nominations for all award categories.
Multiple high-quality nominations were received for the Rhys
Jones Medal, John Mulvaney Book Award and Bruce Veitch
Award. Of particular note, the Rhys Jones Medal, the highest
award offered by the Association, received nominations of
non-members by non-members, indicating that the Medal is
increasingly valued by the wider archaeological establishment.
This year marks the inaugural awarding of the Bruce Veitch Award
for Excellence in Indigenous Engagement, celebrating Bruce’s close
collaboration with traditional owners and important contributions
to the practice and ethics of archaeology in Australia.
Over the next 12 months the committee plans to ensure
that accurate and comprehensive listings of past awardees are
available on the soon-to-be relaunched AAA website along with
full descriptions, application procedures and selection criteria
for all award categories.
The subcommittee would like to thank President Alistair
Paterson for active participation in the committee, Val Attenbrow
for assisting in the review of nominations for the John Mulvaney
Book Award and Nikki Stern for organising judges for the
conference awards. For funding awards for this year’s conference
we thank Nexus Energy, Bob Wilson from Footprint Books and
the La Trobe conference organisers. Finally, we thank the 2006
conference prize judges. For papers we thank Fiona Hook, Ken
Mulvaney, Nikki Stern and Alex Mackay and for posters Mitch
Allen, Janine Major, Alistair Paterson and Sean Ulm.
5.11 National Archaeology Week Subcommittee
Report
There is currently no National Archaeology Week Subcommittee.
We are seeking a new chair for this subcommittee, if interested
please contact the Executive after the AGM.
5.12 State Representatives’ Reports
5.12.1 Northern Territory Report (Daryl Guse)
Indigenous archaeology in the NT is probably at its lowest ebb
in a very long time.
The repatriation of Indigenous skeletal remains is gaining
some momentum with the recent employment of Francesca
72
Cubillo at the Museum and Art Gallery of the NT. She was
formerly at the National Museum of Australia and worked on
their repatriation programme. Francesca is a local Larrakia
woman and I have high confidence in her ability to manage
issues regarding the repatriation of Indigenous skeletal remains
in an appropriate and sensitive manner.
My colleague, Richard Woolfe and I, have been trying to
implement consultation with Indigenous traditional owners
on archaeological consultancy surveys, a practice undertaken in
every other State and Territory, and as you know, an important
part of AAA and AACAI codes of ethics. However, Heritage
Conservation Services, the Northern Territory Government
agency responsible for administering the Heritage Conservation
Act 1991, will not enforce this as a condition of archaeological
surveys and, therefore, proponents will not fund consultations.
We’ve taken this issue up with the NT government, however with
no results.
A significant rock art site in western Arnhem Land on the
road to Oenpelli was destroyed by fire as a result of negligence
from the local community government council. The incident
was reported by to the NTG who responded that they would
not investigate the incident. The NTG has stated in response to
a proposal I and the Northern Land Council had put to them,
that issues regarding rock art management in Arnhem Land
‘cannot be described as a high priority for this division at this
point in time … and are not in urgent need of Government
attention given that they are statutorily protected as prescribed
archaeological sites, as well as having the protection offered by
restricted access to Aboriginal Land’ (Correspondence from the
EPA Director).
Charles Darwin University no longer has an archaeology
programme, with one anthropology lecturer remaining in
the Faculty of Law, Business and Arts. There are no plans for
CDU to replace the archaeological staff. It is likely that the
well-equipped archaeology laboratories established by Peter
Hiscock will be converted into office space. As a result there
are fewer professional development, research, and education
opportunities in archaeology for people who reside in
the NT.
A parallel development to the end of archaeology at CDU
resulted in the Director of Heritage asking me what relevance
there was in retaining the general provisions for the protection of
Indigenous archaeological sites and objects in the development
of the new Heritage Conservation Act if there is no research or
education fraternity in the Northern Territory. Obviously there
are many answers to this question, however, you might start to
see where things are going here in the NT.
I have personally written to the Chief Minister in response
to the government’s new Indigenous Community Development
policy promoting possible ways that Indigenous communities
could be more actively engaged in the cultural heritage
management process. Much could be done to promote this
through local Indigenous ranger programmes and improved
Indigenous employment outcomes in remote communities.
However this was met with a very disinterested response.
The archaeological community in the NT is quite small
and we probably need to seek the support of AAA in trying to
develop a strategy to promote the management and conservation
of Indigenous archaeology in the Northern Territory.
Backfill
I know that there are very pressing issues elsewhere,
especially on the Burrup, however, I feel that the situation
in the NT has been growing worse in the last couple of years,
and we need some help to start a modest strategy to get
Indigenous cultural heritage issues back on the agenda before
it is too late.
Discussion Arising
The Executive will write to Charles Darwin University expressing
its concern regarding the loss of their archaeology programme.
The Executive will liaise with NT members to consider the
best way to lobby the NT government regarding the protection
of archaeological sites.
5.12.2 Australian Capital Territory Report (Stephen Free)
The ACT State Representative has not conducted any activities on
behalf of AAA. Stephen reported that he is no longer living in the
ACT and a new State Representative will need to be appointed.
5.12.3 South Australia Report (Lynley Wallis)
There is currently a proposed review of the SA heritage legislation.
The Executive and AAA members will be asked for assistance
when required.
Motion: ‘that the reports presented here are accepted’. Moved:
Ian Lilley. Seconded: Val Attenbrow. Motion carried nem. con.
7. Election of Officers of the Committee
The following AAA Officers were elected for 2007:
Executive
President – Alistair Paterson
Secretary – Fiona Hook
Treasurer – Adam Dias
Membership Secretary – Annie Carson
Public Officer – Sally Brockwell
Webmaster – Samantha Bolton
Media Liaison Officer – Kelly Flemming
Editors – Sean Ulm & Annie Ross
State and Territory Representatives
ACT – Alex Mackay
NSW – Val Attenbrow
NT – Daryl Guse
QLD – Lara Lamb
SA – Lynley Wallis
WA – Stuart Rapley
VIC – Nikki Stern
TAS – vacant
8. Close of Meeting
The President thanked members for attending the AGM. The
meeting was closed at 7:15pm.
6. Other Business
6.1 Appointment of Auditor for 2006-2007
Financial Year
No auditor was appointed at the 2005 AGM in accordance with
Item 9.1 of the Constitution. The Executive appointed an auditor
under item 9.4 for the 2005–2006 financial year.
Motion ‘that Addition Bookkeeping Services be appointed
as the auditor for the 2006–2007 financial year’. Moved: Bob
Gargett. Seconded: Jill Reid. Motion carried nem. con.
73
Backfill
RHYS JONES MEDAL FOR OUTSTANDING
CONTRIBUTION TO AUSTRALIAN
ARCHAEOLOGY: MIKE SMITH
Dr Mike Smith has been
awarded the Rhys Jones Medal
for 2006 to mark his enormous
contribution to the development
and promotion of archaeology
in Australia. Mike is currently
Director of Research and
Development at the National
Museum of Australia. For more
than 25 years he has worked in
the Central Australian desert. A
distinguished field archaeologist,
he pioneered research into late Pleistocene settlement in the
Australian desert and over recent years has initiated, planned
and conducted a series of international conferences.
Mike’s ground-breaking research began in the 1980s, before
which Australian deserts were largely believed to be inhospitable
landscapes that remained uninhabited until 12,000 years ago.
Mike’s thorough and dedicated research over three decades has
demonstrated that the history of Australian deserts is in fact
much longer and much more dynamic and varied. The work at
Puritjarra helped change views on desert habitation. Mike has
worked with multidisciplinary teams and published papers and
books on the timing and settlement of the shelter, the stone tool
assemblage, seed-grinding, charcoal, rock art, the source of ochres
and their relationship to trade, ethnography and impressions of
the rockshelter from people in other disciplines. Recently a book
documenting the recent history of the region has been met with
popular acclaim: Peopling the Cleland Hills: Aboriginal History
in Western Central Australia, 1850-1980 (Aboriginal History
Inc., 2005). More broadly, Mike has expanded his research and
publications to focus on issues relating to both the technicalities
of dating methods and the implications of archaeological dates for
understanding the prehistory of Australia and the wider region.
In recent years Mike has led the way in developing an
understanding of the environmental histories of deserts and their
relationship to cultural change. Seeing the need for the exchange
of information across disciplines and across continents, Mike
initiated, planned and conducted an international conference
series, 23ºSouth: The Archaeology and Environmental History
of the Southern Deserts held in Canberra in 2003, Chile in 2005,
and set for Namibia in 2008. Two edited volumes arose from these
meetings: 23ºSouth: Archaeology and Environmental History of the
Southern Deserts (with Paul Hesse) (National Museum of Australia
Press, 2005) and Desert Peoples: Archaeological Perspectives (with
Peter Veth and Peter Hiscock) (Blackwell Publishing, 2005). This
conference series has raised the standing of Australian archaeology
internationally and has forged strong links between researchers of
many nations. These days when global warming is on everyone’s
lips, the understanding of human and environmental interactions
is vitally important. Recognition of Mike’s unique contribution
to research into late Pleistocene archaeology and Quaternary
environments in Australia resulted in his recent appointment as
74
Adjunct Professor at the Centre for Resource and Environmental
Studies at the Australian National University, and election as a
Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities.
Mike’s achievements at the National Museum of Australia
include the researching and curation of blockbuster exhibitions
(e.g. Tangled Destinies: Land and People in Australia; Extremes:
Survival in the Great Deserts of the Southern Hemisphere), leading
the way in educating the general public and disseminating
archaeological information in a manner not open to academia.
Mike’s attention to the ‘big questions’ facing archaeology,
his ability to turn ideas into research projects, his continued
work in the field, his enviable publication record, his elegant
prose, his generosity to other researchers, and his passion for
the discipline of archaeology make him a worthy recipient of
the Rhys Jones Medal.
LIFE MEMBERSHIP FOR OUTSTANDING
CONTRIBUTION TO THE AUSTRALIAN
ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION:
IAN JOHNSON
Dr Ian Johnson has been
awarded Life Membership
of the Association in
recognition of his longstanding support. This
award was established to
recognise significant and
sustained contribution to the
objects and purposes of the
Australian Archaeological
Association Inc.
With a Cambridge BA
and a Bordeaux DES, Ian
Johnson started his PhD
research at the Australian
National University in 1976 with excavations at Abercrombie
Arch Shelter near Bathurst, New South Wales. He has been
a member of AAA ever since, and served on the Executive in
1984 and 1985. He organised what is thought of as the first AAA
conference at Kioloa in 1978 and edited the resulting publication,
Holier Than Thou (Department of Prehistory, Research School
of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 1980) titled
with a famous Rhys Jones quote. He organised later conferences,
including the Sixth Australian Archaeological Association
Conference in 1984 at Tallebudgera, Queensland, and has helped
many archaeologists with computing problems of all kinds.
Ian started development on broad archaeological applications
of his Minark database system straight after his PhD was completed
in 1980, and introduced many Australian archaeologists to the
huge potential of computerised databases. As an archaeological
consultant, Ian has advised many government and heritage
organisations and set up database applications in Europe, USA,
UK and, of course, in many Australian State and Commonwealth
organisations. Ian set up the first website and computerised
databases for AAA and the Australian Association of Consulting
Archaeologists Inc.
Backfill
He has managed to mix archaeological fieldwork in several
parts of the world with teaching, research and ongoing software
development in the Archaeological Computing Laboratory, which
he first set up at the University of Sydney in 1992. Ian Johnson has
generously contributed to the growth of Australian archaeology
and is thoroughly deserving of AAA Life Membership.
BRUCE VEITCH AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE
IN INDIGENOUS ENGAGEMENT:
RICHARD FULLAGAR
Richard is well-known for his generosity of heart, opening his
home and family to visitors and returning to country where he
has worked as often as he is able. Richard is never apologetic about
archaeology – he is able to respect and interact with Indigenous
worldviews while being passionate about scientific archaeology.
He is able to communicate that passion to Indigenous people, as
he is able to understand and share something of their passion
for the land.
JOHN MULVANEY BOOK AWARD
Dr Richard Fullagar has
been awarded the inaugural
Bruce Veitch Award. This
award was created to
celebrate Bruce’s important
contribution to the practice
and ethics of archaeology
in Australia. It results from
contributions by resource
companies, consultants
and individuals, made
after Bruce’s death in 2005.
The award is presented
to an individual or group
who has undertaken an
archaeological or cultural heritage project which has produced
significant outcomes for Indigenous interests.
Richard Fullagar has a long and distinguished career in
archaeology spanning the last 30 years which has centred on
working in collaboration with Aboriginal communities. He has
always practiced archaeology with a sense of moral and ethical
obligation to the people he has worked with and has actively sought
to engage with traditional owners on all the projects he has been
involved in. His commitment has always been long-term and often
has involved significant outcomes for individuals, communities,
and for the ethical standing of archaeology in this country.
Three particular projects highlight Richard’s commitment to
Aboriginal communities and the manner in which he practices
archaeology. First, he has worked with the Miriuwung-Gajerrong
and other Top End people since the late 1980s, providing expert
witness testimony in their successful Native Title case. Second,
Richard has been a key member of the University of Sydney
Riversleigh Archaeology Project, working closely with the Waanyi
people in northwest Queensland. He was active in many months
of fieldwork, assisted and ran traineeship programmes for young
community people, and provided expert advice and reports.
As many would know, this project often brought community
people to Sydney to be a part of post-fieldwork analysis and to
attend conferences like AAA. Third, Richard has provided a key
leadership role in his work as Chair of the AAA Code of Ethics
Review Subcommittee.
When he is in the field, as his colleagues would know, Richard
is usually responsible for extensive background consultation
work. Yet somehow he also manages to spend a lot of time down
the pit. He’s the first one up, cooking porridge for people and
usually the last one to bed, and still manages to be enthusiastic
about the artefacts coming out of the trench on a boiling hot
afternoon. His generosity to others in a range of field-based
projects has always been selfless.
The 2006 John Mulvaney
Book Award is made to Dr
Rodney Harrison’s Shared
Landscapes: Archaeologies
of Attachment and the
Pastoral Industry in New
South Wales (Department
of Environment and
Conservation NSW and
UNSW Press, 2004).
Rodney’s
book
investigates the history,
archaeology and issues
of
cultural
heritage
management of pastoralism
with two substantial regional case studies, East Kunderang
Pastoral Station, now within the Oxley Wild Rivers National Park
near Kempsey, and Dennawan Aboriginal reserve, within the
Culgoa National Park, near Goodooga, both in NSW. His book
entwines the studies of archaeology and heritage conservation
through the lens of shared Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal
pastoral activities.
This well-presented book derives from a well-organised
collaborative research project which provides an understanding
of both archaeological and historical aspects of these landscapes.
Additionally, the book contributes to debates about the current
state of heritage and heritage interpretation in New South Wales.
Shared Landscapes also contributes to studies of culture contact,
and Indigenous and non-Indigenous archaeologies. The notion of
Shared Landscapes is used to explore the relationship Indigenous
people had with the pastoral industry – an issue of relevance even
today.
Shared Landscapes represents a recent and important area of
research. It will be valuable for professionals in the heritage sector,
academic researchers, Indigenous people, students, and the public.
CONFERENCE PAPER PRIZES
(Judging Committee: Fiona Hook, Alex Mackay, Ken Mulvaney,
Nicola Stern)
Best Overall Paper Prize
(Sponsored by Nexus Energy)
Hunting Strategies in Late Pleistocene South
West Tasmania
Jillian Garvey, Anne Pike-Tay and Richard Cosgrove
Archaeologists have been increasingly interested in the
first appearance of fully modern human behaviour and
debate has raged as to how to characterise it. Work on
75
Backfill
pre-45,000 BP hominid sites now shows material evidence
of ‘advanced’ cognitive abilities, previously thought to
indicate the existence of modern human behaviour. Faunal
studies in particular have highlighted the presence of these
‘advanced’ skills at various archaeological sites in both time
and space. In an effort to widen the debate, we examine the
late Pleistocene Tasmanian faunal data, focusing on human
prey selection and land-use. We apply skeleton-chronological
analysis to Bennett’s wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus) from
Tasmania’s earliest sites, presenting results of seasonal
teeth annuli growth. Results suggest that hunting occurred
in upland and lowland valleys on a coordinated seasonal
basis using what would be considered a Middle Palaeolithic
stone technology. These data bring into question the use of
single sets of criteria used presently to characterise modern
human behaviour.
Best Student Paper Prize
(Sponsored by Nexus Energy and Footprint Books)
Technological Transitions in the Late Pleistocene
of South Africa’s Western Cape
Alex Mackay
This paper discusses changes in flaked stone artefact technology
at three rockshelter sites in the Western Cape of South Africa,
occupied between ~100ka and 18ka. This period includes
technologically innovative stages such as the Still Bay and the
Howiesons Poort – stages that have produced early evidence
for the human use of symbols and personal ornamentation. It
is argued that technological changes exhibited over the study
period are best understood in terms of transitions rather than
breaks, and that there is no clear evidence for a technological
revolution during the Middle Stone Age. The transition from
Middle to Later Stone Age (~40ka–20ka) may be more significant
than any changes within the MSA.
The Laila Haglund Prize for Excellence in
Consultancy
(Sponsored by the Australian Association of Consulting
Archaeologists Inc.)
Communities of Confidence: Documenting
Indigenous Land-Use and Settlement Patterns
from Rock Art Distribution in Western
Arnhem Land
Daryl Guse and Richard Woolfe
The overwhelming majority of archaeological sites in western
Arnhem Land consist of rock art in the sandstone escarpment
and outliers of the Arnhem Land Plateau. As a result, this
extraordinarily visible archaeological record has seen the
documentation and production of a temporal framework of
stylistic rock art sequences. Hiscock surmises that Indigenous
settlement patterns in western Arnhem Land comprised mobile
Aboriginal populations during the Pleistocene-Holocene
transition with an increasing trend towards more sedentary
patterns of occupation in the late Holocene. It has been proposed
that rock art from the Pleistocene-Holocene transition depicts
a population of Aboriginal people that have complex material
culture and engaged in a variety of activities that occurred in
76
a time of conflict during environmental stress. In contrast, the
late Holocene period up to the present is known to have been
a period of far greater ecological abundance and diversity after
the sea-level stabilisation with fewer depictions of large-scale
conflict (although scenes of small-scale conflict occur through
to the present). Rock art from this period, although with many
stylistic changes, continued to be complex, depicting a wide
variety of narratives and images of people, ecology, spirituality
and mythology.
Cultural resource management surveys undertaken for the
Northern Land Council have focused on the Narbalek and Tin
Camp Creek areas of western Arnhem Land. A GIS analysis of
rock art locations in these areas indicates subtle, yet significant,
differences in the distribution of Pleistocene-Holocene
transition period rock art and that of later Holocene assemblages.
Pleistocene-Holocene transition period rock art is largely
located in ravines and narrow gorges, or shelters situated high
on cliff faces. In contrast, late Holocene rock art assemblages are
situated either at the entrance of gorges and at the floodplain
level. Analysis of the spatial and temporal distribution of
these sites indicates a late Holocene reorganisation of landuse strategies, social economies and group interaction for the
dissected plateau and plains. Therefore, late Holocene changes
in the rock art sequence reflect a growing confidence to occupy
openly accessible sites in terms of social and ecological stability
and security.
CONFERENCE POSTER PRIZES
(Judging Committee: Mitch Allen, Janine Major, Alistair Paterson,
Sean Ulm)
Best Overall Poster Prize
(Sponsored by Nexus Energy)
Identifying the Bones: A Radiographic Comparison
of the Cortical Bone Thickness in the Radius of
Humans and Kangaroos
Sarah Croker, Warren Reed and Denise Donlon
Identification of bones as human or non-human is often aided
by an understanding of the different body proportions and bone
shapes that result from the bipedal stance of humans compared
with the quadrupedalism of most non-human mammals. This
could possibly extend to a difference in thickness of the long
bone cortex, used by some workers to aid identification of
bone fragments. In Australia, bones of kangaroos, being bipedal
hopping animals, can be confused with human remains, as
similarities in function, particularly the upper body, are reflected
in similar bone shapes. This is particularly notable in the radius,
which is studied here to determine whether differences in the
thickness of the bone cortex exist, despite the similar external
morphology of the human and kangaroo radius. For this
preliminary study, 20 human and 20 kangaroo (Macropus sp.)
radii were radiographed, and measurements taken of the bone
diameter, medulla cavity and cortices at three sites along the shaft.
Both the raw cortical thickness dimensions and the proportion
of cortical bone to the whole bone diameter were compared
between the two groups. Significant differences were discovered
at some, but not all, sites measured.
Backfill
Best Student Poster Prize
(Sponsored by Nexus Energy and Footprint Books)
From Midden to Sieve: The Impact of Differential
Recovery on Shellfish Remains in Australian
Archaeology
Robyn Jenkins and Sean Ulm
Experimental mechanical sieving methods were applied to
samples of shellfish remains from three sites in southeast
Queensland (Seven Mile Creek Mound, Sandstone Point and OneTree) to test the efficacy of various recovery and quantification
procedures commonly applied in Australia. Although there
has been considerable debate regarding the most appropriate
sieve sizes and quantification methods that should be applied
in the recovery of vertebrate faunal remains, few studies have
addressed the impact of recovery and quantification techniques
on the interpretation of invertebrate remains. In this study, five
shellfish taxa representing four bivalves (Anadara trapezia,
Trichomya hirsutus, Saccostrea glomerata, Donax deltoides)
and one gastropod (Pyrazus ebeninus) common in eastern
Australian midden assemblages were sieved through 10mm,
6.3mm and 3.15mm mesh and then quantified by weight, MNI
and NISP. Results indicate that different structural properties
of shells and pre- and post-depositional factors affect recovery
rates. Findings demonstrate that for all quantification methods
tested the 3.15mm mesh produced the most consistent and
comparable data.
The Big Man Award was this year selected from among
the Little Boy Awards. We note that as long as people give
two or more papers at the AAA conference, the ad hoc
committee reserves the right to heap multiple humiliations
upon attendees.
Back to the Future Award
Richard Cosgrove: For welcoming Jim O’Connell to the 2007
AAA Conference in December 2006. An auspicious start with RC
charging out the gate.
Tony Bulimore Award
Jim Allen and Jim O’Connell: For explaining the origins of sea
travel by suggesting that ‘a human sitting on a log is a sail’.
Paul Clitheroe Accounting Award
Michael Westaway: For thinking that he had a lot more money
in the grant than he really did.
Freddie Mercury Songwriting Award
Richard Fullagar: For his lyric ‘The old homos from Omo’.
Jacko Award
Trish Fanning: For spending 12 years of her working life with
the Duracell Bunny (Simon Holdaway).
Pamela Anderson Award
Mike Smith: For telling us ‘I want to look for the busts rather
than the booms’.
Runner-Up Student Poster Prize
(Sponsored by the Conference Organising Committee and
Footprint Books)
Zidane Award
Terrestrial Resource Use at Silver Dollar, Shark
Bay (W.A.)
Alex McKay: For a head-on approach to stratigraphic
identification (stratigraphic units named for the World Cup
Soccer team).
Fiona Dyason
Macropod teeth from the Silver Dollar Aboriginal site were used
to determine environmental and subsistence change between
the Pleistocene and the mid-Holocene in Shark Bay (WA). Silver
Dollar is on the west coast of the Peron Peninsula near the
township of Denham. The site is in the land of an Indigenous
group called the Mulgana.
Eddie McGuire Award
Michael Slack: For invoking Don Bradman in support of his
Riversleigh score.
Macquarie Dictionary Award
Tim Denham: For saying ‘Nexus is a really nice word, though I’m
not really sure what it means’. Nicely post-structural, Tim.
BIG MAN AND SMALL BOY AWARDS
(Judging Committee: Colin Pardoe, Catherine Westcott, Jane
Balme, Ken Mulvaney)
The Big Man and Small Boy Awards are designed to
provide maximum embarrassment and humiliation at the
annual Australian Archaeological Association conference.
All submissions must have been made in public, preferably
during a presentation. The ad hoc committee accepts
nominations from attendees. The committee does not appear
to be bound by any rules, guidelines or ethics statements – we
do what we want.
The awarding of honours is at the discretion of the committee.
In keeping with our commitment to care and nurturing of
students, the ad hoc committee targeted students. Complaints
may be directed to the Complaints Manager, who may be
contacted at [email protected]
Pope Benedict XVI Award
Chris Clarkson: For using the term ‘UNROOTED NEIGHBOUR’
to describe differential mating patterns.
2 Sigma Chronological Specificity Award
Chris Clarkson: For presenting two different papers in which the
dates given for first landfall in Australia are 50,000 years apart.
Optometry Award
Scott Mooney: For saying ‘If you squint a bit, you start to see
patterns in this work’.
WMD Award for Self-Affirmation
Bill Boyd: For stating ‘Here are some phytoliths so you know that
we know what we are looking for’.
77
Backfill
Ian Campbell Award
Steve Kuhn Award
The Driver of the World Heritage 4WD: For ignoring the
‘No Parking’ signs and parking on the lawn in the middle of
a drought (award sheepishly accepted by Michael Westaway).
Nikki Stern: For telling us that stone tools are a particularly
blunt instrument for understanding human behaviour.
Paris Hilton Award
Alex McKay: For comparing flaking efficiency with academic
careers and clearly demonstrating an association between tenure
and a reduction in efficiency.
Big Balls Award and BIG MAN AWARD
Iain Davidson: For shameless self promotion.
Conferences
THE FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY IN
ARCHAEOLOGY AND CONSERVATION
21–26 September 2007
Sydney, New South Wales
7–12 July 2007
Granada, Spain
The fifth conference in this series will stress four main themes:
Tourism and Heritage at Risk; Comparative Archaeology and
Architecture: The Umayyads and Andalusia; Stone and Mortar
Preservation Problems: Weathering Studies and RestorationConservation Actions; and, The Acoustics of Ancient
Theaters. Other topics for this year are very much the same as
before: Archaeology; Tourism; Risk Assessment and Disaster
Preparedness; Modern Documentation Processes and their
Importance in the Protection of Cultural Heritage; Protection
of Cultural Heritage in Times of Conflict and Natural Disasters;
Conservation and Preservation of the Tangible and Intangible
Cultural Heritage; Cultural Resources Management and AIS
(Archaeological GIS Systems); Management of Archaeological
Landscapes; Ancient Technologies; Ancient Water Management
in Spain.
Details: http://www.eyeonculture.net
ICOMOS 2007 – EXTREME HERITAGE:
MANAGING HERITAGE IN THE FACE
OF CLIMATIC EXTREMES, NATURAL
DISASTERS AND MILITARY CONFLICTS
IN TROPICAL, DESERT, POLAR AND OFFWORLD LANDSCAPES
19–21 July 2007
Cairns, Queensland
The ICOMOS conference theme in 2007 is Extreme Heritage.
It reflects the modern challenge of managing heritage in a
changing and volatile world. The theme puts Australia and its
climatic diversity in a world context and draws together national
and international researchers from across the world working
in similar environments to talk about common and emerging
issues. The conference will be relevant to a broad audience
involved in the heritage industry. It will provide an excellent
opportunity for delegates to meet and exchange ideas with other
ICOMOS members and heritage and other professionals, and
will be particularly relevant to many of our neighbours in the
Asia-Pacific region who have to deal all too often with issues of
Extreme Heritage.
Details: http://www.aicomos.com
78
NEW GROUND: AUSTRALASIAN
ARCHAEOLOGY CONFERENCE 2007
New Ground will combine the annual conferences of the
Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology Inc. (AIMA),
the Australasian Society for Historical Archaeology (ASHA),
the Australian Archaeological Association Inc. (AAA) and the
Australian Association for Maritime History Inc. (AAMH). The
Australian Association of Consulting Archaeologists Inc. (AACAI)
is also formally involved in the conference. New Ground will
focus on presenting and discussing new research and advances
in theory, method and practice, building connections between
archaeologists and defining future directions for Australasian
archaeology in regional and global perspective. The forum will
bring together educators, researchers, consultants, government
archaeologists, students and other practitioners grappling with
some of the most topical issues in archaeology today. The focus
will be on how together we can break ‘new ground’.
Details: http://www.newground.org.au
SYMPOSIUM 2007 – PRESERVING
ABORIGINAL HERITAGE: TECHNICAL AND
TRADITIONAL APPROACHES
24–28 September 2007
Ottawa, Canada
Symposium 2007 will provide an opportunity for Aboriginal
people and conservation specialists to learn from one another
– in an atmosphere of mutual respect – about traditional,
technical, ethical, and intangible aspects of the conservation of
Aboriginal material culture. It is being organised by the Canadian
Conservation Institute (CCI), with input and guidance from
an Advisory Committee comprising members of First Nations,
Inuit and Metis communities across Canada. The themes of
Symposium 2007 are: Mutual Learning, Respect, and Ethics;
Working Together; Technical and Traditional Approaches; LongTerm Impact; and Pesticides. Symposium 2007 incorporates
and welcomes multiple perspectives, including international
viewpoints. Potential participants include Aboriginal people
involved in heritage, staff and volunteers in Aboriginal
community cultural centres, Elders and Aboriginal community
leaders, community-based and institutional researchers,
academics and students, museum and archival conservation
specialists, collection managers, curators and museum directors.
Details: http://www.cci-icc.gc.ca/symposium/index_e.aspx
Backfill
32ND CONGRESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL
COMMITTEE OF THE HISTORY OF
ART (CIHA) CONFERENCE: CROSSING
CULTURES: CONFLICT, MIGRATION AND
CONVERGENCE
13–18 January 2008
Melbourne, Victoria
The first meeting of an international congress of the history
of art in the southern hemisphere epitomises the expansion of
the field throughout the globe. The history of the International
Committee of the History of Art suggests what many people
throughout the world have recognised: art and the discourses
around it are increasingly global. Art and its history are not only
created, but discussed in one form or another on all the inhabited
continents of the earth. Globalism has thus also assumed an art
historical aspect: indeed it has been described as art history’s
most pressing issue. But how can global issues in art history take
form in theory or practice? What are the possibilities for a world
art history? Sessions have been developed that explore major
themes as they unfold across time and space. Subsections lend
themselves to period and regional subdivisions. You are warmly
invited to join in these vital debates by offering a paper and by
coming to the Congress.
Details: http://www.cihamelbourne2008.com.au
WORLD ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONGRESS
(WAC-6)
29 June–4 July 2008
Dublin, Ireland
The Executive of the World Archaeological Congress (WAC)
announces that the Sixth WAC Congress, WAC-6, will be held
in Ireland at the University College Dublin. WAC-6 will build
on the success of previous WAC congresses in promoting the
exchange of results of archaeological research, professional
training and public education and the application of scholarship
to ensure the conservation of archaeological sites across the
world. WAC is committed to diversity and to redressing global
inequities in archaeology through conferences, publications and
scholarly programmes. It has a special interest in protecting the
cultural heritage of Indigenous peoples, minorities and peoples
from a range of countries. WAC-6 will continue the established
practice of previous international congresses in facilitating the
participation and empowerment of Indigenous peoples and
researchers from economically disadvantaged countries.
Details: www.worldarchaeologicalcongress.org/site/wac6.php
(Source: http://www.arc.gov.au/)
ARC DISCOVERY GRANTS 2007
Archaeology and Prehistory
Anthropology
The Origins of Asian Domestic Buffalo and its Role
in the Development of Agricultural Technology
The African Origins of Asian and Australian
Lithic Technologies: Exploring Modern Human
Origins and Dispersals Using New Techniques of
Core Analysis
Chief Investigators: Prof. L. Liu; Prof. X. Chen; A/Prof. D. Yang;
Mr T. Gonzalez
2007: $190,324; 2008: $175,324; 2009: $179,324
La Trobe University
Project Summary: Benefits for Australia are educational, cultural
and scientific. This project will enhance research collaborations
between Australian universities and research institutions in
China, Canada, the USA and India. It will particularly create
more opportunities for academic exchange between Australia
and China. This project employs new methods combining
archaeology with DNA technology and archaeometry to tackle
important issues in animal domestication and agricultural
technology in many Asian regions. Its outcome will make a
significant contribution to our knowledge of the human history
of our region and the world.
Chief Investigator: Dr C.J. Clarkson
2007: $107,030; 2008: $97,030; 2009: $100,030
University of Queensland
Project Summary: This project will demonstrate that Australia is
committed to understanding the origins of modern humans and
solving research problems within and beyond our geographic
region. The history of modern human evolution in Africa has
significant implications for the origins of the first Australians,
Indians and Asians and will contribute to an understanding of
our shared and recent common ancestry and the emergence
of human diversity. Australian archaeological innovations,
especially when applied to global issues such as human evolution,
will continue to showcase Australian scientific expertise and
achievements. The study of problem-solving and technological
innovation will help understand the sophisticated nature of early
Australian peoples.
A Study of the Archaeology of Caucasian Iberia
with Implications for Grazing Management in
Australia
Chief Investigators: A/Prof. A.G. Sagona; Dr G. Tsetskhladze; Mr
C.L. Ogleby; Dr C. Sagona
2007: $48,818; 2008: $50,000; 2009: $50,000
University of Melbourne
Project Summary: This multidisciplinary project will promote a
79
Backfill
younger generation of talented postgraduate and undergraduate
students in a wide variety of fields, including archaeology,
geomatic engineering, conservation of material culture,
environmental and other natural sciences. The highlands of the
Caucasus, located in a bioclimatic zone with a long history of
alpine grazing, can also provide answers to questions such as the
effect of grazing on biodiversity and the rehabilitation of fragile
ecosystems, which may inform management and conservation
activities in analogous highland country in Australia. The project
will also ensure that exhibitions illustrating the rich heritage of
Caucasus will reach Australian shores.
A Mechanism to Authenticate Porcelain Treasures
from the Yuan-Ming Dynasties (1260-1644 AD)
in China
Chief Investigator: Mr B. Li
2007: $95,000; 2008: $95,000; 2009: $90,000
Project Summary: Jingdezhen wares were the most widely
exported of all Chinese porcelains with worldwide distribution
and representation in ancient sites and museum collections,
including many in Australia. They are often auctioned at high
prices (e.g. £15.68 million for one Yuan dynasty blue-and-white
jar in 2005), but their authenticity is often controversial, leading
to lawsuits and attracting public interest. The chemical database
from this research will enable unequivocal authentication
of Jingdezhen porcelain in prevailing world antique markets,
allowing treasures to be sorted out of trashes. The project
strengthens links with China, UK, USA and Japan. It greatly
enhances knowledge about China, which is having increasing
interaction with Australia.
Loyalty Islands Archaeological Project: Phase I
(Tiga Island)
Chief Investigator: A/Prof. I.A. Lilley
2007: $56,000; 2008: $40,000; 2009: $48,000
Project Summary: The project is explicitly intended to help
safeguard Australia by strengthening our understanding of
our region and the world. The study will substantially enhance
international research cooperation between Australia, France
and the French Pacific territories and will contribute to South
Pacific development through its direct and indirect spin-offs
for cultural heritage management and tourism. These outcomes
will directly benefit the nation/community at a time when social,
cultural and historical issues of the sort addressed by the project
are assuming an ever-greater importance in an uncertain global
security environment.
Precisely Dating the Evolution of Complex
Societies in Polynesia: The Hawaiian Example
Chief Investigators: Dr M.I. Weisler; Dr K. Yu
2007: $63,000; 2008: $94,000; 2009: $72,000
Project Summary: It is of enormous national benefit to
develop intellectual innovations that set Australia apart from
its neighbours and establish its position as a regional leader
in science. Because the Australasian region relies heavily on
primary resource exploitation, intellectual developments are
80
crucial for sustainable economic growth. Understanding how
societies meet the challenges of resource depletion, landscape
degradation, drought and population increase can be monitored
with archaeological data over hundreds of years. Our research
seeks to use an innovative technique for precisely dating major
changes in Oceanic societies over the past 500 years, which will
provide insights into how modern communities can cope with
these problems today.
Food, Drink and Sociality in the Early Roman
Empire and their Significance for Understanding
Ancient Family and Community Life
Chief Investigator: Dr P.M. Allison
2007: $121,342; 2008: $145,287; 2009: $120,969; 2010: $60,300;
2011: $97,446
Australian National University
Project Summary: To understand and be secure in the present we
must understand the past. The Roman world was multicultural
and multiethnic – a foundation for modern European and
Mediterranean cultures. It, therefore, has deep significance for
contemporary Australia and its migrant populations. Knowledge
of Roman social practices can provide unique insights into issues
and dilemmas facing Australian society. Eating behaviours and
food practices are of great public interest and understanding the
foodways of people in the past is vital to these debates. This project
also places Australia at the forefront of archaeological research and
guarantees its international prominence in Roman social history.
The Creation of Southeast Asian Peoples and
Cultures, 3500 BC to AD 500
Chief Investigators: Prof. P.S. Bellwood; Dr M.F. Oxenham;
Dr J.G. Stevenson
2007: $91,500; 2008: $130,000; 2009: $100,000; 2010: $30,118
Project Summary: This project will make a significant intellectual
contribution to enhancing Australia’s awareness of the histories
of neighbouring populations in Southeast Asia that in total
exceed 350 million people. It will thus contribute to a better
understanding of our region and the world. The project will
also benefit the Indigenous populations and future researchers
of neighbouring Southeast Asian countries, through training,
research collaboration and the dissemination of original research
results, enhancing Australia’s status as a supportive neighbour in
the region.
Colonization of the Mariana Islands and its
Implications for Indo-Pacific Prehistory
Chief Investigator: Dr G.R. Clark
2007: $79,000; 2008: $68,000; 2009: $72,000
Project Summary: The Asia-Pacific region, including Australia,
is linked by seas and oceans that have been crossed by colonists in
ancient as well as recent times. The most significant prehistoric
migration was the movement of people out of southern China,
into Taiwan, Island Asia and from there into Micronesia and
across the Pacific. New investigations of the oldest sites in the
Marianas will provide better understanding of early prehistoric
maritime capacity, the connections between migrant groups who
settled the islands of Asia and Oceania, and the processes of Indo-
Backfill
Pacific colonisation. Improved knowledge of our neighbours
capabilities and history is of clear national benefit to Australia.
The Colonial Souvenir Market and Indigenous
Agency in Oceania
Chief Investigator: Dr R.Q. Harrison
2007: $108,000; 2008: $92,000; 2009: $78,480
Project Summary: This project focuses on the objects from the
late nineteenth and early twentieth century which were sold
as Indigenous ‘curios’ to the general public through a Sydney
museum. While much of the literature on collecting has focused
on the role of institutional collecting, the project examines
popular objects which the general public purchased. This
project will contribute to the growing importance of research
into colonialism in the region, drawing together the results
of research from the fields of archaeology, anthropology and
material culture studies.
East Meets West: An Archaeological Study of
Early Contact between China and Eurasia
Chief Investigators: A/Prof. A.V. Betts; Dr P. Jia; Dr X. Wu; Prof.
J.P. Mallory
2007: $95,001; 2008: $79,001; 2009: $85,001; 2010: $73,001
University of Sydney
Project Summary: The project will link Chinese and Australian
researchers in a collaborative programme exploring the origins
of cultural contact between China and the West. Through the
work of a team of international specialists, this fresh initiative
will bring Western analytical techniques together with Chinese
archaeological experience to create a new and robust picture of
the evidence for early cultural contact. From this we will study
the early movements of Indo-European populations and examine
the question of the origins of early metal production in China.
Astride the Wallace Line 2: Human Evolution,
Dispersal, Culture and Environmental Change in
Southeast Asia
Chief Investigators: Prof. M.J. Morwood; Dr F. Aziz;
Mr D. Kosasih
2007: $195,000; 2008: $180,000; 2009: $190,000
University of Wollongong
Project Summary: Our previous project on the archaeology and
fossil record of Southeast Asia yielded results of international
significance, including the discovery of a new human species and
dates for major changes in the Indonesian faunal sequence. It
also involved collaboration between Australian, Indonesian and
Canadian researchers from a range of institutions and disciplines,
and provided topics for six PhD and two MA students. This level
of significant research, international collaboration and training
will continue with the current project.
Evolution of Technology and Tool Use in 10,000
Years of Aboriginal History
Chief Investigators: Dr P. Hiscock; Dr V.J. Attenbrow
2007: $52,000; 2008: $39,000; 2009: $43,000
Project Summary: Results will substantially enhance the power of
explanations for the Australian backed artefact proliferation, a key
archaeological signature of cultural change in ancient Aboriginal
society. A solution to the puzzle of why those artefacts were
frequently made during one period in the past will be of interest
to all researchers concerned with the historical development of
Aboriginal societies, and to Aboriginal people. Furthermore, a
detailed study of the evolution of a technology and its use over a
period of 10,000 years, defining the entanglement of production
and use systems, is rare in archaeology and the project will enable
development of new insights into theories concerning the reasons
technologies are adopted and changed.
Atmospheric Sciences
Sea-Level Change in the Australasian Region
during the Past 6000 Years: Understanding the
Past to Predict the Future
Chief Investigators: Prof. K. Lambeck; Prof. C.D. Woodroffe;
Dr J. Zhao; Dr S.G. Smithers; Dr D. Fabel; Dr J. Stone
2007: $128,000; 2008: $137,000; 2009: $96,000
Project Summary: Interactions of climate, ice, oceans, and
solid earth result in complex variations in sea-level in time and
space. This proposal develops a predictive understanding of this
change through an interdisciplinary integration of geophysical
theory and geologic observations. Focus is on the Australian
area and on the present interglacial, but the outcomes will
be placed in a global frame. Outcomes will include estimates
of rates and amplitudes of sea-level change, of changes in ice
volume, of land movements from isostatic and tectonic causes.
It also provides the framework necessary for separating natural
change from anthropogenic change during the recent past and
for predicting future regional and global sea-level change on a
century time scale.
Characterising the Tropical ‘Heat Engine’ of
Global Climate: Combined Coral, Stalagmite and
Tree-Ring Records from the Indo-Pacific Region
Chief Investigators: A/Prof. J. Zhao; Dr K. Yu; A/Prof. M.F. Barbetti;
Dr Q. Hua; Prof. Y. Wang
2007: $192,614; 2008: $192,614; 2009: $102,614; 2010: $96,614;
2011: $96,614
Project Summary: The recent anthropogenic global warming is
causing polar icecap melting, sea-level rise, reef coral bleaching
and degradation, and increased frequency and intensity of
severe droughts, floods, tropical cyclones/hurricanes/typhoons
in the past decades, focusing daily media headlines worldwide.
Our study will enhance understanding of global climate change,
El Niño and Asian-Australian monsoon variability and coral
reef degradation, and provide improved knowledge for future
predictions. The outcome will impact on our National Research
Priority 1: An Environmentally Sustainable Australia, enhance
Australia’s leadership in coral reef research, and contribute to an
improved relationship with our neighbours in science, education
and training.
81
Backfill
Demography
Founders and Survivors: Australian Lifecourses
in Historical Context
Chief Investigators: Dr H.J. Maxwell-Stewart; Dr R. Kippen;
Prof. J.S. McCalman; Mr G.J. McCarthy; Dr R. Shlomowitz; A/
Prof. A.J. Venn; A/Prof. D.G. Meredith; Dr S.C. Dharmage
2007: $200,000; 2008: $200,000; 2009: $250,000; 2010: $50,000;
2011: $100,000
University of Tasmania
Project Summary: This project will create one of the world’s
outstanding longitudinal studies of human health and resilience.
It will contribute to the historical understanding of European
migration, settler colonialism, forced labour and human health
under stress, long-run family formation and falling fertility,
household economy, and the social determinants of health. It
will contribute to debate both nationally and internationally
on the long-run effects of social and biomedical interventions
and of investment in human capital. It will tell the grassroots
history of the Australian penal and colonial experiments and
it will form a scholarly coalition with the great community of
family historians.
Ecology and Evolution
DNA preservation from sites all across Australia and use the
DNA sequences to discover information about extinct animals
and how past climate changes effected the native biota.
Responses of Southern Australian Mammal
Faunas to Climate Change Before and After
Human Arrival
Chief Investigator: Dr G.J. Prideaux
2007: $139,274; 2008: $130,000; 2009: $120,000; 2010: $120,000;
2011: $120,000
Flinders University
Project Summary: In the past 170 years, southern Australian
mammals have suffered one of the worst extinction rates in the
world. More losses are predicted in the face of global warming.
This recent extinction wave follows a major extinction event that
saw 90% of Australia’s large animals disappear 60,000–40,000
years ago. The causes are hotly debated. Some researchers argue
for a human cause, others suggest that climate change was to
blame. This study will refine our knowledge of the timing and
causes of these extinctions in southern Australia by assessing
how communities responded to climate change in the lead-up to
human arrival. It will provide vital information for managing the
conservation of many modern species and guide us in limiting
future losses.
Extrinsic Threats and Biological Predisposition in
Animal Extinction and Rediscovery
Genetics
Chief Investigator: Dr D.O. Fisher
2007: $105,000; 2008: $105,000; 2009: $98,287; 2010: $100,000;
2011: $96,950
Project Summary: A global extinction crisis looms, and Australia
has a shocking record, especially of mammal extinctions. The
results of this project to find how different threats affect each
species will lead to management that focuses on speciesand region-specific causes. This will help to prevent further
extinctions of Australian mammals and other fauna. Many
people hope that species of particular importance to us such as
the thylacine have defied extinction, and will be rediscovered.
This project will test which predictive factors can increase the
chance of species rediscovery, and help management agencies
plan for the expected number of future rediscoveries.
Evolutionary Genetics of Bovid Genomes over
60,000 Years
Ancient DNA as a Tool to Study Australia’s
Paleome: Exploring Climatic Change, Past
Biodiversity, Extinctions and Long-Term Survival
of DNA
Chief Investigator: Dr M. Bunce
2007: $63,000; 2008: $69,000; 2009: $60,000
Murdoch University
Project Summary: Restoration of Australian ecosystems can only
occur if we know what plants, animals and insects used to live in
the area before ‘pest’ species were introduced. This project will
use ancient DNA obtained from ‘poo’ and cave sediments, that is
thousands of years old, to discover what species used to live where
and when. The ancient DNA profiles of past ecosystems will allow
us to make better decisions when trying to establish sustainable
and ‘natural’ mainland and island sanctuaries. Ancient DNA is
well-preserved in some dry environments; this project will assess
82
Chief Investigators: Prof. A. Cooper; Prof. J.F. Taylor
2007: $188,825; 2008: $178,000; 2009: $166,000
University of Adelaide
Project Summary: This project will provide data critical for
understanding the genetic background of modern cattle and
bison, and how humans have shaped factors such as milk
yield, growth rates and muscle mass. It will also reveal genes
and genomic regions that were favoured in the domestication
process, including those potentially linked to genes of
commercial interest for future research. This pioneering ancient
DNA approach will also be applicable to a variety of other
domestic crops and animals. The unique temporal analysis of
microevolution will provide crucial data for genetic research,
and groundproof our attempts to analyse the timing and nature
of human evolutionary history and major domestication events,
and inform conservation management.
Geochemistry
Are Humans Responsible for Recent Changes in
the Behaviour of Tropical Cyclones? Decoupling
Natural Variability from Human Influence Using
Isotopes
Chief Investigators: Prof. J.F. Nott; Prof. M.I. Bird; Dr S.G.
Smithers
2007: $80,000; 2008: $50,000; 2009: $90,000; 2010: $70,000;
2011: $25,118
James Cook University
Project Summary: An increase in the frequency of intense
landfalling tropical cyclones will have a major impact upon
Backfill
Australia’s economy and the safety of its citizens and visitors.
There is little doubt that global climate change will cause this
increase. Understanding when this might occur and the extent of
this change over and above that which could also occur naturally
will help reduce economic loss and save peoples’ lives. Using
isotope records of tropical cyclones and global climate models
we will differentiate natural from human induced changes and
ascertain the likely future impact of this hazard on Australia and
its near neighbours.
Geology
Landscape Evolution and Palaeo-Climates
in Indonesia: Environmental, Faunal and
Archaeological Implications
Chief Investigator: Ms K.E. Westaway
2007: $102,030; 2008: $102,030; 2009: $102,030
University of Wollongong
Project Summary: The influence of environmental and climatic
changes on faunal (including human) populations is a pressing
issue for Australian communities in environmentally sensitive
areas. This project will address this issue by documenting how
certain flora and fauna in Indonesia, our nearest northern
neighbour, responded to environmental challenges. Revealing
when humans first dispersed through the region and how
they adapted to changing environmental conditions will
also contribute to our understanding of the cultural heritage
of Australia’s Indigenous settlers. This project will build on
established collaborations with Indonesian researchers and
pioneer new dating methodologies to further enhance Australia’s
place at the forefront of geochronology.
ARC LINKAGE GRANTS 2007
Anthropology
Indigenous Participation in the Australian Colonial
Economy: An Anthropological and Historical
Investigation
Chief Investigators: Dr I.D. Keen; Prof. C. Lloyd;
Dr A.J. Redmond; Dr M.P. Pickering
2007: $45,000; 2008: $44,000; 2009: $50,000
Australian National University and National Museum of
Australia
Project Summary: The main benefits of the research to the
nation and community lie in the new information generated by
the project, and the enhancement of our understanding of past
relations between Indigenous people and the wider community.
The proposal has the potential to mediate the extreme positions
in the ‘history wars’ by investigating the various types of
accommodation and mutuality of interests which informed many
early encounters on and beyond the frontier. It will also widen
the focus of settler-Indigenous relationships from those between
Indigenous people and Anglo-Celtic Australians to include
relations with other ethnicities including Afghani settlers.
Geology
Environmental Evolution of the Willandra Lakes
World Heritage Area
Chief Investigators: Prof. R. Grun; Prof. S.G. Webb;
Dr A.S. Fairbairn; Dr E.J. Rhodes; Dr N. Stern
2007: $229,739; 2008: $151,312; 2009: $189,833
Australian National University, Department of Conservation and
Environment and Three Traditional Tribal Groups
Project Summary: The Willandra Lakes World Heritage Area ranks
as the most significant area for documenting Australia’s unique
cultural and environmental history. Parts of this remarkable
archive are being lost through erosion. This project is the basis for
a strategic research alliance between the custodians and managers
of the area and leading Australian research institutions to build
a picture of the continent’s human and environmental history
before this evidence is irretrievably lost. Lake Mungo is known
to Australians as the site of the world’s earliest cremation and a
window into our remote past. We will provide novel insights into
the evolution of the Australian landscape, its fragile environment
and the history of its resilient inhabitants.
Historical Studies
The Role of the Wittenoom Asbestos Mine in
the Lives and Deaths of Italian Transnational
Workers
Chief Investigators: A/Prof. J.W. McCulloch; A/Prof. P. Miller
2007: $27,118; 2008: $25,118; 2009: $27,118
RMIT University and Italian Australian Institute
Project Summary: Reconstructing the lives of Italian workers in
the context of transnational migration and the mining of one of
the world’s most hazardous minerals is significant in itself as part
of Australian historical record. To the Italian community, the story
exemplifies the disproportionate contributions and sacrifices of
post-war migration. Importantly, the evidence produced will be of
use in improving public health and policy responses to the legacy
of asbestos disease, both in Australia and in Italy. In drawing on
Italian and Australian scholarship, community networks and
government initiatives, the project will provide valuable training
to a doctoral candidate, and contribute to furthering the practical
internationalisation of Australian research.
The Queensland Historical Atlas: Histories,
Cultures, Landscapes
Chief Investigators: Prof. P. Spearritt; Dr G.A. Ginn;
Prof. D.J. Carter; Dr S.G. Ulm; Dr N.S. Bordes; Dr C.A. McAlpine;
Dr J.P. Powell; Mr M.C. Quinnell; Mr P. Gesner; Dr B.A. Crozier;
Dr J.M. McKay; Ms P.E. Barnard
2007: $200,591; 2008: $192,533; 2009: $209,189
University of Queensland and Queensland Museum
Project Summary: An Historical Atlas of Queensland will provide
a unique perspective on the interaction between environmental
and cultural forces in the shaping of Queensland’s history. By
bringing together a wide range of existing but dispersed areas
of expertise, and making innovative use of the latest digital
technologies, it will produce new knowledges of Queensland’s
geography, biodiversity, rural and urban development,
communications and cultures.
83
Backfill
ARC LINKAGE INTERNATIONAL
FELLOWSHIPS 2007
Archaeology and Prehistory
The Niah Cave Project: Archaeological Textile
Analysis
Chief Investigators: Dr J.A. Cameron; Prof. G.W. Barker
2007: $53,387
Collaborating Countries: Malaysia; UK
Project Summary: This project on archaeological textiles from
excavations at Niah Cave in Sarawak involves collaborative
links between researchers from many different disciplines from
the Australian National University, the National University of
Singapore, the University of Cambridge and the University of
Leicester as well as researchers from the Sarawak Museum in
Malaysia. The project is an integrated programme of archaeological
excavation and environmental science by an interdisciplinary
team from universities in Great Britain, Australia, Sarawak and
the USA and will lead to further international collaboration.
ARC LINKAGE INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS
2007
Artificial Intelligence and Signal and Image
Processing
Satellite Remote Sensing and GIS Data Processing
Facilities at Charles Darwin University
Chief Investigators: Dr W. Ahmad; Prof. D.M. Bowman;
Dr G. Boggs; Dr D.M. Pearson; Prof. S.T. Garnett
2007: $101,967
Charles Darwin University
Project Summary: Northern Australia is vast, remote and
spreads across diverse and extensive landscapes. There is no
centralised remote sensing and GIS facility within 2000km of
CDU, Darwin. The upgraded infrastructure at CDU will assist in
strengthening the research base in this remote part of Australia.
This will allow the NT researchers to focus on the environmental
applications of remote sensing and GIS technologies which will
have many community benefits through better management of
water resources, land degradation, wetlands, cultural knowledge
and sustainable use of Australian biodiversity. The infrastructure
will also assist in the training of new researchers within this
developing field.
Information Systems
Australian Social Science Data Archive: Network
Extension and Sub-Archive Development
Chief Investigators: Dr D.A. Mitchell; Prof. M.C. Western; Prof.
M.S. Humphreys; A/Prof. D.N. Denemark; Prof. P.G. Saunders;
Prof. H.L. Kendig; Dr H.A. Evans; Dr T.M. Rowse; Dr L.R. Smith;
Prof. I. McAllister; Ms S.K. Holloway; Mr S.C. Hungerford;
Dr T.L. Phillips; Dr A.E. Smith; A/Prof. M. Emmison; Dr L.A.
Cheshire; Dr A.F. Broom; Dr B.W. Bradbury; Prof. R.J. Stimson;
Dr B. Evans
2007: $400,000
University of Queensland, University of Western Australia,
University of New South Wales, Australian Consortium for Social
and Political Research and Australian National University
Project Summary: The Australian Social Science Data Archive
is a national facility that allows all researchers and members of
the public to access a wide range of social science data sets for
online analysis. The archive contains data that covers 40 years
of social, political and economic surveys. The archive also acts
as a gateway for social science researchers to access data from
equivalent overseas institutions in North America, the European
Union and OECD countries.
(Source: http://www.humanities.org.au/)
At the Annual General Meeting of the Australian Academy of the
Humanities on 18 November 2006, one outstanding scholar in
archaeology was elected Fellow: Michael Smith. Fellows elected
to the Academy are residents of Australia who have achieved the
highest distinction in scholarship in the humanities.
Dr Michael Smith is Director of Research and Development at
the National Museum of Australia. He has a distinguished career in
Australian archaeology, in both the academic and public spheres.
His work is characterised by careful and detailed scholarship,
meticulous excavation techniques, versatility, persistence and
84
a desire to address the big questions of archaeology. He has
published three books, edited another three, and published
many articles in refereed journals and edited books. He has also
organised two major exhibitions at the NMA, Tangled Destinies:
Land and People in Australia, and Extremes: Survival in the Great
Deserts of the Southern Hemisphere.
1. General
5. References
Australian Archaeology, the official publication of the Australian
Archaeological Association Inc., is a refereed journal published
since 1974. It accepts original articles in all fields of archaeology
and other subjects relevant to archaeological research and
practice in Australia and nearby areas. Contributions are accepted
in five sections: Articles (5000–8000 words), Short Reports
(1000–3000), Obituaries (500–2000), Thesis Abstracts (200–
500), Book Reviews (500–2000) and Backfill (which includes
letters, conference details, announcements and other material of
interest to members). Australian Archaeology is published twice
a year, in June and December. Provided submissions meet the
requirements outlined in these Notes to Contributors and quality
requirements assessed through peer review, we would normally
anticipate publishing of submissions within 12 months.
Type the References starting on a new page. Include all and
only those references cited in the paper. Do not cite papers in
preparation. Papers may be cited as ‘in press’ where they have
been accepted for publication. For general publication categories
the format should follow the examples below. Please pay
particular attention to capitalisation, punctuation and spacing.
Submissions that do not conform to these referencing guidelines
will be returned to authors for correction.
2. Submission of Contributions
Submissions that do not conform to these Notes to Contributors
may be returned to authors for correction before they are
processed. All contributions must be typed, double line spaced,
using 12 point Times New Roman font or similar. Do not use
more than three heading levels. Do not use footnotes. Do not
use double spaces after full stops at the end of sentences. Number
all pages submitted consecutively. For further guidance on style
refer to the most recent issue of Australian Archaeology. A 150–
200 word abstract must be included for articles. The abstract
should be a complete, concise summary of the paper. A cover
page must be included listing contribution title and full names,
affiliations and addresses for correspondence (including email)
of all authors. Do not include author names on pages other than
the cover page.
Journal Articles
Bird, C.F.M. and D. Frankel 1991 Problems in constructing a prehistoric regional
sequence: Holocene south-east Australia. World Archaeology 23(2):179-192.
Book Chapters
Craib, J.L. and G.R. Mangold 1999 Storm in a test pit: Effects of cyclonic storms
on coastal archaeological sites in western Micronesia. In J. Hall and I.J.
McNiven (eds), Australian Coastal Archaeology, pp.299-306. Research
Papers in Archaeology and Natural History 31. Canberra: ANH Publications,
Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Research School of Pacific
and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
Books
Lourandos, H. 1997 Continent of Hunter-Gatherers: New Perspectives in Australian
Prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edited Books
Hall, J. and I.J. McNiven (eds) 1999 Australian Coastal Archaeology. Research
Papers in Archaeology and Natural History 31. Canberra: ANH Publications,
Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Research School of Pacific
and Asian Studies, Australian National University.
3. Processing of Contributions
Monographs
The Editors will acknowledge receipt of all contributions. The
Editors and external peer reviewers will review all contributions
submitted as articles and short reports. As for any refereed journal,
authors may be asked to make revisions to their manuscript. If
substantial revision is required manuscripts may be rereviewed
before a decision to publish is made. Once a paper is accepted in
its final form, page-proofs will be sent to the senior author for
checking. Proof Approval and Author Agreement forms will be
sent with the page-proofs and must be completed and returned
before publication can proceed. Final acceptance of manuscripts
for publication is at the discretion of the Editors. For paper
submission instructions see below.
Wickler, S. 2001 The Prehistory of Buka: A Stepping Stone Island in the Northern
Solomons. Terra Australis 16. Canberra: Department of Archaeology and Natural
History and Centre for Archaeological Research, Australian National University.
Theses
David, B. 1994 A Space-Time Odyssey: Rock Art and Regionalisation in North
Queensland Prehistory. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Anthropology
and Sociology, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Unpublished Reports
Smith, J.R. and H.J. Hall 1996 Beaudesert Shire Regional Archaeological Project.
Unpublished report to the Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra.
4. Citations
Internet Resources
References should be cited in text by author’s surname,
publication year and page (e.g. Smith 1988:45). For three or
more authors ‘et al.’ (with italics) should be used after the first
surname (e.g. David et al. 1994). If multiple references are cited
they should be ordered alphabetically and then by publication
year, with authors’ names separated by a semicolon (e.g. Appleby
1990:19-25; Childe 1952; David 1988; David and Chant 1995;
David et al. 1994, 1999; White and O’Connell 1982:42, 50).
Australian Bureau of Statistics 1996 Education: Participation in Education: The
Education of Indigenous People. Retrieved 6 November 2003 from http://www.
abs.gov.au/ausstats.
Listserver Communications
Ross, A. 2004 Useless Australian archaeology graduates. Message posted to the
AUSARCH-L listserver, 31 May 2004, archived at http://mailman.anu.edu.au/
mailman/listinfo/ausarch-l.
85
Notes to Contributors
6. Initial Submission
11. Reporting Radiocarbon Ages and Calibration
In the first instance, papers should be submitted by email with
the contribution as a single attachment, including text, figures and
tables, using Microsoft® WORD (.doc), Rich Text Format (.rtf)
or Adobe® Portable Document Format (.pdf). Specifications for
tables and figures should follow the guidelines below.
Conventional radiocarbon ages should be reported as ‘BP’ and
calibrated ages as ‘cal BP’. Report laboratory number, material
dated, calibration method used and any corrections made (e.g.
marine reservoir correction).
12. Copyright
7. Final Paper Submission Instructions
Once accepted for publication, final versions of papers (including
figures and tables) should be submitted as email attachments or
on clearly labelled 9.5cm high-density discs or CDs in PC or
Macintosh format. Specifications for tables and figures should
follow the guidelines below.
8. Text
Text should be submitted using Microsoft® WORD (.doc) or
Rich Text Format (.rtf).
9. Tables
Type each table (including a caption) on a separate page at the
end of the manuscript, not in the body of the text. Number and
refer to tables in the text with Arabic numerals (i.e. Table 1 etc).
Tables should be submitted using Microsoft® WORD (.doc) or
Rich Text Format (.rtf).
Authors are responsible for ensuring that any material that
has influenced the research or writing has been properly
cited and credited both in the text and in the list of references.
Contributors are responsible for gaining copyright clearance
on figures, photographs or lengthy quotes used in their
manuscript that have been published elsewhere. Once accepted
for publication in Australian Archaeology, the author retains
copyright in the work and may publish or authorise others
to publish the entire work or any part thereof, provided that
due acknowledgement is made in any further publication that
the work was originally published in Australian Archaeology.
An article will not be published until the signed Author
Agreement has been completed and returned to the Editors by
the contributor.
13. Other
Contributors are encouraged to contact the Editors if they have
any questions or concerns about the submission process.
10. Figures (Line Drawings and Photographs)
Line drawings and photographs should both be referred to as
Figures, and numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals
(i.e. Figure 1 etc). Figures should be submitted on separate
pages at the end of the manuscript, not in the body of the text.
Figure captions should be typed on a separate page, not on
the figures. For final submission, figures should be submitted
electronically as separate files as TIFF, JPEG (maximum quality)
or EPS (with preview) files. If figures cannot be submitted as
computer files, please submit as black-and-white line drawings
or as high contrast, glossy black-and-white prints. All figures
will be printed as greyscale images. Figures should be submitted
at final size, ready for the printing process. Figures should be
submitted at resolutions of 600 dpi at final size. That is, the figure
and its caption should be sized to fit either within the margins of
a double columned page (170mm) or a single column (81mm).
The available space within margins for the full length of a page is
250mm (this leaves room for a one line caption). Please choose
appropriate letter size, line thickness and shading/stippling.
Photocopies of drawings are not acceptable. If not your own
work, you must acknowledge the origin of all figures and, where
applicable, it is the author’s responsibility to obtain written
unfettered permission to publish from the copyright owner of
the original.
86
14. Correspondence and Submissions
PO Box 6088
St Lucia QLD 4067
AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION INC.
Office Bearers for 2007
Position
Australian Archaeology, the official publication of the
Editors
Australian Archaeological Association Inc., is a refereed
Sean Ulm University of Queensland
journal published since 1974. It accepts original articles
Annie Ross University of Queensland
in all fields of archaeology and other subjects relevant to
Name
Address
Executive
President
Alistair Paterson
Secretary
Fiona Hook
Crawley, WA 6009
archaeological research and practice in Australia and nearby
Editorial Advisory Board
Treasurer
Adam Dias
areas. Contributions are accepted in five sections: Articles
Val Attenbrow Australian Museum
Membership Secretary
Annie Carson
Public Officer
Sally Brockwell
Webmaster
Sam Bolton
(5000-8000 words), Short Reports (1000-3000), Obituaries
Margaret Conkey University of California, Berkeley
(500-2000),
Bruno David Monash University
Thesis
Abstracts
(200-500),
Book
Reviews
(500-2000) and Backfill (which includes letters, conference
Andrew Fairbairn University of Queensland
details, announcements and other material of interest to
Richard Fullagar Scarp Archaeology
members). Australian Archaeology is published twice a year,
Martin Gibbs University of Sydney
in June and December.
Simon Holdaway University of Auckland
Crawley, WA 6009
& Asian Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200
are
available
to
individuals
through
Crawley, WA 6009
Media Liaison Officer
Kelly Fleming
Crawley, WA 6009
Jo McDonald JMcD CHM Pty Ltd
Subscriptions
Department of Archaeology & Natural History, Research School of Pacific
& Australian National University
membership of the Australian Archaeological Association
Tim Murray La Trobe University
Australian Archaeology Editors
Inc. or to organisations through institutional subscription.
Jim O’Connell University of Utah
Editor
Subscription application/renewal forms are available at
Fiona Petchey University of Waikato
http://www.australianarchaeologicalassociation.com.au.
Paul Rainbird University of Wales
Editor
Annie Ross
Lynette Russell Monash University
Editorial Assistant
Geraldine Mate
Catherine Westcott
Environmental Protection Agency, PO Box 15155, City East, QLD 4002
Graphic Design: Lovehate Design
Robin Torrence Australian Museum
Printing:
Peter Veth Australian National University
Printpoint Australia Pty Ltd
Cover: View looking southeast across built stone wall to
Editorial Assistant
small cave, Rankin Island, Kimberley, Western Australia
Geraldine Mate University of Queensland
Short Report Editors
Chris Clarkson University of Queensland
Catherine Westcott Environmental Protection
Lara Lamb University of Southern Queensland
PO Box 6088
AUSTRALIA
Book Review Editors
Ian Lilley University of Queensland
URL: http://www.australianarchaeologicalassociation.com.au
Jill Reid Department of Main Roads (Qld)
the Australian Archaeological Association Inc. or the Editors.
© Australian Archaeological Association Inc., 2007
ISSN 0312-2417
Stephen Nichols University of Queensland
Brisbane, QLD 4072
Chris Clarkson
Lara Lamb
Review Editor
Ian Lilley
Review Editor
Jill Reid
Department of Main Roads, GPO Box 1412, Brisbane, QLD 4001
Stephen Nichols
School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane QLD 4072
Queensland
Lara Lamb
New South Wales
Val Attenbrow
Australian Capital Territory
Alex McKay
Brisbane, QLD 4072
State Representatives
Agency (Qld)
St Lucia QLD 4067
The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of
Sean Ulm
Anthropology, Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, NSW 2010
School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University,
Canberra, ACT 0200
Victoria
Nicola Stern
Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC 3086
Tasmania
Vacant
—
South Australia
Lynley Wallis
Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide,
SA 5001
Western Australia
Stuart Rapley
Archae-aus Pty Ltd, PO Box 177, South Freemantle, WA 6162
Northern Territory
Daryl Guse
PO Box 43119, Casuarina, NT 0811
In this issue
Editorial
ii
ARTICLES
Andrew Fairbairn
1
Bryce Barker
9
15
To Make a Point: Ethnographic Reality and the Ethnographic and Experimental Replication of Australian
Macroblades Known as Leilira
Kim Akerman
23
35
SHORT REPORTS
Paul Irish
46
50
BOOK REVIEWS
53
54
56
Many Exchanges: Archaeology, History, Community and the Work of Isabel McBryde edited
by Ingereth McFarlane with Mary-Jane Mountain & Robert Paton
57
58
59
THESIS ABSTRACTS
61
OBITUARIES
63
2007
number 64
64
74
Conferences
78
79
84
85
ISSN 0312-2417
number 64
BACKFILL
June 2007

Australian Archaeology (Number 64) June 2007

Transcription

Similar documents

RESEA R C H UNC O VERED

Paula Brennan, Greater Dandenong

AEC Vol 10 No 1 1995 internet sites and activities

Airplane ticket

this PDF file

Hassad Australia - Grain Trade Australia

PDF

Combined Profile Stakeholder Summary 0315

a pdf here. - The Australian Sex Party

I-Drive Press Release